Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[ClearedHot]

9 hours ago, di1630 said:

Meh, Russian weapons shot down an airliner in 2014 with zero European response….I have little faith that Europeans have any stomach for war or escalation. Even the Brits.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

RAF Airplane with RAF service members is not an airliner (not sure if any Brits were on that flight....and BREXIT has changed a few things. I've been in London all week and there you can feel it in the air when this story hit BBC.

[Lawman]

Great question.  No, but let me explain: the current level of support is escalating not remaining static.  From types of weapons (cluster bombs, F-16s) to amount of funding to real-time tactical intelligence used for lethal targeting, it’s continued up up up with no end in sight or coherent vision of an upper limit.  I would answer yes if anyone had a cogent articulated strategy with self-imposed limitations (example: containment, MAD, etc.), but we don’t.  
I’ve had GOs summarize our strategy as “continuing to dial it up as the Ukrainians need, to bleed Russia dry.”  This seems open-ended and risky, but my question is how much say should the electorate have in the risk our leadership accepts on our behalf?  

They “had their say” at the ballot box.

We are a representative democracy specifically to avoid the sways of the populist mob which does act in ignorance.

Does John Q Public have a firm understanding of why you need X number of aircraft on a flight line or ships in dock to make effective combat power? How about assault weapon bans? You can pick any number of loud polarizing topics that general public ignorance wants in a given space of immediate time.

A good chunk of the public has isolationist desires to walk away from NATO. Hypothetically: Should we let the mob slow down or loudly call to stop the process of mobilizing and responding to direct aggression to an Article 5 member? You know just a recheck by show of hands on policy they were happy to live with when it was convenient for the last 70 years?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

15 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

RAF Airplane with RAF service members is not an airliner (not sure if any Brits were on that flight....and BREXIT has changed a few things. I've been in London all week and there you can feel it in the air when this story hit BBC.

You're there, and your work puts you in a much better position to know, but it's very hard to imagine the response you suggest. Especially considering the history.

 

This is a real question: Are there still reputable groups that believe the pipelines were blown up by Russia? The public narrative seems to have settled on Ukraine-assisted-by-the-US/UK and then the story kinda faded. I'd expect the pro-Ukraine-support crowd (myself as one) to be talking about that more if there was still a credible argument that Russia did it.

 

I remember you implied you saw or were told of very definitive evidence that it was Russia.

[Day Man]

On 9/14/2023 at 3:57 PM, tac airlifter said:

Are you implying Americans are too stupid to have negative opinions on sending their kids to WW3?

'more aid' ≠ boots on the ground

also, 1/3 > 1/4

[ClearedHot]

5 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

You're there, and your work puts you in a much better position to know, but it's very hard to imagine the response you suggest. Especially considering the history.

 

This is a real question: Are there still reputable groups that believe the pipelines were blown up by Russia? The public narrative seems to have settled on Ukraine-assisted-by-the-US/UK and then the story kinda faded. I'd expect the pro-Ukraine-support crowd (myself as one) to be talking about that more if there was still a credible argument that Russia did it.

 

I remember you implied you saw or were told of very definitive evidence that it was Russia.

I've worked with the Brits for years on many things and I have never seen this reaction.  I was with them after the Tube bombings in 2005 and was stunned at their reaction...more than put on a brave face, it simply FU terrorists as we press forward with life...we saw far worse during the blitz. 

By chance I was with a very senior recently RAF pilot traveling through one of the heavily bombed areas from WWII when he showed me the article about the almost shootdown.  He shared some other details I won't publish and I said I was surprised the truth leaked out, he was not surprised at all given the underlying anger and contempt for what almost happened. 

[tac airlifter]

2 hours ago, Day Man said:

'more aid' ≠ boots on the ground

also, 1/3 > 1/4

Boots on the ground = not required to start WW3.  

also, I'm a pilot and therefore unfamiliar with your odd numbers and symbols above.

