Lord Ratner Posted October 25 Posted October 25 8 hours ago, gearhog said: Last time I saw Israel drop a building that cleanly was 9/11. That was good. Bravo 1
BashiChuni Posted October 25 Posted October 25 how's that ukraine war working out right now that so many of you were in love with? seems like a lot of crickets 1
ClearedHot Posted October 25 Posted October 25 As of a few minutes ago Israel has started it's retribution attack and is hitting Iran with strikes in Tehran proper.
Boomer6 Posted October 26 Posted October 26 On 10/23/2024 at 9:34 AM, fire4effect said: If this happens, I don't see it before November 6. Glad to see Israel took care of business on their timeline and not our election cycle. 1
The46IsntThatBad Posted October 26 Posted October 26 13 hours ago, gearhog said: Last time I saw Israel drop a building that cleanly was 9/11. I literally lol'd
fire4effect Posted October 26 Posted October 26 (edited) 2 hours ago, Boomer6 said: Glad to see Israel took care of business on their timeline and not our election cycle. Point taken. I was thinking if they were going to hit their oil production it would be after the election to avoid a spike in prices. Of course, Israel is pragmatic enough to know they can't predict which administration they'll be dealing going forward so they try to maintain some semblance of balance between parties. Edited October 26 by fire4effect
gearhog Posted October 26 Author Posted October 26 (edited) 12 hours ago, BashiChuni said: how's that ukraine war working out right now that so many of you were in love with? seems like a lot of crickets Great question. I've been busy building a house this summer, so I haven't been able to pay attention. I just did a quick google search for "Russia Ukraine advances". I just clicked the first article from the Independent. The first few lines. "Russian forces are making swift and “significant tactical advances” into the eastern Ukrainian city of Selydove, war monitors have said. Open source data suggests Russian forces advanced in September at their fastest rate since March 2022, despite Ukraine taking a part of Russia’s Kursk region. Those rapid advances have continued in the past week as Russian forces appear to be charging towards - or even into - the city of Selydove, which is less than 10 miles south of its main target, the larger city of Pokrovsk, a linchpin of the wider Donetsk region’s defences." I don't think many in the West have the ability to understand an adversary using a "dilatory tactic" in conflict. "Rapid Dominance, Shock and Awe, and Blitzkreig" are what the average American understands as the standard strategic winning tactics. Someone committed to the painfully slow grinding advance without regard to timeline, goal posts, achievements has always been a difficult problem for us. “If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.” Edited October 26 by gearhog 1
Stoker Posted October 26 Posted October 26 At the current rate of Russian advance, how many years/decades will it take for them to capture Kiev?
gearhog Posted October 26 Author Posted October 26 2 hours ago, Stoker said: At the current rate of Russian advance, how many years/decades will it take for them to capture Kiev? How long will it take them to take Berlin? We're told both are strategic objectives of Moscow and thus necessitate us spending hundreds of billions to prevent it. Has Russia ever stated that is their intent? But say that is was... One answer to your question: 14-15 years, or not as long as it took us to abandon our interests in Afghanistan and Iraq. The website https://liveuamap.com/ shows the average distance to the front line from the Eastern border is around 70 miles.(Click on the polymeasure icon in the bottom left). Kiev is about 420 miles, give or take. A better answer to your question: Slightly longer than we're willing to remain committed. That is to say we're not in this for the long haul. They are. It's their backyard. US administrations change, budgets change, public perceptions change. I've said this since the beginning. The overall direction of the war continues since the beginning to go in one direction. I'd also submit that the conventional conflict on the ground in Ukraine is a small part of a much bigger war being waged on us by Russia. https://www.reuters.com/world/spurred-by-shared-grievances-brics-gathers-pace-2024-10-24/ The pace of advance by BRICS is also slow and fraught with problems. But it continues to trend in the direction of success.
BashiChuni Posted October 26 Posted October 26 10 hours ago, Stoker said: At the current rate of Russian advance, how many years/decades will it take for them to capture Kiev? that's not their objective IMO
Stoker Posted October 28 Posted October 28 On 10/26/2024 at 12:38 PM, gearhog said: A better answer to your question: Slightly longer than we're willing to remain committed. That is to say we're not in this for the long haul. They are. It's their backyard. With that in mind, how long until we tell them "feel free to take the Baltics?" After all, it's their backyard, no point in waiting to get involved in a conflict we couldn't possibly remain committed to.
uhhello Posted October 28 Posted October 28 On 10/26/2024 at 4:43 PM, BashiChuni said: that's not their objective IMO What is their current objective IYO
Lawman Posted October 28 Posted October 28 What is their current objective IYO I’m sure Kharkiv wasn’t their objective either.He’s still trying to figure that one out (along with most of the Russian Army leadership). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BashiChuni Posted October 28 Posted October 28 (edited) 3 hours ago, uhhello said: What is their current objective IYO to make ukraine a neutral state and deny them entry into nato. secondary objective to "liberate" eastern ukraine from "oppression". Edited October 28 by BashiChuni 1
BashiChuni Posted October 28 Posted October 28 2 hours ago, Lawman said: I’m sure Kharkiv wasn’t their objective either. He’s still trying to figure that one out (along with most of the Russian Army leadership). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and you're still trying to relearn how the russian bear fights wars.
uhhello Posted October 29 Posted October 29 20 minutes ago, BashiChuni said: and you're still trying to relearn how the russian bear fights wars. I'm still trying to interpret if you really think this was their plan all along or ?
BashiChuni Posted October 29 Posted October 29 1 hour ago, uhhello said: I'm still trying to interpret if you really think this was their plan all along or ? bro i have no idea what their plan was. i know they were not going to let NATO establish influence in ukraine. something we kept pushing over and over foolishly. the lack of critical thinking skills from our professional officer corps and diplomats is shocking. and the dismal foreign policy results back it up. 2
StoleIt Posted October 29 Posted October 29 59 minutes ago, BashiChuni said: bro i have no idea what their plan was. i know they were not going to let NATO establish influence in ukraine. something we kept pushing over and over foolishly. the lack of critical thinking skills from our professional officer corps and diplomats is shocking. and the dismal foreign policy results back it up. So, I am unfamiliar with the intimate history of NATO courting Ukraine for membership. But, I did just read the Wikipedia article dedicated to the subject, and it seems like the only recent (in the last decade) time Ukraine seriously considered joining was after they were invaded by Russia in 2014. Quote Ukraine joined NATO's Partnership for Peace in 1994 and the NATO-Ukraine Commission in 1997, then agreed the NATO-Ukraine Action Plan in 2002 and entered into NATO's Intensified Dialogue program in 2005. In 2010, during the premiership of Viktor Yanukovych, the Ukrainian parliament voted to abandon the goal of NATO membership and re-affirm Ukraine's neutral status, while continuing its co-operation with NATO.[3] In the February 2014 Ukrainian Revolution, Ukraine's parliament voted to remove Yanukovych, but the new government did not seek to change its neutral status.[4][5][6] Russia then occupied and annexed Crimea, and in August 2014 Russia's military invaded eastern Ukraine to support its separatist proxies. Because of this, in December 2014 Ukraine's parliament voted to end its neutral status,[7] and in 2018 it voted to enshrine the goal of NATO membership in the Constitution. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine–NATO_relations#:~:text=After it was attacked by,has increasingly sought NATO membership.&text=Ukraine joined NATO's Partnership for,Intensified Dialogue program in 2005. So, while I continually hear the narrative that this is NATO/West's fault for seducing Ukraine into the organization...I'm not seeing it that way. But, I am open to learning if you care to refute the Wikipedia article and educate a mostly uninformed individual on your counternarrative.
