Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)
- Thread starter ParadiseLost
- Start date
Seems a bit late for an April Fools Joke.
If so I guess those restrictions cross international borders in some cases. Never really gave it much thought tbh but technically there is a logic to it.
If so I guess those restrictions cross international borders in some cases. Never really gave it much thought tbh but technically there is a logic to it.
Colonel Douglas MacGregor has disclosed another shocking revelation no doubt based on the Russian military performance in Ukraine.
In case of Poland,he is right.We had 4 divisions,but gave part of weapons to Ukraine and now it would be maybe 3 or less.
We have weak air forces,weak territorial defense,aor Navy is joke,and civilians are unprepared for war.
Moreover,we do not produce powder anymore,and some ammo we made is made from powder buyed from others.
As a result,we have ammo for maybe few weeks of fighting,or less.
And,current premier is german agent,and german as Moscov troyan horse.
So,do not count,that Poland would last longer then in 1939,if war happen.Becouse we do not have means to fight,our current goverment do not want to fight,and even if they want,we do not have time for reforms.
We need years to become ready for war,and we would not have it.
stephen the barbarian
Well-known member
that's right, what we lack is leadership that's worth a damn.
Civiliam leadership at that.
Some of the military leaders excel in the leading of troops in combat, not in peace
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
Ladies and gentlemen, the aristocrats United States House of Representatives!
Y'know, I think the thing that really aggravates over all this independent of all and any argument over funding levels or priorities or anything else on the specifics of the topic of Ukraine, is that it's the final death of any potential consequences?
The people waving Ukrainian flags in Congress at this bill and the ones implementing it in the State Department and overseeing things in the Executive Branch writ large are the same people who were dismissing Russia as a threat a decade ago. 'The 80s called and want their foreign policy back.' was a thing, and a thing with wide take-up in both the professional political class and the everyday person.
There's just...not going to be any kind of reckoning or consequences for that, electorally or 'professionally' for the various people espousing it in media or in government positions, and it's one of the largest foreign policy mistakes as yet in the 21st century (topped only by the US yeeting into sandboxes and staying there so long).
But gobs and gobs of money and equipment and Ukrainian lives are getting spent in a manner that may at least have been mitigated downwards with different actions in prior years and, at most, could have been prevented altogether (depending on all those wibbly-wobbly geopolitical guessing-game factors). Even NOW you see some vestiges of that bullshit in the US jaggling Ukraine's arm not to blow up Russian oil infrastructure.
Anyhow.
Don't expect even with new rounds of aid Ukraine will take back much more territory, and especially not Crimea. I could be wrong. But, it does extend the war for Russia and leave them quagmired in an Afghanistan-like fuck-fuck show that saps manpower, material, and maybe eventually domestic political popularity of Putin (whether that's a good thing might be argued). So overall beneficial to American foreign policy, and as more and more politicos and those trying to sell it have pointed out in their moments of honesty (which I do honestly commend), it's beneficial to the American military-industrial complex. That should have domestic economic benefits in the US.
The insincerity of the flag-waving is really the despicable part.
Y'know, I think the thing that really aggravates over all this independent of all and any argument over funding levels or priorities or anything else on the specifics of the topic of Ukraine, is that it's the final death of any potential consequences?
The people waving Ukrainian flags in Congress at this bill and the ones implementing it in the State Department and overseeing things in the Executive Branch writ large are the same people who were dismissing Russia as a threat a decade ago. 'The 80s called and want their foreign policy back.' was a thing, and a thing with wide take-up in both the professional political class and the everyday person.
There's just...not going to be any kind of reckoning or consequences for that, electorally or 'professionally' for the various people espousing it in media or in government positions, and it's one of the largest foreign policy mistakes as yet in the 21st century (topped only by the US yeeting into sandboxes and staying there so long).
But gobs and gobs of money and equipment and Ukrainian lives are getting spent in a manner that may at least have been mitigated downwards with different actions in prior years and, at most, could have been prevented altogether (depending on all those wibbly-wobbly geopolitical guessing-game factors). Even NOW you see some vestiges of that bullshit in the US jaggling Ukraine's arm not to blow up Russian oil infrastructure.
Anyhow.
Don't expect even with new rounds of aid Ukraine will take back much more territory, and especially not Crimea. I could be wrong. But, it does extend the war for Russia and leave them quagmired in an Afghanistan-like fuck-fuck show that saps manpower, material, and maybe eventually domestic political popularity of Putin (whether that's a good thing might be argued). So overall beneficial to American foreign policy, and as more and more politicos and those trying to sell it have pointed out in their moments of honesty (which I do honestly commend), it's beneficial to the American military-industrial complex. That should have domestic economic benefits in the US.
The insincerity of the flag-waving is really the despicable part.
Scooby Doo
Well-known member
They should move to Ukraine and fight for them at this rate since they seem to care more about that country than any other 🙄
Was the bill at all associated with a border bill.
Would the current admin do ANYTHING to actually use the money given for the border tk defend the border?
Spending money on the border with Bidenbas pres is lining tje pockets of the DHS and would not be used AT ALL.
So why hope a budget for the border goes through?
Would the current admin do ANYTHING to actually use the money given for the border tk defend the border?
Spending money on the border with Bidenbas pres is lining tje pockets of the DHS and would not be used AT ALL.
So why hope a budget for the border goes through?
The thing is, what could congress pass that would actively change thw border?
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
Won't it be hilarious if Putin dies before the conclusion of this war?
I am hoping for the same. It doesn't matter to us whether Russia or Ukraine becomes the victory, but a destabilization of the region could be very fruitful if you remember what the only other major independent polity in Russia is.
I am hoping for the same. It doesn't matter to us whether Russia or Ukraine becomes the victory, but a destabilization of the region could be very fruitful if you remember what the only other major independent polity in Russia is.
paulobrito
Well-known member
Considering is health, it is more probable that the next US president will die first.
strunkenwhite
Well-known member
The phrase "oft evil does evil mar" comes to mind; Bentley may have been too bonkers to fairly call evil himself, but he was certainly serving evil. Either way, I have a feeling that evil will mar the guys who deprived Russia of such a lovely patsy pretty soon.
I would never, ever bet on Rasputin dying first.
Poe
Well-known member
If Putin dies he will be replaced with a hardliner. It's similar to the Israeli/Palestine thing, some westerners fail to understand how united the population is on this.
A hardliner for sure, but a hardliner in what? That is if they don't have a hardliner shadow war for a decade or two. And then decide that picking fights with the West is not worth the effort and redirect their fun and profit initiatives to Central Asia or somewhere else most of NATO powers give less of a damn about than middle of Europe.
Putin is proverbially married to his own decisions, but his replacement may have some freedom in picking and choosing what parts of Putin's legacy he wants to keep and throwing the dead guy under the bus. Much like Putin has shifted a fair amount of blame on the previous guy despite taking power from him amicably.
Last edited:
Poe
Well-known member
Specifically any successor during the war will likely drop any rhetorical semblances of this not being a conquest.