User Panel
Originally Posted By HIPPO: /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/LOL-UMAD-BRO1gqf_zps44023202_JPG-109.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GXScBx3WwAE8pUT?format=jpg&name=large/media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/LOL-UMAD-BRO1gqf_zps44023202_JPG-109.jpgETA — video of the evil midget saying it in tweet below (3 min clip).
View Quote Wait, he’s saying this is the next red line after saying that about every single other thing? lol!!!!! |
|
|
Pentagon SPOX is covering the waterfront and taking questions from the pool. |
|
|
Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: How on earth could Putin be induced to accept that??? Notice he didn't say "Russia wants this war to end." Russia can still accomplish their goals with continued military action. Ukraine can't. So what huge incentives could possibly be offered to Russia to take the arrangement he describes? Withdrawal of NATO support for the Baltics (which he already asked for prior to invading in 2022)? Knowing that Russia's starting point to even negotiate is unilateral Ukrainian withdrawal to the administrative borders of the annexed territories, how could Ukraine be induced to accept that??? I expect Harris & Walz to make statements that are completely untethered from the real world, but Vance? WTF? That was very unserious. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Originally Posted By HIPPO: ~1 min video in tweet. "So I think it goes like this: Trump sits down, says to the Russians, to the Ukrainians, to the Europeans, you guys need to figure out what a peaceful settlement looks like. And it will probably look roughly the same as the current dividing line between Russia and Ukraine. It will become like a demilitarized zone. It will be strongly fortified so that the Russians do not invade again. Ukraine retains its independent sovereignty. Russia receives a guarantee of neutrality from Ukraine, it does not join NATO, it does not join any allied institutions." — J.D. Vance How on earth could Putin be induced to accept that??? Notice he didn't say "Russia wants this war to end." Russia can still accomplish their goals with continued military action. Ukraine can't. So what huge incentives could possibly be offered to Russia to take the arrangement he describes? Withdrawal of NATO support for the Baltics (which he already asked for prior to invading in 2022)? Knowing that Russia's starting point to even negotiate is unilateral Ukrainian withdrawal to the administrative borders of the annexed territories, how could Ukraine be induced to accept that??? I expect Harris & Walz to make statements that are completely untethered from the real world, but Vance? WTF? That was very unserious. The Russians have made it clear what they want: the entire political and cultural subjugation of Ukraine, combined with its demilitarization. In other words, unconditional capitulation. That's actually a minimalist goal, by the way. A maximalist goal would be the expulsion of NATO from Eastern Europe and/or undermining article 5. When will people in "the west" understand: The Russians are not interested in negotiations with what they consider to be their food. Moreover, if someone tries to negotiate with them, they interpret it as weakness, as a sign that it's time to push more. And if they are in a position of weakness, they also aren't keen to negotiate, because they expect the same. Given their current position, I don't see any reason why Russia would accept such a peace deal, unless it involved significant concessions. There exists a chance of a temporary "ceasefire" that will be far more violent than anything between 2015 and 2021, during which the west may strangle Ukraine down in silence so that they won't resist that much when the full-scale hostilities resume in a few years, this time with a fully China-equipped reinvigorated Russian military. The more likely outcome, IMO, is that a hypothetical second Trump Administration tries to force that peace deal, it doesn't work, and the conflict continues on, only with Ukraine receiving little to no US support. Trump's hypothetical "peace plan" (try to force a deal by saying he'd give Ukraine more than Biden did if Russia didn't negotiate) rests upon the assumption that Trump would actually be willing to surge aid, which I doubt he would. It is Trump, though, so anything is possible. |
|
Field grade officer in the Ukebro Army
Globalist shill |
It is VERY clear to me that -
We need to be in emergency/war time footing building Patriot launchers and missiles and a absolute metric shit ton of medium and short range ADA Drones- by the thousands- millions Submarines Ships Then a plan to deal with Iran, NK, and China |
|
|
Originally Posted By NEXT23: It is VERY clear to me that - We need to be in emergency/war time footing building Patriot launchers and missiles and a absolute metric shit ton of medium and short range ADA Drones- by the thousands- millions Submarines Ships Then a plan to deal with Iran, NK, and China View Quote I think most agree with that, it’s definitely been said enough. But you need to convince the people in charge first. Also we’re now paying $1 trillion on just servicing the National debt a year and we are borrowing $1 trillion every 90 days. |
|
A lot like GD. Obsessed with the latest shiny weapon but never budgets enough for the ammo... jwnc 5/9/2024
|
Originally Posted By GoldenMead: I think most agree with that, it’s definitely been said enough. But you need to convince the people in charge first. Also we’re now paying $1 trillion on just servicing the National debt a year and we are borrowing $1 trillion every 90 days. View Quote And, not a single Presidential candidate has mentioned a word about the National Debt (that I have heard). CMOS |
|
"If their "fair share" demands that I get nothing for my labors, that it requires me to be a victim, then "public good" be dammed."
