And...what facts do you have to back this up besides "Russia says so?"
Russian-Ukrainian-Polish Eternal Friendship Thread
- Thread starter Husky_Khan
- Start date
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
And the facts you have to back your warboner besides ''Biden wills it''? You have been declaring war will break out any day now for three months and have been consistently wrong and continue. I mean, I understand, I'm not in favor of war breaking out, but even I am getting blue balls from incessant media hype, I can't even imagine how bad it must be for you.
If that really is the First Gaurds and T-90s...
Belgorod is a place that sees military deployments by Russia from time to time, if I remember some stuff I read in Air and Space right.
However the First Guards plus the timing, with that new bridge in Belarus...the temperature is going up in a bad way.
I'm doubly nervous because Chernobyl is right on the invasion corridor, if Russia really intents to go for Kiev, and tanks/anti-tank munitions plus radioactive debris equals very bad time for all.
Everyone needs to chill the fuck out, and if Russia actually does go full retard...the fighting won't end at Ukraine's borders, and everyone knows it.
Belgorod is a place that sees military deployments by Russia from time to time, if I remember some stuff I read in Air and Space right.
However the First Guards plus the timing, with that new bridge in Belarus...the temperature is going up in a bad way.
I'm doubly nervous because Chernobyl is right on the invasion corridor, if Russia really intents to go for Kiev, and tanks/anti-tank munitions plus radioactive debris equals very bad time for all.
Everyone needs to chill the fuck out, and if Russia actually does go full retard...the fighting won't end at Ukraine's borders, and everyone knows it.
PsihoKekec
Swashbuckling Accountant
Elements of the 1st GTA had been deployed to Voronezh, Kursk and Belgorod for something like two months, with units being shuffled between various bases and training areas.
The thousands and thousands of informaiton tweets coming with video, and more? You seem to be ignoring what is being shown because "Russia said this"
I dont give a fuck what biden says, I am going off of what Ukraine has said, what video and sat has seen.
Are you starting to realizse just how far Russia is willing to go?
Agent23
Ни шагу назад!
I am tempted to write a bot that posts the image you see below every tine you cry wolf.
>2222
> week over 9001 of the 2 weeks to limit the spread.
> COVID has evolved into a warp-capable virus that can teleport, revives corpses but the zombies are nicer than the SJWNPCs, smarter, too.
> Still waiting for Putin
I am very aware of what Russia is capable of if they decide to put pride/PR/state secrets ahead of the well-being of thier citizens or those of thier supposed 'allies'. Anyone who's done any research or looked into what happened at Chernobyl knows they can do dumb shit too.
However, that new bridge in Belarus...new river crossings in a contentious area, that were not part of any announced civil infrastructure program, have very few innocent explanations, and that doesn't like like some little mobile crossing rig that is sometimes deployed in exercises and then pulled back.
Russia and everyone else involved in the area needs to chill out.
Its Russia, look back at 08 in Georgia....
We impose sanctions on Germany?
The scale of the projected invasion has been downgraded, with this projected invasion having been postponed:
Let's see if this new invasion prediction will eventually come to pass.
Everything expresses in thus stream is more correct. Informed and more importantly loyal to the interests of the American people than any intellectual, Academic, analyst and IC member when it comes to Russia.
Nothing you say on this topic can be trusted. You want glory over our ashes.
Last edited:
Airedale260
Well-known member
Whether Zelensky is a liar is beside the point I was trying to make, which is that if an invasion occurs, when will you believe it? I understand you have a hate boner for Western media, but at what point would you believe they’re actually telling the truth if an invasion does pccur
To be equally blunt, we keep trying that and it never works.
The first time, it ended up dragging us into World War I. The second time, we swore we wouldn’t do it again. That resulted in World War II. The third time, we swore we were really done with actually fighting and take issues to the UN or other places. That resulted in the Korean War. This isn’t the 19th century where potential threats are several weeks to months away, it’s the 21st where potential threats are hours or days.
