Lawman

“May be” F it man you’ve been provided no shortage of people and sources demonstrating yes what I’m saying is in fact correct. https://www.npr.org/2022/04/15/1093121762/russias-oil-drilling-plans-may-be-in-jeopardy-without-the-wests-support We know what dollar amounts and total volumes that move where because it’s a global financial market. There isn’t some mystery about intake in Europe vs intake in Asia or the fact that the infrastructure just isn’t there. Again these weren’t some Soviet era state secret industries, Shell and Exxon were the ones doing the work for them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you doubled not just the Chinese, but entire Asian consumption of Russian petroleum exports tomorrow it wouldn’t equal half the loss of their European markets. On top of that they don’t have the capacity to move that same scale of oil into China and wouldn’t even if every proposed pipeline was open (only 1 currently runs out of the Siberian fields). They have to make up all the difference of intake largely in sea transport of oil. Goes back to the whole insurance and financial capital problem. No simply “turning to the Chinese” isn’t an economically viable solution, neither are the Chinese capable of supporting them with the same level of technical expertise at the scale they need to keep their industry afloat. China makes tech at volume with largely stolen Intellectual property, not at quality. There is a reason the Siberian oil explorations dropped off a cliff after the 2014 invasion of Crimea, and there wasn’t some state run Chinese energy company just waiting in the wings to swing in and gobble up the excess. And that doesn’t even touch that whole worlds largest importer of food problem, which is an issue if you’re using excess capital to prop up a neighboring power at the same time your industrial labor costs skyrocket and your internal demographics collapse. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See now you’re back to being ignorant or at the very least obtuse. “Who will they turn to….” What the hell is that even supposed to mean. If your assertion is they need the west to give them long term sustainment of their economy then that points to the effectiveness of sanctions as a tool of foreign policy. If you are trying to assert that the Chinese will simply step in and laterally equal western tech and expertise or economic consumption you are grossly ignorant of the reality here. Simply put the Chinese can’t do that. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/11/business/china-russia-ukraine-sanctions-economy.html https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/china-russia-war-ukraine-taiwan-putin-xi Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Most of their Siberian wellheads are maintained with western assistance. https://delano.lu/article/russia-depends-on-western-tech https://cepa.org/article/sanctions-against-russia-are-more-effective-than-skeptics-suggest/ They aren’t being maintained and the Russians are in danger of not having a way to export them with the freeze on insurance and exporting vessels by western nations. (Again results of unified sanctions). They can’t make that difference up with the Chinese which despite volume will never match the peak high end tech that was lost. We can see Russian industrial accidents from space right now. They’ve been increasing in frequency since this war started. They may export energy as a raw product but they import the technical expertise that allowed them to actually pump it out of the ground. The outcome of a mass exodus of that resource is kinda predictable And if you’re China right now you have to weigh the idea of being belligerent and triggering massive unified sanctions when you are simultaneously the worlds largest importer of energy and more importantly food. That’s in addition to seeing how your Russian derived tech systems cope when dealing with western weapons. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again… as obvious that it is you still haven’t watched the provided information that explains why this phase of the war is actually about preventing WWIII, we don’t have to kill Putin to achieve that. Demonstrating to him (in indirectly China) that wars of conquest will not be accepted by a unified group of western powers is done by what we are currently doing and that we (the west) don’t dither internally to the point of giving into compliant isolationist views that benefit the belligerent party. Putin can always go home and keep his shamble empire. The difference now is he does it without the ability to project or seriously threaten any of his neighbors a large group of which are Article 5 NATO powers which in case of hostilities we would be compelled to act to protect. And likewise Xi now has to look at what happened economically and physically and recalculate if he really thinks his first military foray should be to execute an apposed amphibious operation against an Island armed with all our modern weapons. Sitting around on our asses, sending thoughts and prayers instead of arms and supplies, and watching him take Ukraine will do nothing but embolden a military which has lost the majority of its conventional arms capability. When they come out for the next war (because this isn’t their first) they won’t hesitate to take the nuclear weapons out the second they miscalculate western resolve, engage in an offense into Poland/Latvia/Lithuania/etc, and suddenly find themselves facing a United NATO conventional force they have no ability to stop. That becomes a far more dangerous scenario than the current one where despite our aid to Ukraine, western leaders up to and including the US president can literally land in the middle western capital of a war zone and disrupt/delay the Russian targeting cycle for fear of widening the conflict. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It wasn’t terrible, but it was kinda terribly moderated (in that it really wasn’t dude just kinda kept time). There was a definite disconnect between parties on what was to be the subject of discussion, Crenshaw went in there prepared to defend specific Ukrainian intervention and aid and more broadly foreign policy. The other side wanted to discuss wider foreign intervention and spent very little time discussing Ukraine (or Thailand) outside saying “well it sucks for them but we don’t have an interest there.” Crenshaw did a good effort in explaining that we have serious economic interest not just a moral one towards maintaining security and that “the two big moats” as his opposite put it are not sufficient protection to simply withdraw from the policies we’ve had since the late 1800s. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great bro, do you own research. Hey somebody let the DIA know we don’t need them anymore. Nothing to learn that can’t be found out on dubious YouTube/Reddit posts of some guy shouting from the cab of a truck. Remember “experts” are the ones that told you gasoline is toxic to humans… better question that now because Covid. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It does when you deliberately ignore or flat out dismiss people with way more knowledge and access to the circles discussing the nuance of what is really going on there (causes/current situation/selective end-states). Again, unclass forum. That dudes about as succinct as you’re gonna get while still staying in the green. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’ve been handed the material to educate yourself as best can be done in an unclass forum. And you’ve deliberately chosen to ignore that. That by definition makes you ignorant if your sole screaming reason for wanting us to stop doing what we are doing is “Ukraine isn’t NATO” or whatever other talking point you’ve been handed. And you can’t be told the reality is something different. Again, in about 6 minutes you could educate yourself on the reason the current status quo of exchange of support for US/NATO interest far outweighs not doing anything now and just waiting for an actual shooting war with NATO. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You aren’t pro Putin, you’re just ignorant. Quick go find us some more memes from Reddit to tell us how important it is we stop supporting Ukraine in any meaningful fashion or how this isn’t NATO’s concern. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was in the room when somebody asked Chief Friel (now CW5 but then pilot of the 47 that crash landed down the mountain) if he would have done anything differently. His response was had he known then he wasn’t going to be much use he’d have shut it down on the LZ and put himself and his crews into the fight with the rangers. There’s also a random civilian guy that works the ramp at SOATB on Campbell Army Airfield. Unassuming guy who runs blade tie downs and stuff out in a golf cart. You’d never know he has a silver star for his work pulling ammo from the wrecked aircraft and taking it in belts up the mountain to resupply the ground force gunners from their 240 ammo. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reddit is a cesspool of all the things wrong with giving anyone access to everyone and granting that person complete anonymity at the same time. Going there is like the social media equivalent walking into a gas station bathroom on some random middle of nowhere off-ramp in Mississippi. Even if it might look ok (and that’s a big if)… deep down you should probably take a shower afterward just to be safe. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

In a word… Yes. Because we aren’t “going to war” and again that could be explained to you in about 6 minutes. You’ve spent more time arguing with me than it would take to educate yourself as to why the strategic policy makers are doing what they are doing in regards to arming Ukraine. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your opinion is noted. It’s stupid and Ill-informed but noted. Here is a chance to actually educate yourself on the why of what’s going on and how waiting for Russia to attack NATO is stupid. “Expert” in quotes, adorable. Yeah it’s probably pretty fair to say he’s a crap load more qualifiedto discuss the nuance of this and why it’s critical while maintaining an apolitical stance while you deliberately drag up Biden and Blinken. Dude routinely lampoons Biden, Trump, and Obama so he’s hardly some unqualified political narrative talking head. He isn’t the media, he’s a well circulated published author and does strategic policy seminars for billion dollar investment groups and government strategic planning. So yeah, it’s fair to say he’s probably decently qualified at his job and pretty accurate in his interpretations considering the amount of money that kind of influence its being steered by. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tell us you didn’t watch the video without telling us you didn’t watch it… Dude lays out exactly why waiting for Russia to invade Poland/Latvia/Estonia/etc is suicide at about the 6 minute mark… At 25 minutes he explains why something like Nordstream would happen intentionally… Yes we get it, it’s not Tucker Carlson but this guy briefs strategic level government officials and key notes seminars on energy and agriculture industry leaders and investors. Tucker… briefs people living in trailer parks. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This guy succinctly explains in the first six and a half minutes why you’re viewpoint is completely out of contact with why we are doing this. It’s not about widening a war it’s about preventing the war with NATO a phase before it can occur, because at this point the Russians are recognizing their only real card to play against NATO at this point is going to the nuclear assets. Oh he’s also updated this presentation as the war has evolved, and for those that don’t think the Russians have a reason to destroy Nordstream, you really need to go look at the amount of damage not being able to readily get Natural Gas is about to do in the most powerful industrial base in the EU. It’ll hurt the Russians… but it will kill the Germans and by extension hobble the EUs economic ability to do anything. And deliberate sabotage vs just turning it off gives them the political card to play accusing the US and forcing political pressure to lessen aid to Ukraine (as we are now actively seeing calls for). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The evidence is building from open source intel that the Russians have consumed a lot of their viable FMC ASE equipment and are now operating their KA-52s without it. We’re seeing shoot downs occur without any expenditures of flares or similar, and the post shoot down analysis of photos shows them either partially or completely not installed. I don’t doubt their fixed wing aircraft are having similar problems. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look at how far we’ve advanced in communications. We’ve come a long way from having hostile entities and criminals need to steal our PIA from a laptop left in a random rental car or the bathroom of a Panera bread. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

But wait we were assured this was strictly about energy production. That must be some massively efficient energy what with pushing the envelope for weapons grade when you can make power with a third that level pretty much anywhere. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Between this stuff and what’s been going on with DCA over Iraq/Syria it’s become the air to air version of what we were doing spending multi hundred thousand dollar to kill a guy with a shovel. Directed Energy can’t get here fast enough… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh you definitely sound like you “did your own research on the matter.” Again, you say you aren’t sympathetic to the Russians absurd view that this is all justified, then you list out tit for tat pretty much their interpretations of the Maiden protests and other pretexts for invasion of Ukraine. Your little history lesson ignores a lot including the long established history of the guy those protests resulted in deposing (you know the one that won the first set of rigged elections a decade earlier after his opponent was mysteriously poisoned then later lost). Then there’s how he got elected after Russia used economic embargo of gas and other means to paralyze Ukraine’s infrastructure and work to foment the western push that got him elected the second time. Oh and Russia actually did join the rest of the world in recognizing the new Ukrainian president. They just did so after they annexed portions of the country they wanted and staged rigged elections to support their actions as legitimate. Just a quick reminder…. The Donbas and Crimea both belonged to Ukraine. What next you gonna tell us this was really about de-nazification or some other excuse that absolves them of any culpability in the decade long war inside the borders of a neighbor? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Again we didn’t start this, and your efforts to be sympathetic to the Russian point of view aren’t lost on the adults in the room. We didn’t start a war with a European neighbor, they did. We didn’t invade a country under false pretenses to overthrow its government and attempt to replace it with a more amenable vassal state, they did. And they are “spinning their wheels” because in no small amount of efforts to bolster the Ukrainian military by U.S. and other NATO nations since they started annexing territory in 2014. You seem to either fail to understand that or deliberately do not acknowledge it as the effect of Russian aggression not the cause of it. Our enhanced posturing and things like Atlantic Resolve are costing us billions and have been since 2014. They are costing us manpower because of the increased demand on families and soldiers which costs more in the long run due to lost experience and the requirement to restore it. The Army has acknowledged the desire to go to the lower cost EDRE enhanced model of maintaining readiness and deterrence without the full on deployments of rotational combat forces, but that has been predicated on the cessation of direct hostilities by Russia against its European neighbors, which I’ll remind you yet again came first before the deployments started. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again as others have pointed out this is the cheapest form of spending we have ever had in regards to opposing Russian influence and attempts to hinder our efforts and interests and positively affect their own. If you were at all honest in your sudden alarm to the cost of these efforts (let alone wider foreign policy) Id encourage you to compare the ongoing costs of Atlantic Resolve deployments against the pitifully low cost of our efforts to aid Ukraine to date. It costs a little less than 2 billion in current costs just to rotate an Armor brigade or similar heavy element. That’s the direct cost, it doesn’t even begin to scratch the manpower negative we get on sustainment with those rotations. We only started doing that in direct response to Russian aggression in Crimea. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No the summation of the arguments he’s making is what is getting him called a stooge. This isn’t “I just want an honest open conversation about…” We can read the real intent his actions through the culmination of stated opinions and what conversations he attempts to advance and which ones deliberately avoided/ignored/bypassed. And while yes examples of historical conspiracy theorists turn out right the vast majority do not. You can’t point to media/social media bias in say hiding the Biden laptop stuff during the election, then turn around and use that as the justification for your belief that Bush did 9/11 or the moon landing didn’t happen and demand to be taken seriously with that. Go read the other thread, dude is seriously peddling crap from Twitter handles, or wild ramblings by Seymour Herch passing it off as part of this mountain of direct evidence that we are being lied to and the US simply has to be responsible. He’s not presenting this as a possible, he’s presenting it as a fact and telling the room we’re all too stupid to put the clues together. By the way if you want a laugh go to his Twitter loon’s page the latest stuff is tinfoil crazy like the US used an Earthquake gun on Turkey. Dude is in this thread repeatedly sharing nothing but examples and stories about dubious Ukrainian actions and downplaying real examples of Russian actions. I’ll remind you he’s the one that started the whole line topic on downplaying Russian involvement in MH17, then kept trying to minimize the realities of that exact situation when challenged on it. So what is his desired end state. Well it’s kinda the joke with the whole “I’m not racist, but” example. Make pleading statements when pressed on it about how you wants Russia to lose, but really he’s only interested in that we modify our support to an isolationist standpoint of delayed or no real tangible support to Ukraine. He and others keep implying this isn’t in our interests and we have no dog in it. We (the US and Allies) have to suddenly be hyper sensitive to some impossible purity standard in the actions/corruption/etc of a foreign state even when it’s interests directly along with our own interests. Establishing that standard we halt our current or future spending and stop delivering any kind of meaningful money or actions to support the Ukrainians. That’s exactly the outcome that aligns with Russian desires, hence why they spend the effort in influence campaigns like the ones mentioned in that Brookings Institute article. And I’ve seen plenty of with that kind of desired end-state at the heart of their efforts on Ukraine whatever their deeper motivation to it. A bunch seem to be the “can’t let the other team have a win” types (Tucker Carlsons types) who just adopt the opposite tact and support or don’t support war when it suits them. Some are the isolationist types that just don’t want us to play the foreign policy/influence game at all or the hard Dove types who just don’t support anybody in this situation but offer no solution other than wouldn’t it be great if we all loved each other… We saw this exact same type of thing with regards to preventing us from taking actions against Isis. “We can’t support the Kurds/Yazidi/Iraqi government because…..” “Isis isn’t hurting us” stuff like that. In that previous example all those arguments did was lengthened the time to actually do something about it and the size and damage of the conflict that was churning with or without us when it was clearly the right thing to anybody that was there fighting it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes tell us all about the dangers of the media and disinformation dangers… specifically ones regarding this and how it’s impossible that you are buying the wrong parties bullshit. https://www.brookings.edu/techstream/u-s-podcasters-spread-kremlin-narratives-on-nord-stream-sabotage/ Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk