Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[956 Worldwide 34462]

1 hour ago, statsman said:

What is the US strategy, here? It’s to counter and prevent the Russian strategy. The Russian strategy is to parlay their military capability and institutional disdain for liberal democracy into regional dominance and increased global influence. The US strategy is to stop them (and China). Supporting Ukraine is a tactic for the US. A victorious Ukraine would be nice, but not essential. 
Russia can, and will, get nastier. They can kill civilians. They can blow up nuclear power plants, poisoning the land for generations. They can use tactical nukes. NATO will not respond in kind. 
The proper NATO response isn’t to push harder for victory in Ukraine, who isn’t a NATO member. The proper response is to let Russia display who and what they are, in its full horror. Then, NATO nations can go about the work of shoring up their defenses, and increasing energy independence. 
If the west stays true to its principles-liberal democracy, market capitalism and rule of law, time is on its side (as it has been for the last couple of centuries). This approach is, unhappily, accepting of a bad outcome for Ukraine. The west needs to welcome its refugees and work hard to keep the same from happening to Taiwan. 
All that being said, yes, if Putin were to die, it could be possible to negotiate a peace that was acceptable. 

Got it, so we should sit back and let Russia put heads on spikes, establish rape basements, burn POWs alive, toss bodies down wells, loot Ukrainian homes, and send kids to concentration camps.

But it’s cynical to arm Ukraine to fight against that to the last man, if they do CHOOSE.

What Ukrainians get—and lots of Western observers don’t get— is that they are in an existential fight for their nation, culture, and in many cases their lives.  They didn’t get to choose to be in it, but they can choose to fight it. 

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

Airfield in Crimea struck. Ladies and gentlemen the longer range missiles arrival in theatre has just been announced.

Sevastopol naval base is now in range.

[statsman 5425]

4 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

 

 

you are exactly what Russia is counting on.  sitting back and just letting it happen.

 

Russia has already said they have every intention of retaking Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania  along with all of Ukraine, Muldova, and Bulgaria.  and they may get froggy enough to think they can take Poland.

 

Russia is being led by a James Bond madman who wants the world to bow to ancient perceived Russian pressure while he tries to rebuild the Soviet Empire. and either the West lets it happen- and lose all chance to contain.... or we take a stand...... a stand that may fuck us all.

otherwise, this shit is going to be repeated every 20 years.

How about we wait for them to invade a NATO member before escalating to an existential conflict?

[texastough 1129]

1 minute ago, statsman said:

How about we wait for them to invade a NATO member before escalating to an existential conflict?

Which is . . . exactly what we’re doing? Seriously, go sniff farts with immaculate vibes

[BabaYaga 15214]

3 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

Russia has already said they have every intention of retaking Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania  along with all of Ukraine, Muldova, and Bulgaria.  and they may get froggy enough to think they can take Poland.

With what forces?  They've lost north of 40K people already, have untold casualty numbers, lost equipment they can't replace, and have little to no effective leadership left.

Their ONLY gains are made with mass saturation attacks via population centers with stand-off attacks.  Even if EU support dried up tomorrow and they "took" most of Ukraine, they can't fucking hold it.  

This conflict would end tomorrow if the UA had the means to hit Russian rail inside it's borders.  Grinding most supply and logistics to a halt.  

[BabaYaga 15214]

7 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

But it’s cynical to arm Ukraine to fight against that to the last man, if they do CHOOSE.

 

His point I do get - We are insanely hawkish on this.  Even going so far as to threaten aid/supplies if the UA entertains peace talks as much of the EU has been pushing for.  This is a proxy war and we want our pound of flesh.  

 

[utee94 15746]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

His point I do get - We are insanely hawkish on this.  Even going so far as to threaten aid/supplies if the UA entertains peace talks as much of the EU has been pushing for.  This is a proxy war and we want our pound of flesh.  

 

Meh.  We know the same thing Ukraine knows-- there can be no negotiated peace with a terrorist state like Russia.  

 

[956 Worldwide 34462]

7 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

His point I do get - We are insanely hawkish on this.  Even going so far as to threaten aid/supplies if the UA entertains peace talks as much of the EU has been pushing for.  This is a proxy war and we want our pound of flesh.  

 

Do you have a source on this, because I am unaware of any U.S. threat to turn off aid and equipment if Ukraine decides they want to hold talks.  And they have held talks. I’m pretty close to this and we have been pretty consistent at saying that Ukraine gets to decide when it wants to consider terms.

We have been unwilling to make a link the other way (sit down and talk or no more guns), which SOME Europeans (not the ones with the most skin in the game) have quietly suggested. 

[BabaYaga 15214]

1 minute ago, utee94 said:

Meh.  We know the same thing Ukraine knows-- there can be no negotiated peace with a terrorist state like Russia.  

 

We'll see.  This won't last forever.  The great irony being the leader that did engender peace talks would probably get the Nobel. 

What I'm worried about are whispers that US weapons sent to help the UA are popping up outside the country.  Small arms obviously (for now), but what oversight and tracking do we actually have in the region?

[RPM 26234]

36 minutes ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

Airfield in Crimea struck. Ladies and gentlemen the longer range missiles arrival in theatre has just been announced.

Sevastopol naval base is now in range.

 

[Gatorubet 30125]

17 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

We'll see.  This won't last forever.  The great irony being the leader that did engender peace talks would probably get the Nobel. 

What I'm worried about are whispers that US weapons sent to help the UA are popping up outside the country.  Small arms obviously (for now), but what oversight and tracking do we actually have in the region?

Just asking questions Comrade. 

[RPM 26234]

19 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

What I'm worried about are whispers that US weapons sent to help the UA are popping up outside the country.  Small arms obviously (for now), but what oversight and tracking do we actually have in the region?

You should be more concerned about the stuff we left in the sandbox.

[956 Worldwide 34462]

Love to see this.  Russian tourists and beachgoers aren’t getting killed, but the shit scared out of them.  They need to know they aren’t at home, they aren’t safe, and Crimea is not for their holiday. 
 

Incidentally, I’ve been perhaps not to that beach, but damn close to it. 
 

 

[texastough 1129]

20 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

We'll see.  This won't last forever.  The great irony being the leader that did engender peace talks would probably get the Nobel. 

What I'm worried about are whispers that US weapons sent to help the UA are popping up outside the country.  Small arms obviously (for now), but what oversight and tracking do we actually have in the region?

Posts no source for the claim that US would withhold aid if Ukraine participated in talks, instead claims that arms are escaping Ukraine but posts no source for that either

[Dahobbs 17451]

33 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

His point I do get - We are insanely hawkish on this.  Even going so far as to threaten aid/supplies if the UA entertains peace talks as much of the EU has been pushing for.  This is a proxy war and we want our pound of flesh.  

 

What are you referring to? 

[Dahobbs 17451]

7 minutes ago, RPM said:

 

That's a fucking explosion. I assume that is an ammo cook-off and not a direct result of the strike. Either that or we sent some real big shit to Ukraine. 

[Dahobbs 17451]

2 hours ago, Gengs1 said:

The Answer is pretty simple, give Ukraine all of the weapons they need to win, give them long range weapons, some planes and what they ask for. They are more willing and capable to fight and win, they would prevail if given what they need. Look what they are doing with limited resources.  The west is slow playing this and looking weakish, single overwhelming support sends a message to Russia/China, don’t start shit and there won’t be shit.

you answer Russia with brute force cause that’s what they understand. Don’t backdown from them and they will move back 

Eh, I think we've played it pretty well. You can't just give Ukraine everything. They aren't setup to handle it. You slowly provide them more stuff and heavier stuff as they show they can use it. 

[956 Worldwide 34462]

There will be some spillage of small arms from Ukraine. That’s an iron-clad guarantee in a war zone, although it can be worse or better. All indicators are that it’s not a particularly critical problem or deficiency of the Ukrainians at this point. 
 

It’s also a sneaky issue to hammer.  The only way to get the guarantees you want is to put real live U.S. advisors and inspectors and logisticians on the ground and actually control more of the process. But that is also going to be a a huge escalation and increase in risk, which the people who want more accountability are also usually against. So then the only option is not to help arm Ukraine, which is of course the end goal of this argument. 

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

That's a fucking explosion. I assume that is an ammo cook-off and not a direct result of the strike. Either that or we sent some real big shit to Ukraine. 

It’s an airbase so you might also see fuel tanks, although I’d expect some blacker smoke from that. 

[BabaYaga 15214]

7 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Do you have a source on this, because I am unaware of any U.S. threat to turn off aid and equipment if Ukraine decides they want to hold talks.  And they have held talks. I’m pretty close to this and we have been pretty consistent at saying that Ukraine gets to decide when it wants to consider terms.

We have been unwilling to make a link the other way (sit down and talk or no more guns), which SOME Europeans (not the ones with the most skin in the game) have quietly suggested. 

Here's one, there are others

It's about Putin

TLDR, there are a number of thoughts - the most obvious being this is a way to get rid of Putin.  Talks happen, but nothing serious is coming from them.  To your second point, this has been the message for a while.  Many EU nations in close proximity with the conflict have been quietly pushing for peace while the more hawkish nations like the US and the UK seem to want this to continue.  

Some argue it's about the US dollar and the burgeoning new currency between Russia/China, but that is another topic.  To tie them both back, this is about weakening Russia - both militarily and economically.  

To be clear, I'm 100% for supplying aid to the UA.  My only issue as stated above are concerns about weapons sent to the UA popping up elsewhere.  Some is inevitable, but I do question what oversight mechanisms we have in place?

[BabaYaga 15214]

15 minutes ago, RPM said:

You should be more concerned about the stuff we left in the sandbox.

I already kicked the shit out of that soapbox.  It's unconscionable what we left behind.

[956 Worldwide 34462]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Here's one, there are others

It's about Putin

TLDR, there are a number of thoughts - the most obvious being this is a way to get rid of Putin.  Talks happen, but nothing serious is coming from them.  To your second point, this has been the message for a while.  Many EU nations in close proximity with the conflict have been quietly pushing for peace while the more hawkish nations like the US and the UK seem to want this to continue.  

Some argue it's about the US dollar and the burgeoning new currency between Russia/China, but that is another topic.  To tie them both back, this is about weakening Russia - both militarily and economically.  

To be clear, I'm 100% for supplying aid to the UA.  My only issue as stated above are concerns about weapons sent to the UA popping up elsewhere.  Some is inevitable, but I do question what oversight mechanisms we have in place?

You just linked an opinion piece that appeared on Chinese state media (CGTN) and a Real Clear Politics link.

[Dahobbs 17451]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

Here's one, there are others

It's about Putin

TLDR, there are a number of thoughts - the most obvious being this is a way to get rid of Putin.  Talks happen, but nothing serious is coming from them.  To your second point, this has been the message for a while.  Many EU nations in close proximity with the conflict have been quietly pushing for peace while the more hawkish nations like the US and the UK seem to want this to continue.  

Some argue it's about the US dollar and the burgeoning new currency between Russia/China, but that is another topic.  To tie them both back, this is about weakening Russia - both militarily and economically.  

To be clear, I'm 100% for supplying aid to the UA.  My only issue as stated above are concerns about weapons sent to the UA popping up elsewhere.  Some is inevitable, but I do question what oversight mechanisms we have in place?

Wait, so you don't actually have any sources where anyone actually associated with the US government said no aid if UA has peace talks? Instead, you cite sources that are opinions (which, you know, aren't facts) from known and suspected agents of Russian disinformation? Seriously?!

[statsman 5425]

10 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

 

Some argue it's about the US dollar and the burgeoning new currency between Russia/China, but that is another topic.  

