7 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

You know there is still a South Korea, right?

 

You have the most curiously simplistic view I've seen in a long time. That's not to say the argument against Ukraine aid is necessarily simplistic. It's mostly just you.

Disagree. But nice dig. 

You know there is still a South Korea, right?
 
You have the most curiously simplistic view I've seen in a long time. That's not to say the argument against Ukraine aid is necessarily simplistic. It's mostly just you.

There’s also the intangible side of the cost argument.

Full rage Conflicts are actually a culmination of late stage Foreign Policy. The fact we are living in the longest continuous period of human prosperity built largely on the western globalist system is proof of greater total success than simply counting up Korea, Vietnam, and GWOT and dismissing every action of foreign policy as folly.

Same is true of the argument for dollar figures and limits to them on Ukrainian aid. Go look at the intelligence we got out of Israel during its proxy conflicts with our super power adversary. “Have Donut” just for example led directly to a massive shift in fighter tactics in the Navy and Air Force that had direct effect on the battlefield. Our electronic warfare programs which were foundational in our air playbook in GWI were tested and developed largely using those same regional conflicts and lessons preserved in the vault for an “on the day” event with the Soviet Bear.

Same situation is happening right now in Ukraine. We validated billions of dollars in equipment investment just in HIMARs alone through its demonstrated performance it’s not just a guess now. We also learned a hell of a lot of “oh we better fix that right now” situations since we started supporting the Ukrainians in 2014. And when we are sending weapons largely at the end of their useful shelf life (example: M26 and ATACMs) what is the acceptable cost worth in number of exploitative efforts by the intel community? And how much deterrence in Russia and the wider sphere of everybody using their kit or the massive investment in our own by Allie’s do you think this conflict has bought? What’s a dollar figure on that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

3 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

yeah korea stalemate since 1950 big win.

You know that stalemate involved pushing them back to the 38th with a stationary, mostly non-kinetic, border for 69+ years (and counting)…and an economically thriving South Korea, right?

1 hour ago, BashiChuni said:

https://www.newsweek.com/biden-warns-us-military-may-get-pulled-direct-conflict-russia-1856613

 

THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN WARNING ABOUT ALL ALONG

Cool well I guess we agree now. I didn’t know you had so much respect for Biden…I’m not with you on that one. 
 

Siri didn’t catch my typo, that bitch! I award you one grammar Nazi point. 

Edited December 29, 20231 yr by ViperStud
Typos! Don’t want BC getting more grammar Nazi points

3 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

Disagree. But nice dig. 

Sorry dude, you communicate like a frustrated toddler. If I had to bet on who's just the random person on the forum, and not an educated officer with leadership experience, you are probably my top guess. 

 

And considering we have Biff here now, that's saying something 🤣😂.

2 hours ago, ViperStud said:

You know that stalemate involved pushing them back to the 38th with a stationary, mostly non-kinetic, border for 69+ years (and counting)…and an economically thriving South Korea, right?

Cool well I guess we agree now. I didn’t know you had so much respect for Biden…I’m not with you on that one. 
 

Siri didn’t catch my typo, that bitch! I award you one grammar Nazi point. 

i don't count cease fire agreements as wins. maybe you do.

42 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

i don't count cease fire agreements as wins. maybe you do.

I bet if there was a cease fire in Ukraine signed tomorrow you'd count that as a win. LordRatner is right, you're overly simplistic and fail to understand any complexity in the world beyond A therefore B. Go back to your cave.

Bashi the Black Knight

 

Edited December 30, 20231 yr by ViperStud
!

1 hour ago, brwwg&b said:

I bet if there was a cease fire in Ukraine signed tomorrow you'd count that as a win. LordRatner is right, you're overly simplistic and fail to understand any complexity in the world beyond A therefore B. Go back to your cave.

there could have been a agreement hammered out before hundreds of thousands of deaths but the USA and UK killed it.

24 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

there could have been a agreement hammered out before hundreds of thousands of deaths but the USA and UK killed it.

Source?

2 hours ago, ViperStud said:

Source?

It is a fairly reliable claim. Very early on there was at least talk of a negotiated truce before everything got really ugly. Whether or not that ever would have happened is speculation we will never know.

It is a fairly reliable claim. Very early on there was at least talk of a negotiated truce before everything got really ugly. Whether or not that ever would have happened is speculation we will never know.

