Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page / 4
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 10:27:27 AM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



It's actually elective on what is done


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
It is not that I care, it is the USA has an agreement with NATO.
Our NATO agreement will send your sons into battle whether you like it or not.



It's actually elective on what is done



With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.



Thanks for the clarification.
Hopefully whoever is in charge of our military when this happens has some common sense.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 10:33:07 AM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


You could significant impact Russia without trying to enforce a difficult to implement oil embargo on them.

Just increase U.S., Saudi, and Venezuelan oil production thereby lowering the price of a barrel of oil to pre 2020 levels.  Joe Biden pissed off the Saudi Crown Prince when he took office, U.S. State Department has been unable to repair the damage done.   Whatever the U.S. is hoping to accomplish regarding Venezuela is just not working and frankly we need their oil,  an olive branch should be extended to Venezuela to get oil production there back up.   We also need oil production in the USA, Canada, and Mexico increased significantly.

If you look at Russian defense spending it nose dived under Trump due to the low cost of oil.   If they were serious about economically harming the Russians that's exactly what they would do, but they really don't care.  The point of this conflict isn't to defeat Russia it is to have a forever war that allow the military industrial complex to line its pockets and western politicians to acquire greater power/authority.   The outcome is something that the west could care less about.
View Quote


I would agree with this too as a way to avoid war. Also make oil worthless by pushing more electricity using nuclear power. Although Russia is a big supplier of the fuel for nuclear plants.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:03:48 AM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Why don't you give us your thoughts on La Raza and giving the south west back to Mexico, it was theirs to begin with after all.
View Quote



I am good with it, the SW doesn't really have any redeeming qualities anyway.  Too many Democrats now to be ever saved.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:05:35 AM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
2% of GDP for each nato country? Just so Ukraine can not lose to Russia?


Let Russia have Ukraine. Ukraine can’t defend itself. There are too many things America could spend 2% of the GDP internally to even consider sending more money to Ukraine.
View Quote


Agreed:  The USA could use that money to support those "undocumented and/or illegal aliens" who came over our southern border.  (sarcasm)

OTOH, the money could actually be used to support our veterans and disabled seniors who have paid into the social security system.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:16:43 AM EDT
[#5]


little chihuaha europe ain't gonna do shit...
lotta tough talk from countries that have an active invasion of islam going on, have ZERO manufacturing ability and ZERO energy resources....
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:20:14 AM EDT
[#6]
does this mean Lujan's not cumming?
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:26:58 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History



The forest is prettier, I’ll take Moscow.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:29:56 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
I dedicate this post to my first Russian teacher, whom I more than ever cannot name, as she is one of so many who have "disappeared" and stopped communicating online back in late 2022, hopefully she hasn't disappeared into a gulag like so many others have, even if their imprisonment has been covered by the media.  

NATO is coming for you, for Russia, and likely here even at some point, if you support Russia.  The soldiers is British.  

https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/BB1mnkh1.img?w=634&h=423&m=6&x=67&y=77&s=88&d=88


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/europe-gears-up-for-war/ar-BB1mnhQJ?ocid=winp2fptaskbar&cvid=d5603e6b344c4c259cf3b482f44505d6&ei=8



More than two years into the Ukraine war, Vladimir Putin has doubled down
UK and European allies are steeling their economies and armed forces for war
Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 saw the horrors of a large-scale war darken Europe's doorstep for the first time since the end of World War II.

For a short while, hope endured that a swift resolution to the conflict would materialise, but before long the prospect of a speedy diplomatic solution lay in tatters as Moscow's drones and missiles continued to batter Ukraine's cities.

Now more than two years into the conflict, Vladimir Putin has doubled down.

His forces have made noticeable gains on the frontlines in recent weeks as they pressure war-weary and ammo-starved Ukrainian defenders, and his decision to appoint civilian economist Andrei Belousov as defence minister suggests the Kremlin is committed to sustaining its war economy over the long run.
Meanwhile, the president's long-serving and intensely loyal foreign minister Sergei Lavrov earlier this week challenged what Russia calls the 'collective West', declaring Moscow's troops are ready to meet NATO on the battlefield.  

In light of the downward spiral of East-West relations - not to mention the alarming escalation of tensions further afield in the Middle East and Indo-Pacific - the UK and its European partners could soon be forced to contend with any number of major military threats.

As a result, many countries are reversing decades of peacetime policy to reignite their war engines. Others never stopped and are only consolidating efforts to ensure they are fit for conflict.

But there is little doubt that all Europe is now scrambling to prepare in anticipation of what may lie over the horizon.

Here, MailOnline assesses what Britain and its continental allies are doing to ready their armed forces, economies and citizens for the prospect of war.

Defence spending

Armies can only fight with the resources made available to them.

There is no clearer example of this axiom than on the frontlines of Ukraine where Kyiv's troops have only been able to hold off Russian invaders thanks to a huge quantity of Western supplied weaponry.

After years of drawing down military capabilities in the UK and Europe following the collapse of the Soviet Union, such resources were until recently languishing at levels far below those maintained during the Cold War.

But now, in the words of Britain's Defence Secretary Grant Shapps: 'The peace dividend is over'.

NATO expects two-thirds of its members to commit 2% of their GDP to defence spending by the end of this year, of which at least 20% must go toward the development of new military technologies and equipment.

Rishi Sunak declared last month the government would raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by the end of the decade - part of Britain's transition to a 'war economy'.  

On the continent, the European Commission has earmarked almost €2 billion to ramp up defence production among EU member states.

€500 million of these funds will go toward the production of artillery shells, with the stated target of producing 2 million shells per year, among other ammunition, by the end of 2025 for Ukraine.

The rest of the budget is to facilitate procurement, boost manufacturing capacity and enhance research and development in crucial defence domains, including 'countering hypersonic missiles, developing a range of unmanned vehicles in the air and on the ground, and ensuring secure space communication,' as well as 'next generation defence systems, such as helicopters and mid-size cargo aircraft'.

Meanwhile, Norway - a member of NATO but not part of the EU - is leading the charge in the Nordics.

Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre proposed last month a 'historic' 12-year defence spending plan that commits a whopping 1.6 trillion NOK (£118 billion) to revitalise his nation's armed forces, with a particular focus placed on upgrading naval capabilities in view of its proximity to Russia's nuclear submarine fleet, and the increasing maritime prowess of China.

And Finland, a country already renowned for its military preparedness, has tested its defence procurement contracts and has built up a huge stockpile of fuel, grains and ammunition in preparation for a possible war.

It has also invested heavily in defence infrastructure - there are now enough air shelters scattered across Finland to house the entire population.

Conscription and military service

It was revealed this past weekend that Germany is considering a reintroduction of mandatory national service, according to leaked documents, with military planners discussing three potential approaches to preparing future generations for large-scale conflict.

It is understood that officials are in the final stages of discussions with German defence minister Boris Pistorius, and are expected to go public with official plans next month, The Sunday Telegraph reported.

In one proposal being considered by military planners in Berlin, all men and women would be subject to conscription once they turned 18, provided a constitutional amendment to include women in mandatory service is passed.

But many European countries still maintain national service - and others have recently reintroduced it following Russia's invasion of Ukraine more than two years ago.

The Baltic and Nordic states are all well ahead of their Western European counterparts when it comes to military preparedness - perhaps as a result of their proximity to Russia.

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania all maintain some form of national service, with Latvia having reintroduced the policy in 2023 as concern over Russian aggression in Ukraine prompted a rethink of defence strategy.

All male citizens aged 18 to 27 are now required to complete a year of service there.

Further North, Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Finland all maintain their own programmes, with Sweden having reactivated their national service policy in 2018.

Denmark announced earlier this year women would also be subject to mandatory service and revealed plans to extend the duration of the training.

Meanwhile, one in three Finns are reservists, meaning Finland boasts one of Europe's largest armies despite having a tiny population of just 5.6 million.

Austria, Greece and Switzerland are the other three European nations to maintain national service, albeit with varying durations and degrees of intensity.

For now, the UK continues to resist calls from the continent to reintroduce national service, which was abandoned in 1960.

But several top military figures in Britain have also backed the calls following a years-long policy of reducing the size of the UK's armed forces.

The British Army shrunk by 28% in the past 12 years to around 103,000 soldiers, of which around 76,000 are regulars and 27,000 are reservists, according to YouGov figures.

General Sir Patrick Sanders, Chief of the General Staff of Britain's Armed Forces, said in January that Britain should 'train and equip a citizen army' to prepare for the possibility of a land war in Europe in the coming years.

And General Sir Richard Shirreff, a former NATO commander, warned that the UK might need to introduce a system akin to Finland's, in which all 18-year-old males are required to perform 6-12 months of service in the military, or with border guard units.

They subsequently enter the reservist programme until age 60.  

Sir Richard, the Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe from 2011 to 2014, said earlier this year: 'I think now... is the time to start thinking the unthinkable and really having to think quite carefully about conscription if we are to deliver the numbers needed.'

War games and enhanced security cooperation
Perhaps the most overt display of Europe's renewed focus on improving its military readiness comes in the form of NATO's stunning war games.

Steadfast Defender 2024, a suite of training exercises running from January to June, is among the largest military drills ever conceived by the security bloc since the Cold War.

Before its end, the mammoth undertaking will have witnessed the involvement of 90,000 troops from all 32 members of the alliance in a host of different missions including live fire exercises, strategic and logistical game-planning, and the deployment of cross-continental forces from the High North above the Arctic Circle to Central and Eastern Europe.

The drills are not just reserved for land forces - hundreds of military aircraft and more than 50 naval vessels will also perform drills to gauge and strengthen NATO's air and maritime capabilities.

An area of renewed focus for military exercises this year is the Arctic, which could soon become a new frontier where world powers clash for strategic superiority, control of new trade routes and access to previously untapped natural resources.

Russia reveres the Arctic as an 'indisputable priority' and has committed to building up military and civilian infrastructure in the region.

But the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO in recent months means Europe's Nordic powers are now able to operate more closely than ever before and are helping the US to upgrade its own understanding of the Arctic and approach to polar policy.

Norway has hosted NATO's Cold Response winter training exercises since 2006, but this year launched 'Nordic Response' - a dramatically enhanced programme that saw 20,000 troops participate in expanded drills on the frozen coasts of the remote Finnmark region some 300 miles north of the Arctic Circle.

Meanwhile, Oslo has worked with counterparts in Stockholm and Helsinki to help formulate Washington's brand-new Arctic Strategy.

This is set for publication in the coming weeks - almost 18 months after the US Department of Defense announced the creation of a new office dedicated to improving America's capabilities in the High North.

Elsewhere, the invasion of Ukraine prompted a reinforcement of NATO's eastern flank, with more European nations willing to welcome foreign troops on their soil.

Romania, Slovakia and Bulgaria and Hungary are all now hosting a contingent of NATO forces, upping the total of multinational battlegroups in Europe to eight from the original four in the Baltic states, plus Poland.

And in move defying pressures from the Kremlin, Moldova is reportedly set to deepen its defence ties with the EU.

The country, which shares a land border with Ukraine, is close to signing a new defence pact that would see Chisinau increase its intelligence sharing with European partners, participate in joint military drills and win inclusion into the EU's joint weapons procurement programmes, according to the FT.  

Hosting US nukes and upgrading Europe's nuclear deterrent
Europe's nuclear deterrence relies massively on the US, which has the second largest stockpile of nukes at around 5,200 to Russia's 5,800 - though more a thousand of them are thought to be retired and awaiting disarmament.

Several hundred of these warheads are deployed in various European territories - primarily at locations in Germany, Italy and the Netherlands.

But Sweden earlier this week announced it would be willing to host US nuclear weapons on its soil in a time of war, a move that has been hotly criticised by de-armament advocates.

NATO's newest member sensationally abandoned two centuries of military non-alignment to join the security bloc in March this year, and its parliament is now set to vote on a Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) with the United States in June which will give the US access to military bases in Sweden.

The Swedish Peace and Arbitration Association, among others, is campaigning for the government to put in writing in the DCA agreement that Sweden will not allow US nuclear weapons on its soil.

But Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said hosting US nukes may be necessary 'in a war situation'.

'In the absolute worst-case scenario, the democratic countries in our part of the world must ultimately be able to defend themselves against countries that could threaten us with nuclear weapons,' he told Swedish public radio.

Kristersson's declaration came weeks after Polish President Andrzej Duda said last month his nation would be ready to station American weapons on its territory, given Russia's decision to deploy intercontinental ballistic missiles in neighbouring Belarus late last year.

Meanwhile, Britain and France - the only European countries to have their own nuclear arsenals - are both in the process of upgrading their existing capabilities and adding new ones in the coming years.

In March, defence contractor Babcock announced a contract with the Submarine Delivery Agency (SDA) - an MoD agency - to perform a £560 million overhaul of HMS Victorious, one of the UK's four Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs).

HMS Vigilant - another SSBN - is already next in line to undergo such transformative maintenance as soon as Victorious' upgrades are completed.

Though the Vanguard class vessels continue to maintain Britain's nuclear deterrent, these submarines will be replaced in the next decade by four fearsome 'Dreadnought' class submarines - three of which are already under construction.

Defence Procurement Minister James Cartlidge said earlier this year the Dreadnought programme is on track to replace the Vanguard fleet at a cost 'within the original £31 billion plus £10 billion contingency budget'.

All the while, Britain continues to increase its stock of nuclear weapons from 225 to 260 - bringing it closer to France's total - and is also thought to be manufacturing a new class of warheads.

France is also embarking on an overhaul of its nuclear sub arsenal, announcing in March that construction had begun on its latest generation of SSBNs called 'SNLE 3G'.

Three more are planned to enter service before 2035 and are said to be so advanced that they will remain in service until the 2080s and beyond.
View Quote
 
View Quote


CIA throw her into black-site prison?
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:32:45 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Ha ha that money would just go to some  Gender studies...
It's not like they're gonna build another space shuttle or Invest in top quality military leaders or Conservative colleges.
View Quote


thanks for saving me the trouble of typing that out
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:33:04 AM EDT
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Europe gears up for war.
China gears up for war.

Meanwhile we're depleting our weapons stores shipping oodles of surplus to an unwinnable war (involving former soviets on both sides ), racking up even more debt sending aid to both sides of the jewish-palestinian conflict, draining our strategic reserves to keep prices low in an election year, and our DEI-qualified NCO's are making sure all our troops have sat through the latest woke PowerPoint training put together by their transsexual military brass while the Commander in Cheif transforms pudding cups into diaper shit.

We are so fucked.
View Quote


The truth angers me...

Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:35:22 AM EDT
[#11]
By gearing up for war, does that mean they're getting ready to house the combatants, who would of course be corn-fed American males from Missouri, Alabama, and Tennessee?
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:36:55 AM EDT
[#12]
World war is needed to save the world economy. And we need to kill off the white men so our new guests can breed with the remaining white women to create the new master race.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:41:06 AM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Sure, it sucks for the Ukrainian people, but Ukraine has been nothing more than a political money-laundering scam. The right American leadership could end this war, allow Russia to save face, and likely even help rebuild Ukraine.  

Our biggest threat is China, along with cyberattacks from the CCP, Russia, and Iran.

Europe isn't doing shit.

ROCK6
View Quote


Get out of my head!  100% this!
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:43:16 AM EDT
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.
View Quote


B.s. not our problem. Should have kept our mouth shut about Ukraine joining nato. Russia can have them. Put the money into social security and Medicare.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:45:10 AM EDT
[#15]
This is one of the most divisive topics I've seen in my time on arfcom. I served during the cold war, and I believe we should do everything in our power to degrade Putin's Russia. Spending 5 or 10% of our annual military budget to massively reduce Russia's military resources has been money well spent. Their inventory of ships, armor, aircraft and "precision" weapons have been massively reduced. The remaining hours on their existing airframes is being used up. Is there anything left of their infantry, special forces, or naval infantry cadre from 2 years ago? To replenish our inventory, the MIC will be hiring Americans to do the work.

Washington needs a complete enema, and I mean both parties, both houses as well as every career Congressional and White House staffer. That's the only way things will begin to improve for the US.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 11:45:18 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Hopefully that war they are gearing up for is in 2042 because they *might* be ready for it then.  If they start now of course, which hasn't really happened yet.



The only thing truthful about your statement is that there has been a lot of drama involved.
View Quote


Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:07:26 PM EDT
[#17]
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:08:30 PM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History

This is how World Wars get started. Not that I care what happens to that commie.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:11:39 PM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
2% of GDP for each nato country? Just so Ukraine can not lose to Russia?


Let Russia have Ukraine. Ukraine can’t defend itself. There are too many things America could spend 2% of the GDP internally to even consider sending more money to Ukraine.
View Quote

QFR
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:14:12 PM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.
View Quote

Bullshit fap fantasy.  Ukraine has Russia bogged down and you think Russia will attack a NATO member.  ROFLMAO
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:21:09 PM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Bullshit fap fantasy.  Ukraine has Russia bogged down and you think Russia will attack a NATO member.  ROFLMAO
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.

Bullshit fap fantasy.  Ukraine has Russia bogged down and you think Russia will attack a NATO member.  ROFLMAO


Russia attacking Poland is very unlikely at this point - especially since Ukraine is going to slog on for months or years yet. Neither side can make strategic gains on the ground, taking a couple villages a month is being shouted as progress. The reality is the battle lines are pretty stagnant.

Russia's been depantsed, the tsar isn't wearing any cloths. Their military has proven to be inept and their equipment woefully inferior. The only thing keeping them in the war (and can likely sustain them for a couple years more) is their larger population and mountain of cold war leftover gear.

Poland would gleefully annihilate any Russian attack, and roll strait on for Konigsberg with eyes full of vengeance. Russia's only advantage is numbers, which would not nearly be enough against Poland alone (let alone NATO overall).

The merits of continuing to supply Ukraine hinges on the question - is it in our best interests to finish breaking Russia? On one hand, they have a long and bloody history of attacking neighbors at every opportunity. On the other hand, they are a nuclear power and if internal collapse looms, what becomes of their nuclear arsenal?
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:26:37 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


This. It was theirs to begin with.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
2% of GDP for each nato country? Just so Ukraine can not lose to Russia?