|
Originally Posted By stgdz: Some of you still cease to amaze me. Those two have been telegraphing for damn near a year they will throw Ukraine under the bus if they get elected and you will be surprised when it happens. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By stgdz: Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: I expect Harris & Walz to make statements that are completely untethered from the real world, but Vance? WTF? That was very unserious. Some of you still cease to amaze me. Those two have been telegraphing for damn near a year they will throw Ukraine under the bus if they get elected and you will be surprised when it happens. It's not that I didn't think Trump would absolutely throw Ukraine under the bus, I take him at his word on that. The shock is that Vance could make a statement that he cannot support, uttering a 'deal' that everybody paying attention has no reason to believe Putin would even entertain, much less accept. There is no basis for Putin to consider accepting the current lines, which makes Vance's postulation absolutely stupid. This goes back to the question I've been asking everyone calling for 'negotiations' for the last two years: how can Putin be induced to negotiate? How can he be induced to accept terms, especially now that Ukraine has extended itself and the Russian military is winning or static on every front (however ugly it may be)? As I said above, Russia has the ability to get what it wants without negotiating, by continuing its military operations. Ukraine cannot. There is no 'deal' to be made, which an ostensibly 'deal making' man ought to know, and by extension his running mate ought to know. Vance is unserious. |
|
|
Originally Posted By CMOS: And, not a single Presidential candidate has mentioned a word about the National Debt (that I have heard). CMOS View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By CMOS: Originally Posted By GoldenMead: I think most agree with that, it’s definitely been said enough. But you need to convince the people in charge first. Also we’re now paying $1 trillion on just servicing the National debt a year and we are borrowing $1 trillion every 90 days. And, not a single Presidential candidate has mentioned a word about the National Debt (that I have heard). CMOS The actual spending cuts that would be required to even remotely start solving the problem would be political suicide. |
|
Field grade officer in the Ukebro Army
Globalist shill |
Originally Posted By HIPPO: ~1 min video in tweet. "So I think it goes like this: Trump sits down, says to the Russians, to the Ukrainians, to the Europeans, you guys need to figure out what a peaceful settlement looks like. And it will probably look roughly the same as the current dividing line between Russia and Ukraine. It will become like a demilitarized zone. It will be strongly fortified so that the Russians do not invade again. Ukraine retains its independent sovereignty. Russia receives a guarantee of neutrality from Ukraine, it does not join NATO, it does not join any allied institutions." — J.D. Vance View Quote That would 100% guarantee Ukraine becomes a nuclear power. |
|
"I do believe that some gun laws are needed and yes, I am a Republican" ~ tc556guy - NRA Member
|
|
|
It's not stupid, it's advanced!!
|
Originally Posted By DPeacher: That would 100% guarantee Ukraine becomes a nuclear power. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By DPeacher: Originally Posted By HIPPO: ~1 min video in tweet. "So I think it goes like this: Trump sits down, says to the Russians, to the Ukrainians, to the Europeans, you guys need to figure out what a peaceful settlement looks like. And it will probably look roughly the same as the current dividing line between Russia and Ukraine. It will become like a demilitarized zone. It will be strongly fortified so that the Russians do not invade again. Ukraine retains its independent sovereignty. Russia receives a guarantee of neutrality from Ukraine, it does not join NATO, it does not join any allied institutions." — J.D. Vance That would 100% guarantee Ukraine becomes a nuclear power. Yep. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/07/19/vance-trump-vice-president-foreign-policy/ The Irrelevance of J.D. Vance to U.S. Foreign Policy Vice presidents can have plenty of responsibilities—but shaping strategy usually isn’t one of them. |
|
It's not stupid, it's advanced!!
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted By Prime: Biden may let British Storm Shadow missiles strike inside Russia Keir Starmer flies to US as President Zelensky lays out his ‘victory plan’ The United States may allow Ukraine to use British and French missiles but not its own longer-range weapons inside Russia, according to two sources familiar with discussions that have taken place. President Biden may decide to give the green light to President Zelensky to use Storm Shadow missiles and their French equivalent, Scalp missiles, to strike targets in Russian territory on the ground that the UK and France support such a move, they said. However, the US would not allow Ukraine to fire its longest-range version of ATACMS — a ballistic missile — at targets across the border, hoping to prevent a further escalation of the conflict. The two sources, from the governments of different nations, spoke on condition of anonymity and said they believed that the proposed policy was likely to be adopted after meetings on Kyiv on Wednesday between Zelensky, Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, and David Lammy, the British foreign secretary. One of the sources said they expected the option to be discussed between Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, and Biden in Washington on Friday, although they downplayed suggestions of a sudden announcement on the matter. Biden is expected to discuss the issue with other European leaders to sound them out on any change in policy. A British defence source said that the UK did not need the support of other countries in Nato to go ahead. Both the UK and France are believed to support removing the restrictions on Ukraine’s use of its long-range weapons, but so far the Americans have blocked the change for fear of escalation. The Iranian delivery of more than 200 Fath-360 missiles to Russia last Wednesday is believed to have played a part in persuading some senior figures in the West that the policy needs to be changed urgently. Ben Barry, a senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said he would not be surprised if Biden took a “half-way house” position because “France and Britain would be taking the risk on behalf of Ukraine and Ukraine’s friends”. He said: “It’s a half-way house, it’s less than Ukraine has asked for but it’s better than nothing from Ukraine’s point of view. It increases the risk of escalation against Britain and France but not the US.” In recent months Britain has supplied Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles, which have a range of about 155 miles, and the US has provided the longest-range version of ATACMS, which can travel 190 miles. Ukraine wants long-range weapons to use inside Russia so it can destroy air bases, ammunition depots and other military targets threatening its territory. Its military leaders want to be able to take out Russian bomber fleets, which are dropping air-launched glide bombs — cheap refurbished bombs with guide systems — on