We were trying to extract the legitimate government of Ukraine with use of non conventional assets and they refused to come out in the opening hours of this war.

What exactly is legitimate that Ukraine was seeking a negotiated peace while Russia was driving on Kiev from Hostamel’s failed air assault and the Belarus convoy and somehow we convinced them to just keep rolling the dice?

This sounds like more of the same bullshit blame the “western globalist,” nonsense he’s been pushing this whole thread. Somehow this is “our fault” for this war and not acknowledging Putin for exactly the threat he is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

45 minutes ago, Lawman said:

We were trying to extract the legitimate government of Ukraine with use of non conventional assets and they refused to come out in the opening hours of this war.

What exactly is legitimate that Ukraine was seeking a negotiated peace while Russia was driving on Kiev from Hostamel’s failed air assault and the Belarus convoy and somehow we convinced them to just keep rolling the dice?

This sounds like more of the same bullshit blame the “western globalist,” nonsense he’s been pushing this whole thread. Somehow this is “our fault” for this war and not acknowledging Putin for exactly the threat he is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This. My point in asking for a source is that one doesn’t exist for black knight’s simplistic claim.
 

The idea/claim that there was a concerted effort to extract government members and cede the entire country does not equate to an attempt to save 400k lives. It ignores the reality that “saving 400k lives” (mostly Russian aggressors, BTW) would have meant allowing Russia to annex all of Ukraine. 
 

If China were to attack Guam and Hawaii, would we “win” by ceding them both to save lives? I’d argue 1M lives lost to defend them would be a worthy cause. By black knight Bashi Chuni’s metrics, that defense would be another L in the win/loss column. God forbid there were a ceasefire at some point during that hypothetical conflict, he’d probably count it as two losses. 

27 minutes ago, ViperStud said:

This. My point in asking for a source is that one doesn’t exist for black knight’s simplistic claim.
 

The idea/claim that there was a concerted effort to extract government members and cede the entire country does not equate to an attempt to save 400k lives. It ignores the reality that “saving 400k lives” (mostly Russian aggressors, BTW) would have meant allowing Russia to annex all of Ukraine. 
 

If China were to attack Guam and Hawaii, would we “win” by ceding them both to save lives? I’d argue 1M lives lost to defend them would be a worthy cause. By black knight Bashi Chuni’s metrics, that defense would be another L in the win/loss column. God forbid there were a ceasefire at some point during that hypothetical conflict, he’d probably count it as two losses. 

YGTBSM ... allow almost the total number of American war deaths (from all of the wars we've fought to date - 1Mil vs ~1.3Mil) to save Guam?

7 hours ago, bfargin said:

YGTBSM ... allow almost the total number of American war deaths (from all of the wars we've fought to date - 1Mil vs ~1.3Mil) to save Guam?

 

7 hours ago, ViperStud said:

and Hawaii,

 

7 hours ago, bfargin said:

ceding them both

 

This doesn't have to be that hard.

17 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Sorry dude, you communicate like a frustrated toddler. If I had to bet on who's just the random person on the forum, and not an educated officer with leadership experience, you are probably my top guess. 

 

And considering we have Biff here now, that's saying something 🤣😂.

I was an O-3E..    I have an excuse. I knew my aircraft and could fly that mother fucker better than most.. Ask someone.

I'll get the mission done but I wasn't the guy to send to the staff meeting in place of the CC.  They only made that mistake once lol. COLs didn't like me because I told them the truth.  They liked me as a pilot though.  Especially on shitty missions. 

I like being a toddler.  

I like to argue with my 👊 .

If they ever call me out of retirement to go kill more bad guys.  I'll be ready.

Just don't expect me to act like English royalty while I wear the uniform.

Break Break. 

Russsia sucks. 

Edited December 30, 20231 yr by Biff_T
Not Exec

4 hours ago, Biff_T said:

I was an O-3E..    I have an excuse. I knew my aircraft and could fly that mother fucker better than most.. Ask someone.

Can confirm preventing at least one dumb copilot from pancaking an aircraft.

...but don't call the Huey names.  She doesn't deserve that.

The lack of nuanced analytical thinking about the complex and highly dynamic subjects addressed in this thread is palpable.  

Biff, I'm pretty sure you're the most even keel here.

