Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[tshile]

Just now, NickyJ said:

The difference between whether they said "can't possibly lead to war" and "doesn't necessarily lead to war" is unimportant. The messages of the posts were clear: Do a no-fly zone. It was a risky idea at the time, but fortunately a GOP senator advocated it, so now it's safe to say the idea is dead.

They mean two different things. 
 

You’re criticizing people for saying one, when they said the other. 
 

and you’re grand position on that is that differences in what people say, don’t matter. 
 

well. Ok. No one else works that way. That’s why we have words and dictionaries and rules about the language. 
 

But make up whatever you want so you feel good about yourself. 

[tshile]

Hah. On Twitter one of the highlighted tweets is an article that the us doesn’t haven’t biological weapons labs in ukraine, citing the US embasy and… wait for it… snopes….

 

 

🤔

[NickyJ]

20 minutes ago, tshile said:

They mean two different things. 
 

You’re criticizing people for saying one, when they said the other. 
 

and you’re grand position on that is that differences in what people say, don’t matter. 
 

well. Ok. No one else works that way. That’s why we have words and dictionaries and rules about the language. 
 

But make up whatever you want so you feel good about yourself. 

Mmm, let's take a look back.....

  

On 3/4/2022 at 6:56 PM, Fergasun said:

Re: No Fly Zone

I would prefer a "no destroying Ukrainian cities and killing civilians" zone.  For all of the non military pressure brought to bear, Russia is not letting up.  One would think think they are a few weeks away from total economic collapse from the sanctions, but who knows.  

  

On 3/4/2022 at 5:17 PM, tshile said:

“That could lead to full fledged war in Europe”

 

ok. It could also lead to the immediate halting of bombing and shelling civilians. 
 

And not doing a no fly zone now is not, in any way, a good guarantee you won’t still wind up with war in Europe. 
 

If you don’t want to put our troops there then fine - say that. At least that’s a reasonable position. 
 

But spare me the “putin can do whatever he wants cause we just don’t want war in Europe” crap. 

 

Ah yes, I see, you were one of the people advocating no-fly zones. Makes sense, kudos to you for sticking to your guns when most other people have deserted it because the wrong politician said it.

 

PeterMP was interesting, he was saying both to not do a no-fly zone and also saying that a no-fly zone would be fine because we did it in Serbia.

Edited March 14, 2022 by NickyJ

[88Comrade2000]

If WWW3 starts,most of us won't be around in the post nuclear holocaust.  

 

There are moments that define a presidency. Either Good or bad.

 

Bush Jr- Good 9/11; bad Iraq War, Hurricane Katrina,  Great Recession

Obama- Good - Obama care, Killing Bin Laden

Trump- Bad HIS WHOLE administration , especially  the pandemic response and trying to prevent Biden being President.

 

Just naming a few.

 

This moment could define the entire presidency; especially with the threat of www3.

Edited March 14, 2022 by 88Comrade2000

[tshile]

5 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

Mmm, let's take a look back.....

  

  

 

Ah yes, I see, you were one of the people advocating no-fly zones. Makes sense, kudos to you for sticking to your guns when most other people have deserted it because the wrong politician said it.

 

PeterMP was interesting, he was saying both to not do a no-fly zone and also saying that a no-fly zone would be fine because we did it in Serbia.

Peter was saying that it would be dumb if the consideration of a no-fly zone wasn’t at least on the table. 
 

you suck at reading. 
 

which makes sense given your “it doesn’t matter if you say different things everything means whatever I want it to mean” stance

 

👍

[NickyJ]

26 minutes ago, tshile said:

Peter was saying that it would be dumb if the consideration of a no-fly zone wasn’t at least on the table. 
 

you suck at reading. 
 

which makes sense given your “it doesn’t matter if you say different things everything means whatever I want it to mean” stance

 

👍

And the result is still the same. A no-fly zone is NATO forces engaging in combat with Russian forces. The result: War.

[China]

50 minutes ago, tshile said:

Hah. On Twitter one of the highlighted tweets is an article that the us doesn’t haven’t biological weapons labs in ukraine, citing the US embasy and… wait for it… snopes….

 

 

🤔

 

I'll go with the BBC (says the man who regularly posts crap from The Sun and The Daily Mail):

 

Ukraine war: Fact-checking Russia's biological weapons claims

 

Russia has claimed without any evidence that biological weapons are being developed in laboratories in Ukraine with support from the United States.

 

It says material is being destroyed to conceal the country's weapons programme, but the US says this is "total nonsense" and that Russia is inventing false narratives to justify its actions in Ukraine.

 

Russia has accused the US and Ukraine of working with "pathogens of dangerous infections" in 30 laboratories across the country. Pathogens are microorganisms that can cause disease.

 

Ukraine has dozens of public health laboratories that work to research and mitigate the threats of dangerous diseases.