Ukrainian targets, to devastating effect. Russia can to launch the bombs dozens of miles behind the front lines. Barry said that the Storm Shadow was most useful against hard targets such as bunkers and aircraft shelters. “It’s not particularly useful against targets in the open.” The American missiles are more capable against a range of battlefield targets. “They have a warhead that is designed to explode on the surface, so they are very good for targets like artillery batteries, divisional headquarters, ammunition dumps and anti-aircraft missiles sites. It’s not so useful against the targets Storm Shadow is useful for,” Barry said. “It’s rather like comparing a knife and fork, you can do a bit with either but you are better off with using both of them together.” Starmer will fly to Washington on Friday to meet Biden there before meetings at the UN headquarters in New York on 22 and 23 September. Zelensky has said that he will present his “victory plan”, which is reliant upon US support, during the meetings. https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/keir-starmer-joe-biden-storm-shadow-missiles-jmq87805n View Quote Why does the US get a say in the use of British weapons supplied by the British government? I insist that the US should not be inserting itself in the conflict unnecessarily. |
|
|
Originally Posted By GoldenMead: I think most agree with that, it’s definitely been said enough. But you need to convince the people in charge first. Also we’re now paying $1 trillion on just servicing the National debt a year and we are borrowing $1 trillion every 90 days. View Quote bread and circuses are expensive |
|
"People, Ideas, Technology - IN THAT ORDER"
|
Originally Posted By AlmightyTallest:
View Quote So fucking cool. |
|
Just a stranger on the bus trying to find his way home.
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GXTKBsbWMAAeR82?format=jpg&name=large View Quote Moldovan MoD- CHIŞINĂU, September 12, 2024 — A contract soldier of the National Army, who was serving in the Joint Peacekeeping Forces, was mortally wounded today, September 12, as a result of a shot with the weapon provided, while serving at the post . According to the information provided by the Operational Command Center, the incident took place at 17:50. The doctors who arrived at the scene confirmed the death of the soldier. At the same time, a team of police forensics is investigating the case. The soldier by contract has been serving in the National Army since 2023. The Ministry of Defense expresses its sincere condolences to the family of the deceased soldier and will provide all the necessary support to elucidate this regrettable case. https://www.army.md/?lng=2&action=show&cat=122&obj=9252 |
|
“If by chance you were to ask me which ornaments I would desire above all others in my house, I would reply, without much pause for reflection, arms and books.”
Baldassare Castiglione https://t.me/arfcom_ukebros |
Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Originally Posted By Prime: Biden may let British Storm Shadow missiles strike inside Russia Keir Starmer flies to US as President Zelensky lays out his ‘victory plan’ The United States may allow Ukraine to use British and French missiles but not its own longer-range weapons inside Russia, according to two sources familiar with discussions that have taken place. President Biden may decide to give the green light to President Zelensky to use Storm Shadow missiles and their French equivalent, Scalp missiles, to strike targets in Russian territory on the ground that the UK and France support such a move, they said. However, the US would not allow Ukraine to fire its longest-range version of ATACMS — a ballistic missile — at targets across the border, hoping to prevent a further escalation of the conflict. The two sources, from the governments of different nations, spoke on condition of anonymity and said they believed that the proposed policy was likely to be adopted after meetings on Kyiv on Wednesday between Zelensky, Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, and David Lammy, the British foreign secretary. One of the sources said they expected the option to be discussed between Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, and Biden in Washington on Friday, although they downplayed suggestions of a sudden announcement on the matter. Biden is expected to discuss the issue with other European leaders to sound them out on any change in policy. A British defence source said that the UK did not need the support of other countries in Nato to go ahead. Both the UK and France are believed to support removing the restrictions on Ukraine’s use of its long-range weapons, but so far the Americans have blocked the change for fear of escalation. The Iranian delivery of more than 200 Fath-360 missiles to Russia last Wednesday is believed to have played a part in persuading some senior figures in the West that the policy needs to be changed urgently. Ben Barry, a senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said he would not be surprised if Biden took a “half-way house” position because “France and Britain would be taking the risk on behalf of Ukraine and Ukraine’s friends”. He said: “It’s a half-way house, it’s less than Ukraine has asked for but it’s better than nothing from Ukraine’s point of view. It increases the risk of escalation against Britain and France but not the US.” In recent months Britain has supplied Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles, which have a range of about 155 miles, and the US has provided the longest-range version of ATACMS, which can travel 190 miles. Ukraine wants long-range weapons to use inside Russia so it can destroy air bases, ammunition depots and other military targets threatening its territory. Its military leaders want to be able to take out Russian bomber fleets, which are dropping air-launched glide bombs — cheap refurbished bombs with guide systems — on Ukrainian targets, to devastating effect. Russia can to launch the bombs dozens of miles behind the front lines. Barry said that the Storm Shadow was most useful against hard targets such as bunkers and aircraft shelters. “It’s not particularly useful against targets in the open.” The American missiles are more capable against a range of battlefield targets. “They have a warhead that is designed to explode on the surface, so they are very good for targets like artillery batteries, divisional headquarters, ammunition dumps and anti-aircraft missiles sites. It’s not so useful against the targets Storm Shadow is useful for,” Barry said. “It’s rather like comparing a knife and fork, you can do a bit with either but you are better off with using both of them together.” Starmer will fly to Washington on Friday to meet Biden there before meetings at the UN headquarters in New York on 22 and 23 September. Zelensky has said that he will present his “victory plan”, which is reliant upon US support, during the meetings. https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/keir-starmer-joe-biden-storm-shadow-missiles-jmq87805n What a chicken shit cocksucker. |
|
Just a stranger on the bus trying to find his way home.
|
A lot like GD. Obsessed with the latest shiny weapon but never budgets enough for the ammo... jwnc 5/9/2024
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO:TA — video of the evil midget saying it in tweet below (3 min clip).