Edited December 30, 20231 yr by FourFans

If China attacked Hawaii, China would no longer exist as we currently know it. I'd launch everything we have that makes things glow from the West coast and destroy every major city, military complex, and populated region of China. There'd be no nuance about it. Obviously with Guam my calculus is slightly different but I wouldn't just fight a battle where we were losing men and women slowly in a meat grinder. If talks didn't work quickly then they might get hit with the same massive strike as in scenario 1.

3 hours ago, FourFans said:

The lack of nuanced analytical thinking about the complex and highly dynamic subjects addressed in this thread is palpable.  

 

1 hour ago, bfargin said:

If China attacked Hawaii, China would no longer exist as we currently know it. I'd launch everything we have that makes things glow from the West coast and destroy every major city, military complex, and populated region of China. There'd be no nuance about it. Obviously with Guam my calculus is slightly different but I wouldn't just fight a battle where we were losing men and women slowly in a meat grinder. If talks didn't work quickly then they might get hit with the same massive strike as in scenario 1.

The defense rests.

1 hour ago, bfargin said:

If China attacked Hawaii, China would no longer exist as we currently know it. I'd launch everything we have that makes things glow from the West coast and destroy every major city, military complex, and populated region of China. There'd be no nuance about it. Obviously with Guam my calculus is slightly different but I wouldn't just fight a battle where we were losing men and women slowly in a meat grinder. If talks didn't work quickly then they might get hit with the same massive strike as in scenario 1.

Ummmm…no. If you think any “total war” retaliation is a given in today’s world you’re proving 4Fans’ point. 

33 minutes ago, FourFans said:

 

The defense rests.

throw out a dumbass scenario as a legitimate one, get results

On 12/30/2023 at 3:32 PM, FourFans said:

The lack of nuanced analytical thinking about the complex and highly dynamic subjects addressed in this thread is palpable.  

 

so all you "nuanced analytical thinkers" won't address the root cause of Putin's motivation to go into ukraine: unchecked NATO expansion.

some of you think putin woke up and decided on a whim to attack ukraine. it's ironic that you pat yourselves on the back as such strategic thinkers but have a massive blind spot

6 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

so all you "nuanced analytical thinkers" won't address the root cause of Putin's motivation to go into ukraine: unchecked NATO expansion.

some of you think putin woke up and decided on a whim to attack ukraine. it's ironic that you pat yourselves on the back as such strategic thinkers but have a massive blind spot

Glad to know you’ve got such a good grasp on ground truth.  I make no claims on understanding the root cause of the invasion…and there likely isn’t one such singularly cause.  NATO expansion, demographics, a weak US president, rising US isolationism, EUROPEAN UNION SPINELESSNESS, good timing with Ukraine internal politics, Putin being megalomaniac, Russians being Russians?  All of the above?  
 

But sure, go ahead and believe you’ve got it sorted.  When you make claims like that, does it strike you at all as melodramatically black or white?  Or do you genuinely believe it was solely ‘NATO expansion’?  If so, why?

 

*Side bar: NATO didn’t go out looking for new members.  New members saw Russian aggression starting in Georgia during the GW era and started asking for membership.  I know this because I worked in NATO, and membership was a hot topic.  “NATO Expansion” is a known misnomer propagated by Russian media and intelligence agencies.  Call it whatever, NATO expanded due to Russia invading its neighbors over the past 30 years.  

Edited January 1, 20241 yr by FourFans
forgot to mention the European environment

The Baltics joined in ‘04 (tough to blame them, bracketed by K-grad and Belarus) and since then no one near Russia joined until they invaded Ukraine. 

Now as a direct response to Putin invading Ukraine, Finland and Sweden are in. Zero chance of them joining pre-invasion. That’s a massive strategic failure by Putin if he was really concerned about NATO expansion  

Bashi, you are regurgitating Putin’s talking points. 

Edited January 1, 20241 yr by ViperStud
To further refute black knight bashi

6 hours ago, BashiChuni said:

so all you "nuanced analytical thinkers" won't address the root cause of Putin's motivation to go into ukraine: unchecked NATO expansion.

some of you think putin woke up and decided on a whim to attack ukraine. it's ironic that you pat yourselves on the back as such strategic thinkers but have a massive blind spot

His desire to rebuild the USSR/Russian Empire?