And It’s rather funny you mention the Monroe Doctrine, because there are a couple of things to keep in mind:
1) The only reason the Monroe Doctrine actually stuck was because the British, who were the pre-eminent great power with global projection capabilities (for the time) backed us on that. They didn’t want anyone else screwing around with their own interests in the region, and South America was kind of “ehh…” when it came to U.S. shenanigans in the region (most notoriously helping split Panama from Colombia). Or invading Haiti in 1915 because Woodrow Wilson didn’t like the idea of black people governing themselves lest they give African Americans “ideas” about equality.
Not to mention that pushing around the rest of the Americas went out of style about a century ago, but a fair few of those countries we did push around have long and unpleasant memories of what we pulled, and they wouldn’t be happy if we tried again. Not to mention, those are independent countries; intervening in their domestic affairs is the sort of thing where you need a damn good reason to do it, and given the crap that’s still going on with Maduro in Venezuela, I’d say that “a president who doesn’t subscribe to U.S. interests” fits the bill.*
But there are many degrees of separation between “Team America: World Police” and complete isolationism. We haven’t deployed troops to invade West Africa, though we do have a couple personnel there as advisors and trainers for the locals.
There are a few things you’re ignoring. First, what the hell do you do in the event of a major cyber attack? I don’t mean a couple of hackers using ransomware, I mean large segments of our electrical grid, communications systems, or energy pipelines all at once. Do we nuke Moscow in response? That would cause the end of the world. Do we send the Navy in to block off our shores so the thing can’t come across the ocean? Cyberspace doesn’t work that way. So…what do you do?
Or, say the Chinese decide to start pasting shipping traffic in the Pacific to fuck with Australia? Or India? All of a sudden our economy is going to be in deep shit because we need stuff coming through those shipping lanes and they’re now cut off. If you’re the president and dealing with an even bigger supply crisis than what we have now, how do you respond?
Or let’s say Iran goes nuclear and starts threatening to nuke Saudi Arabia for being Saudi? Do you sit with your thumb up your ass despite such a threat causing oil prices around the world to soar and start crashing the U.S. economy?
As far as getting other countries to pay up, there’s a few things you should know. First, the only allies who can really be accused of shirking off on defense expenditures are Britain, France, Italy, and Germany. The first three have gotten better; the main laggard is Germany. Hence why everybody in Europe is now telling them to pull their big boy pants on and unfuck themselves. The rest? They’re already doing that.
But:
The kind of defense expenditures required to maintain massive militaries are enormous, especially on the naval side. So not just anyone can do that; it takes a lot of time to not only build ships but also learn how to use them. For instance, China got hold of the Liaoning back in 1998. It then took them until 2012 to rebuild it, and then another four years after that to figure out how to employ a carrier properly. But China has a massive economy and can afford to do that. Most countries can’t.
The country with the third largest economy, Japan, has a decent sized military (including two “helicopter destroyers” that are designed to operate F-35Bs) , but in a one-on-one fight there is no fucking way they could match the Chinese. Hence why they’re allied to us, because we can work together (and with other friendly countries in the region). And nobody criticizes the Japanese for “not pulling their weight.”
And also just as important: We don’t expect the British or the French to suddenly field ten divisions of troops and a dozen aircraft carriers, because they don’t have the money or resources to do that. But by having, say, a couple divisions and a couple carriers each (which they can and are in the process of doing) what they can do is work with U.S. forces and thereby effectively give us extra ships without us actually paying for it (called “slotting in”). Notably, the AUKUS pact that was signed last year to help Australia get nuclear submarines is another example of this -Australia has its own assets but in event of a major conflict, they can slot in with U.S. forces and vice versa. And ultimately, that works far better because not only are we not doing all the heavy lifting, but we can get our allies to stay on the same page.