BashiChuni Posted October 29 Posted October 29 11 hours ago, StoleIt said: So, I am unfamiliar with the intimate history of NATO courting Ukraine for membership. But, I did just read the Wikipedia article dedicated to the subject, and it seems like the only recent (in the last decade) time Ukraine seriously considered joining was after they were invaded by Russia in 2014. So, while I continually hear the narrative that this is NATO/West's fault for seducing Ukraine into the organization...I'm not seeing it that way. But, I am open to learning if you care to refute the Wikipedia article and educate a mostly uninformed individual on your counternarrative. Evolution of NATO-Ukraine relations Dialogue and cooperation started when newly independent Ukraine joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (1991) and the Partnership for Peace programme (1994). Relations were strengthened with the signing of the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership, and further enhanced in 2009 with the Declaration to Complement the Charter, which reaffirmed the decision by NATO Leaders at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine will become a member of NATO. The 1997 Charter established the NATO-Ukraine Commission as the main body responsible for developing the NATO-Ukraine relationship and for directing cooperative activities. In 2023, the Commission was replaced by the NATO-Ukraine Council, where Allies and Ukraine sit as equals. This change demonstrates the strengthening of political ties and Ukraine’s increasing integration with NATO. Cooperation has deepened over time and is mutually beneficial. Ukraine has a long track record of active contributions to NATO-led operations and missions. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_37750.htm ---------------------------- VILNIUS, July 10 (Reuters) - As NATO nations try to agree on Ukraine’s push for membership at a summit in Vilnius this week, an earlier gathering casts a long shadow. At a summit in Bucharest in April 2008, NATO declared that both Ukraine and Georgia would join the U.S.-led defence alliance - but gave them no plan for how to get there. The declaration papered over cracks between the United States, which wanted to admit both countries, and France and Germany, which feared that would antagonise Russia. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/natos-ukraine-debate-still-haunted-by-bucharest-pledge-2023-07-10/ --------------------------------- "The White House’s messaging on the Ukraine war is built around two simple-yet-powerful adjectives: “We are united in our condemnation,” said President Joe Biden almost two years ago in a joint statement with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, “of Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine.” The “unjustified and unprovoked” line has been used numerous times by a chorus of top U.S. officials and allies, quickly becoming a rhetorical mainstay of Biden’s maximum pressure campaign against the Kremlin." An explosive New York Times exposé by Adam Entous and Michael Schwirtz sheds light on major developments preceding the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. According to the report, the Ukrainian government entered into a wide-ranging partnership with the CIA against Russia. This cooperation, which involved the establishment of as many as 12 secret CIA “forward operating bases” along Ukraine’s border with Russia, began not with Russia’s 2022 invasion, but just over 10 years ago. The problem, rather, is one of basic security perceptions. Moscow repeatedly warned — for many years before 2014 — that it was and remains prepared to take drastic action to prevent Ukraine from being used by the West as a forward operating base against Russia. Yet that, as recounted in lurid detail by The New York Times, is precisely what has happened over the past 10 years." https://responsiblestatecraft.org/cia-ukraine-russia/ ------------------------------- lots of information to unpack. it's a complicated situation and cannot be boiled down to "Putin Bad, USA innocent and good". Like most of international politics there is lots of nuance which does not make for good prime time TV ratings. my summary: the US has provoked a post cold war russia unnecessarily by pushing nato to the border of russia. a red line that putin has said for decades russia will not stand for. russia is acting as expected and trying to prevent a nato border state...while preserving their black sea access via crimea. basically russia called nato's bluff. their invasion was not done out of left field for no reason. many on here like to argue that putin is the next hitler and a wild man who must be stopped before he rapes paris. i obviously disagree and think he is a very rational actor.
Lord Ratner Posted October 29 Posted October 29 (edited) It's always pointless trying to guess what Trump will do, but he is the only politician with the balls to play hardball with Russia. Okay, Vladimir, if this whole thing is about preventing having NATO right up against your border, then you have two options. You can vacate all Ukrainian territory, affirm the sovereign borders Ukraine as they stood in 2013, and in return you will have a binding treaty that the United States will never support or allow Ukraine membership in NATO. Or, we can lock the borders where they are now after your incursion into the East, we will consider this new Russian territory to be the buffer between NATO and Russia, and immediately recognize what remains of the newly defined Ukraine as the newest member of NATO. Otherwise I'm willing to bet that we can print money to supply Ukraine for longer than you can draft citizens to fight them. Edited October 29 by Lord Ratner 1 3
BashiChuni Posted October 29 Posted October 29 Great post above. ☝️ only quibble would be the limfac isn’t money printing, but American public interest and resolve which I think is low.
Day Man Posted October 29 Posted October 29 3 hours ago, Lord Ratner said: It's always pointless trying to guess what Trump will do, but he is the only politician with the balls to play hardball with Russia. this is straight laughable...trump is a simpleton being played by a far more capable adversary. he will not hesitate to abandon ukraine for a few compliments from another dictator
Lord Ratner Posted October 30 Posted October 30 28 minutes ago, Day Man said: this is straight laughable...trump is a simpleton being played by a far more capable adversary. he will not hesitate to abandon ukraine for a few compliments from another dictator Uh huh. Scoreboard. 1
BashiChuni Posted October 30 Posted October 30 1 hour ago, Day Man said: this is straight laughable...trump is a simpleton being played by a far more capable adversary. he will not hesitate to abandon ukraine for a few compliments from another dictator everything trump says about putin is true. he's smart, savvy, and capable. respecting your enemy is a wise thing to do. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now