 

Some of these labs receive financial and other support from the US, the European Union and the World Health Organization (WHO) - as is the case in many other countries.

 

Despite Russian claims that these are "secret" labs, details of US involvement can be found on the US embassy's website.

 

Additionally, the US set up its "Biological Threat Reduction Program" in the 1990s following the fall of the Soviet Union to reduce the risk from biological weapons that had been left behind in countries including Ukraine.

 

Under this programme certain labs receive funding from the US for modernisation and equipment, but are managed locally, not by the US.

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

[Larry]

1 hour ago, tshile said:

I don’t believe anyone said it couldn’t possibly lead to a war

 

i think people said it doesn’t necessarily lead to a war 

I also think that "there's a chance it might not lead to nuclear war" isn't really an argument in favor of doing something. 
 

 

[tshile]

7 minutes ago, Larry said:

I also think that "there's a chance it might not lead to nuclear war" isn't really an argument in favor of doing something. 
 

 

yeah. Neither do I. 

[China]

Harsh reality of life in Moscow as goods run out and prices sky-rocket

 

Until a few weeks ago, the only queues you’d see on Moscow’s central Gagarin Square were of well-heeled young Russians waiting to get into glitzy clubs or trendy eateries.

Things are different now.

 

With Western sanctions driving out hundreds of major international companies, there’s a sense of desperation in the air.

 

In the upmarket Gagarinskiy shopping mall nearby, there has been a dash for everything from fast food to imported clothing before shops are shuttered up for good - or their rapidly depreciating roubles can no longer buy them.

 

And even in the supermarkets, shelves have been stripped of essentials like pasta and rice, as locals fear shortages and rationing could soon be on the cards.

 

“They don’t have anything I need,” said one anxious resident, who had called into the Auchan supermarket on her way home from work.

 

“And everything that’s left is really overpriced.”

 

With the ruble halving in value over the past fortnight Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the bill for families’ weekly shop has skyrocketed.

 

Darina, an interpreter living in the Russian capital, told me that she was struggling to afford to feed her pet after costs virtually doubled overnight.

 

She said: “It was 600 rubles yesterday online, now it’s 1,100 - they’re raising the prices every minute.

 

"Now my cat is eating more expensive food than I am."

 

Videos shared online of people stockpiling essentials have added to the sense of panic here.

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

Still, doesn't sound as harsh of a reality as what Ukranians are going through...not even close.

[tshile]

15 minutes ago, China said:

 

I'll go with the BBC (says the man who regularly posts crap from The Sun and The Daily Mail):

Where else have I heard this idea that were engaging in developing biological weapons with a foreign country either directly or indirectly (funding)… hmmm… oh yeah. Rand Paul. 
 

 

[Larry]

47 minutes ago, tshile said:

Peter was saying that it would be dumb if the consideration of a no-fly zone wasn’t at least on the table. 
 

you suck at reading. 
 

which makes sense given your “it doesn’t matter if you say different things everything means whatever I want it to mean” stance

 

👍

You are arguing with someone who stated that Trump's pandemic response and "trying to prevent Biden being President" were the good things the define Trump's presidency. 

[FrFan]

Daily Harvest update

 

 

[FrFan]

 

[Jabbyrwock]

30 minutes ago, Larry said:

I also think that "there's a chance it might not lead to nuclear war" isn't really an argument in favor of doing something. 
 

 

 

...well...there goes that pick-up line...

[tshile]

33 minutes ago, Larry said:

You are arguing with someone who stated that Trump's pandemic response and "trying to prevent Biden being President" were the good things the define Trump's presidency. 

Fair enough 😂 

[NickyJ]

33 minutes ago, Larry said:

You are arguing with someone who stated that Trump's pandemic response and "trying to prevent Biden being President" were the good things the define Trump's presidency. 

What? Show me the quote.

[MrSilverMaC]

I wanted to add my two cents in regarding China and ww3, for whatever it’s worth.

 

I don’t fear China. While they are definitely working to expand their reach, any war with China would be fought in China or the countries/waters surrounding them. They lack the ability to reliably project their force anywhere near the U.S. and most of their military hardware is either of russian origin or a reverse-engineered knock-off of russian hardware.
 

They do have some homegrown platforms like the chengdu j-20 which is supposed to be a good airframe with most of the characteristics that denote a 5th gen fighter (mostly stolen from us). But Chinese jets suffer from the same issues a lot of russian jets suffer from, namely underpowered engines. And there is some question of their stealth ability due to the exhaust port shape. They made the same choice russia did with the su57 thrust vectoring vs improved stealth, choosing maneuverability. These are not to be taken lightly but would likely fare poorly against an f-35 or an f-22 especially with U.S pilots flying them.