[Day Man]

9 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Boots on the ground = not required to start WW3.  

also, I'm a pilot and therefore unfamiliar with your odd numbers and symbols above.

perfection 

[Danger41]

I’ll take a Royale with cheese, thank you very much.

[ecugringo]

Zelenskyy was on 60 mins tonight.  They said the front averages 40k artillery rounds a day.  That’s insane!

[BashiChuni]

ukraine is losing. the western media won't tell you that.

you can poo poo me all you want but it doesn't change the facts.

[ecugringo]

11 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

ukraine is losing. the western media won't tell you that.

you can poo poo me all you want but it doesn't change the facts.

I’m not sure anyone thinks they’re winning.  At best they’re surviving.  I think the 60mins story said something that their professional military is basically gone at this point.  Relying on volunteers, militia, foreigners.  Failed to mention conscripts.

[BashiChuni]

the casualty rate is horrific. WW1 style.

there is no way they can win.

unless we want to escalate and commit NATO ground troops the US should be pushing for a negotiated settlement.

[Guest nsplayr]

21 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

unless we want to escalate and commit NATO ground troops the US should be pushing for a negotiated settlement.

Which pieces of your hometown / state / etc. would you be willing to negotiate away after you've been invaded by your belligerent neighbor? Please be specific.

[Pooter]

2 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Which pieces of your hometown / state / etc. would you be willing to negotiate away after you've been invaded by your belligerent neighbor? Please be specific.

Yeah copy not a nice option but neither is losing your entire military aged male demographic to a war of attrition. I feel like people are looking for a good option when all that exists are bad or less bad options. 

[LookieRookie]

8 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Which pieces of your hometown / state / etc. would you be willing to negotiate away after you've been invaded by your belligerent neighbor? Please be specific.

Better than loosing everyone in those towns and then slowly losing those towns.

[pawnman]

9 hours ago, LookieRookie said:

Better than loosing everyone in those towns and then slowly losing those towns.

So, which American cities are you willing to give up again?

If these are losses, I'll take it over the constant "winning" we did in Iraq and Afghanistan...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/09/13/ukrainian-bombers-firing-western-cruise-missiles-have-destroyed-a-russian-submarine/

Edited September 18, 2023 by pawnman

[SocialD]

16 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Which pieces of your hometown / state / etc. would you be willing to negotiate away after you've been invaded by your belligerent neighbor? Please be specific.

 

Specific you say?  I could probably negotiate away the following; 

 

My hometown:  Wayne street east of Main st., and all of Patterson street.

Current town:  pretty much everything downtown, east of the river.

My state:  Ironton...all of it!

United States...San Francisco.  

[LookieRookie]

3 hours ago, pawnman said:

So, which American cities are you willing to give up again?

If these are losses, I'll take it over the constant "winning" we did in Iraq and Afghanistan...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/09/13/ukrainian-bombers-firing-western-cruise-missiles-have-destroyed-a-russian-submarine/

That’s a strawman, there isn’t an active invasion in the US leading to a total decimation of the American male.

[Lawman]

That’s a strawman, there isn’t an active invasion in the US leading to a total decimation of the American male.

Go read some history on Soviet era Russification efforts in places like the Baltic states or Ukraine.

It might be pretty informative as to why a nation is willing to risk so much for a dire outcome vs take what they know in eventuality will be a pretty dire outcome.

Also read up on what a mismatch Finland was and apply that to the current situation. The reason Finland was willing to still accept violence as the outcome (and they didn’t see it going so lopsided at the time) was because they could look next door at what happened to their neighbors who submitted to the big bully’s advances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HossHarris]

49 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Go read some history on Soviet era Russification efforts in places like the Baltic states or Ukraine.

It might be pretty informative as to why a nation is willing to risk so much for a dire outcome vs take what they know in eventuality will be a pretty dire outcome.

