DirkDiggler
-
Posts
839 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Posts posted by DirkDiggler
-
-
Good video of Russians getting grenade’d.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:
If we select the AT-802 we will crash several of them as new pilots learn the idiosyncrasies of flying a tail wheel. It’s not rocket science, but it’s different enough to surprise you if your habit patterns aren’t defaulted that way. Knowing this organization, if that happens risk averse management will generate policies which obviate the austerity advantages you reference above. I’m excited to see which aircraft is selected, and I believe it’ll be announced in the next few weeks.
I do think our nation isn’t done with jihadi VEOs, as much as we want to be. I don’t think we’re going back to AFG. AFSOC’s pivot towards near peer is driven by a desire to remain NSS relevant. Appetite to engage VEOs has decreased markedly since the fall of Kabul. No one really knows what near peer looks like for us, resulting in a weird dilemma where HQ is mad that ops units aren’t creatively finding ways to do new missions, without actually defining those missions. It’s a strange time in the command.
Agreed. As with everything, follow the money. SOCOM’s budget has taken a hit in the last several years; in my opinion the command is trying to find ways to remain/demonstrate relevance with the pivot to peer/near peer. I personally don’t think we (AFSOC) have much play in those fights right of bang (that’s 5th gen/CSG/ABCT centric). The 3rd floor is pushing hard otherwise but isn’t really providing very clear guidance to the line squadrons on what we should stop doing IOT refocus. I think the next 3-5 years are gonna be turbulent to say the least.
-
13 hours ago, waveshaper said:
"Russia says flagship of Black Sea fleet badly damaged by blast | Reuters"
This story just hit the news about 45 minutes ago. There are two versions of what happened (TBD) but either way it sounds like this Russian Flagship is probably toast/artificial reef material. "The Neptune (Ukrainian: Р-360 «Нептун», romanized: R-360 "Neptun") is a Ukrainian anti-ship cruise missile. The system entered service with the Ukrainian Navy in March 2021 and has a 330lb Warhead"
"Russia on Thursday said the flagship of its Black Sea fleet was seriously damaged and its crew evacuated following a fire that caused an explosion, as a Ukrainian official said the vessel had been hit by missiles."
"The incident on the Moskva missile cruiser occurred after ammunition on board blew up, Interfax news agency quoted the Russian defence ministry as saying."
"Maksym Marchenko, governor of the region around the Black Sea port of Odesa, said in an online post that the 12,500 tonne ship was hit by two missiles, without providing evidence.
"Neptune missiles guarding the Black Sea caused very serious damage," he said in an online post."
etc:
Russia says flagship of Black Sea fleet badly damaged by blast | Reuters
Nice win for Ukraine after all the cruise missiles they’ve absorbed from the Black Sea Fleet. Hopefully a good portion of her crew is fish food.
-
1
-
-
Ukrainians got a good strike on a Russian ammunition depot
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, FLEA said:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/04/bill-clinton-nato-expansion-ukraine/629499/
Interesting article by Bill Clinton about his time working with Putin. While I don't 100% agree with him I respect the weight of his office. Dude had some tough decisions to make and it seems like he attempted them in good faith.
Good article, thanks for posting.
-
1
-
-
Good video of Russians burning
-
2
-
-
57 minutes ago, fire4effect said:
Overall I agree stacking up Russians should convince them to back off. But as is often the case Putin doesn't appear to feel the pain of their sacrifice. I thought I saw a quote (no way to ascertain veracity) from a Russian Mom who lost a son in Ukraine and blamed the US. for supplying the weapons used. She supposedly said Russia should send us a nuke to get us to back off in Ukraine. If thats the sentiment on their side this could really get ugly. At a minimum I hope they have good control of the people actually minding the button.
I'm pretty sure North Vietnam wasn't producing it's own SA-2s/3s/23mm/37mm/57mm/85mm. We didn't "send the Russians a nuke". Karma is a bitch. Russian soldiers wouldn't be dying if Putin would have stayed on his side of the border; she should take her case up with him.