Let Russia have Ukraine. Ukraine can’t defend itself. There are too many things America could spend 2% of the GDP internally to even consider sending more money to Ukraine.


This. It was theirs to begin with.



Will you hand Alaska over to them when they demand so? After all it was theirs to begin with.

I swear the level of retardness in GD has reached critical mass.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:26:48 PM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
2% of GDP for each nato country? Just so Ukraine can not lose to Russia?


Let Russia have Ukraine. Ukraine can't defend itself. There are too many things America could spend 2% of the GDP internally to even consider sending more money to Ukraine.
View Quote

Just let Hitler have the Sudetenland! I know he said he needs lebensraum, but I promise.
.....He'll totally be done after taking it!



Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:29:50 PM EDT
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.
View Quote

This is what many Putin-tards don't understand. With Trump saying he'd let Russia do whatever the hell it wanted and taking 6 months to get any aid passed for Ukraine. Deterrence is gone. He no longer fears Article 5.

When the US can't even bring itself to send military aid to a country that wants to JOIN WITH US.... why would Putin NOT take away from that; that the US has no stomach at all for a real confrontation with Russia?
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:29:56 PM EDT
[#25]
This will probably end up to be an excuse to accept another stolen election.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:30:15 PM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Ukraine and Russia have hated each others guts since around the year 1200.

Its in their DNA.

Ukraine has had around 30 years to gear up after the soviets crapped out in 1989.

12 years ago, it was more than obvious there was going to be war between them.

What did Ukraine really do to prepare for it?

You tell me.

https://video-images.vice.com/articles/63c53d8fc7ac2d494f0cc467/lede/1676457191776-ledeukrainepiece.jpeg
View Quote



Remember when the US sold them the weapons they asked for?

Oh wait, right. We refused to sell them ANY weapons up until Trump did. Remember how the Dumbocrats were totally against it?

Looks like the "America first" flatheads are just like the dumbocrats 2016-2020.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:30:36 PM EDT
[#27]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Sure, it sucks for the Ukrainian people, but Ukraine has been nothing more than a political money-laundering scam. The right American leadership could end this war, allow Russia to save face, and likely even help rebuild Ukraine.  

Our biggest threat is China, along with cyberattacks from the CCP, Russia, and Iran.

Europe isn't doing shit.

ROCK6
View Quote
Give Ukraine some nukes and a plan to destroy and Nuke all grain production.

Let everyone starve if Russia tales Ukraine
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:40:56 PM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


(reusing and updating a prior debunking of petrodollars. I saved it because arf doomers seem to love the concept)

the petrodollar concept is antiquated. IMO it peaked around 1979.

The total market for oil has not kept up with the overall US economy.

1979 - oil averaged about $20 per barrel (very volatile year), and global production 24.088 billion barrels, or $481.76 billion dollars.
global production source (in tons. x7.46 to get barrels)
US economy was 2.627 trillion. Total global crude oil was equal to 18.3% of the US GDP

2023 - Oil averaged $77.64 per barrel, global production of 37 billion barrels, or $2.87 trillion dollars.
oil production source
US 2023 GDP was 27.36 trillion. Total global crude oil is equal to 10.4% of the US GDP.

OK, so the US economy has grown faster than the oil market. What of it?

The devil is in the details.

In 1979 imported 2.379 billion barrels of oil. Which using that $20 price, is $47.58 billion dollars, or 1.8% of our GDP.

For 2023, we imported 2.4 billion barrels. Using that $77 price, is $184 billion dollars, or 0.6% of our GDP.

This is ignoring the fact that we are a net exporter of refined petroleum products, which weakens the balance of trade argument of the petrodollar further. On top of that, we are a huge player in terms of oil infrastructure and extraction knowledge. Foreign oil fields are kept running with a lot of US based equipment and expertise.

We are not a powerless price taker in the oil market, we are the most powerful player in that market.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's all fun and games until the petro dollar tanks....
Once our billion dollar checks don't cash we'll see how well the EU plays ball together.


(reusing and updating a prior debunking of petrodollars. I saved it because arf doomers seem to love the concept)

the petrodollar concept is antiquated. IMO it peaked around 1979.

The total market for oil has not kept up with the overall US economy.

1979 - oil averaged about $20 per barrel (very volatile year), and global production 24.088 billion barrels, or $481.76 billion dollars.
global production source (in tons. x7.46 to get barrels)
US economy was 2.627 trillion. Total global crude oil was equal to 18.3% of the US GDP

2023 - Oil averaged $77.64 per barrel, global production of 37 billion barrels, or $2.87 trillion dollars.
oil production source
US 2023 GDP was 27.36 trillion. Total global crude oil is equal to 10.4% of the US GDP.

OK, so the US economy has grown faster than the oil market. What of it?

The devil is in the details.

In 1979 imported 2.379 billion barrels of oil. Which using that $20 price, is $47.58 billion dollars, or 1.8% of our GDP.

For 2023, we imported 2.4 billion barrels. Using that $77 price, is $184 billion dollars, or 0.6% of our GDP.

This is ignoring the fact that we are a net exporter of refined petroleum products, which weakens the balance of trade argument of the petrodollar further. On top of that, we are a huge player in terms of oil infrastructure and extraction knowledge. Foreign oil fields are kept running with a lot of US based equipment and expertise.

We are not a powerless price taker in the oil market, we are the most powerful player in that market.



You think the 1979 dollar is worth the same as a 2023 dollar?   HAHAHAHAHAHA



On a different note:

GD is showing that too many people failed history.  At least know what happened before WWII.


Yes Ukraine is corrupt but no more so than our own government.  The US promised to protect Ukraine if they gave up their nukes.  I don't care if the Ukrainian government is hung from whatever tree they have left but the people shouldn't be left to be slaughtered by Putin.  Many fail to realize Russia, Iran, and China are playing to win, we're just playing politics.


Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:43:06 PM EDT
[#29]
IDK. This just makes me horny
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:43:39 PM EDT
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


NATO did a fantastic job in Afghanistan. I'm sure the Russians are scared shitless.
View Quote



People were making too much money not fighting to win.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:47:45 PM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

rooshia cant even take 20% of ukraine. Spare me the theatrics. My sons aren't going. You can send you and yours since you care so much.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here you go OP. Join the uke army and stop those mean ol' russkies!
https://ildu.com.ua/
It is better to give everything we can to Ukraine so they can defeat Russia before Russia invades a NATO country then we have an agreement to put our boys into battle.

rooshia cant even take 20% of ukraine. Spare me the theatrics. My sons aren't going. You can send you and yours since you care so much.


You're dishonest.

Show me ONE poster demanding Americans going to Ukraine fighting the ruzzian scum. Just ONE.

I'll wait here. Surely you will deliver. Soon.

@Strike504
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 12:58:43 PM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yeah I'm OK with that. We have far bigger problems than big bad Russia.
View Quote

It's fine. The US has never gotten sucked into conflict in Europe before, so we can safely ignore everything that happens over there.

But then, Asia isn't our problem either, is it? Just focus on domestic affairs only, that where all of our problems are.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:07:53 PM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:Russia attacking Poland is very unlikely at this point - especially since Ukraine is going to slog on for months or years yet. Neither side can make strategic gains on the ground, taking a couple villages a month is being shouted as progress. The reality is the battle lines are pretty stagnant.

Russia's been depantsed, the tsar isn't wearing any cloths. Their military has proven to be inept and their equipment woefully inferior. The only thing keeping them in the war (and can likely sustain them for a couple years more) is their larger population and mountain of cold war leftover gear.

Poland would gleefully annihilate any Russian attack, and roll strait on for Konigsberg with eyes full of vengeance. Russia's only advantage is numbers, which would not nearly be enough against Poland alone (let alone NATO overall).

The merits of continuing to supply Ukraine hinges on the question - is it in our best interests to finish breaking Russia? On one hand, they have a long and bloody history of attacking neighbors at every opportunity. On the other hand, they are a nuclear power and if internal collapse looms, what becomes of their nuclear arsenal?
View Quote

Poland isn't rolling anywhere. They have a total of about a quarter-million soldiers, less than a quarter Russia's armed forces. Russia has more troops in Ukraine than Poland has in total. Poland could liberate Koenigsberg, but it would take all of NATO to stop Russia from doing to Poland what they did to Ukraine - taking a big chunk of it, draining Poland's entire economy & military, and holding what they take with endless supplies of missiles & meat.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:09:44 PM EDT
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
2% of GDP for each nato country? Just so Ukraine can not lose to Russia?


Let Russia have Ukraine. Ukraine can’t defend itself. There are too many things America could spend 2% of the GDP internally to even consider sending more money to Ukraine.


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.


If they can't/won't defend themselves, spend the money on things other than defense, why should we?

We have enough of our own problems at home. For one, we're 34 trillion in debt.

https://www.usdebtclock.org
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:10:03 PM EDT
[#35]
[Deleted]
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:11:22 PM EDT
[#36]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

It's fine. The US has never gotten sucked into conflict in Europe before, so we can safely ignore everything that happens over there.

But then, Asia isn't our problem either, is it? Just focus on domestic affairs only, that where all of our problems are.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yeah I'm OK with that. We have far bigger problems than big bad Russia.

It's fine. The US has never gotten sucked into conflict in Europe before, so we can safely ignore everything that happens over there.

But then, Asia isn't our problem either, is it? Just focus on domestic affairs only, that where all of our problems are.

That is kind of a tautology, we have been involved in wars in Europe in the past,  but every time we provided aid and support to one side while saying we had to provide aid and support to prevent being dragged into the war.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:14:44 PM EDT
[#37]
You guys are ignorantly short sighted.

If Ukraine falls, guess who is getting conscripted into the new Russian Army...

Yeah that's right the Ukrainian Army. Guess who they put at the front when they invaded the next country.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:18:01 PM EDT
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
You guys are ignorantly short sighted.

If Ukraine falls, guess who is getting conscripted into the new Russian Army...

Yeah that's right the Ukrainian Army. Guess who they put at the front when they invaded the next country.
View Quote

Don't worry, we'll just stop sending Ukraine arms. So instead of running out of weapons in 3 days versus China, we'll run out in 4 days. That'll surely deter the Chinese from invading Taiwan!
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:20:31 PM EDT
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.
View Quote


Yeah except those are NATO members and Ukraine isn't. NATO would absolutely stomp Russia in a conventional war and they know it.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:26:21 PM EDT
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


You're dishonest.

Show me ONE poster demanding Americans going to Ukraine fighting the ruzzian scum. Just ONE.

I'll wait here. Surely you will deliver. Soon.

@Strike504
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here you go OP. Join the uke army and stop those mean ol' russkies!
https://ildu.com.ua/
It is better to give everything we can to Ukraine so they can defeat Russia before Russia invades a NATO country then we have an agreement to put our boys into battle.

rooshia cant even take 20% of ukraine. Spare me the theatrics. My sons aren't going. You can send you and yours since you care so much.


You're dishonest.

Show me ONE poster demanding Americans going to Ukraine fighting the ruzzian scum. Just ONE.

I'll wait here. Surely you will deliver. Soon.

@Strike504

Lol. The only dishonest ones here are uke bros thinking if only we threw a little more money at it, ukraine can "win" (whatever that means) without more bodies on the frontline.

If rooshia invades a NATO country after ukraine what happens?

Can you define NATO troops from a historical point of view?

Where are the majority from in past conflicts?

Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:27:54 PM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is one of the most divisive topics I've seen in my time on arfcom. I served during the cold war, and I believe we should do everything in our power to degrade Putin's Russia. Spending 5 or 10% of our annual military budget to massively reduce Russia's military resources has been money well spent. Their inventory of ships, armor, aircraft and "precision" weapons have been massively reduced. The remaining hours on their existing airframes is being used up. Is there anything left of their infantry, special forces, or naval infantry cadre from 2 years ago? To replenish our inventory, the MIC will be hiring Americans to do the work.

Washington needs a complete enema, and I mean both parties, both houses as well as every career Congressional and White House staffer. That's the only way things will begin to improve for the US.
View Quote


Well said
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:33:58 PM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

That is kind of a tautology, we have been involved in wars in Europe in the past,  but every time we provided aid and support to one side while saying we had to provide aid and support to prevent being dragged into the war.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's fine. The US has never gotten sucked into conflict in Europe before, so we can safely ignore everything that happens over there.

But then, Asia isn't our problem either, is it? Just focus on domestic affairs only, that where all of our problems are.

That is kind of a tautology, we have been involved in wars in Europe in the past,  but every time we provided aid and support to one side while saying we had to provide aid and support to prevent being dragged into the war.

Valid. In order to have influence, power, prosperous trade, we must be part of the community of nations with whom we can share values and goals. If we do that, we get sucked into wars abroad, to preserve influence, power, and prosperous trade and our partners. If we turn away from our partners for isolationism, we would lose the influence, power, and prosperous trade. ALL choices have costs. Isolationism has costs, as surely as foreign entanglements. This is part of what we require our government to do, balance the costs and benefits of competing choices.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:40:33 PM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Lol. The only dishonest ones here are uke bros thinking if only we threw a little more money at it, ukraine can "win" (whatever that means) without more bodies on the frontline.

If rooshia invades a NATO country after ukraine what happens?

Can you define NATO troops from a historical point of view?

Where are the majority from in past conflicts?

https://www.memecreator.org/static/images/memes/5204553.jpg
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here you go OP. Join the uke army and stop those mean ol' russkies!
https://ildu.com.ua/
It is better to give everything we can to Ukraine so they can defeat Russia before Russia invades a NATO country then we have an agreement to put our boys into battle.

rooshia cant even take 20% of ukraine. Spare me the theatrics. My sons aren't going. You can send you and yours since you care so much.


You're dishonest.

Show me ONE poster demanding Americans going to Ukraine fighting the ruzzian scum. Just ONE.

I'll wait here. Surely you will deliver. Soon.

@Strike504

Lol. The only dishonest ones here are uke bros thinking if only we threw a little more money at it, ukraine can "win" (whatever that means) without more bodies on the frontline.

If rooshia invades a NATO country after ukraine what happens?

Can you define NATO troops from a historical point of view?

Where are the majority from in past conflicts?

https://www.memecreator.org/static/images/memes/5204553.jpg


So you basicly admit your original post was made up bullcrap? No shit Sherlock.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:45:20 PM EDT
[#44]
Although I don't think they're really gearing up for war with Russia over Ukraine, I'm glad to see that they're finally spending to the agreed-upon bare minimum of a NATO country.  My ears will really perk up when they start going beyond that amount.

To be honest, if this is a real rearmament by Europe, it's for a world war where China is the main enemy.  They're too late for Ukraine/Russia.  I guess that Russia could be involved on China's side, if you really want to attribute a build up to a Russian threat.  That's TBD at this point, but very possible.

Either way, the world is prepping for the next kinetic war, not for a current kinetic fight.

I add "kinetic" in there because war with China has already begun on other fronts.  Cyber, political, psychological, and economic wars have been going for years.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:45:21 PM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

You think the 1979 dollar is worth the same as a 2023 dollar?   HAHAHAHAHAHA

View Quote


No - which is exactly my point by normalizing vs % of GDP.

Our amount imported in terms of barrels is very close to what it was in '79. Price per barrel is up, but overall prices and GDP is up way more. The economic reality of the US's position relative to the global oil market has changed drastically - in our favor. The numbers back it up.
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:46:15 PM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Sorry, but after Ukraine, they would take one or all of the Baltic countries, then Poland.  Go look at a map of the USSR, and keep in mind Putin said that its dissolution was the "greatest geopolitical tragedy of the 20th century".  Ukraine was a Soviet socialist republic, the Baltics were too, Poland was a satellite, and he wants it all back, and he or his successor won't stop until they get those countries back.  Who really wants war?  No one of course, but sometimes it's forced upon you.
View Quote


Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:54:11 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


B.s. not our problem. Should have kept our mouth shut about Ukraine joining nato. Russia can have them. Put the money into social security and Medicare.
View Quote

thats what the USA needs, more socialism
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 1:57:21 PM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


So you basicly admit your original post was made up bullcrap? No shit Sherlock.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here you go OP. Join the uke army and stop those mean ol' russkies!
https://ildu.com.ua/
It is better to give everything we can to Ukraine so they can defeat Russia before Russia invades a NATO country then we have an agreement to put our boys into battle.

rooshia cant even take 20% of ukraine. Spare me the theatrics. My sons aren't going. You can send you and yours since you care so much.


You're dishonest.

Show me ONE poster demanding Americans going to Ukraine fighting the ruzzian scum. Just ONE.

I'll wait here. Surely you will deliver. Soon.

@Strike504

Lol. The only dishonest ones here are uke bros thinking if only we threw a little more money at it, ukraine can "win" (whatever that means) without more bodies on the frontline.

If rooshia invades a NATO country after ukraine what happens?

Can you define NATO troops from a historical point of view?

Where are the majority from in past conflicts?

https://www.memecreator.org/static/images/memes/5204553.jpg


So you basicly admit your original post was made up bullcrap? No shit Sherlock.

My original post was a link to join the UA. Read mad maxxxs replies. Where did I ever make that claim? If you cant understand basic english and context I cant help you. You cant define what a uke victory looks like. They dont have the bodies and cannot win without NATO intervention. Where are they going to come from? Do you even have the capacity for foresight? Actions and consequences? Non of these questions will be answered. Just deflected and ignored as per uke bro usual.

What does this mean?
"It is better to give everything we can to Ukraine so they can defeat Russia before Russia invades a NATO country then we have an agreement to put our boys into battle."

I consider myself of average intelligence but gd sometimes I feel like a genius talking to you ?? s

@abakan
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 2:19:13 PM EDT
[#49]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


That's not how it works. Petrodollar is Saudis selling oil in US dollars only, which forces the rest of the world to have US dollars, which allows us to export inflation.
View Quote



Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 5/15/2024 2:19:25 PM EDT
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
You guys are ignorantly short sighted.

If Ukraine falls, guess who is getting conscripted into the new Russian Army...

Yeah that's right the Ukrainian Army. Guess who they put at the front when they invaded the next country.
View Quote


It'll be ok, all the Ukrainians have to do is shoot the Russian commanders. It's easy as that, I see this advocated all the time as to why the Russians don't just shoot their commanders.
Page / 4
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! 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.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top