So, you’re OK with that, but what about training them on how to use the weapons, or what to do in certain combat situations that basic training (assuming they had the time to go through it, which given that a bunch of the people involved aren’t professional soldiers but more like the Resistance movements of World War II, they won’t have had? What about sharing intelligence like “Our satellites see X number of tanks in this location; we’ve got signals intercepts indicating Y and Z battalion tactical groups are moving to these locations” etc. Hell, Russia does that all the time with groups it supports, same as China. Are we not allowed to share that despite it not being any sort of act of war, just one country sharing information it’s already collecting for its own purposes?
Because that’s all we are doing, and in fact a day or two ago we actually pulled the trainers we sent over out of Ukraine so they won’t be in the line of fire. Believe it or not, the only people claiming the U.S. wants war are 1) Russian propagandists and 2) People who take said Russian propagandists at face value. Also the odd junior soldier on here, I suppose, but taking him as representative of the U.S.’ national security establishment is like taking a cashier at In-N-Out Burger on the subject of them expanding their footprint as representative of the senior execs’ positions. It may line up, but that has nothing to do with the individual actually knowing anything material, much less be in a position to influence said policies.
There’s a big difference between some skepticism in reporting so as to sort out biases and not believing a word they say. While I won’t dispute the Washington press corps has really fucked up over the past few years, it’s important to note that not everything they say is a lie or seriously inaccurate. Or, as one of my professors (who was that rare breed of hardcore conservative in academia) once put it, “Just because someone is a schtunk doesn’t mean everything they say is invalid.” But I’d also note that “the election was stolen” was true, either. There were some irregularities, but even Trump’s own lawyers, when questioned, admitted there was no evidence of material fraud (that is, the kind of fraud that would flip an election). Again, just as you treat sources you disagree with, that doesn’t mean they’re lying; likewise, just because someone says something you do agree with doesn’t automatically mean they’re telling the truth (whether because they are genuinely mistaken or else deliberately lying).
Look, I don’t want a war with Russia any more than you do. But at the same time, just sitting back and saying “Not my problem” isn’t an option and hasn’t been since 1945.
The good news is, I don’t think the Russians quite expected the West’s reaction to be what it is. Putin’s best hope now is to keep playing brinksmanship games and string out everyone long enough that either the West gives up or else he gets something he can portray as a win domestically and back off. But given that his demands are “Russia gets to tell NATO and the EU what to do now and forever” those are impossible to meet. And a Finlandized Ukraine isn’t an option, because the Ukrainians have made it clear that’s unacceptable. Ditto NATO for the same reason, because it goes back to a Russian veto over NATO’s external affairs, which isn’t going to happen.
So for now we wait and see. I’ll be very happy if the Russians back off. But I’m not counting on it.
That’s a bridge layer for allowing tanks to cross. It’s sure as hell not any sort of permanent crossing, which would involve multiple construction vehicles, anchorages for each end of it, paving equipment, etc.
And all the discussions we’ve had and the threats of sanctions have been intended to get them to chill out. If they’re ignoring those and instead keep taking actions to escalate the situation, what does that tell you?
QUOTE="King Arts, post: 248037, member: 2704"]
Guys we have to look at the worst case scenario possible. What if Russia invades all of Ukraine, and when we try to impose sanctions Germany tells us to fuck off because Russia has them by the balls. What would happen next.
[/QUOTE]
@WolfBear is essentially correct -we tell them to shut the fuck up and tell them to decide whether they want to do business with North America and Europe or Russia. And not even the EU would be able to bail Germany out, because even France is getting tired of their bulls
Agent23
Ни шагу назад!
Sssshhh...I think he is just being a very bad, cliched mouthpiece for the establishment on purpose, he cons his bosses into paying him to just hang around here and shitpost all day, at least that is my theory.
Fair, I can respect the hustle.
A lot more than I respect people who are part of the academic and lobby wing of this nonsense.
