The Ukraine war. (Yes, we'll mind our manners)
- Thread starter BigBlueFanGA
- Start date
Obviously the US ain't in war in Europe. But somehow you can't see that.
There is no winning for Ukraine. I said this a month after it started. Ukraine is going to lose territory. It was foregone then and is long past settled now.
Who said the U.S. was physically in a war in Europe??? The U.S. is financing a war in Europe. I never said otherwise.
Stop playing coy.
You wrote, "The UK, Sweden and others, going to a border to present a front to Russia can both be a move that secures peace, as Hack suggested, and a move that creates potential for a larger war."
That's your view as opposed to Hack's. There's nothing in history to suggest your view is correct.
Perhaps. The issue will come down to Western support. The "experts" on these matters aren't as confident as you appear to be.
Nothing, absolutely nothing, in that post says the U.S. is in a war in Europe. Quit being obtuse. And, that post acknowledges two possibilities. Nothing rejects Hack’s conclusion. Seriously, take a breath and attempt to comprehend.
And my point is that there is nothing, literally nothing, in the history of NATO that supports the possibility you proposed. Yet you throw it out as if it's real, finite concern.
Might as well flip a coin on anything & claim that whatever outcome increases the risk of war as to suggest NATO troop movements might do that. What a stupid position.
---UK joining fun, too.
UK to deploy 20,000 troops to NATO military drill to practice repelling a Russian invasion
In a speech today, the defence secretary is expected to announce the deployment of the army, navy and RAF personnel to the 31-nation Steadfast Defender military exercise across Europe.news.sky.com
The UK has a barely functional military force.
What is the current state of the British armed forces?
As a US general warns the British Army is no longer a top-level fighting force and calls for greater defence spending, we take a look at data showing the current state of the British armed forces.
Nope. You made up crap and then said that I said it. Get your shit together before you go on your rampage.
If you think amassing troops, rather than simply financing Ukraine, does not increase a threat of a conflict that involves more countries, that is your opinion. And, you thinking those who disagree are stupid is well documented.
Move along.
Except the “lose territory” part hasn’t happened yet. How much territory do you expect them to lose and where?
Nope to your thinking you control me in any way.
I'm with Ronald Reagan: The best assurance for peace is a strong defense. Or you can take the isolationists' position: appeasement.
Forbes article - we can send military aid to Ukraine for basically pocket change (paying transport costs only). Fiscal conservatives should be for this - we’re paying more to
de-commission and deconstruct dated hardware rather than donating it.
“It’s a classification for older weaponry the U.S. government calls “Excess Defense Articles,” or EDA. The government has the legal authority to sell extremely cheaply—or even give away—any U.S. military hardware that U.S. forces no longer need.
Biden only rarely has used his EDA authority to send weapons to Ukraine. Instead, he has leaned more heavily on his separate Presidential Drawdown Authority to send to Ukraine newer weapons that U.S. forces otherwise still might use.
But the way Biden has used PDA requires the Pentagon immediately to pay for replacement weapons for its own forces. It’s money for those replacements—as well as financing for other arms production for Ukraine—that Biden largely is asking for in his supplemental funding proposal.
All that is to say, Biden needs Republicans if he’s going to continue supporting Ukraine via his drawdown authority. He doesn’t need Republicans if he instead falls back on his EDA authority.”
de-commission and deconstruct dated hardware rather than donating it.
“It’s a classification for older weaponry the U.S. government calls “Excess Defense Articles,” or EDA. The government has the legal authority to sell extremely cheaply—or even give away—any U.S. military hardware that U.S. forces no longer need.
Biden only rarely has used his EDA authority to send weapons to Ukraine. Instead, he has leaned more heavily on his separate Presidential Drawdown Authority to send to Ukraine newer weapons that U.S. forces otherwise still might use.
But the way Biden has used PDA requires the Pentagon immediately to pay for replacement weapons for its own forces. It’s money for those replacements—as well as financing for other arms production for Ukraine—that Biden largely is asking for in his supplemental funding proposal.
All that is to say, Biden needs Republicans if he’s going to continue supporting Ukraine via his drawdown authority. He doesn’t need Republicans if he instead falls back on his EDA authority.”
Yeah the UK army has been cut and cut. In favor of a strong navy.---
The UK has a barely functional military force.
What is the current state of the British armed forces?
As a US general warns the British Army is no longer a top-level fighting force and calls for greater defence spending, we take a look at data showing the current state of the British armed forces.
I think I'll take this guys opinion over yours. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blo...estern,power, and assault breaching equipment.
I guess I’m so taken aback by how clueless your question is that I don’t have a ready answer other than, check a map. That big swath of territory in eastern Ukraine that has been controlled by Russia for about 18 months, including the Donbas. THAT territory.
I have to ask- did you think Ukraine had taken that back?
and I’ll take the assessment of our own intelligence agencies over his. It ain’t happening and you know it. Everyone has known it for over a year now, except for those who either A) stand to profit from continued slaughter, or B) cannot admit when they’re wrong.