View Quote First, he's repeating something I have not believed, but has been posted in GD. Or rather, GD has apparently been repeating Putin's talking points for him again. He says only NATO troops can enter the targeting info into the western weapons systems, Ukrainian troops cannot do this. I think it's a lie. Can anyone confirm or refute this? I thought Ukraine was fully responsible and capable for entering targeting data for ATACMs launches, for example. Second, this is why I've been saying that the US government should STOP trying to MAKE the US into a party to the war. We are not and should not be a party to the war. But by micromanaging what Ukraine can and cannot do with the systems we provide them, we make ourselves party to the war. While it may pain me to say it, Putin has a valid point here: if the US is the one saying what can and cannot be struck, the US is a party to the war and therefore a combatant. You can't choose targets for attack and then say "I didn't pull the trigger, so I'm not involved." I absolutely hate the Biden administration for doing this. Give Ukraine weapons and let them fight. That's how a proxy war is supposed to work. This theory of 'escalation management' is and always was BS. |
|
|
"If their "fair share" demands that I get nothing for my labors, that it requires me to be a victim, then "public good" be dammed."
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: Just putting this here for those reading the thread from Rio Linda can see it.
View Quote Hah! A Rush reference. I miss that guy. He'd have a lot to say about this whole fiasco. |
|
|
he chose poorly. |
|
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: he chose poorly. View Quote Clearly an UA war crime! He tried to surrender! |
|
„From a place you will not hear, comes a sound you will not see.“
Thanks for the membership @ Toaster |
I bet we strike a deal to sell Russia, Iran and NK some goodies from our war machine contractors. That's how I'd handle this situation. Cease fire, and you can buy all the fun toys you want from us, special deal just for you, comrades.
|
|
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: There are more out there seeking power and trying get into Congress, like this former CIA Office and Green Beret…: Link to article: Meet the Kremlin's ideal Congressional candidateArticle is in spoiler below. Click To View Spoiler “I mean Putin is a bad guy, but, like, a lot of people are bad guys. I mean he’s pragmatic.” This is how Joe Kent, a former Green Beret and CIA operative running for Washington state’s 3rd congressional district, described Russian President Vladimir Putin on a podcast earlier this year. Kent’s congressional race, a rematch between him and the district’s first Democratic representative in 12 years, is one of the most competitive in the nation. Last time, he lost by less than 3,000 votes. The Cook Political Report rates Kent's rematch against Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA) as a "tossup." When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, Kent — only a few months into his first run for office — described Putin’s demands to claim large parts of Ukrainian territory as “very reasonable.” Kent’s campaign has also received significant help from Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), one of the most Russia-friendly members of Congress. Through his Protecting Freedom PAC, Paul has provided nearly half a million dollars to support Kent’s candidacy. Kent has echoed Russian propaganda about the war in Ukraine throughout his campaign during hours of interviews on conservative news programs and podcasts reviewed by Popular Information. Meanwhile, according to an indictment unsealed by the Department of Justice last week, Russian operatives have been running a massive disinformation campaign to sow division and decrease support for Ukraine in the US. Part of this program included amplifying anti-Ukraine messages from conservative US politicians, candidates, and pundits on social media to increase support among American voters for policies favored by the Kremlin. Kent and Putin: Ukraine and Russia share one culture and language The first piece of Russian propaganda that Kent has pushed is that Ukrainians and Russians are one people with one common history. On a podcast hosted by Sean Parnell in January 2024, Kent said, “Look, I don’t want America involved in the actual territorial dispute between Russia and Ukraine. I view that as an issue between two Slavic cousins. Like, they can figure out where those borders go.” Later on the podcast, Kent continued, “[Putin] understands all this and so like he’s never really had any aspirations to anything but unite the Russian speaking people. I mean, I’ll let the Russian speaking people hash that out on their own.” Here, Kent referenced one of the most important myths that the Kremlin has used to justify its war in Ukraine. If Ukrainians are actually Russians who share Russian culture and language, then Russia is actually saving its own people by invading. Several months before the 2022 invasion, Putin published an essay called “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians” in which he claims that Ukrainians are actually Russians. The Kremlin has maintained this narrative. In March 2024, Dmitry Medvedev, the deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, said, "One of Ukraine's former leaders said at some point that Ukraine is not Russia. That concept needs to disappear forever. Ukraine is definitely Russia. Historic parts of the country need to come home." But this narrative is false. While Ukraine has been controlled by Russia at certain times, it has a history of its own dating back to the 9th century and has been independent since 1991. And although there are certain regions of Ukraine where Russian is spoken, Ukrainian is a distinct language and is highly favored as the country’s official language and the language of education. In fact, since the Russian invasion in 2022, the number of Ukrainians who believe that Russian should be allowed to be a second official language in certain regions has decreased. Kent and Putin: NATO is responsible for Russian aggression Kent has also frequently pushed the Russian narrative that Russia was provoked to invade Ukraine by the expansion of NATO to Eastern European countries close to its borders. During the same podcast appearance in which Kent called Ukrainians “Russian-speaking people,” he also claimed that NATO is encroaching on Russia: [T]he next president, and I pray it’s going to be President Trump, I think he’s gonna have to be very