Also read up on what a mismatch Finland was and apply that to the current situation. The reason Finland was willing to still accept violence as the outcome (and they didn’t see it going so lopsided at the time) was because they could look next door at what happened to their neighbors who submitted to the big bully’s advances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pffft. History. 
 

 

[WillJamForFood]

47 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Go read some history on Soviet era Russification efforts in places like the Baltic states or Ukraine.

It might be pretty informative as to why a nation is willing to risk so much for a dire outcome vs take what they know in eventuality will be a pretty dire outcome.

Also read up on what a mismatch Finland was and apply that to the current situation. The reason Finland was willing to still accept violence as the outcome (and they didn’t see it going so lopsided at the time) was because they could look next door at what happened to their neighbors who submitted to the big bully’s advances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The parallels between the two courses of these two wars is truly remarkable, the key difference being that the Finns were utterly lacking in international support of the material variety. Ultimately, Finland agreed to a negotiated peace in which they ceded more territory to the USSR than the Soviets had initially demanded. Despite this, history remembers the Winter War as a "win" for Finland; the Soviets suffered lopsided casualties and considerable damage to their international prestige, while the Finn's maintained sovereignty and boosted their own reputation. Is it realistic to expect a better outcome for Ukraine today?

[uhhello]

Wonder what a negotiated 'truce' looks like for Russia at this point.  Ukrainians aren't going to stop fighting in Crimea for a long time.  It won't be force on force like now but I can't imagine it will be a comfortable lifestyle for anyone truly Russian in those areas.    

[tac airlifter]

20 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Which pieces of your hometown / state / etc. would you be willing to negotiate away after you've been invaded by your belligerent neighbor? Please be specific.

Quite a bit if the alternative was my family dying, and I would deeply resent a foreign power meddling in my business.  I’d bide my time and wage an insurgency when I felt I had the upper hand.  But I wouldn’t bleed my neighbors against an adversary so much larger than me, I’d play it smart like the Taliban and eventually gain my land back.  What were witnessing is just bad tactics.

It is astounding to me how the warmonger crowd acknowledges they are sending kids into the meat grinder with no hope of victory yet they claim moral superiority for their stance.  All the while advocating for somebody else’s family die with the guns we give them.  I do enjoy war and I don’t mind killing Russians, but what is happening right now is just foolish. Brought to you by the same people who lost Afghanistan and gave Iraq to the Iranians, lol.

[Clark Griswold]

Yeah copy not a nice option but neither is losing your entire military aged male demographic to a war of attrition. I feel like people are looking for a good option when all that exists are bad or less bad options. 

This

There is a point where you’ve done everything you can and for your future you need to let it go or tell someone who you are funding to let it go but then you would have not consider that person just a weapon to hurt your bigger enemy in a giant geopolitical chess game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Quite a bit if the alternative was my family dying, and I would deeply resent a foreign power meddling in my business.  I’d bide my time and wage an insurgency when I felt I had the upper hand.  But I wouldn’t bleed my neighbors against an adversary so much larger than me, I’d play it smart like the Taliban and eventually gain my land back.  What were witnessing is just bad tactics.
It is astounding to me how the warmonger crowd acknowledges they are sending kids into the meat grinder with no hope of victory yet they claim moral superiority for their stance.  All the while advocating for somebody else’s family die with the guns we give them.  I do enjoy war and I don’t mind killing Russians, but what is happening right now is just foolish. Brought to you by the same people who lost Afghanistan and gave Iraq to the Iranians, lol.

Tell me you haven’t been to Iraq in the last 5 years without just saying it.

Sadr not immediately kicking us out of that country and bulldozing our ramps in Erbil is proof the Iranians have far less influence than they wanted over there.

Again, do you think given historic examples of what happens with Russification the Ukrainians aren’t fully aware and willingly fighting this war? They didn’t start this fight with HIMARS and Leo IIs. They begged for more so they could stand up and fight a country that enjoyed a safe mobilization area 80 km from their capital and was supposed to have bulldozed them in a week.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk