|
distortion park posted:Do you think he's dumb enough to be in the blacked out 4x4 and not a random support car I think there is more than one Russian trying to figure it out so they can leak it to the Ukrainians and get rid of him.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
distortion park posted:Do you think he's dumb enough to be in the blacked out 4x4 and not a random support car This is the guy that wears prada boots with his tacticool fit. Of course he would be in the blacked out 4x4. He doesn't give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:So uh, having knocked Putin for thinking that a short victorious righteous war against a hapless opponent is just to thing to revitalise a nation that believes itself to be a great power in decline... It's not to say that there's some hunger for war, I highly doubt that polls well. It's just that this has rapidly unified the American public in a surprisingly thorough way and that does change the way American leadership tends to act. Also very possible that unification goes away with enough time for Fox/etc to push propaganda through, should they decide to do that. But there doesn't seem to be a ton of interest in doing so right now outside of Carlson and the stable of predictably pro-Russian guests like Gabbard or Greenwald.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
distortion park posted:Do you think he's dumb enough to be in the blacked out 4x4 and not a random support car Your lips to [diety's] ears, though this Kadyrov watching reporter doesn't think he's actually anywhere near the lines https://twitter.com/chambersharold8/status/1503003258356486145?s=20&t=Sk_o5_NtiBWUYG7OA-a0EA IF he is, and DOESN'T fight, it's gonna make him look like a chickenshit which wouldn't be helpful for his position.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
distortion park posted:They're also using a lot of cheaper atgms. NLAWs are way cheaper, less than a quarter of a Javelin depending on where you look and have similar destructive power (but shorter range). Not sure about the older gear they have but I would assume even less valuable. There are also using RPGs and ATGMs of Soviet/Russian design, as well as home brewed ATGMs. And they got Panzerfaust 3s from germany, M72s from Denmark and canada. It's basically the testing grounds for the last 30 years of AT weaponry.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:53
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:Ukrainians are apparently able to start launching counter offensives. They have been launching counter-attacks since day 1, it's not new. But really worth remembering that most of the Ukrainian success has been light infantry with portable AT guns versus Russian tanks, they probably are not going to be seriously rolling back Russian gains.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:55
|
|
|
Trump posted:There are also using RPGs and ATGMs of Soviet/Russian design, as well as home brewed ATGMs. And they got Panzerfaust 3s from germany, M72s from Denmark and canada. It's basically the testing grounds for the last 30 years of AT weaponry. Not to forgot the real real vintage AT weaponry: Molotovs. I still sometimes wonder at the Finns who fought off Russian armored assaults with nothing but Molotovs, cunning and massive kivekset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:56
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:First of all, unfortunately, I do not think you have your ears to the ground with your 'average' American right now. When my mom, who is a progressive Democrat, is calling me up and talking my ear off about how we should just "deal with Russia now" then what you are saying about 'nobody' wanting war with Russia is wrong. Maybe the more accurate thing to say is, most of the people still being rational do not want war with Russia. You are certainly right that many Americans claim they want war with Russia. Some interesting polling, though (second tweet): https://twitter.com/edokeefe/status/1503010920557125633?s=21 I suspect that the more information one’s given about what going to war with Russia would mean, the less popular it would be. I cannot imagine that many Americans would respond favorably to the poll question: “do you want nuclear war?”
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
smug n stuff posted:I suspect that the more information one’s given about what going to war with Russia would mean, the less popular it would be. It's absolutely this. Anyone under, what, 40? Really has no frame of reference for the cold war or nuclear deterrence, unless they went out of their way to study it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Yeah I think people freaking out by Americans claiming they want No Fly Zones is misunderstanding. I do think the average American wants to support Ukraine (or hurt Russia), and so if you say "are you in support of [thing that sounds like doing something but doesn't sound like war]" people are bullish on it because they're conveying an overall interest in doing something. When you explain it further, people change their views. It's hard for people to express nuanced views in a yes/no answer.
JerikTelorian fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Mar 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
smug n stuff posted:You are certainly right that many Americans claim they want war with Russia. reminds me of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
I guess the question everyone wants to know is 'if Russia accidentally strikes land past the Ukrainian border, can NATO de-escalate and claim it was an accident before angrily calling Putin to watch himself/keep his forces on a leash?' I think Putin knows better than to directly involve them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:10
|
|
|
smug n stuff posted:I suspect that the more information one’s given about what going to war with Russia would mean, the less popular it would be. I cannot imagine that many Americans would respond favorably to the poll question: “do you want nuclear war?” Don't discount the influence of apocalypticism. True Christians will be raptured! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:I guess the question everyone wants to know is 'if Russia accidentally strikes land past the Ukrainian border, can NATO de-escalate and claim it was an accident before angrily calling Putin to watch himself/keep his forces on a leash?' There's no robot mechanically invoking full on mobilization the second a Russian bullet crosses a NATO member border, so yes, everything is possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:13
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Don't discount the influence of apocalypticism. True Christians will be raptured! Last Secretary of State among them! Pompeo would’ve begged Trump to press the big ‘un.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:27
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:They have been launching counter-attacks since day 1, it's not new. But really worth remembering that most of the Ukrainian success has been light infantry with portable AT guns versus Russian tanks, they probably are not going to be seriously rolling back Russian gains. I don't think the Ukrainians have been launching counter attacks since day 1. Ambushes, defensive action that drives the attackers back, and organized/planned offensives are different things I don't disagree that they likely won't be taking a lot of territory back, but the ability to re-open supply corridors to places like Mariupol is just as valuable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
Ukrainian counter attacks were able to effectively stall the Kharkiv offensive, far as we can tell from available information. It's definitely not something to discount.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:I don't think the Ukrainians have been launching counter attacks since day 1. Ambushes, defensive action that drives the attackers back, and organized/planned offensives are different things Offensive on a front and counter-attacks are too different things. Ukraine took Antonov Airport with 2 counter-attacks on the first day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:33
|
|
|
It is already been stated but people hear no fly zone and think yeah that sounds great and don't realize that it would mean an event that could possibly lead to the end of all life on the planet. Frame the question properly and the numbers are going to shift dramatically.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:I don't think the Ukrainians have been launching counter attacks since day 1. Ambushes, defensive action that drives the attackers back, and organized/planned offensives are different things Ukrainians have also been very good at husbanding their forces. Tactically, small unit fights are probably best for this sort of fighting right now. Russian supply lines are stretched and are vulnerable to small unit ambushes as we have seen. Ukrainian tank forces are not so good for that sort of thing due to the terrain and climate. Let the Russians deal with the mud. Light infantry can go places that Russian heavy equipment can't go. edit: Also the narritive is great for Ukraine right now too. We are seeing the building of a national mythology, just like the Americans had during the Revolutionary war with the Minutemen. Brave Ukrainians picking up their rifles to go fight the invader? Thats a huge morale booster, made all the better that they being loving _effective_ in doing so too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:37
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:There's no robot mechanically invoking full on mobilization the second a Russian bullet crosses a NATO member border, so yes, everything is possible. I'd expect particular restraint to verify that it was, in fact, a Russian attack and not a false flag designed to draw in direct NATO support. coelomate posted:Good. The only thing more important than the red lines is clearly telegraphing the red lines. All the relevant actors should already know all of this, but underlining and emphasizing it is critical given the stakes. Like Stoltenberg's put it before: https://twitter.com/exileddub/status/1502626281040629761?s=20&t=MQwGlrxUQeNMkAhC9euwyg PerilPastry fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Mar 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:38
|
|
|
cr0y posted:It is already been stated but people hear no fly zone and think yeah that sounds great and don't realize that it would mean an event that could possibly lead to the end of all life on the planet. There is absolutely no way even an all out nuclear war would lead to "the end of all life on the planet". Probably not even humanity. Yes it'd be a total catastrophe but not that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:Yeah I think people freaking out by Americans claiming they want No Fly Zones is misunderstanding. I do think the average American wants to support Ukraine (or hurt Russia), and so if you say "are you in support of [thing that sounds like doing something but doesn't sound like war]" people are bullish on it because they're conveying an overall interest in doing something. When you explain it further, people change their views. It's hard for people to express nuanced views in a yes/no answer. It's not really a nuanced view, it's more of an incoherent one; the lesson isn't that "yes/no" is misleading, the lesson is that you can't give people the credit of knowing what the hell you're talking about when you ask them a poll question but that's not going to stop them from answering it. You see the same thing with polling about US health care policy, where you can get a 30 point swing just by slightly changing the wording.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
BigglesSWE posted:Last Secretary of State among them! Pompeo would’ve begged Trump to press the big ‘un.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:Time for a boats update! The russians are moving around a little bit more.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