-
3
-
-
Ballsy BTR crew smacking T-72s with their 30mm.
-
1
-
-
Any landing you can walk away from is a good one!
-
Surprising that the Russian military hasn’t been able to counter Ukrainian’s asymmetric advantage in UAS this far into the war.-
1
-
-
Good looking Flanker, maybe parts plus 12.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, M2 said:
Within the next 12-18 months AFSOC is planning on eliminating Ops, MSG, and MX Grp/CC (Med Grp will remain for now). Wings will transition to an A-Staff construct with an Air Base CC at locations where AFSOC owns the base.
-
41 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:
You’re literally offering something to someone hoping for a positive outcome in your favor. That’s literally the definition of a bribe.
Wrong. The evaluator doesn’t get the bottle and also doesn’t even know what he or she is getting until after the grade is announced. How can you be bribed by something unknown to you?
I’ve thankfully never had to Q3 anyone (have hooked several people on rec rides at the schoolhouse, which is really a gift when it comes down to it) but if someone really did that bad on a checkride where I had to Q3 them, I wouldn’t give a shit if they had a bottle of Redbreast 27 waiting for me.
Why would anyone jeopardize the safety of their brothers and sisters and pollute the aviation gene pool by passing someone who is incapable of hacking the mission for a bottle of booze? -
Good video of Russian vehicles getting blasted.
-
Good video of a T-72 in its natural state.
-
2 minutes ago, FLEA said:
In todays culture of hyper vigilant moral enforcement its simply too risky for it to get pegged as bribing (which it is) and end your career. Just a different AF than 15 years ago.
It’s not bribing. If you Q3 the evaluator doesn’t get the bottle, the evaluatee drinks it instead. Things like this is just weak dick leadership at Sq and Grp level.
-
5
-
-
51 minutes ago, Danger41 said:
The only advice I have for evaluators out there is to honor the booze bribe, you dumbasses. I was going to downgrade a dude one time (and I’m a huge Santa Claus evaluator so it was bad) and he produced a nice bottle of bourbon at the end. Q-1, no downgrades!
Unfortunately the booze bottle to your evaluator tradition is slowly going the way of the dinosaur; have been told some FTUs are actively discouraging it. Lotta young guys don’t do it anymore.
-
2
-
-
Nice video of a T-72 getting schwacked by some sort of LAW. -
Another good video of Russians cooking.-
1
-
2
-
-
59 minutes ago, FLEA said:
To my second point, I dont think we'll ever know. I think its very possible. I believe in the west we tend to discount security concerns for other countries fairly often. Culturally, I think we are shorter sighted than other powers and I think we are willing to ignore future problems for immediate gains.
It wasn't just the question of Ukraine joining the alliance but the amalgamation of several nuances about the alliance that admittedly, even by NATO's own standards, didn't make sense. The biggest and most obvious one being "why?" In the Cold War that question was obvious. "Keep Russia out, America in, and Germany down." But I think once the Berlin wall fell Russia really believed there was going to be a new era of parlay that would remove the necessity of the alliance. Its lack of clear purpose and continued growth would certainly send mixed signals and while the alliance forthright is for collective defense, in war, "collective defense" is just ambiguous enough to mean so many things.
I was explaining this to friends the other day. There are so many justifications a country could use for article 5. Say Russia had a missile misguide into Poland, was Poland attacked? What if a Russian aircraft accidentally cut Polands airspace? What if Poland shot that aircraft down? What if the aircraft never crossed Polish airspace but got close enough Polish authorities got skittish and said they were being attacked? What if its not kinetics? What if Russia jams all of eastern Poland while combating Ukraine? What if its a cyber attack? What if Russia detonates a nuke and the EMP wipes out most of Poland but otherwise no damage? Its so fricken nebulous NATO isn't even always sure what constitutes article 5, and the only thing that is for certain is if all 30 members agree its an article 5, then NATO will go to war as an alliance.
