User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:18:22 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By planemaker: If it wasn't put on paper, it wasn't an agreement. (Although, to be fair, even if it were put on paper, Russia would violate the terms anyway. It's what they do.) That's the rub, it was never a treaty. So as much as the russians were pissed off about it there was nothing they could do but bitch about how unfair it all was to them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:18:30 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Nope. But anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together could have predicted the eventual invasion in ukraine. Doubly so when they lost control of it and Ukraine started to court NATO. Not saying  it's right it just is what it is. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By KELBEAST: So NATO violating an unwritten, unsigned agreement is grounds for Russia to violate a written, signed treaty to respect Ukraine’s borders? If that was Russia’s justification, what would it have taken to get them to avoid invading in the days and weeks leading up to February 2022? If NATO had said super sorry and pulled all westerners out of UA, would russia have packed up the army and left UA alone? Nope, because it’s all Russian bullshit Nope. But anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together could have predicted the eventual invasion in ukraine. Doubly so when they lost control of it and Ukraine started to court NATO. Not saying it's right it just is what it is. So it’s Ukraine’s fault they got invaded, they encouraged the rapist by wearing that short skirt……. They gave up their protection (nukes/bombers) and in return Russia promised to respect their borders. NATO failed when they let Russia invade in 2014 without consequences (after seeing what happened in Chechnya and Georgia). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:21:37 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MarkNH: So it’s Ukraine’s fault they got invaded, they encouraged the rapist by wearing that short skirt……. They gave up their protection (nukes/bombers) and in return Russia promised to respect their borders. NATO failed when they let Russia invade in 2014 without consequences (after seeing what happened in Chechnya and Georgia). Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:22:58 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By MarkNH: So it’s Ukraine’s fault they got invaded, they encouraged the rapist by wearing that short skirt……. They gave up their protection (nukes/bombers) and in return Russia promised to respect their borders. NATO failed when they let Russia invade in 2014 without consequences (after seeing what happened in Chechnya and Georgia). Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. Why would Putin be fucked if Ukraine joined NATO? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:23:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Zhukov]
[#5]
Beat by 20 seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:23:56 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:24:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. Uh huh. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:24:57 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By MarkNH: So it’s Ukraine’s fault they got invaded, they encouraged the rapist by wearing that short skirt……. They gave up their protection (nukes/bombers) and in return Russia promised to respect their borders. NATO failed when they let Russia invade in 2014 without consequences (after seeing what happened in Chechnya and Georgia). Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. Devils advocate here….your statement….how would Ukraine joining NATO going to destroy Russia (as you imply…although it’s more likely now than it ever was)? Would the “threat” come from that keeping them from being invaded by Russia forever and that be what gets Russia upset (no longer able to invade control them)? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:28:33 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kncook: Devils advocate here….your statement….how would Ukraine joining NATO going to destroy Russia (as you imply…although it’s more likely now than it ever was)? Would the “threat” come from that keeping them from being invaded by Russia forever and that be what gets Russia upset (no longer able to invade control them)? NATO has just been the Soviet/Russian boogeyman forever. They are pathologically fearful about it. It doesn't make make much sense, but to them its the great Satan. Hence why they invaded and tried to get at least something out of it. Especially after POTATOUS basically green lit them doing it. Putin probably thought/hoped it would be a repeat of 2014 just on a larger scale. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:29:17 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jaehaerys: Why would Putin be fucked if Ukraine joined NATO? Cuz the russians are irrational about it. Have been forever. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:31:42 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Birddog15: Giving up land for entrance into NATO is a pragmatic idea. We may not like it, but if Ukraine eventually chooses that path, I'd understand. For those who say that this will just delay Russia's next attack; Russia has shown no inclination to go to war with NATO. If they do decide to attack NATO down the road at some point, then all of this worry over Ukraine and its territory will be a moot point. The world will have much bigger worries. Whether Russia loses to Ukraine next year and goes back home with no Ukrainian territory, or goes home with a little Ukrainian territory, really doesn't make much difference in the long run, as far as long term security goes for Ukraine. Either way, Ukraine is ending up in NATO and Russia will be very unlikely to attack it again. Obviously, we all hope that Ukraine keeps every square inch of its territory and that every Russian that set foot in Ukraine ends up as dirt. But Ukraine is the one with more and more families visiting grave sites every day, so how this ends is their decision alone to make. That's why I say give up Crimea and Russia loses Donetsk and Luhansk. The defensive line in northern Crimea is going to be a tough nut to crack. It's a win for Ukraine and a major loss for Russia. BUT before that deal happens Ukraine needs to liberate Transnistria and send it back to Moldova. That would be the ultimate defeat for Russia. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:33:00 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. let's assume there was an agreement. Russia then uses the agreement within a few months to launch invasions in Georgia and Moldova. No new nato members joined until the end of the 90s while in the beginning of the 90s Russia was already invading it's former puppet states to keep them out of nato. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:34:22 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By THOT_Vaccine:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F3mGTdsWUAEXp_A?format=webp&name=small The guy was probably smuggling suitcases and the rubles were just being used as "filler". Interesting sidenote, in April 1865 the CSA dollar was worth about 1.5 cents US. The Russians are redefining failure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:36:33 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: let's assume there was an agreement. Russia then uses the agreement within a few months to launch invasions in Georgia and Moldova. No new nato members joined until the end of the 90s while in the beginning of the 90s Russia was already invading it's former puppet states to keep them out of nato. I'm really not sure where you are going with this, are you cosplaying? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:36:35 PM EDT
[#15]
 
|
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:48:33 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. That's truly a precious statement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:52:46 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Cuz the russians are irrational about it. Have been forever. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: Why would Putin be fucked if Ukraine joined NATO? Cuz the russians are irrational about it. Have been forever. I think you're on a pretty reasonable track with all of this, though I personally don't think an alleged verbal agreement to the Soviet Union is particularly relevant. The Russian mindset that they're an empire and deserve to own all of their former states is what justifies all the grey zone bullshit they do to try to maintain influence, no matter how detrimental it is to those countries. NATO membership is arguably the difference between being Croatia or Moldova. Everybody's got their problems, but Russia is a much bigger problem for Moldova. It's pretty understandable why Russia doesn't want to lose potential victims. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:53:02 PM EDT
[#18]
Please stop giving Polly the crackers it wants.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:57:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Prime]
[#19]
There'll be jokes, but...still pretty good
 Recruitment video for the International Legion. https://twitter.com/TreasChest/status/1691595973225591172 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:57:25 PM EDT
[#20]
TLDR
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 9:59:32 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By vahog: "Relax", said the night man, "We are programmed to receive. You can check out but you can never leave." Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By vahog: Originally Posted By Prime: ⚡️The movement of cars on the Crimean bridge from the Krasnodar Territory towards the Crimea has been restored. Traffic is still closed for the exit from the peninsula. https://t.me/ukraina_ru/164833 "Relax", said the night man, "We are programmed to receive. You can check out but you can never leave." They need more than steely knives... |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:00:43 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fisherman: The guy was probably smuggling suitcases and the rubles were just being used as "filler". Interesting sidenote, in April 1865 the CSA dollar was worth about 1.5 cents US. The Russians are redefining failure. That's an old Weimar Republic joke of some kind, isn't it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:01:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Blackhawks have been getting decommissioned in small batches for several years. Everything getting decommissioned should be made available to Ukraine, if it's still usable and serviceable. Tico cruisers included.  We could really clean up a lot of our yards from surplus stuff we bought or paid for decades ago. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:03:15 PM EDT
[#24]
   
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:05:16 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By absael: Regardless of the pretext, Russia was going to invade. Just the fact that they have changed their story about the reason so many times (and the reasons keep getting more reprehensible) is proof enough that it was unavoidable. And even in hindsight, I'm not sure what should or could have been done in preparation. I hope I'm being coherent here, I just got out of surgery and I'm on drugs. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By absael: Originally Posted By KELBEAST: Originally Posted By Harlikwin: Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. So NATO violating an unwritten, unsigned agreement is grounds for Russia to violate a written, signed treaty to respect Ukraine's borders? If that was Russia's justification, what would it have taken to get them to avoid invading in the days and weeks leading up to February 2022? If NATO had said super sorry and pulled all westerners out of UA, would russia have packed up the army and left UA alone? Nope, because it's all Russian bullshit Regardless of the pretext, Russia was going to invade. Just the fact that they have changed their story about the reason so many times (and the reasons keep getting more reprehensible) is proof enough that it was unavoidable. And even in hindsight, I'm not sure what should or could have been done in preparation. I hope I'm being coherent here, I just got out of surgery and I'm on drugs. Hope you get better fast, but your making sense to me despite the medication.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:08:20 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Logcutter: Reasonable? Like GTFU of Ukraine completely? I doubt Russia will ever officially offer returning any territory. If they ever do it would be small, like offering Ukraine territory they have already retaken. But even broaching the subject would be a big sign for Russian "reasonableness" as a result of their impending defeat. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:12:10 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Well at least they list the one factual point that Baker did make the statement. The rest of that analysis is mostly bullshit. The russians absolutely pressed the Brits on it, and then loudly complained later in the 90s. Here is another take a bit more rooted in reality. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/12/russias-belief-in-nato-betrayal-and-why-it-matters-today NATO expansion was a big issue back then and it WAS brought up by Russia. They have been complaining about it ever since. If the words "No NATO expansion" didnt make it into the treaty, then there is obviously flexibility on the matter. Regardless it doesn't justify invasion and genocide. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:15:16 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Not really their fault. The west was weak, and putin took advantage of it in 2014. I mean from Putins perspective he literally had nothing to loose. Option 1 is to let Ukraine join NATO and hes fucked. Or option 2 is to try to take as much of ukraine AND THEN they join NATO. So not really a hard choice for him, though I assume he thought it would go way better than it has. I have read that the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 was an inspiration for Putin and he saw it as a green light. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:18:24 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kncook: Devils advocate here….your statement….how would Ukraine joining NATO going to destroy Russia (as you imply…although it’s more likely now than it ever was)? Would the “threat” come from that keeping them from being invaded by Russia forever and that be what gets Russia upset (no longer able to invade control them)? I guess it would put the final nail in the coffin for the Russian empire and the USSR Part II he thought he was destined to build. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:19:15 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By THOT_Vaccine:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F3mGTdsWUAEXp_A?format=webp&name=small I kinda want to buy a big stack of rubles. Just a dollars worth or so. Is that legal? Just for collecting/gloating purposes. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:22:48 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By weptek911: I kinda want to buy a big stack of rubles. Just a dollars worth or so. Is that legal? Just for collecting/gloating purposes. Whoa, don't want 30 cents like that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:26:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. Well documented in what? Certainly not any documents. You know like the documents Russia signs and regularly wipes it’s ass with along with its bloody hands. “ Documented”??? post them here. Show your work. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:28:24 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: I guess it would put the final nail in the coffin for the Russian empire and the USSR Part II he thought he was destined to build. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: Originally Posted By kncook: Devils advocate here….your statement….how would Ukraine joining NATO going to destroy Russia (as you imply…although it’s more likely now than it ever was)? Would the “threat” come from that keeping them from being invaded by Russia forever and that be what gets Russia upset (no longer able to invade control them)? I guess it would put the final nail in the coffin for the Russian empire and the USSR Part II he thought he was destined to build. In other words the “Nato forced his hand” just mean Russia wouldn’t be able to invade and kill their neighbors in the future….so had to act now. And that is literally what some people here use as a legit pro-Russia argument. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:32:00 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: NATO has just been the Soviet/Russian boogeyman forever. They are pathologically fearful about it. It doesn't make make much sense, but to them its the great Satan. Hence why they invaded and tried to get at least something out of it. Especially after POTATOUS basically green lit them doing it. Putin probably thought/hoped it would be a repeat of 2014 just on a larger scale. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By kncook: Devils advocate here….your statement….how would Ukraine joining NATO going to destroy Russia (as you imply…although it’s more likely now than it ever was)? Would the “threat” come from that keeping them from being invaded by Russia forever and that be what gets Russia upset (no longer able to invade control them)? NATO has just been the Soviet/Russian boogeyman forever. They are pathologically fearful about it. It doesn't make make much sense, but to them its the great Satan. Hence why they invaded and tried to get at least something out of it. Especially after POTATOUS basically green lit them doing it. Putin probably thought/hoped it would be a repeat of 2014 just on a larger scale. Putin was badly advised, the competence and readiness of their military was faked to hide massive corruption, and they expected Zelenskyy to take the helicopter ride to safety if their assassins failed in their decapitation mission. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:35:33 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fadedsun: That's why I say give up Crimea and Russia loses Donetsk and Luhansk. The defensive line in northern Crimea is going to be a tough nut to crack. It's a win for Ukraine and a major loss for Russia. BUT before that deal happens Ukraine needs to liberate Transnistria and send it back to Moldova. That would be the ultimate defeat for Russia. I would disagree on giving up Crimea, fight to the sea and cut off the land route, take out the bridge, long range missiles can hit any point in Crimea, no resupply and they will surrender without a costly land invasion. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:36:37 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: NATO expansion was a big issue back then and it WAS brought up by Russia. They have been complaining about it ever since. If the words "No NATO expansion" didnt make it into the treaty, then there is obviously flexibility on the matter. Regardless it doesn't justify invasion and genocide. Honestly there was just nothing they could do about it then, plus I think there is a very real difference in their minds between the former warpac countries. And literally something Putins considers part of Russia proper. They were happy enough when their guys ran the show, but once that was over the writing was on the wall. It might have been solved diplomatically, or maybe not. But it wasn't and here we are. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:37:51 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ITCHY-FINGER: I have read that the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 was an inspiration for Putin and he saw it as a green light. Not sure I track that, but ok. Reality was/is that the Russian military was pretty much fucked during the 90's and the 00's. And well as we can see today it pretty much still is. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:38:29 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By weptek911: Well documented in what? Certainly not any documents. You know like the documents Russia signs and regularly wipes it’s ass with along with its bloody hands. “ Documented”??? post them here. Show your work. Already did, you can scroll up. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:38:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AlmightyTallest]
[#39]
Ukraine announces air alert again In several regions of Ukraine, mainly in the eastern and southern parts, an air alert has been declared. It is reported that a large group of Shahed-type kamikaze drones was launched from Primorsko-Akhtarsk in the Krasnodar Territory and is currently moving towards the mouth of the Danube towards the city and port of Izmail. From the Odessa and Nikolaev regions, reports are coming in about the operation of air defense systems. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:39:28 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MarkNH: Putin was badly advised, the competence and readiness of their military was faked to hide massive corruption, and they expected Zelenskyy to take the helicopter ride to safety if their assassins failed in their decapitation mission. Yup, I'll totally believe that. Honestly I don't think the west expected Zelensky to put up much of a fight, but when he showed some spine, it was game on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:40:57 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MarkNH: I would disagree on giving up Crimea, fight to the sea and cut off the land route, take out the bridge, long range missiles can hit any point in Crimea, no resupply and they will surrender without a costly land invasion. Honestly the entire point of the invasion IMO was to secure a land bridge TO Crimea. Sure, they would have tried to grab the whole thing if they could with a decap strike. But I think Plan B was always to gobble up as much of the east as possible and hold it. The logical border there would have been the river, but they never made that far in most places. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:46:45 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Honestly the entire point of the invasion IMO was to secure a land bridge TO Crimea. Sure, they would have tried to grab the whole thing if they could with a decap strike. But I think Plan B was always to gobble up as much of the east as possible and hold it. The logical border there would have been the river, but they never made that far in most places. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By MarkNH: I would disagree on giving up Crimea, fight to the sea and cut off the land route, take out the bridge, long range missiles can hit any point in Crimea, no resupply and they will surrender without a costly land invasion. Honestly the entire point of the invasion IMO was to secure a land bridge TO Crimea. Sure, they would have tried to grab the whole thing if they could with a decap strike. But I think Plan B was always to gobble up as much of the east as possible and hold it. The logical border there would have been the river, but they never made that far in most places. You’re probably right, when they retreat from Crimea and the bridge is history we can offer them a treaty where they get permission to transit the strait of Kerch
|
|
|
|
NV, USA
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:51:12 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcantu: Yup, I said this about DPICM back when people were making a big deal about getting it sent over. Against infantry it is mediocre as the video shows. It was made to attack massed vehicle formations where the small shaped charge warhead can penetrate the thin top armor and only has a small fragmentation effect. Against infantry, plan ole HE set to air-burst is a much better choice Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By mcantu: Originally Posted By spydercomonkey: Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest: These could be cluster munitions.
The caveat I think is accuracy of the shot, much like a shotgun #4 buck vs slug at 50yd. The slug has much higher lethality, but the #4 due to it spread has a much higher hit probability, especially in a quickly aimed or moving target scenario where the slug might miss entirely. Likewise, an accurate HE Airburst going off over overhead is definitely more lethal - assuming the the shot is accurate. But it also has a good chance of missing entirely. Whereas the huge spread of DPICM gives a higher chance of a submunition landing near a group / individual soldier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:53:23 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MarkNH: You’re probably right, when they retreat from Crimea and the bridge is history we can offer them a treaty where they get permission to transit the strait of Kerch Here's hoping Ukraine can actually take it back. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:56:06 PM EDT
[#45]
 15 Aug: Russians Are Furious! Their Commander LEAKED A KEY WEAK SPOT IN DEFENSE | War in Ukraine |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 10:57:11 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: I'm really not sure where you are going with this, are you cosplaying? No. If there was an agreement Russia once again used it as a "cease fire" to invade more nations and stop them from joining Nato. In November of 1990 Russia backed "Transnistrians" fought against Moldova to create the fake puppet state of "Transnistria". Later they also backed invasions into Georgia to create "Abkhazia" and "South Ossetia". This was before any new members joined Nato. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 11:00:55 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Honestly there was just nothing they could do about it then, plus I think there is a very real difference in their minds between the former warpac countries. And literally something Putins considers part of Russia proper. They were happy enough when their guys ran the show, but once that was over the writing was on the wall. It might have been solved diplomatically, or maybe not. But it wasn't and here we are. The problem is that Russia does not view Ukraine and Belarus as being sovereign entities. In Russia's eyes, Belarusians and Ukrainians are branches of a single Russian 'people' and their statehood cannot exist separate from Russia. Russian leaders have never respected and have long refused to view Ukraine as being a sovereign country, taking the entire decade of the '90s to recognize its borders. Historically and into the present, Russia has viewed any Ukrainian identity that exists separate from Russia as being attributable to foreign conspiracies, such as Sweden during the Great Northern War, Germany during WW2, Western and Israeli intelligence agencies during the Cold War, the EU and the US today, etc. The usurpation/annexation of Ukraine in one form or another was basically decided by the Russian deep state in 1991, right after the breakup of the USSR. The first plans to reintegrate Ukraine were solely political; it was thought that it could be gone through the elites. That is, Kuchma and the oligarchs. This didn't work due to the first Maidan in 2004. After that, a more aggressive approach was selected, and by that time, Putin had consolidated his grip on power and dictated the Russian deep state. The plan was a two-pronged operation, focusing first in political overtaking through Yanukovich and bought oligarchs, and if that didn't work - turning Ukraine into a failed state that would be sliced apart via manufactured unrest in the east and Crimea. The foundations of the L/DPR were being formed years before 2014, and I've seen evidence that Russia was supporting separatism in Crimea as early as 2009. I do agree that once it became clear that Russia couldn't control Ukraine politically, they were going to intervene militarily. That doesn't mean that this is something that should be tolerated by the civilized world, though. We're at the point in which Russia has made its genocidal ambitions clear, through deporting and brainwashing hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian children, conducting mass executions in occupied Ukraine, stating openly that Ukrainian identity is paramount to Nazism and must be eradicated, moving hoards of Russians into occupied cities like Mariupol, etc. I haven't bought into realpolitik and foreign policy realism enough to view these actions as being acceptable or tolerable. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 11:02:15 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Here's hoping Ukraine can actually take it back. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By MarkNH: You’re probably right, when they retreat from Crimea and the bridge is history we can offer them a treaty where they get permission to transit the strait of Kerch Here's hoping Ukraine can actually take it back. 
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 11:02:28 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Harlikwin: Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: There was never any promise not to expand NATO. Tucker and Kennedy are deliberately lying to further a pro-Russian narrative. There's just no other charitable way to put it. Lol. There absolutely was its well documented. It was never put on paper though that was the rub. And russia has screamed about it for the past 30 years. It was just a matter of time before they decided to do something about it. The fact that they want to "do something about" a defensive alliance that exists solely to stop Russia from invading and annexing other countries tells you all your need to know. Ukraine joining NATO isn't a threat to Russia. It's the reverse - Russia saw it as a "now or never" situation where their long term goal of invading Ukraine was being put at risk. |
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 8/15/2023 11:02:55 PM EDT
[#50]
Anyone looking objectively at possible outcomes of Russia invading Ukraine could've seen it was likely Finland and Sweden would join NATO. After they joined Putin hasn't reinforced his border, nobody's made a big stink about it. Fear of NATO expansion is a fig leaf.
Putin invaded Ukraine because he thinks he owns it. And even if it was real, all this talk about NATO expansion is like NATO rolled up one day and snatched Poland and Romania and the Baltics off the street and stuffed them in a van. These countries are full of live human beings seeking liberty and justice and wanting to get away from butt-fucking Russia. They've seen the Rusky Mir and want no part of it. Russia doesn't get to tell them otherwise. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