And for the record I do not hold any love of Putin or Russia.
I just think the US has a moral duty at this point to oppose globalism and defend every nation and group that sticks up for itself and its own citizens and interests against this attempt to force homogeneity on our species in the name of progress.
The people who want a one world order are on the side of the Ukraine.
Therefor the Ukraine is an enemy asset. Russia in defense of its decrepit borders is destabilizing a tool of the international vultures, ergo it is not at present a threat.
I think that bridge looks more like a semi-permanent, one or two lane, quick assembly trussel bridge, meant to be plonked in place in a matter of hours from easy to transport pieces, and have more permanent 'anchors' build into it, while allowing transit at the same time.
Think larger version of some two lane US highway bridges set down by the CCC back in the day.
Also, the First Guards being in Belgorod and this new bridge is the sort of hard evidence I needed to see, if I was going to think Russia might go full retard via Belarus on short notice. It's not something that can be easily or cheaply faked, and if Russia was going to use any unit to make a move, the First Guards and their tanks is pretty high up on units I'd expect them to use.
With the new bridge there, and everything else, I understand this move.
Also this.
With the First Guards in Belgorod, and that new bridge near the border Belarusian border with Ukraine, if Russia decides to go full retard and push for Kiev, make sure the world sees their movements in the open as they happen, so everyone can see what happened and who fired when and where.
If this becomes a hot conflict between Russia and Ukraine via Belarus, we need to make sure the eastern flank of NATO has enough planes on hand ensure nothing can 'spillover' into a NATO nation without there being a massive and overwhelming response any formation that does so.
Edit:
It's a pontoon bridge inside the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone...they are going to try to use that zone's unique issues and lack of militry hardening, to bypass some other defenses, if they make a move on Kiev
Last edited:
Airedale260
Well-known member
I wouldn’t expect them to show the exact footage from the Global Hawk -one thing you never want to do is reveal the level of capability you actually have unless you absolutely have to, because the moment you do, your adversary can start developing counters. And as it is, given that Russia is the one making aggressive moves, they are going to be hard pressed for any credibility in claiming Ukraine started it.
It looks like they’re carrying out operations they’d planned months ago (in the case of the B-52s) and as part of routine air patrols they’ve been doing since the Crimea fuckery in 2014 (F-15s and F-16s). Most of the fighters are already stationed in Europe already, but someone probably decided that, if need be, sending some F-35s over to Spangdahlem to help cover any potential gap in coverage in case something happens while the others are out doing their thing.
As for the troop deployments, they’re there as an assurance to other NATO members that, yes, we have their backs. Don’t expect them to slug it out, though; these guys are light and motorized infantry. They’re a tripwire in the extremely unlikely event Russia has decided to fool everybody and launch an invasion of NATO instead of Ukraine.
Not that I think they would, but OTOH “X would never be that stupid!” has in fact turned out to be very wrong in the past.
King Arts
Well-known member
Ok I didn’t think of that since they are an ally so we have options. But will the sanctions be effective? If Germany needs Russian gas more than trade with us they won’t choose us.
But Ukraine is not globohomo and they are standing up for itself and it’s citizens.
I am literally using Twitter to prove people wrong on here.... With video and pictural evidence
@WolfBear is essentially correct -we tell them to shut the fuck up and tell them to decide whether they want to do business with North America and Europe or Russia. And not even the EU would be able to bail Germany out, because even France is getting tired of their bulls
[/QUOTE]
I never said we would go to war, just that Russia will invade
Ukraine still has LGBTQ+ rights/pride parades, but Yeah, the situation in Ukraine for them is nowhere near as good as it is here in the West:
Thousands march for LGBTQ+ rights in Ukraine despite some opposition
Thousands of people including soldiers and diplomats marched peacefully through the Ukrainian capital on Sunday in an annual gay pride parade despite some opposition to an event called off last year because of the coronavirus pandemic.
www.reuters.com