From Russia's standpoint, being boxed in by a massive conglomerate of military power like that seems risky. What if he can't police his own borders when newly ascended Finland breaks out into civil war and munitions start accidentally falling within 75nm of St Petersburg. Or Turkey and Greece finally decide to go at it, blocking Russia's access to the Dardanelles. Maybe Russia has a legit interest in that but can't act because of the risk of entangling the rest of the alliance.
I think Russia's standpoint was largely this: If you aren't going to bring me in, then we need to keep a gray zone between us, because I need the room to breath without the worry that your 30+ countries with all their political baggage, aren't going to go starting crap in my back yard that seriously threatens my interests and I have no recourse to intervene.
One last note, there would have been value in just entertaining his pitch on those demands. For one, sometimes people just like to think they are being heard. But more so than that, it would have stalled time and back in February, time was something Ukraine needed as much of as possible. So even if those pitches had absolutely not probability to go anywhere, spinning them on a yard long enough to delay invasion a month or two would have been invaluable.
Fair enough, agree to disagree on your previous second point then. I do not believe that Putin was ever serious about negotiating and I believe the final decision to invade was made weeks, if not months before the actual invasion date.
I don’t necessarily have a problem with Article 5 being nebulous; it gives us flexibility. I think anything that gives Putin doubt or makes him hesitate to escalate against NATO because he’s unsure of the response can be positive at times.
If an armed Russian military aircraft violates Polish airspace then it should be intercepted and forced to turn back across the border or forced to land. If it doesn’t comply then the Poles should take whatever measures they deem to necessary defend themselves, including shooting it down. If Russia has a missile malfunction and hit Poland, they’d better apologize and demonstrate real quick measures on how they’ll avoid future fuck ups or NATO should be free to shoot down any missiles approaching a NATO border. If Russia jams all of Eastern Poland (very hypothetical) then that’s an act of war and the jammer locations should be targeted and destroyed if the Russians refuse to cease buzzer. Cyber attacks should be responded to in kind. If Russia detonates a nuclear warhead for the express purpose of EMP damage to a NATO country that’s an act of war and we should respond in kind.
Russia isn’t “boxed in” by NATO. Russia enjoys large water bodies on its northern and eastern flanks. It has largely neutral or friendly states on its southern borders. NATO is not organizing to invade or attack Russia; Putin is using Russia’s history/fear of invasion as a cudgel/excuse to reestablish a greater Russian empire. Hitler, Napoleon, and Ghengis Khan are no longer in charge of their respective countries. If anything, this invasion is rapidly making Russia less secure due to Putin’s gross miscalculation.
Generally I agree that talking is always preferable to fighting. But we and the Ukrainians have no obligations to listen to absurd demands just for the sake of listening. Putin was in the driver’s seat with regards to the invasion timeline, I don’t believe us stringing him along would’ve pushed D-Day to the right much, if at all.
-
3
-
-
33 minutes ago, FLEA said:
Russian capitulation would be anything short of total victory in Ukraine (or at least up to the Dnieper). That's a hard pill for Putin to take back and sell his people and its going to burn some political currency for him within his cabinet. That and the likelihood they will not be accepted back into several global systems while Putin is in power.
The article above doesn't really illustrate a serious approach to negotiation. Putin said he was willing to negotiate and sent a list of demands. Many of them were ridiculous, but several of them had adequate positions to begin a negotiation. It was a bit odd because it was like watching two people have two separate conversations. Russia asked for NATO to return to its 1997 state allegiances (never going to happen) and the US responds, "sure we are willing to renegotiate the IMF." Was very odd because Russia is benefitting from the current status of the IMF and really has no reason to renegotiate it, but that was something we've wanted to renegotiate for years. So I think there was a lapse in DoS about what our actual positional priorities were and what was worth discussing. In the end, there was probably a discussion in the Presidential cabinet about whether or not Ukraine should just be taken off the table for NATO membership. My guess is the President in concert with Zelensky, refused to consider it, recognizing imminent invasion was the likely consequence. But its hard to say, we'll never know now.
One thing Id add though is none of our opinions on the issue really matter. If Ukraine finds terms they believe are acceptable, then that is their decision and we should support them on it.
I think the two most likely outcomes are 1.) Ukraine and Russia negotiate an armistice where Ukraine agrees to maintain strict neutrality and grant independents to the eastern regions, plus secede Crimea to Russia or 2.) this drags into a 10 year long stale made that bleeds Russia economically to the bone. Putin dies in his early 80s and the new government swiftly uses the new leadership opportunity to withdrawal and normalize relations with the world again.
To your third and forth points above, fresh off the press:
I would agree that if the Zelensky states the above and negotiates on that, we should be supportive if it leads to a ceasefire.
To your 1st point, IMO Russian capitulation should also include security guarantees for Ukraine (probably worthless at this point given what we’ve seen the last 30 days) and Russian reparations in the form of financial assistance to rebuild Ukrainian cities. Most likely not going to happen, but they started a war of aggression and should suffer the consequences of that.
I disagree with your second point; I believe the US and members of NATO made a serious effort to set expectations and avoid war. I don’t believe Russia had any intention to do anything but invade. Do you honestly believe the Russians would’ve stepped back from the brink given what we’ve seen?
-
Good video of some Russians burning in a BMP.-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, Blue said:
What do I think Russia should capitulate on? Honestly, I don't know. Ukraine and Russia have relationships going back hundred of years. I don't have the expertise necessary to parse all that history into something that's workable to end the war. I don't know what the right answer is. Maybe Russia takes all of Crimea, the Donbass becomes an independent state, and Ukraine gets some sort of Swedish-like "NATO-lite" membership, where they aren't a full NATO member, but still enjoy some of the benefits?
In theory, we have a State Department that's full of professionals with the expertise to facilitate these kinds of negotiations. Normally, these State Department pros would have the support and backing of the White House, as they seek to thread-the-needle of promoting global peace and democracy, while ensuring global stability, and at the same time looking out for America's best interests.
Instead, we have a President running his mouth about pushing another world leader out of power. And as far as I can tell, Sec of State Blinken has done fuck-all to help deescalate the whole thing.
I don't have a crystal ball any more than the next person. But I'm concerned that our foreign policy of the last 20 years seems to revolve around spending our blood and treasure dredging up old foes of the 80s and 90s, like we're some movie studio bent on rebooting all the classics.
We got Saddam, we got Gaddafi, and our war on Iran seems to be forever under script development. We've done nothing but break a lot of people and leave instability and chaos in our wake. And now with Ukraine, we're seeing a possibility of remaking the biggest 80's classic of all: Evil Russia vs. the Red, White, and Blue. Only this isn't some tin-pot dictator in an isolated kingdom. Russia has a lot of nukes, and a lot of economic ties in Europe and Asia.
I want to see us head down the path of de-escalation. Instead, all I see is "Russia Bad, Ukraine Good," and other such nonsense.
So you don’t have the expertise to say what Russia, the country whose invasion is turning cities into rubble and killing hundreds, if not thousands of innocents, should capitulate to, but in your first post you had the expertise to say what Ukraine should acquiesce to?
At this point in the conflict, with Russia continuing to dismantle 30 years of Ukrainian progress with high explosives, I doubt the Ukrainians are in any mood to give up more of their territory. And I don’t blame them. I would agree with your point about Crimea probably permanently becoming Russian territory; the civilian population there is more sympathetic to and aligned with Russia than Ukraine.
Your second point is incorrect and isn’t backed by the reality of both the US and individual European countries efforts prior to the invasion to find a diplomatic solution. The above link is just one example of the US diplomatic effort to avoid war. Up till the very moment of the invasion Russia was lying to the world about their intentions; their military buildup started back in November. The US government clearly stated to the world what Russia’s true intentions were. Russia never had any serious intentions to negotiate in good faith as evidenced by the current war. Now that we’re right of bang, I’m of the opinion that a third party intermediate is the best hope for a negotiated settlement; the Russians lied to us for three months and our current diplomatic efforts are where they should be in maintaining the unity of the NATO alliance.
Russia is not our friend or ally, and this invasion has cemented one of the biggest mistakes the US and Western world has made in the last 30 years. No matter how much involvement and exposure to the liberal international system and the world banking and economic system, Russia’s autocracy is fundamentally at odds with the Western world and its values. If we find ourselves at odds with Russia today, it’s due to Putin’s actions, not ours.
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, Blue said:
Because Russia's invasion wasn't "unprovoked." We've been "poking the bear" by advocating for Ukrainian entrance to NATO, along with our covert support of revolutions in Ukraine in 2004 and 2014. None of that is an excuse for Putin to invade another sovereign country of course, but shows that the invasion was anything but "unprovoked."
I'd love to see the Ukrainian military defeat the Russians, and push them back over the border. Would love to see Zelensky wave the Ukrainian flag as the last Russian walks across the border defeated. However, I suspect that here in the West, we're seeing a propaganda-filled picture of the war thus far. I think we're seeing Ukraine's successes being amplified, and their losses being minimized. Anything's possible at this point, but I don't think we're going to see a quick, resounding victory at the hand of Ukrainian farmers stealing missile batteries and and Ukrainian soldiers sneaking around with anti-tank weapons.
Ultimately, I don't think Ukraine has the resources to mount a force-on-force battle with the Russians, so they're forced to use more guerilla tactics. Which is fine, and could maybe lead to eventual victory. But only after a long, protracted war. Meanwhile, you'll have all sorts of opportunities for some kind of "fog of war" mistake that opens up a wider conflict. After all, we've got a senile old man with his finger on the nuclear button on our side. Meanwhile, Russia has their own old timer of questionable physical and mental state on their side.
The whole thing seems to be unfolding to leading everyone down the path to global chaos.
Completely disagree on it not being “unprovoked”. Ukraine as a sovereign nation was turning more towards the West, which in they should have every right to do. For multiple reasons they don’t see a positive future tying their cart to an autocratic police state, probably to include the millions of Ukrainian nationals that were starved, imprisoned, displaced, or tortured to death by the former USSR. Ukrainian democracy was and is the true “threat” (if there was one) to Putin and the current Russian system.
Some of the news coming out of the war is an amplified version of what Ukraine wants the world to see and hear, but a good portion is not. The Russian invasion plan in its original form has failed. It’s true that the Ukrainians most likely don’t have the combat power to completely kick the Russians out of Ukraine in a force on force basis but right now they don’t have to. The longer this goes on, the worse it gets for Russia as they continue to bleed men and materiel for little gain.
Since Russia is the aggressor here the bulk of the onus to ensure some “fog of war” issues where something happens that triggers a NATO response is on them. We (NATO) aren’t chucking cruise and ballistic missiles within a few miles of a NATO country. Holding firm to defending NATO territory is vital and I’m glad Biden is staying firm on that. We shouldn’t be acquiescent on Russia threats.
As things currently stand I’d say we have little reason to force the Ukrainians towards capitulation on much.
I’ll ask again, what do you think Russia should capitulate on?
-
2
-
3
-
Russian Ukraine shenanigans
in General Discussion
Posted
Possible, but I doubt it. If you look close at the end there’s about 6-9 Russian pigs with Russian uniforms/weapons getting snuffed out. Seems lately like the Russians are barely trying to justify their actions; I don’t think the “de-Nazify” horseshit is getting traction with anyone.