clear that we’re not for NATO expansion because that’s really what started this entire thing. We’ve had this mentality that we need to continue to add countries you know to the eastern flank, right on Russia’s border of NATO. And that was against the original designs of NATO. Since the end of the Cold War, The Kremlin has used NATO expansion to justify its attacks in Ukraine. In December 2023, Putin said in a press conference, “We remember, as I have mentioned many times before and as you know very well, how you promised us in the 1990s that [NATO] would not move an inch to the East. You cheated us shamelessly: there have been five waves of NATO expansion.” The promise that Putin referred to, however, was never actually made. During early negotiations for the re-unification of Germany at the end of the Cold War, the US informally proposed a ban on NATO expansion in exchange for Russia giving up its half of Germany. But this condition was not a part of the final negotiations. Additionally, the most recent NATO expansions have been the result of Russian aggression, not the cause. When Finland and Sweden joined NATO in April 2023 and March 2024 respectively, they cited Russian aggression as the catalyst for joining after remaining neutral for so long. Kent and Putin: The US should focus on its own problems Another message promoted by Kent, which comes straight from Putin’s playbook, is that Ukraine should be none of America’s business. He made this point during an August 27 podcast: I mean Ukraine, before this war, was our 65th trading partner. Most Americans couldn’t find Ukraine on a map and that’s not a ding on most Americans. They couldn’t find Ukraine on a map because it didn’t matter that much to America. Roman Osadchuk, a research associate at the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, pointed out that whether most Americans can find Ukraine on a map or not, the US still has an obligation to Ukraine — in the form of the Budapest Memorandum. Signed in 1994, the Budapest Memorandum is an agreement between Ukraine, the US, and the UK that Ukraine would give up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for assurances that the other two countries would help Ukraine maintain its independence (although it did not specify exactly what such assistance would look like). Kent is “actually mirroring the idea that Russians are spreading most of the time, which is that all other countries should spend time on their internal issues and not be involved in [the Russia-Ukraine war],” Osadchuk told Popular Information. Heightening tensions over domestic politics in the US is one of the key priorities of the Russian propaganda campaign exposed by the DOJ last week. The scheme involved creating dozens of memes and other posts daily through social media accounts targeting conservative voters in all 50 states. The goal of such posts is to stoke fears about topics including the “threat of crime coming from people of color and immigrants (including new immigrants from Ukraine)” and “overspending on foreign policy [at] the expense of white US citizens.” Kent and Putin: Western support for Ukraine could lead to World War 3 Russia and Kent both want the West to focus on internal issues instead of helping Ukraine. And they both warn that the consequences of Western aid to Ukraine will be disastrous. During the August 27 podcast, Kent said, “So now we’re letting Biden unilaterally take us off to what would really be for all intents and purposes the start of World War 3 that potentially has a nuclear angle…The big question too is, like, it’s for what?” According to Osadchuk, Russia ramps up its threats about global war whenever more aid from the West is being discussed. But so far there has been no follow through. “So basically, they're trying to [say]... ‘oh, there would be World War Three if you would continue helping Ukraine.’ But every time, they back down. So every time when Ukraine asks for specific military equipment, Russia says that ‘if you give them [anything], it will be a huge red line.’ Then Ukraine receives it, and nothing happens,” Osadchuk said. Russian propagandists have been hard at work stoking nuclear fears. In the affidavit released last week by the Department of Justice when it indicted two Russian propagandists for pumping disinformation into American right-wing media, one of the goals of this propaganda campaign was described as “the creating of a nuclear psychosis.” Russia wants the US to be afraid that helping Ukraine will provoke global war. One cog in a disinformation machine It is unclear why Joe Kent, a combat veteran and former US intelligence operative, has turned to Russian propaganda. When Popular Information asked his campaign, there was no response. Whatever the reason and whether intentional or not, Osadchuk said that Kent’s rhetoric helps Russia. People like Kent, according to Osadchuk, are influencers. Being a politician, candidate, or talking-head, some people “are effective at promoting some specific ideas to a number of people. So in that way, they are amplifying them, willingly or unwillingly,” he said. Along with media influencers, candidates like Kent play an important role in Russian propaganda efforts, legitimizing their talking points. “What Russian then does with this is another important and interesting thing,” said Osadchuk. “They will point at this person and [say] ‘look, US politicians are certain that the US should not be helping Ukraine.’ They will write this in Russian, then [Russia Today] will translate it in English, and then it will be picked up again. So this is just a kind of feedback loop again and again.” View Quote I vehemently disagree with Joe Kent on this issue. Not sure where he gets his opinions: Ignorance or Russian PR influence. I'd still eagerly vote for him over any democrat. |
|
|
Field grade officer in the Ukebro Army
Globalist shill |
Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: First, he's repeating something I have not believed, but has been posted in GD. Or rather, GD has apparently been repeating Putin's talking points for him again. He says only NATO troops can enter the targeting info into the western weapons systems, Ukrainian troops cannot do this. I think it's a lie. Can anyone confirm or refute this? I thought Ukraine was fully responsible and capable for entering targeting data for ATACMs launches, for example. Second, this is why I've been saying that the US government should STOP trying to MAKE the US into a party to the war. We are not and should not be a party to the war. But by micromanaging what Ukraine can and cannot do with the systems we provide them, we make ourselves party to the war. While it may pain me to say it, Putin has a valid point here: if the US is the one saying what can and cannot be struck, the US is a party to the war and therefore a combatant. You can't choose targets for attack and then say "I didn't pull the trigger, so I'm not involved." I absolutely hate the Biden administration for doing this. Give Ukraine weapons and let them fight. That's how a proxy war is supposed to work. This theory of 'escalation management' is and always was BS. View Quote Ukraine is getting most of its intelligence from the US. Ukraine doesn’t have intelligence satellites and we are not flying MQ-4’s around the border for nothing. So there targeting data is most likely coming from us. I’m sure Ukraine can handle running the vehicles. But don’t think for a second we don’t have advisors on the ground observing everything and relaying data. |
|
A lot like GD. Obsessed with the latest shiny weapon but never budgets enough for the ammo... jwnc 5/9/2024
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: he chose poorly. View Quote Most satisfying ventilation. Those UKR bros were not fucking around |
|
|
Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: The actual spending cuts that would be required to even remotely start solving the problem would be political suicide. View Quote We previously had discussions in the other thread about Democrats happy to sacrifice Ukraine over open borders. Well they’d be happy to sacrifice Israel, Taiwan, US Defense budgets etc to retain their domestic spending programs and taxes. Obviously with all the Democrats China spying scandals, China is happy to encourage that. |
|
Deckard “nobody wants to know the truth, nobody” Cobra Kai Johnny Lawrence “she’s hot and all those other things” Tucker Carlson 1/10/2018 “I used to be a liberatarian until Google”https://mobile.twitter.com/Henry_Gunn
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: he chose poorly. View Quote A culmination of many poor choices. |
|
Remorse is for the dead
|
Originally Posted By CarmelBytheSea: We previously had discussions in the other thread about Democrats happy to sacrifice Ukraine over open borders. Well they’d be happy to sacrifice Israel, Taiwan, US Defense budgets etc to retain their domestic spending programs and taxes. Obviously with all the Democrats China spying scandals, China is happy to encourage that. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By CarmelBytheSea: Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: The actual spending cuts that would be required to even remotely start solving the problem would be political suicide. We previously had discussions in the other thread about Democrats happy to sacrifice Ukraine over open borders. Well they’d be happy to sacrifice Israel, Taiwan, US Defense budgets etc to retain their domestic spending programs and taxes. Obviously with all the Democrats China spying scandals, China is happy to encourage that. It's not just the left. Fiscal conservatism is dead in general, and it has been for quite some time. |
|
Field grade officer in the Ukebro Army
Globalist shill |
|
Originally Posted By NEXT23: It is VERY clear to me that - We need to be in emergency/war time footing building Patriot launchers and missiles and a absolute metric shit ton of medium and short range ADA Drones- by the thousands- millions Submarines Ships Then a plan to deal with Iran, NK, and China View Quote Democrats will drag feet on all that while demanding $ to save lesbian tree frogs from climate change |
|
Deckard “nobody wants to know the truth, nobody” Cobra Kai Johnny Lawrence “she’s hot and all those other things” Tucker Carlson 1/10/2018 “I used to be a liberatarian until Google”https://mobile.twitter.com/Henry_Gunn
|
"People, Ideas, Technology - IN THAT ORDER"
|
Originally Posted By CarmelBytheSea: As I wrote before the debate all the “no more wars” and “peace and prosperity” talk amongst conservatives sounds great except it neglects the main point I always make which is the enemy gets a vote. It’s narcissism to think we can control the world and force it or trick it or buy it off to be peaceful View Quote And it goes against Trumps basic tenant of negotiating: If you want something, don't act like you want it. |
|
|
Originally Posted By michigan66: This was mentioned in a post last night, more details came out this morning: Twitter thread about IDF attack/raid on Syria last week. First tweet below, thread in quote box:
View Quote I guess you can't shake a stick at hamas terrorists without hitting some UNRWA "staff"... |
|
|
Originally Posted By GoldenMead: Ukraine is getting most of its intelligence from the US. Ukraine doesn’t have intelligence satellites and we are not flying MQ-4’s around the border for nothing. So there targeting data is most likely coming from us. I’m sure Ukraine can handle running the vehicles. But don’t think for a second we don’t have advisors on the ground observing everything and relaying data. View Quote Absolutely, US is providing huge data and ISR to Ukraine. But the argument made that US soldiers have to input the targets into the systems - or British soldiers for Storm Shadow and French soldiers for Scalp - is BS, is it not? I see that claim get made in GD, and now also by Putin himself, and I don't believe it. There's a world of difference between saying, "here's data on all the targets" and maybe even giving the customer the ability to request targets/locations/ranges and "I'm going to input target data into the missile system now, you can push the red button when I'm done." |
|
|
|
Originally Posted By kpacman: This is about as unambiguous as a statement can be. Essentially, JD is stating that Russia's conditions for a cease fire will be accepted and promoted by a Trump administration. NATO membership is the ONLY thing that will guarantee that Russia won't initiate SMO 2.0 in several years after it re-arms and lays in more offensive weaponry. Let's not pretend/hope/pray Trump's actions will be anything different than this. View Quote Probably but NATO membership would be secondary to fulling arming and equipping Ukraine with credible defenses. Otherwise a weak and ill equipped NATO member Ukraine would just be attacked asymmetrically again and the weak members would argue it's just more "domestic issues" like in 2014 and veto article 5. Anyway, if this shit deal is pushed on Ukraine they will likely get nukes ASAP, stupid not to. |
|
|
|
Originally Posted By HIPPO: Just putting this here for those reading the thread from Rio Linda can see it.
View Quote If I'm not mistaken it's that "out of nato" part that makes sure that russia can invade again later. I think russias wet dream would be 1) Out of NATO 2)Russia gets to keep what they've taken 3)Russia is not responsible for fixing anything they've broken 4)Russia gets some of the sanctions lifted 5)Russia gets some time without war to rebuild and modernize their military. 6)They make some agreement to not invade, something they can just break later with little consequences. |
|
SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS
|
Originally Posted By Prime: Biden may let British Storm Shadow missiles strike inside Russia Keir Starmer flies to US as President Zelensky lays out his ‘victory plan’ The United States may allow Ukraine to use British and French missiles but not its own longer-range weapons inside Russia, according to two sources familiar with discussions that have taken place. President Biden may decide to give the green light to President Zelensky to use Storm Shadow missiles and their French equivalent, Scalp missiles, to strike targets in Russian territory on the ground that the UK and France support such a move, they said. However, the US would not allow Ukraine to fire its longest-range version of ATACMS — a ballistic missile — at targets across the border, hoping to prevent a further escalation of the conflict. The two sources, from the governments of different nations, spoke on condition of anonymity and said they believed that the proposed policy was likely to be adopted after meetings on Kyiv on Wednesday between Zelensky, Antony Blinken, the US secretary of state, and David Lammy, the British foreign secretary. One of the sources said they expected the option to be discussed between Sir Keir Starmer, the prime minister, and Biden in Washington on Friday, although they downplayed suggestions of a sudden announcement on the matter. Biden is expected to discuss the issue with other European leaders to sound them out on any change in policy. A British defence source said that the UK did not need the support of other countries in Nato to go ahead. Both the UK and France are believed to support removing the restrictions on Ukraine’s use of its long-range weapons, but so far the Americans have blocked the change for fear of escalation. The Iranian delivery of more than 200 Fath-360 missiles to Russia last Wednesday is believed to have played a part in persuading some senior figures in the West that the policy needs to be changed urgently. Ben Barry, a senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said he would not be surprised if Biden took a “half-way house” position because “France and Britain would be taking the risk on behalf of Ukraine and Ukraine’s friends”. He said: “It’s a half-way house, it’s less than Ukraine has asked for but it’s better than nothing from Ukraine’s point of view. It increases the risk of escalation against Britain and France but not the US.” In recent months Britain has supplied Ukraine with Storm Shadow missiles, which have a range of about 155 miles, and the US has provided the longest-range version of ATACMS, which can travel 190 miles. Ukraine wants long-range weapons to use inside Russia so it can destroy air bases, ammunition depots and other military targets threatening its territory. Its military leaders want to be able to take out Russian bomber fleets, which are dropping air-launched glide bombs — cheap refurbished bombs with guide systems — on Ukrainian targets, to devastating effect. Russia can to launch the bombs dozens of miles behind the front lines. Barry said that the Storm Shadow was most useful against hard targets such as bunkers and aircraft shelters. “It’s not particularly useful against targets in the open.” The American missiles are more capable against a range of battlefield targets. “They have a warhead that is designed to explode on the surface, so they are very good for targets like artillery batteries, divisional headquarters, ammunition dumps and anti-aircraft missiles sites. It’s not so useful against the targets Storm Shadow is useful for,” Barry said. “It’s rather like comparing a knife and fork, you can do a bit with either but you are better off with using both of them together.” Starmer will fly to Washington on Friday to meet Biden there before meetings at the UN headquarters in New York on 22 and 23 September. Zelensky has said that he will present his “victory plan”, which is reliant upon US support, during the meetings. https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/keir-starmer-joe-biden-storm-shadow-missiles-jmq87805n View Quote "We're too scared but you can if you really want"... I wonder what the official explanation is for this? What could the US be telling partners about our rationale? "We are afraid of escalation but not if you do it"? Like if my kid needed some medicine late at night and I told my wife "no way I'm going honey, it's dark and scary out there, YOU SHOULD GO"... |
|
|
Originally Posted By kpacman: China has shown no effort at all to ameliorate this situation. They are the benefactor of seeing this continue. They are getting gas from Russia under the greatest conditions, along with huge sales of military and technology products. How would they improve their situation by "twisting Russia's testicles"? They hold sway over N. Korea, yet the Nork's are sending ballistic missiles and artillery shells galore. I see no scenario where China would act as you describe. View Quote At best Ukraine can offer China some rebuilding contracts in exchange for not getting more involved with helping Russia. They realize that the US/NATO are maxed out either due to lack of supply or lack of testicles. And China has not even broken a sweat yet. |
|
|
Originally Posted By GoldenMead: Zelenskyy accuses Brazil of being pro-Russia, slams peace proposal When asked about Brazil’s position on the war, Zelenskyy said, “Unfortunately, I believe that they [the Brazilian government] are taking Russia’s side.” https://www.politico.eu/article/volodymyr-zelenskyy-china-brazil-peace-proposal-russia-ukraine/ Not surprising that Brazil is taking Russia’s side. Brazil has moved very far away from the US the last 3 years and they are deep in China sphere of influence now. More foreign policy failures from our current government. View Quote It's amazing how Neo-marxist fascist countries seem to support one another. |
|
|
My hope is that Ukraine, being the brains behind a significant percentage of Russia's smarts for the duration of the cold war, has kept at least one SCALP and an ATACMS and a this and a that and has taken them apart and managed to cop as much IP as possible so they can domestically procure ATACMsky's and SCALPsy's.
Would go a long way if they can domestically produce even a 90% analog. "It's ok, we don't need your stuff to deep strike Russia, we've got it covered with our own stuff." Oh it looks suspiciously like an ATACMS strike? But it's got Cyrillic all over the debris raining down on Red Square? Huh... |
|
|
|
Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: It's not just the left. Fiscal conservatism is dead in general, and it has been for quite some time. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: Originally Posted By CarmelBytheSea: Originally Posted By Jaehaerys: The actual spending cuts that would be required to even remotely start solving the problem would be political suicide. We previously had discussions in the other thread about Democrats happy to sacrifice Ukraine over open borders. Well they’d be happy to sacrifice Israel, Taiwan, US Defense budgets etc to retain their domestic spending programs and taxes. Obviously with all the Democrats China spying scandals, China is happy to encourage that. It's not just the left. Fiscal conservatism is dead in general, and it has been for quite some time. It's because the problem is intractable. You can cut ALL defense spending, and ALL HHS spending and still not solve the deficit, and those are some sacred cows. I keep posting that really solving the problem requires spending cuts AND tax increases, but that's not popular in a nominally 'conservative' forum. The shock that would be involved in eliminating the deficit purely by spending cuts would blow up a lot of our society. The problem has gotten so big, that someone who is truly fiscally conservative - meaning, someone who wants to minimize debt & deficit - must accept tax increases of some kind. That's why it's gotten so hard to find a 'fiscal conservative.' You can't cut your way out of this mess, not really. And this is just to maintain the current level, ignoring the fact that Defense is actually underfunded as a percent of GDP in historical terms. |
|
|
Deckard “nobody wants to know the truth, nobody” Cobra Kai Johnny Lawrence “she’s hot and all those other things” Tucker Carlson 1/10/2018 “I used to be a liberatarian until Google”https://mobile.twitter.com/Henry_Gunn
|
Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Absolutely, US is providing huge data and ISR to Ukraine. But the argument made that US soldiers have to input the targets into the systems - or British soldiers for Storm Shadow and French soldiers for Scalp - is BS, is it not? I see that claim get made in GD, and now also by Putin himself, and I don't believe it. There's a world of difference between saying, "here's data on all the targets" and maybe even giving the customer the ability to request targets/locations/ranges and "I'm going to input target data into the missile system now, you can push the red button when I'm done." View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By Lieh-tzu: Originally Posted By GoldenMead: Ukraine is getting most of its intelligence from the US. Ukraine doesn’t have intelligence satellites and we are not flying MQ-4’s around the border for nothing. So there targeting data is most likely coming from us. I’m sure Ukraine can handle running the vehicles. But don’t think for a second we don’t have advisors on the ground observing everything and relaying data. Absolutely, US is providing huge data and ISR to Ukraine. But the argument made that US soldiers have to input the targets into the systems - or British soldiers for Storm Shadow and French soldiers for Scalp - is BS, is it not? I see that claim get made in GD, and now also by Putin himself, and I don't believe it. There's a world of difference between saying, "here's data on all the targets" and maybe even giving the customer the ability to request targets/locations/ranges and "I'm going to input target data into the missile system now, you can push the red button when I'm done." Is BS
Ukraine can organically close the kill chain.
|
|
It's not stupid, it's advanced!!
|
Originally Posted By stone-age: If I'm not mistaken it's that "out of nato" part that makes sure that russia can invade again later. I think russias wet dream would be 1) Out of NATO 2)Russia gets to keep what they've taken 3)Russia is not responsible for fixing anything they've broken 4)Russia gets some of the sanctions lifted 5)Russia gets some time without war to rebuild and modernize their military. 6)They make some agreement to not invade, something they can just break later with little consequences. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Originally Posted By stone-age: Originally Posted By HIPPO: Just putting this here for those reading the thread from Rio Linda can see it.
If I'm not mistaken it's that "out of nato" part that makes sure that russia can invade again later. I think russias wet dream would be 1) Out of NATO 2)Russia gets to keep what they've taken 3)Russia is not responsible for fixing anything they've broken 4)Russia gets some of the sanctions lifted 5)Russia gets some time without war to rebuild and modernize their military. 6)They make some agreement to not invade, something they can just break later with little consequences. A buddy of mine has a saying, It's harder for the Russians to not lie than it is to tell the truth. |
|
|
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.