Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Bateshorn 9,991]

5 minutes ago, The Ace of Aces said:

Strong disagree. I posted a long rant a few days about but basically Putin has never had any strategy. He acts without thinking and then cleans up the mess it creates - his KGB training taught this and he never has strayed from it. I know several who have dealt with him directly and .. he's not that bright. He's incredibly skillful as a politician and mob boss, but a genius he ain't. 

This has been coming for a decade. Why 2014 was more of a half-ass try will always boggle my mind. 

Edit: I misread this my bad - I somehow read you were saying he was smart. He hasn't been that stable but by Russian standards he's fairly straight. 

This.  He’s vicious and not a complete alcoholic fool; that makes him mix of Churchill and Bismarck by Russian standards.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8,984]

[956 Worldwide 35,594]

I usually do not recommend believing what Russian officials say, but I think you start with what Putin said he wanted when he launched his invasion.  If inclined to parse words, always assume he really wants something more or worse:

- Recognition of DPR/LPR within the territories they claim for themselves 

- Ukraine to promise never to join NATO and NATO to promise never to accept it.

- “De-militarization,” which at least entails giving back all of its modest Western tech (that was only fired at Russian tanks in Ukraine), but likely more.

- “Denazification” which means at least the removal of the current government and a replacement with a Russian toady and possibly is also much worse. Putin won’t set the boundaries.

So to sum up, the “reasonable” demands are to lose territory, let Russia choose your friends, make yourself supine and defenseless, and install a non-democratic regime that Russia will choose for you.

People need to stop with the fiction that these are acceptable terms or that Putin would have ever been satisfied with less. He likely actually wants much more. 

[NoName 17,148]

8 minutes ago, The Ace of Aces said:

Strong disagree. I posted a long rant a few days about but basically Putin has never had any strategy. He acts without thinking and then cleans up the mess it creates - his KGB training taught this and he never has strayed from it. I know several who have dealt with him directly and .. he's not that bright. He's incredibly skillful as a politician and mob boss, but a genius he ain't. 

This has been coming for a decade. Why 2014 was more of a half-ass try will always boggle my mind. 

Edit: I misread this my bad - I somehow read you were saying he was smart. He hasn't been that stable but by Russian standards he's fairly straight. 

i think the way they got into the  Second Chechen War was really well thought out and devious but worked even though execution on their end was far from 100%

you are 100% right on him cleaning up messes and we are on the same page about him as a politician and mob boss - not saying he is some brilliant dude though!

i think we agree on most things about this conflict btw

[FORTY NINE TO ZERO 2,651]

dumb question.  i see all these reports of russian SUs.  are migs not a thing anymore? 

[Nivek 17,415]

On 3/3/2022 at 8:53 AM, TwiceHorn said:

Impressive.  I loved all those Q-ship "coupes" (Hurst Olds/442, Monte Carlo SS, GN), but have gained a new respect for the GN/X.  And the Turbo T/A.

/threadjack

I kind of liked all of them as well, but there was a deep satisfaction in beating the shit out of the Monte Carlo SS which was kind of slow.   GNX's were nice but I kind of didn' want one because I knew I would start tinkering and not be able to contain myself.  I wanted an 89 TTA as well   I was always curious if the different gear ratio was part of their performance boost over the GN's.   One of the cars I had was a 79 Regal Sports Coupe which had the wet turbo (carburetor sat on a plenum that fed into the compression housing of the turbo).   

[The Ace of Aces 5,377]

1 minute ago, NoName said:

i think the way they got into the  Second Chechen War was really well thought out and devious but worked even though execution on their end was far from 100%

you are 100% right on him cleaning up messes and we are on the same page about him as a politician and mob boss - not saying he is some brilliant dude though!

i think we agree on most things about this conflict btw

Indeed - sorry for misreading that post (I need more caffeine, clearly). The 2nd Chechen War was going "ok" until Grozny and well we'll soon see the same for several Ukrainian cities. Russian military doctrine combined with the grift of the military itself isn't great for land wars. It's even less great for urban fighting. 

[Guest Lobo]

I feel like Russia is being cancelled right now.  And that's not fair.  CCCP Cancellation will not prevail, man! 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,731]

11 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

23 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't understand anyone going with the Clayton Williams' attitude that Russia will ultimately win so Ukrainians should just accept it. There are times in life that you have to take a stand even if the chance of winning is low in the short term. And sometimes you have to be willing to take a defeat for the right cause.
And Ukraine will eventually win. Occupiers (almost) never win in the long run.

There's a good number of posters here that you wouldn't want to share a foxhole with. Football board out front should have told you.

Someone has to play the collaborator mayor in Red Dawn.

[Cheeseweasel 26,439]

8 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

 

Da fuck?

[BabaYaga 15,625]

2 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Da fuck?

How exactly can Russia verify what information is being shared and when?  This is fucking stupid

Quote

“We want to support the Ukrainians in every way we possibly can, without going to war with Russia,” Smith said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.” “When it comes to intel-sharing and targeting, that’s a fine line.”  

The U.S. is providing some intelligence to Ukraine, he said, but not “real-time targeting.”

How about shutting the fuck up and not letting anyone know what is being shared as that is none of anyone's business  

Edited March 4, 2022 by BabaYaga

[Guest Lobo]

1 minute ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Da fuck?

Of course we're saying that.  It'd be weird if we were saying the opposite, or nothing at all.  "What this?  This incredibly clear satellite imagery that everybody knows we have?  We are certainly not sharing it with Ukraine.  Because (pulls down hidden microphone from ceiling)...it would be wong." 

[Nicole44 22,315]

 

[SA-KC_Horn 1,298]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

How exactly can Russia verify what information is being shared and when?  This is fucking stupid

Duh. They intercepted the transmission. 

[phdhorn 6,225]

Okay, all done.  Can't we all just get along?  War over!
 

 

[phdhorn 6,225]

[bolverk 30,325]

18 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

If you assume I'm right about Ukraine's military chances, #2 and #3 are going to happen anyway. The only question is what will the human cost be. As for #1, I haven't seen that demand (NATO can never expand anywhere ever), got a link? I've only seen that Ukraine can never join NATO. Which, again, is also going to happen anyway if Russia wins the war.

Once Putin is dead then all this stuff is back on the table. He's 69. He probably won't last 10 more years, likely much less, and possibly much much less if someone on the inside gets to him.

Quick summary of demands

The Russian proposal took the form of two draft treaties, one with NATO and the other with the United States.

“Member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization accept the obligation to exclude farther expansion of NATO to Ukraine and other states,” the text suggested. In demanding the written guarantee from NATO, Mr. Putin and other Russian officials have reached into early post-Cold War history, describing what they see as a betrayal by the West in 1990.

They assert that NATO expanded to the east despite a spoken assurance from James Baker, then the secretary of state, to the Soviet leader, Mikhail S. Gorbachev, that it would not.

The agreement was never put in writing and Mr. Baker said later that Russian officials misinterpreted his comment, which applied only to the territory of the former East Germany. Mr. Gorbachev has, in interviews, confirmed that spoken assurance came in discussions only of East Germany.

The new Russian proposal surfaced other historical grievances.

It demanded that NATO withdraw military infrastructure placed in Eastern European states after 1997, the date of an accord signed between Russia and NATO that Moscow wants now as a starting point for a new security treaty.

The Russian Foreign Ministry had earlier demanded that NATO officially abrogate a 2008 promise, known as the Bucharest Declaration, that Ukraine and Georgia would be welcomed into the alliance. The NATO chief invoked that declaration after the meeting with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, on Thursday, saying the offer still stands.

Russia is also insisting that NATO countries do not deploy offensive weapons in states neighboring Russia, including countries not in the alliance — a reference to Ukraine. And the proposal suggested a ban on military exercises at strengths of more than a brigade in a zone along both sides of Russia’s western border, an issue that would address the current military buildup near Ukraine.

 

[SmokeyTheBear 5,569]

4 minutes ago, phdhorn said:

Okay, all done.  Can't we all just get along?  War over!
 

 

That is all for his people. He needs to act like a rational actor but the rest of the world knows what's really up. 

[TwiceHorn 32,079]

9 minutes ago, Nivek said:

I kind of liked all of them as well, but there was a deep satisfaction in beating the shit out of the Monte Carlo SS which was kind of slow.   GNX's were nice but I kind of didn' want one because I knew I would start tinkering and not be able to contain myself.  I wanted an 89 TTA as well   I was always curious if the different gear ratio was part of their performance boost over the GN's.   One of the cars I had was a 79 Regal Sports Coupe which had the wet turbo (carburetor sat on a plenum that fed into the compression housing of the turbo).   

I didn't really appreciate turbocharging at the time and thought it was an effort to make a 3.8L V6 into a 5L V8, basically.  Hell, I really haven't been a turbo convert untll the last couple of years.  And hp numbers at the time were unreliable.  But yeah, the V8s in the Olds and Chevys were pretty anemic and even an NA 3.8V6 was probably a better engine if you dyno'd it.  And turbocharge it, fuhgeddaboutit.  I think I have seen that the GN turbos and TTA were putting out substantially over 200hp and most 5LV8s were maybe good for 180, tops.

I think the V6 was just a better engine under the late 70s, early 80s conditions (high rear ends, emission controlled without "compensation," etc.).

/it wouldn't be surly without a completely irrelevant threadjack

[Handcruser 2,815]

Da fuck?

You believe that? US just calls France and France calls Ukraine.

[Brisketexan 106,899]

15 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't understand anyone going with the Clayton Williams' attitude that Russia will ultimately win so Ukrainians should just accept it. There are times in life that you have to take a stand even if the chance of winning is low in the short term. And sometimes you have to be willing to take a defeat for the right cause.

And Ukraine will eventually win. Occupiers (almost) never win in the long run.

This.

Some of the discussion above is because some folks have too narrow an idea of what a "win" for Ukraine is.

Will Russia eventually occupy major Ukrainian cities, including Kyiv?  Probably.  And probably after devastating attacks that wreck them and kill civilians. 

Will Russia have a fully pacified Ukraine?  Almost certainly not.

As long as Ukrainians are alive who fight for their country and their right of self-determination, Russia hasn't won.  AND, in the process of "not winning," a Russian military that is a lot thinner on equipment and trained troops than people thought will continue to lose both.

Ukraine's spirit, hope, and resistance survive, Russia's ability to dominate Ukraine long-term -- and to be a threat to others -- is continuously degraded.  Also, the remainder of NATO has learned a lot, and starts taking the defense of Europe seriously again.  And maybe Finland and Sweden join.  That's a win.

Just understand that ALL options here are shitty.  There is no "woo-hoo, a win and nobody gets hurt!" option on the table.  You play with the chess board as it is presently arranged.  That's the way this shit works, and always has been.

[BillyGoatHill 4,421]

57 minutes ago, Deej said:

Ukraine should just bend the knee to Putin so that a few people on this board can go about their lives feeling safe. 

"Hey, Ukraine, can you stop fighting for your continued existence please? It's making some guys on Surly uncomfortable."

 

38 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't understand anyone going with the Clayton Williams' attitude that Russia will ultimately win so Ukrainians should just accept it. There are times in life that you have to take a stand even if the chance of winning is low in the short term. And sometimes you have to be willing to take a defeat for the right cause.

And Ukraine will eventually win. Occupiers (almost) never win in the long run.

 

26 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

38 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't understand anyone going with the Clayton Williams' attitude that Russia will ultimately win so Ukrainians should just accept it. There are times in life that you have to take a stand even if the chance of winning is low in the short term. And sometimes you have to be willing to take a defeat for the right cause.
And Ukraine will eventually win. Occupiers (almost) never win in the long run.

There's a good number of posters here that you wouldn't want to share a foxhole with. Football board out front should have told you.

They wouldn't be there next to you. Would've shot themselves in the foot so they wouldn't have to enlist. Crazy how some on here just say "Fuck It! C'mon Ukraine, just capitulate and live under a tyrants rule so I can get some sleep at night".  Good times create soft men.

[Brisketexan 106,899]

16 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

How exactly can Russia verify what information is being shared and when?  This is fucking stupid

How about shutting the fuck up and not letting anyone know what is being shared as that is none of anyone's business  

Ummmm......

14 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Of course we're saying that.  It'd be weird if we were saying the opposite, or nothing at all.  "What this?  This incredibly clear satellite imagery that everybody knows we have?  We are certainly not sharing it with Ukraine.  Because (pulls down hidden microphone from ceiling)...it would be wong." 

.....this.

Stop taking things at face value. Yes, that includes from US sources and Ukrainian sources.  Aggregate the information you're seeing, and give yourself a more accurate picture.

[956 Worldwide 35,594]

15 minutes ago, ONE YARD said:

dumb question.  i see all these reports of russian SUs.  are migs not a thing anymore? 

MiGs are still a thing, although you’re correct that Sukhoi has been the winner in the more recent bids for new Russian fighters. You’re seeing more Sukhois downed in Ukraine because the MiG-29 and MiG-31 are an air superiority fighter and bomber interceptor, respectively. 
 

Russian Su-25s and 34s are attack and strike aircraft and that’s what Russia has needed and what’s more likely to get shot in this environment. 

[atomheartbevo 90,650]

1 hour ago, Buzzrock said:

And when Russia wins anyway and takes over Ukraine, what will have been the point of all those deaths?

The Russians have at most, at absolutely most, 50,000 infantry in Ukraine. And I’m being very generous.  50,000 troops aren’t enough to occupy a big fucking country with 44 million people, especially when those 50,000 infantry aren’t even able to keep the other 150,000 members of the invading force secure  

If you don’t understand what infantry is, it’s not a truck driver or a medic or a cool or mechanic or gun bunny.  It’s a guy with a rifle trained to fight with that rifle and who can take and hold land.  Being able to lob shells at a building doesn’t mean you are holding that building. You have to have some Russian infantry conscript in that building to declare it as being controlled by your side.

And that Russian infantry conscript is also the guy who has to guard your forward base and your shitty convoys and when you take a village or city you have to leave some infantry behind to make sure the enemy doesn’t take it back.

Russia screwed the pooch.  We couldn’t conquer Iraq and it’s 25 million people with an invading force  larger than Putin is using.   And the Warsaw Pact wasn’t next door to Iraq flooding the place with the latest anti-tank weapons and MANPADs.

And NATO and the EU will  easily keep feeding more weapons and other aid in to Ukraine. 

[KYHorn 17,615]

11 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Of course we're saying that.  It'd be weird if we were saying the opposite, or nothing at all.  "What this?  This incredibly clear satellite imagery that everybody knows we have?  We are certainly not sharing it with Ukraine.  Because (pulls down hidden microphone from ceiling)...it would be wong." 

No, I think it's a serious problem. Ben Sasse (on the Senate Intelligence Committee) has been bringing this issue up in multiple interviews over the past few days, and this finally confirms it. Any time Psaki or others are asked about it, they are not asked directly about whether we're providing "real-time lethal targeting intelligence" (Sasse's words), so they are able to dance around it by saying "we are providing real-time intelligence that's extremely valuable to the Ukrainian military." 

[Hermanator 7,674]

47 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Which we all "knew", but had trouble proving.  It's a game of cat & mouse, but overt NATO pilots, etc sends a clear message of escalation that nobody wants right now.  

We very well might have "advisors" smuggled in as "volunteers" for the Legion.  That would not surprise me in the least, especially agency ground branch guys.  As for pilots, if you had NATO pilots, the carry the Vietnam analogy, they'd be in MIGs posing as Uke pilots, not in Western planes. 

Vietnam was have escalated instantly had modern Russian planes with Russian Air force markings, with Russian pilots entered the sky's to create a "no fly" zone over Hanoi....which is what many here are advocating for.  

Yeah that's why NATO most likely isn't entering Ukraine. Where this gets murky is even thoughout the Vietnam War the US was never just laying complete waste to entire populations of civilians. There were civilian casualties and war crimes committed by US soldiers but it was never a policy to just destroy every aspect of the country the way Putin is starting to do here. Does that lead NATO to draw a line in the dirt and confront Putin? I don't know. 

There has to be a like somewhere. NATO made it clear that line wasn't Ukraine when it refused to work with Ukraine to station troops and equipment on the Russian border as Putin amassed his troops there. 

So where is the line? If he invades Moldova as well is that not a line? Is the line only at NATO borders and any and all atrocities committed by Putin outside of that not to be responded to militarily? 

That's the tough question right now. What I do know is under no circumstances should the US go unilaterally here, especially since this is in Europe's back yard. Biden should support and give advice in the NATO discussions and hold to what we've been doing already. 

Just now saw NATO said this morning they won't do a no fly as that would lead to direct confrontation with Russia and all out war with Russia and the west. 

[hookemATL 12,278]

According to my extensive 12yo knowledge of fighter jets (all learned from Chuck Yeager’s Air Combat flight simulator game), you can shoot down 10 migs with one F4 and then still have time to jerk off to CD ROM pornography. 

[BabaYaga 15,625]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummmm......

.....this.

Stop taking things at face value. Yes, that includes from US sources and Ukrainian sources.  Aggregate the information you're seeing, and give yourself a more accurate picture.

Then maybe stay out of the weeds all together and give vague, opaque answers instead of specifics about targeting this......"oh but not that.  Heavens no.  Not that"

Of course we're sharing as much as we can.  You answer such a question with platitudes.  

[Goredho 17,656]

56 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

Daaaamn

 

39 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

Possible end game if Putin is sane:

Russia gets:

Ukraine officially recognizes Crimea as Russian.

UN installs monitors in Donbas.

Ukraine agrees not to join NATO before 2035.

West lifts some sanctions with a path to lift remaining sanctions once reparations and nuke reductions are complete.

 

Ukraine/West gets:

Russia pulls out completely from Ukraine (including Donbas) immediately.

Russia pays full reparations to completely rebuild everything they destroyed plus pain and suffering.

Russia agrees to eliminate 3/4 of its nuclear arsenal (and agrees to UN verification of that).

Russia agrees to increased UN oversight in their elections.

 

I just don’t see that being agreed to by Putin. His successor, maybe.

[956 Worldwide 35,594]

Also on the MiG-29– they are capable of being configured for multi-role attacks but the Frogfoot and Fullback are just better tools for the job at hand.  With budget constraints and difficulties keeping the fleet flying, they’d hold back on that especially given thus far restrained use of air power.

Hell, we in the U.S. are now regretting the hours of flight time we put on our F-18s and B-1s to shoot missiles at insurgents with no air defenses.  

Edited March 4, 2022 by 956 Worldwide

[pops 7,142]

1 hour ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Zelenskys nuclear videos last night were just that…a way to get the west involved in this mess. He spread panic. It’s why he wants to constantly close off Ukrainian air space, so we show up to the fight.


I agree with SL…this will not be occupied by Russians, ever. Not now. It’ll be a civil war. Whatever’s worth it to Ukrainians to keep fighting for, again like you said-not me to decide. But I know we’ll be sending aid, relief in the billions, probably trillions, because of this mess. By then Kyiv will probably be straight from an alien invasion movie.

And everybody important to you is dead or displaced that you’ll never see again.

A civil war?   What the fuck,  man?   Ukraine is not Russia. Russia is not Ukraine. It is one country invading another country.  Quit being such a capitulating bitch. If you can't understand why Ukrainians would rather die fighting against russia....russia!.... instead of going back to 1989 then I guess you just don't get it. 

[Guest Lobo]

5 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

No, I think it's a serious problem. Ben Sasse (on the Senate Intelligence Committee) has been bringing this issue up in multiple interviews over the past few days, and this finally confirms it. Any time Psaki or others are asked about it, they are not asked directly about whether we're providing "real-time lethal targeting intelligence" (Sasse's words), so they are able to dance around it by saying "we are providing real-time intelligence that's extremely valuable to the Ukrainian military." 

Sasse can't be trusted.  Did you see how he voted last year?  

[Neonmoon 38,130]

Russia calling in more troops because the ones in Ukraine are dead

 

 

['stache 22,143]

Humans are so silly. The premise of whether Putin goes nuclear is based on technicalities of written documents? If US or NATO enforce a "no fly zone" or send troops, he'll use nukes. But as long as they're just giving them tanks, planes, weapons, ammo, etc., he'll hold back. I think the second Putin thinks he might lose he'll go nuclear regardless of whether western help is direct or "indirect." I'm still not sure how supplying equipment is indirect, but again, humans are silly.

[Brisketexan 106,899]

3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Then maybe stay out of the weeds all together and give vague, opaque answers instead of specifics about targeting this......"oh but not that.  Heavens no.  Not that"

Of course we're sharing as much as we can.  You answer such a question with platitudes.  

We may see some value in denying a specific action here -- perhaps because we're getting intel/chatter from Russia that indicates that they suspect we're doing that specific action.

I genuinely don't know (which is the point).  I do know that when it comes to such matters, there's a metric shitton going on beneath the surface that we don't know or see (I know THAT from info we get after the fact, and/or things that have been communicated to me by family members in the general field that make it rather clear that in such cases, there's a whole lot that goes on that the public never knows about).

But again, here, I'm guessing at motivation and purpose for the message.  I DO know that if we're playing it smart (and so far, it looks like we are), every public message from a US official has a purpose, it isn't just sloppy (setting aside Lindsay Graham).

[atomheartbevo 90,650]

4 hours ago, Doug E. Fresh said:

There is no way the conventional Russian military is being used up in this war. There are plenty of Russian troops, tanks, artillery and more importantly aircraft available to move on to the next target.

At the same time they are losing equipment that can not be physically replaced when its production ended long ago.  And they are shipping in vehicles from 6,000 miles away.  

Helicopters are useless  if they’re afraid of Stingers.  Aircraft are  nearly useless with non-precision weapons that require them to get within Stinger range for decent accuracy against Ukrainian forces.  

Tanks are useless if they can be easily defeated by Javelins and NLAWs because they aren’t operating in tandem with infantry who are needed to keep ATGMs out of range.   There’s that word again: infantry.

5-star QBs are useless if they are on the bench because the other team keeps intercepting or sacking them   You start to question why they were given 5 stars in the first place.

 

[bolverk 30,325]

2 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Russia calling in more troops because the ones in Ukraine are dead

 

 

If you're wondering where Pskov is on the map, this is where it's located.

Hint: Nowhere near Ukraine, but...um...elsewhere.

[Bateshorn 9,991]

16 minutes ago, Handcruser said:

You believe that? US just calls France and France calls Ukraine.

Probably more likely the Poles.

”Good Morning, fellow NATO reps, let’s get you an update on latest intelligence we have on the conflict in Ukraine.  Remember, this is super secret and shouldn’t leave this room!”

[BabaYaga 15,625]

6 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

Yeah that's why NATO most likely isn't entering Ukraine. Where this gets murky is even thoughout the Vietnam War the US was never just laying complete waste to entire populations of civilians. There were civilian casualties and war crimes committed by US soldiers but it was never a policy to just destroy every aspect of the country the way Putin is starting to do here. Does that lead NATO to draw a line in the dirt and confront Putin? I don't know. 

We bombed the dogshit out of Hanoi and Haiphong - we targeted military sites, but we all know thousands of civilians were killed/injured.  So to parallel Ukraine, had obviously Russian planes, with Russian pilots, engaged these US bombers, it would have been game on.  That is the same line here.  That is the escalation path everyone is avoiding.  Now layer on Russian tanks and other crews staging in N. Vietnam and across the border or active Russian SAM sites positioned on the border and active against US air crews on sorties in the north.  Also game on.  

I think the line is clear.  Any direct action from NATO air or ground forces can be seen a an ovious catalyst for escalation.  

[Gatorubet 30,720]

If I was giving secret intel to kill Russians, I’d say that too….