JerikTelorian posted:Yeah I think people freaking out by Americans claiming they want No Fly Zones is misunderstanding. I do think the average American wants to support Ukraine (or hurt Russia), and so if you say "are you in support of [thing that sounds like doing something but doesn't sound like war]" people are bullish on it because they're conveying an overall interest in doing something. When you explain it further, people change their views. It's hard for people to express nuanced views in a yes/no answer. I hate to be the one who keeps saying this, but this assumption that NATO intervention means absolutely nuclear war is hysteria. Does NATO intervention raise the risk of that? Yes! Should NATO intervene? No... but the constant "Russia will nuke everyone!" line gets kind of old, and is not really helpful. See part of the issue is that it is not certain a 'no fly zone' would equate to nuclear war, which motivates support for such things in the United States. If we were able to rationally discuss the risks of that without screaming at people "AMERICA, DO YOU WANT NUCLEAR WAR!!" it would be much easier to communicate to people why NATO going to Russia would be bad without having lots of people immediately dismiss the very real risks inherent in shooting at the Russians as being in some way connected to hyperbolic statements about the end of days. TL;DR Nuclear war is a possibility, but insisting that this is the absolute natural result of any armed conflict with a nuclear power causes the reverse of what you are trying to achieve--it makes people dismiss the risk as hyperbolic anti-war rhetoric because most people realize that for Putin to launch strategic nuclear weapons at anyone would spell the absolute destruction of Russia as well as NATO countries. Really though, we should not even be talking about this. NATO is not going to intervene despite what the polling says unless a NATO country is attacked by Russia.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:I guess the question everyone wants to know is 'if Russia accidentally strikes land past the Ukrainian border, can NATO de-escalate and claim it was an accident before angrily calling Putin to watch himself/keep his forces on a leash?' Probably been answered 10 times already but… Intent and what that missile hits would play a big role in that decision. Like if a missile strays off course because Russian equipment and lands in some farmer’s field 2km into Poland, that sucks for the farmer and but it’ll slide. If that same missile hits that same field but there’s a Polish or US forward operating base on it and it gets out to the media, that’s much harder to dismiss as a not-escalation. May come down to Russia signaling some kind of mistake right after word of the missile gets out. dirty shrimp money fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Mar 13, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:44
|
|
|
The funniest outcome of an attack (accidental or otherwise) on Poland would be Poland declaring war without asking for NATO assistance. If they've regularly taken part in stuff like Red Flag then their airforce is probably many times more capable than their Russian counterparts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:48
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I guess by copying his own tricks. How about not sending troops to Ukraine, but allowing soldiers to take a voluntary leave and find employment in the ranks of Rengaw Inc.? Warfare was based on mercenary companies for centuries. Someone start up the Golden Sunflower Company
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:49
|
|
|
I wonder where this mindset came from. Where people are so desperate to not engage because it could mean total global thermonuclear war and the end of everything. What, you don't think Russians have people like that too? You think we couldn't just drop a nuke on Moscow and say "We will absolutely destroy every single person on the planet if you dare to try anything but total surrender right now." because they'd just all line up to kill themselves? Why? Would you? Why do you think Russians are especially deranged? I'm not advocating for any of that, I just wonder why people think Russians are just itching for an excuse to end it all all and only they, rational actors that they are, can advocate for not engaging with the rabid animal that is the Rus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
dirty shrimp money posted:Probably been answered 10 times already but… Yeah. That's basically the purpose of that "de-confliction line" they set up two weeks ago between NATO/the US and the Russian Ministry of Defense. It's specifically designed "for the purposes of preventing miscalculation, military incidents, and escalation” https://thehill.com/policy/defense/596789-us-russia-set-up-military-communication-line-to-prevent-accidental-clash
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1503077943811223554
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:54
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:The funniest outcome of an attack (accidental or otherwise) on Poland would be Poland declaring war without asking for NATO assistance. If they've regularly taken part in stuff like Red Flag then their airforce is probably many times more capable than their Russian counterparts. Does anyone have that fake Korean poll one completely unrelated answer is "declare war on Japan?" We need this but for Poland. Mulva posted:I wonder where this mindset came from. Where people are so desperate to not engage because it could mean total global thermonuclear war and the end of everything. What, you don't think Russians have people like that too? You think we couldn't just drop a nuke on Moscow and say "We will absolutely destroy every single person on the planet if you dare to try anything but total surrender right now." because they'd just all line up to kill themselves? Why? Would you? Why do you think Russians are especially deranged? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 19:56
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:
Hey, I’m sure that Vladimir V. Putin, the current leader of Russia, would respond in a reasonable, de-escalators my fashion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:02
|
|
|
Thoughtless posted:There is absolutely no way even an all out nuclear war would lead to "the end of all life on the planet". Probably not even humanity. Yes it'd be a total catastrophe but not that. I mean this is pretty clancychat but just I just want to say that a full nuclear exchange between super powers that results in both or all involved parties detonating their existing nuclear warheads would absolutely boil life down to insects and bacteria on a medium time frame. There is absolutely enough nuclear weapons on the planet today to remove anything resembling intelligent life as we currently know it. This is not the thread for this discussion so let's just agree to disagree unless you want to chat elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:04
|
|
|
the popes toes posted:This issue has unnecessarily created a tension in the US/Pole relationship where none previously existed and reflected poorly on the State Dept. Yeah Biden and the State Department went way overly timid in this one I get that they probably want to be the Admin that ended all the wars abroad but wow, this is a big fumble for little gain. Same with Biden insisting there was nothing Russia could do that would make us retaliate. You just lose a ton of coercion power there by taking everything off the table immediately. I wonder what is making them tiptoe around this so much?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:05
|
|
|
Unrecognized states appealing for absorption? Does this change anything in the real world?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:05
|
|
|
How would the Russians find out if Poland fired Patriot missiles at Russian planes that are trying to bomb the supply convoys? The area is under heavy SAM coverage and I can’t imagine it’s easy to tell if a Ukranian or Polish air defence system brought down those planes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
Trump posted:Unrecognized states appealing for absorption? Does this change anything in the real world? It's like 50 guys and their cronies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
smug n stuff posted:Hey, I’m sure that Vladimir V. Putin, the current leader of Russia, would respond in a reasonable, de-escalators my fashion. I'm not the only one that thinks the current political climate of "the more the rest of the world thinks you're a violent lunatic, the easier it is to get them to give you whatever you want" is destined to end very, very badly, am I?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2022 20:07
|
|
