pawnman
-
Posts
4,225 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
77
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by pawnman
-
-
1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:
In Russia's eyes NATO has been encroaching on them for decades despite promises not to, and they started this war to prevent Ukraine from further aligning with the west and threatening them. Additionally the area they invaded are full of ethnic Russians who claim mistreatment by Ukraine.
you asked the question so I'm answering it, not endorsing Russian actions. Although I would add that my non-US friends are quick to point out that a preemptive invasion to deter a threat to their homeland.... is exactly what the US did to Iraq.
my opinion: we need to end the war in Ukraine. It would involve Ukraine giving up territory. That sucks. However, that is preferable to me than getting the US involved in war against Russia to settle a regional dispute.
Do you think Ukraine should exist as a country? Because where I see a negotiation that gives up a bunch of Ukrainian territory is another invasion in a few years (like they already did to Crimea). Then another one a few years after that. Then Russia's in Kyiv and there's no Ukrainian government anymore.
In my mind, it's not just about Ukraine. It's about whether we want to set the precedent that bigger nations can just seize territory from smaller ones at will, because we don't think we should get involved in territorial disputes.
I'd also say one big difference between Ukraine and Iraq is that the US didn't set out to conquer and annex Iraq. There was never, even for a second, the consideration that Iraq would become a US territory.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:
so i agree with you from a western perspective.
but i'd imagine russia doesn't hold the same perspective. try to see the game thru your opponents eyes and not western ones.
So in Russia's eyes, this is an existential war that they started because...?
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, bfargin said:
Some of you def seem pretty obsessed with going to war with Russia. Every single questioning post on the wisdom of our current, obviously less than optimal, strategy and people claim someone’s a Putin stooge or Russian bot. I don’t see any benefit of continuing the current strategy.
We’re destabilizing current alliances, risking an escalated war, fostering the complete destruction of a sovereign nation, exacerbating our own financial crisis, and strengthening the alliance between our worlds current primary threat and Russia.
Maybe the world new sources are all bought and paid for and Russia really is about to collapse. I’d love to see our strategy actually work for our benefit, but the most obvious endgame doesn’t appear to benefit anyone. I hope they (all the news outside of the US) are wrong and Ukraine wins.
I dont understand how anyone looks at the way NATO came together, and the addition of Finland and Sweden to NATO, and comes to the conclusion that those are weakened alliances...
-
15 minutes ago, Air_Space said:
Without going into specifics how does HAF assume this is going to happen? Assuming Chang isn't a troll, there is just no way I can see this happening even if we go to T1 only sim track tomorrow. There's still the bottleneck of T-6s
1) Maintenance isn't going to be able to keep up especially on the 38 side
2) You don't have the instructors
3) High risk, if we go to flying 6-7 days a week with trip turns. That's how people put jets in the dirt (which we don't have enough of already). Or has HAF just said screw it, we accept the losses?
4) High ops tempo in UPT makes your instructor problem worse as now their living in s%*t towns and never see their family either in the process
5. Lower the bar. 5 sorries in the T-6, do all instruments in the simulator. VR instead of flight time for low-level navigation. Kick formation to the FTUs.
Not a smart idea, but one I can see the Air Force leaning towards. We're already reducing flying hours and training events.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, BashiChuni said:
stop backpedaling
I can't say this to you any more clearly...
Eat a giant bag of dicks.
-
2
-
4
-
-
56 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:
Both of which, masks and the vax, didn’t work. OOPS!
I've been ordered to do a lot of things that don't work. The question isn't whether they work, or even whether the decisions were smart. The question is whether a bunch of military officers are willing to follow legal orders or not.
-
2 minutes ago, bfargin said:
you guys are only ones saying surrender.
How do you think this ends? You think Zelensky just asks nicely and Putin removes all the troops?
Every proposal I've seen from folks who say we should negotiate a settlement involves Ukraine giving up a bunch of land to Russia. And let's not forget this is the third attempt by Russia to take land from Ukraine in the last 20 years. I don't know why anyone would think Russia would stick to any negotiated settlement this time around.
-
56 minutes ago, bfargin said:
Apples to oranges and even I know that. The Ukraine - Russia relationship is not like any relationship we've had as a nation beside possibly with England (though even thats not really the same). There were about 3 to 5 million Russians living in Ukraine before the war started. They speak the same language and were part of the same Nation (USSR) for many years. Not the same situation at all.
But, to play your game/question ... If we were about to be completely obliterated and the invader offered us a chance to keep most of the US intact but give back part of the region that already had many of "their people" living there, I'd negotiate peace.
Russia also treated Ukraine pretty brutally and starved several million people there... maybe there's a reason Ukraine isn't in a hurry to surrender.
-
3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:
I get where you’re coming from and if circumstances surrounding the shot were different I would agree with your logic. However the conspiracy theorist isn’t encouraging me to give this shot to my pregnant wife. Whoever is (FDA, Pfizer, CDC, etc) should sell me on both necessity and safety. If you’re buying a car and someone tells you “that car is unreliable” the salesmen could reply “you prove it!” But you don’t have to buy the car unless you want to; if the salesman wants to make a sale he should probably convince you to buy it.
To continue this analogy, in the crazy world of C19 vaccines the salesmen have convinced the government to force you buy it while also censoring true facts indicating the car is unreliable.
In your analogy, the dealer said the car's reliable. You said it only has 3 wheels. The dealer says "look, you can see all 4 wheels right here". Then you said "it doesnt matter if it has all 4 wheels, it's still unreliable".
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, bfargin said:
Ukraine has about 500k dead and injured now, so it’s def not going well for them. If you listened, he does at least acknowledge the complexity and huge risk of not working on a peace deal sooner than later. Again I’m not sure how in the know he is, but he’s pointing out the obvious fact that Ukraine is not winning. He thinks we’re essentially destroying a nation by encouraging them not to seek peace.
On the last point, he seems correct for sure.
There is a very wide gulf between "Ukraine is struggling as this war continues" and "Russia is stronger now than they were before the invasion".
There's probably some merit in the idea that Russia can eventually win just through sheer weight of manpower. I don't see any merit in the idea that they're better off militarily now than they were in 2019...
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Bigred said:
Can't speak to the rest of her bio, but whenever I read/hear someone say "classified missions", my BS meter pegs. This is particularly true if it's a pilot that says that.
Guys that ran classified missions don't put that in their bio. Well, except for SEALs. Those guys get issued a literary agent when they graduate BUDs.
When I read "flew F-16s, then deployed in helicopters" (assuming that part is true)...what I hear is "washed out of F-16 B-course and got reassigned to helos".
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, TreeA10 said:
There's crazy and then there is batshit crazy. And about those online dating apps.......
Probation? All she got after stabbing a dude and trying to kill him was PROBATION?
-
2 hours ago, bfargin said:
I have no idea on retired Col Mcgregors pedigree, but he makes some interesting points. He thinks Russia’s military is stronger now, after more than a year of war in Ukraine than it’s been in over 30 years. Increased war production capability and renewed national resolve. Has our plan to weaken and undermine Russia backfired spectacularly?
I don't know how you make the claim that a military digging out 60's Era equipment and buying ammo from North Korea is stronger...
-
3
-
-
6 hours ago, BashiChuni said:
You're right... we should definitely just let Russia invade whoever they want.
-
1
-
-
Yeah, I'm tapping out. You all can declare victory if you want.
-
2 minutes ago, VMFA187 said:
Pretty sure somewhere over the course of this discussion you said you would punish any military member who didn't get the vaccine with the full authority given by the UCMJ if you were a commander. That's about as close as one can get to what you said.
No...I said I'd be pretty pissed when I found out people were lying about being vaccinated just so they could disregard SECDEF's guidance on masks. Including UCMJ action for people who choose to lie, to my face, about their vaccination status in order to not wear a mask.
Integrity first, unless it's something I don't want to do...
I was always clear that I believed Biden and the DoD had the legal authority to order military members to get vaccinated. That's very different than believing that the federal government should force every citizen to get vaccinated.
Like...I literally can't say this any more simply. Y'all have built a strawman, and you're clutching it with both hands so you can keep beating on it.
-
6 hours ago, HeloDude said:
Your words two years ago speak for themselves. You were against everyday folks who didn’t want to get the vaccine, and then who didn’t want wear a mask, didn’t want to social distance, etc. I’m just pointing out that you were being a complete jerk and believed that what you were being told was true—that if someone fell into the camp above, that they were wrong. So unless you would like to admit that you were being a jerk and that you were wrong, I just reposted your words for everyone else to read once more.
You got all the apology you're gonna get.
-
1
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, HeloDude said:
It’s funny to see people try to act differently today when this is how they were 2 years ago.
It’s ok to have been wrong in the past, and it’s ok to even change your mind. I’ll even forgive people for being jerks if they show remorse and humility. But people need to own what they said/did and tell people they were wrong and a complete jerk. Anything less than that, well, then I’ll assume they’re the same person as two years ago.
I'm sorry...can you point to the phrase you believe says "I think thenfull force of the federal government should come down on people who don't get vaccinated?"
You guys enjoy beating on that strawman. Youve gotten plenty of practice over the last 2 years.
-
1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:
Awesome, we finally agree! And I don't care how many boosters you take or how often you double mask your kids. Have at it.
Freedom of choice has traditionally been a shared value in the US; it's only recently tyrants tried forcing us rather than convincing us. If you've switched away from the mandate cultists, then I welcome you on the side of freedom regardless of your opinion on vaccine efficacy. Live and let live.
Great. I was never on the side of the mandate cultists. You guys have just decided that anyone who doesn't believe the vaccines will sterilize you daughters and kill your sons must be on the side of mandates.
I was on the side of "get the vaccine so we can get back to normal". I've been bitterly disappointed at the long-term efficacy of the vaccines. I don't believe they are any more dangerous or damaging than any of the dozens of vaccines already on the vaccination schedule.
Now, before someone drags up previous posts for a "gotcha" moment, I want to make a distinction. I believe Biden and the DoD had the legal authority to order service members to get vaccinated. That doesn't mean I think it was a good idea. I NEVER supported the idea of a nation-wide mandate for the vaccines.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:
The "data" doesn't support all the young athletes dying suddenly, yet it's plain as day that's exactly what's happening.
turns out when you lie to people, they don't trust you. I notice you didn't engage on whether you'd have your pregnant wife/sister/daughter get vaxed and boosted. I don't blame you for avoiding the question, it's quite uncomfortable to realize you're the bad guy in a narrative.
So...a couple high profile cases are more compelling to you than any actual statistical data?
I'm not going to keep arguing it with you. You've found a topic you're passionate about, and you won't be convinced otherwise. Unlike you, I can be convinced by data...and it turns out there's a lot of studies that show people who hold emotional views not only can't be swayed by data, they actually just dig in as you present data contrary to their opinion.
Dont get vaccinated. Don't get your kids vaccinated. I don't care.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:
You're quite right, the burden of proof rests with the person making the assertion. The assertion made is that we must get vaccinated, it is the safe & effective way to "stop the spread." You should be prepared to convince a pregnant mom, not presume to order her.
You pro-vaccine zealots don't get it; 100% of the burden to prove vaccine validity is on you. This isn't a tit for tat discussion, you need overwhelming evidence from impartial sources and total data transparency or no one will believe you. You don't have it. Would you force your wife to take the clot shot while pregnant if risk of miscarriage increase was only 1%? Which is greater: the risk a young woman will have and spread covid so severe it threatens her life and others, or the risk this shot will harm her unborn baby?
Since you can't answer those question, you shouldn't be shaming people misreading data to err on the side of cautious prenatal care.
Ah. "I don't like the vaccines, I can make up anything I want and it's on you to prove me wrong".
You guys are about as coherent as flat earthers with your arguments.
For what it's worth, I don't think the vaccines should be mandatory for anyone and I'll even give you the point that they don't work nearly as well as advertised. I think you hurt your own argument when you completely make up new, scary side-effects that aren't supported by the data.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:
Your article does not provide any actual data, it merely alludes to mathematical errors in the assertion that C19 vaccine causes a higher miscarriage risk. If you want to "debunk the conspiracy" then we'd need to know the number of miscarriages in a non-vaccinated control group compared against the number in the vaccine group, then curate for other factors (lifestyle risk choices, age, overall health, etc.). This should be easy to debunk given that data exists, I wonder why that wasn't part of your article?
The only relevant information your linked article provided for those questions was the Pfizer comment that they did testing and do not assess miscarriage as a risk. Except they've lied about many things during the pandemic, including efficacy of the shot. **Edited to add: I did read the linked Sep 21 article claiming to prove no relation between vaccine and miscarriage; too old & not good enough, I want the Pfizer study data.**
So good luck debunking conspiracies, I mean that genuinely. But denial & counter-accusation does not actually debunk it. Release of all raw testing data might. The appeal to authority is unconvincing in light of complete failure, uncovered deception and corruption by the authorities.
The burden of proof rests with the person making the assertion. What evidence do you have that the vaccines did cause all these additional miscarriages? Aside from counting multiple instances in the report twice to get a more alarming number, that is?
-
1
-
3
-
-
45 minutes ago, HeloDude said:
So you’re for age restrictions on voting, but just the current age restriction. I mean, if a 16 year old can operate a vehicle by themselves, surely they’re competent enough to be able to vote? A lot of people are supportive of amending the Constitution to change the age to 16…would you be in favor?
I'm in favor of a single age for adulthood. If you think 16 year olds are old enough to vote, they should also be allowed to drink, smoke, join the military, get credit cards, get married, move out, etc.
I'm not at all a fan of our tiered approach, where you're an adult for some things but underage for others.
-
4
-
-
17 hours ago, Pooter said:
Well that's weird, because China's manufacturing quality is also known to be shit, but the moment they got their hands on sensitive F-35 tech data they made the most credible adversary threat aircraft basically out of nowhere.. up to that point only having borrowed Russian designs for decades.
Russia also still makes superior jet engines to China so I don't buy that Russia just doesn't have the machining tolerances to do stealth.
Yeah, look at that precision machining...
-
2
-
Russian Ukraine shenanigans
in General Discussion
Posted
Pretty sure Germany isn't paying as much because, despite being the richest country in Europe, they're way behind the US. And then there's also the fact that seems overlooked in all these conversations...most of what we're giving them is weapons and ammo, something we have WAY more of than Germany.
Ironically, the reason most of NATO has so little to give is because NATO never expected to fight Russia, let alone invade them. Most of Europe was winding down military spending in favor of social spending, and getting into business with Russia...something Romney and Trump saw, and got ridiculed for at the time.