It is a very stupid topic. The USD may lose its place as the global reserve currency some day. When that happens, it will be replaced by a currency denominated in a nation that allows global buyers to purchase property and goods, unfettered, in that nation. Neither the Russian ruble nor the Chinese yuan matches that description. 
 

I get that Russia and China bristle at the power of the USD. That’s too damned bad. 

Edited August 9, 2022 by statsman

[956 Worldwide 34462]

 

[BabaYaga 15214]

5 minutes ago, statsman said:

It is a very stupid topic. The USD may lose its place as the global reserve currency some day. When that happens, it will be replaced by a currency denominated in a nation that allows global buyers to purchase property and goods, unfettered, in that nation. Neither the Russian ruble nor the Chinese yuan matches that description. 
 

I get that Russia and China bristle at the power of the USD. That’s too damned bad. 

I don't buy it either, but as a regional trade denomination in Asia, it does pose a threat 

[956 Worldwide 34462]

Russian state media: “There was just a detonation of some munitions, no one is hurt, nothing damaged.  We’re putting out the fire.”

 

 

[AUS-97HORN 11682]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

 

really sounds like we gave them the ~300Km range weapons.    if all the Russian airbases within 300Km of Donbass start cooking off in the next few days that will be a holy shit wakeup call for Russia.

 

it could get so bad that Amnesty International will blame Ukraine for targeting peaceful civillian airfields in Russia that just happen to stuffed with Russian military attack Helo's and planes.

[InkaUtexas 25531]

6 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Russian state media: “There was just a detonation of some munitions, no one is hurt, nothing damaged.  We’re putting out the fire.”

 

 

Well aircraft need fuel and munitions. So if they went Boom that is still a good thing.

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

The Answer is pretty simple, give Ukraine all of the weapons they need to win, give them long range weapons, some planes and what they ask for. They are more willing and capable to fight and win, they would prevail if given what they need. Look what they are doing with limited resources.  The west is slow playing this and looking weakish, single overwhelming support sends a message to Russia/China, don’t start shit and there won’t be shit.
you answer Russia with brute force cause that’s what they understand. Don’t backdown from them and they will move back 

Kind of have to wonder if HARMs taking out RU’s air defense and the ATACMS arrival happened this week as a message to China about US weapons’ capabilities. Is RU going to have the USA opening the arms floodgates on them in response in China?

[BabaYaga 15214]

13 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Wait, so you don't actually have any sources where anyone actually associated with the US government said no aid if UA has peace talks? Instead, you cite sources that are opinions (which, you know, aren't facts) from known and suspected agents of Russian disinformation? Seriously?!

Stop.  Its one article.  Newsweek and others ran the same basic premise - that the US from the start want to punish/bleed Russia by dragging this out.  Blinken a few months back dismissed outright calls for negotiations.  When talks were held on allowing Russia to hold on to initial, modest gains this was scoffed at that in no way should Russia benefit from their actions at all.  Again, fine.  But there is the argument as well that the flow of weapons is prolonging the conflict and eschewing peace talks that many, many EU nations are trying to facilitate.  

[Fico 1743]

4 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Well aircraft need fuel and munitions. So if they went Boom that is still a good thing.

It definitely went boom. Russian sources, similar to Muskva, saying they are incompetent and blew themselves up instead of Ukraine successfully striking the base.

Looking at the out of date Google maps, the Russians were using a very small protected hanger area for a ton munitions instead of using the existing, protected ammunition bunkers away from the air field. 

[BabaYaga 15214]

2 minutes ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

Kind of have to wonder if HARMs taking out RU’s air defense and the ATACMS arrival happened this week as a message to China about US weapons’ capabilities. Is RU going to have the USA opening the arms floodgates on them in response in China?

China has been hacking/stealing US defense capabilities for decades.  They know everything we have and then some.  

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3868]

We'll see.  This won't last forever.  The great irony being the leader that did engender peace talks would probably get the Nobel. 
What I'm worried about are whispers that US weapons sent to help the UA are popping up outside the country.  Small arms obviously (for now), but what oversight and tracking do we actually have in the region?

Ukraine is saying don’t fall for the RU propaganda that the weapons are being resold as that is beyond stupid while we are trying to stop Russia’s genocide against us.

[Armybrat 40750]

6 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

China has been hacking/stealing US defense capabilities for decades.  They know everything we have and then some.  

Not quite everything.

[The Dog 43829]

[Dahobbs 17451]

17 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Stop.  Its one article.  Newsweek and others ran the same basic premise - that the US from the start want to punish/bleed Russia by dragging this out.  Blinken a few months back dismissed outright calls for negotiations.  When talks were held on allowing Russia to hold on to initial, modest gains this was scoffed at that in no way should Russia benefit from their actions at all.  Again, fine.  But there is the argument as well that the flow of weapons is prolonging the conflict and eschewing peace talks that many, many EU nations are trying to facilitate.  

Stop. You made a baseless claim that the US threatened to withhold aid if Ukraine negotiated with Russia. You have literally nothing to back that up other than rank speculation of agents of Russian disinformation (and even those articles don't actually say that). 

Edited August 9, 2022 by Dahobbs

[BabaYaga 15214]

10 minutes ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

Ukraine is saying don’t fall for the RU propaganda that the weapons are being resold as that is beyond stupid while we are trying to stop Russia’s genocide against us.

The argument is not to stop sending arms, it's to ensure there are safeguards to track their delivery and dispersion.  That is a clear role of the State/Defense departments as we did in Afghanistan (prior to the withdrawal)

[KYHorn 16865]

 

 

  

Edited August 9, 2022 by KYHorn

[Fico 1743]

14 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Stop.  Its one article.  Newsweek and others ran the same basic premise - that the US from the start want to punish/bleed Russia by dragging this out.  Blinken a few months back dismissed outright calls for negotiations.  When talks were held on allowing Russia to hold on to initial, modest gains this was scoffed at that in no way should Russia benefit from their actions at all.  Again, fine.  But there is the argument as well that the flow of weapons is prolonging the conflict and eschewing peace talks that many, many EU nations are trying to facilitate.  

Or there is the argument that the flow of weapons form 30+ countries including many, many from the EU are allowing Ukraine to defend itself from mass oppression or worse. 

Many also have the opinion any negotiations with Russia for a halt in the conflict will result in a new, more deadly conflict for Ukrainians in not so distant future. 

[The Dog 43829]

The argument is not to stop sending arms, it's to ensure there are safeguards to track their delivery and dispersion.  That is a clear role of the State/Defense departments as we did in Afghanistan (prior to the withdrawal)

[Gengs1 2583]

43 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Russian state media: “There was just a detonation of some munitions, no one is hurt, nothing damaged.  We’re putting out the fire.”

 

 

Translated, They fucked us up pretty good and we lost a lot of airplanes and equipment 

[RPM 26234]

[The Dog 43829]

[InkaUtexas 25531]

Summer's over Babushka, get the gets and back to the tundra.

 

[Dahobbs 17451]

1 minute ago, The Dog said:

 

This is what Rob is referring to:

 

[InkaUtexas 25531]

I laughed. 

 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

18 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The argument is not to stop sending arms, it's to ensure there are safeguards to track their delivery and dispersion.  That is a clear role of the State/Defense departments as we did in Afghanistan (prior to the withdrawal)

I'm sure Afghanistan is an excellent example of the proper implementation and execution of bureaucratic safeguards designed to prevent waste/mismanagement/unintended use of resources.

Your concern is noted.

[Chad Fuck 17572]

13 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Summer's over Babushka, get the gets and back to the tundra.

 

Let as many of them leave as possible.  Then take out that RR bridge over the Kerch strait.  Good times.

[Brisketexan 104670]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

 

 

Yuri.....tell me about the status of our airbase.

 

[The Dog 43829]