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,731]

9 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

The Russians have at most, at absolutely most, 50,000 infantry in Ukraine. And I’m being very generous.  50,000 troops aren’t enough to occupy a big fucking country with 44 million people, especially when those 50,000 infantry aren’t even able to keep the other 150,000 members of the invading force secure  

If you don’t understand what infantry is, it’s not a truck driver or a medic or a cool or mechanic or gun bunny.  It’s a guy with a rifle trained to fight with that rifle and who can take and hold land.  Being able to lob shells at a building doesn’t mean you are holding that building. You have to have some Russian infantry conscript in that building to declare it as being controlled by your side.

And that Russian infantry conscript is also the guy who has to guard your forward base and your shitty convoys and when you take a village or city you have to leave some infantry behind to make sure the enemy doesn’t take it back.

Russia screwed the pooch.  We couldn’t conquer Iraq and it’s 25 million people with an invading force  larger than Putin is using.   And the Warsaw Pact wasn’t next door to Iraq flooding the place with the latest anti-tank weapons and MANPADs.

And NATO and the EU will  easily keep feeding more weapons and other aid in to Ukraine. 

There is a false interpretation of military size when comparing an invading force with a defensive force. Russia's military might be double or triple the size of Ukraine but Russia cannot send 100% or even 50% into Ukraine.  I readily admit that Russia's resource advantage, especially non-personnel, definitely exists.

[Saint Austin 776]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

If you're wondering where Pskov is on the map, this is where it's located.

Hint: Nowhere near Ukraine, but...um...elsewhere.

Surely they're just head south through Belarus and not preparing for an invasion of the Baltics, right?

Right?!?

[South Austin 53,227]

3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

5-star QBs are useless if they are on the bench because the other team keeps intercepting or sacking them   You start to question why they were given 5 stars in the first place.

So the Russian military is the equivalent of this guy:

[Stella Link 535]

1 minute ago, Saint Austin said:

Surely they're just head south through Belarus and not preparing for an invasion of the Baltics, right?

Right?!?

Yes, you're right.  And please, don't call me Shirley.

 

 

[Bateshorn 9,991]

You think the Russians are struggling with air superiority in Ukraine, try that Estonian border and find out what real Air Superiority looks like. 

[bolverk 30,325]

2 minutes ago, Saint Austin said:

Surely they're just head south through Belarus and not preparing for an invasion of the Baltics, right?

Right?!?

Google Traffic Map does show slow going south of town, so yes?

(fingers crossed)

[Guest Lobo]

5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

At the same time they are losing equipment that can not be physically replaced when its production ended long ago.  And they are shipping in vehicles from 6,000 miles away.  

Helicopters are useless  if they’re afraid of Stingers.  Aircraft are  nearly useless with non-precision weapons that require them to get within Stinger range for decent accuracy against Ukrainian forces.  

Tanks are useless if they can be easily defeated by Javelins and NLAWs because they aren’t operating in tandem with infantry who are needed to keep ATGMs out of range.   There’s that word again: infantry.

5-star QBs are useless if they are on the bench because the other team keeps intercepting or sacking them   You start to question why they were given 5 stars in the first place.

 

They're going to pour in 2-3 more divisions as a "surge."  It will look like a reasonable escalation to the West.  They will then broadcast messages about how their increased force posture is under violent guerrilla attack which will seem reasonable to us considering what we've seen already from Ukrainian citizens.  They will make a demonstrable retreat back to the Russian/Belarus border that is clearly visible from satellite imagery.  They will leave behind wounded and equipment/armor/weaponry.  Once back at the read, as the winds shift, they will detonate a handful of low-yield tactical nuclear warheads and eviscerate a portion of a number of Ukrainian cities.  

Because Putin is a stable genius.  This will all take place around Palm Sunday.  

[Chad Fuck 18,135]

36 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

 

Poo tee weet!

[KYHorn 17,615]

8 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Sasse can't be trusted.  Did you see how he voted last year?  

Okay. I'll believe the "sure we are" sentiments from people here instead of the senator who expressed concern about this issue, has access to intelligence on this issue, and whose concerns were just supported by an NBC News investigation.