Last edited:
The Donbas has been controlled by Russia since 2014, genius. Did you really think the Donbas was taken in 2022/2023? Wow, is all I can say.
The front lines at the Donbas have barely moved since 2014. You said it’s settled that they will lose more territory, so I’ll graciously let you try to answer this question again. Give some recent indicators that Ukraine is losing territory since it is, in your words “settled”.
You do realize Russia only controls about 17% of Ukraine, right? Far less than the beginning of 2022.
Last edited:
Ukraine has taken back 55 percent of their lost territory. This guy is hilarious.
Ukraine and (some of) its’ supporters have said they will retake all of it, including Crimea. So yes, I said what I meant when I said “including the Donbas”.
17% is nearly a fifth, a huge chunk. It gives them the land bridge to Crimea that was their most likely war aim. They’re not going to be removed, especially being that close to their own supplies.
You all can piss into the wind all you want. You can get in a big yellow and blue circle jerk where you all assure each other that at some unknown and distant point (if we just keep spending money we don’t have!), all of Ukraine will be unified.
It’s just pure fantasy.
And of course, now we have the democrats extorting our own people with our own security at the border for more and more useless funding in a lost war. It’s an outrage.
So the added stigma for all you that support this: you conversely are accelerating our own demise here at home.
Attempting to conservative shame me? LOL - seriously LOL
I think this nonsensical sentence is a cry for help. Or, you being controlled.
I’m almost certain I said that very thing at the start of the original thread. The good guys lose very often. History is full of examples.
When I’m told by the Democrats that we cannot secure our own border unless we also restore Ukraine’s, I have to wonder what sane person would go along with them.
And if our generals could be honest, we are not what we used to be either. Our only strength these days is our advanced weaponry in which some conclude is enough to win, but we still need "men" to man the weaponry and competent forces to fight a war. Push button fighting only goes so far.---
The UK has a barely functional military force.
What is the current state of the British armed forces?
As a US general warns the British Army is no longer a top-level fighting force and calls for greater defence spending, we take a look at data showing the current state of the British armed forces.
The sad thing is it will get even worse after Labor wins the next election, if that’s even possible.---
The UK has a barely functional military force.
What is the current state of the British armed forces?
As a US general warns the British Army is no longer a top-level fighting force and calls for greater defence spending, we take a look at data showing the current state of the British armed forces.
Best I can find at the moment. The discord leak from last spring shows what our government thought and considering Ukraine’s position has barely improved since then, I can’t imagine a wave of optimism at the pentagon. Unless it’s for more spending.
Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive
Behind closed doors, the administration worries about what Ukraine can accomplish.
www.politico.com
Thanks for the link. At best Russia is in a stalemate position with Ukraine. I think the situation remains too fluid to declare failure in either direction.Best I can find at the moment. The discord leak from last spring shows what our government thought and considering Ukraine’s position has barely improved since then, I can’t imagine a wave of optimism at the pentagon. Unless it’s for more spending.
Biden’s team fears the aftermath of a failed Ukrainian counteroffensive
Behind closed doors, the administration worries about what Ukraine can accomplish.
This is false. It true on stuff like the tanks and artillery shells but some of the stuff is only 15ish years old tech. The reason we've had the problems with billions of dollars of over estimates on shipments is because we've been saying some of this stuff is outdated and cheap and when it isn't they have to go back and readjust the cost.
One thing I want people to explain to me. If Russia goes from 80 billion per year military spending to 140 billion.... and we say that will break them.... Why does our military spending increases help our economy? If spending more on your military domestically helps your economy then why doesn't it help Russia? Are we a unicorn?
No it hasn't. Or are you counting when Ukraine agreed to a pause for negotiations and Russia pulled back. Are you saying they "took" that territory?
Russian central bank reveals major fall in energy revenues
The article specifically mentions old equipment which was the damn point for EDA. Where are they going to get 140 billion^? Revenues hurting.
By the end of 2022, Ukraine had reclaimed approximately 54 percent of the land that Russia had captured during the war, according to an analysis by The New York Times of data provided by the ISW.
Maps show where Russia gained, lost territory in Ukraine war
As Russia's war in Ukraine approaches the 18-month mark, recent maps indicate Russia has lost portions of its early gains.
www.newsweek.com
What stuff is 15ish years old? ACTAMs have been around since the 90s. Himars since the 90s. M113s are 60 years old. Humvees are 30-40 years old. Abrams and Bradelys are 40 and 30 years old. Patriots are 40 years old.
So over a full year after that report and the other half is still under Russian control. The half that the Russians mean to keep.
By the end of 2022, Ukraine had reclaimed approximately 54 percent of the land that Russia had captured during the war, according to an analysis by The New York Times of data provided by the ISW.
Maps show where Russia gained, lost territory in Ukraine war
As Russia's war in Ukraine approaches the 18-month mark, recent maps indicate Russia has lost portions of its early gains.
You're gonna sit here and say russia just wants this 15 percent of Ukraine while they throw wave after wave of men and vehicles at Avdiivka and other positions?