 

China would also fare poorly in a naval battle anywhere other than close to their coasts due to their reportedly very good anti-ship missiles and shallow water defense. One of our battle groups is likely enough to overwhelm their entire deep water navy, and two would certainly be too much. We have 11, including one continuously parked in Japan.
 

Their main advantage is that of course any war near their borders or inside their country would have to contend with their numbers. 1.2 billion people is a daunting number.

But China’s situation is even worse than russia’s with regards to viable experience in that it hasn’t fought in any war of note since Korea. It’s closing in on 100 years since they’ve fought another military worth speaking of. Beating up on Uighurs and Tibetans is quite different than going head to head with even a moderately equipped and trained military, never mind the most advanced/trained/experienced military in the world. And while someone could point out it’s been 30 years since the U.S has fought a sizable military (gulf war 1 against Iraq) they don’t even have the our recent experience with insurgent/guerilla militaries.

 

We’ve historically enjoyed about a 10-1 kill ratio in the wars we’ve fought (not counting the war on terror as those numbers are harder to quantify but would skew it even further our way) but is less than ideal when going against a country 4x our size on their home turf. None of this, of course, takes into account any other country in the region and how they would react/respond. China doesn’t have many friends in their neighborhood.

 

The scenario of a war between the U.S and China aside, a nuclear war started by vladimir puto is even less appealing to them. Assuming that the U.S government still adheres to the MAD philosophy, if russia lets their nukes fly at the U.S and NATO we return the favor. China and N.K are likely on our list of places getting a delivery. Even assuming they aren’t launched against, no one survives the fallout from a NATO/russia nuclear war. It’s game over for everyone. China loses by default in a war they aren’t even actively fighting in.
 

While I’m sure they’d love to see us bleed ourselves in a conventional war with russia, I can’t imagine the consequences of a nuclear war are a result they are willing to accept.
 

It makes me wonder what they’re willing to do to avoid it which is what I imagine is driving the meeting in Rome. I think puto weakened his position by even threatening nukes. It changes the whole calculus of how everyone approaches the situation and basically makes it so any country with something to lose would ultimately be against them.

[tshile]

I so dearly wish the Ukrainian farmers stealing Russian equipment thing occurred on some way other than juxtaposed with civilians being massacred. 
 

The farmer thing makes me laugh so hard. It makes me so happy. It’s the single best thing I recall watching go viral in a long time. 
 

but once I’m done laughing at the latest picture/video, I feel bad about the laughing  

[tshile]

3 minutes ago, MrSilverMaC said:

wanted to add my two cents in regarding China and ww3, for whatever it’s worth.

 

I don’t fear China.

I went into this post, after reading this, thinking which item (that I know about) were you gonna miss in defining where China is different (and more advanced) from Russia. And you hit on all of them. 
 

obviously I only know of a fraction. But you managed to not miss any. Which is good considering the number of “I think <x>“ posts we get that are missing things. 
 

Good post. I agree. 
 

in fact I’m struggling to figure out who could actually threaten our mainland. I’m not thinking of anyone. One off, terrorist type things? Sure 1 person or group flying below the radar is always a threat we’ll never stop. But an army?

 

i believe we’re the only military set up to handle a war with multiple fronts (not that it’s be fun - just that we’re the only ones actually set up for it)

 

I believe we’re the only ones with any real capability to go after any place on the globe (again - not that it would be fun. Some are surely harder than others)

 

I don’t ever want another occupation and nation building mission. But I have no reservations about our ability to protect our mainland and to decimate others if need be.

[tshile]

13 minutes ago, MrSilverMaC said:

And while someone could point out it’s been 30 years since the U.S has fought a sizable military (gulf war 1 against Iraq) they don’t even have the our recent experience with insurgent/guerilla militaries.

To add to this part:

Almost all of our conflicts are on the other side of the globe. 
 

(looking at you Canada - any day now)

 

not only do we have more relevant experience with fighting - but we have tons of real world work (and practice - talk to someone active duty enough and you’ll find out just how much we practice with our allies…) in the logistics of war/conflict on the other side of the globe. 
 

russia can’t seem to go next door without resorting to leveling everything. 

[Larry]

18 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

What? Show me the quote.

On my phone, so trying to format multi-quotes is out. But it's literally the post that contains the phrase "trying to prevent Biden being president". 

[FrFan]

 

Today Masha was supposed to be released after 15 days of arrest, but instead she was taken to court and ... they gave her another 15 days

 

 

[ixcuincle]

 

[Die Hard]

15 minutes ago, tshile said:

To add to this part:

Almost all of our conflicts are on the other side of the globe. 
 

(looking at you Canada - any day now)

I’m not a nationalist and I won’t pretend to speak on behalf of anyone.

 

As a Canadian, I’m intrigued. But your point flew over my head. Would you mind explaining?