|
pro starcraft loser posted:Wow, I had no idea the FSA still had such hardware/area to use it. they keep them in garages, but I guess now that the skies are clear. HorrificExistence fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Apr 12, 2018 |
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 01:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Talking about attacking Russia isn't attacking Russia, and what she said is irrelevant to that. The Russians aren't listening to Sanders for any meaning and they realize what she meant by her statement is "gently caress off reporter" and nothing else. I’m glad you have the inside view of a semi-despotic Russian regime who has very real interests in the regime in Syria. I wish I had your insight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 01:26
|
|
|
Coldwar timewarp posted:I’m glad you have the inside view of a semi-despotic Russian regime who has very real interests in the regime in Syria. I wish I had your insight. The war is dangerous. Sanders is continuously stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 01:35
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:The war is dangerous. Sanders is continuously stupid. It’s an unhelpful addition to discourse. Stupid things come out of the White House every day. No need to add to it rather than being straight up noncommittal like Mattis, someone who has more information on what plans are and has the common sense to say nothing at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 02:29
|
|
|
Coldwar timewarp posted:It’s an unhelpful addition to discourse. Stupid things come out of the White House every day. No need to add to it rather than being straight up noncommittal like Mattis, someone who has more information on what plans are and has the common sense to say nothing at all. It's white noise and there's no reason to freak out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 02:40
|
|
|
Coldwar timewarp posted:It’s an unhelpful addition to discourse. Stupid things come out of the White House every day. No need to add to it rather than being straight up noncommittal like Mattis, someone who has more information on what plans are and has the common sense to say nothing at all. "We're not going to tell what our plans are" is the standard response given every time a reporter asks about them, ever. It would have been remarkable if he had said anything else. You're going a long way out of your way to get upset about nothing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 02:45
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:"We're not going to tell what our plans are" is the standard response given every time a reporter asks about them, ever. It would have been remarkable if he had said anything else. He was saying that Mattis said the right thing, whereas Sanders used the wrong generic phrase and signaled that we might be considering bombing Russians. She's not going to start WW3, it's just a stupid thing to even hint at; we all know targeting the Russian military isn't actually an option being actively considered.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 02:47
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:He was saying that Mattis said the right thing, whereas Sanders used the wrong generic phrase and signaled that we might be considering bombing Russians. She's not going to start WW3, it's just a stupid thing to even hint at; we all know targeting the Russian military isn't actually an option being actively considered. The Russians know it, too. It's a meaningless thing to get cranked about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 02:58
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The Russians know it, too. It's a meaningless thing to get cranked about. I think it's indicative of broader problems with this administration, since she's just talking tough but ambiguous to try not to get caught out by her idiot boss tweeting the opposite of any definitive statement she makes. In the context of him telling Russia missiles are coming on twitter today, I think saying that no, they aren't actually going to be aimed at Russians would have been a good thing to say.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 03:05
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The Russians know it, too. It's a meaningless thing to get cranked about. It's a careless statement from an administration that has been riddled with careless faux pas about a situation in which carelessness could result in severe consequences. This isn't talking about building a wall or defending the President's idiotic conduct. The secretary of state was just fired and we are on the brink of expanding our military involvement in Syria. There is reason to not feel so casually about what's going on
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 03:11
|
|
|
Kawasaki Nun posted:It's a careless statement from an administration that has been riddled with careless faux pas about a situation in which carelessness could result in severe consequences. This isn't talking about building a wall or defending the President's idiotic conduct. The secretary of state was just fired and we are on the brink of expanding our military involvement in Syria. There is reason to not feel so casually about what's going on Wouldn’t want to be hysterical but acting like words from either administration don’t matter at all is foolish especially with what has been said. If the Russians want to stop bombing of Syria they might feel, rightly, that threatening to hit back is the right call. What they think is proportional response might lead for a tit for tat which is dangerous. Or that not responding to a “red line” would lower their standing with their allies, something said repeatedly here with regards to the US. I’ll go out on a limb and say the US doesn’t have the record required to say human rights violations are a bridge too far while supporting a starvation blockade of Yemen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 03:26
|
|
|
It's just more lessons about how when you try to setup a useful idiot, you need to make sure you're not just putting in a plain idiot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 03:39
|
|
|
This seems, uh, not good. https://twitter.com/BulletinAtomic/status/984300091946217472
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 07:51
|
|
|
I'm starting to think MBS has a magic voice or something seeing as how he has the power to turn every world leader he talks to just as stupid and deluded as he is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 07:59
|
|
|
He has a magic checkbook and a magic pen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 08:36
|
|
|
I remember reading somewhere that the Saudi's might have enough leverage with Pakistan that they could probably just buy some of their arsenal off of them, I wonder if anything will come of that maybe?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 08:38
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:OMG I'm reading about the city MBS wants to build, Neom, and it's like a child thought about it quote:It will be an independent zone, with its own regulations and social norms, created specifically to be in service of economic progress and the well-being of its citizens, in the hopes of attracting the world’s top talent and making Neom a hub of trade, innovation and creativity. Is this a code-phrase for "we're going to allow booze and premarital sex (and maybe hookers)"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 09:08
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:I remember reading somewhere that the Saudi's might have enough leverage with Pakistan that they could probably just buy some of their arsenal off of them, I wonder if anything will come of that maybe?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 09:10
|
|
|
I mean at this point Trump could do nothing and claim a win. He grounded Assad's airforce, made them waste time hiding their planes, and had the Russians move their fleet out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 10:45
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:I mean at this point Trump could do nothing and claim a win. He grounded Assad's airforce, made them waste time hiding their planes, and had the Russians move their fleet out. Nobody cares about any of that. He would have backed down after making far more blustery threats than Obama's red line, with nothing he can point to as a win even on the level of Kerry's last minute deal. He pretty much has to do something, the real question is who will be joining in and how severe the attacks will be. If I had to bet, I'd say there's probably some kind of back channel communication with Russia to try to figure out where their red line is, vs what would just make them complain loudly but ultimately let go. That doesn't mean Trump will stick to that script, but having at least some idea of what Russia's thinking is a good idea I can't imagine has escaped everyone. For what it's worth, Dan Drezner thinks Trump might actually be impulsive enough, and his base happy enough to believe whatever he tells them, that there's no telling if he'll follow through or not: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2018/04/12/the-stranger-things-about-polarization-and-foreign-policy Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Apr 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 12:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LSpyropoulou/status/984379932393566208
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
So poo poo will/will not go down this afternoon then?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 14:44
|
|
|
Greek Ministry of Defence says there was no dogfight. By the time pair of Greek Mirage jets arrived to engage, the Turkish jets had vanished from Greek airspace. From this article http://www.airlive.net/breaking-greek-fighter-jet-crashed-near-skyros-island-in-greece-soon-after-dog-fight-with-turkish-aircraft/
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 14:45
|
|
|
It's pretty ridiculous that the west is not unequivocally denying all possibility of tangling with Russia militarily. It's all very well denouncing American interventionism in civil wars and the like from the safety of war free democracies but Russia could realistically threaten us wherever in the world we may be. It's silly to even think about and even more ridiculous when it seems to be something not completely off the table to our leaders.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 14:46
|
|
|
Flayer posted:It's pretty ridiculous that the west is not unequivocally denying all possibility of tangling with Russia militarily. It's all very well denouncing American interventionism in civil wars and the like from the safety of war free democracies but Russia could realistically threaten us wherever in the world we may be. It's silly to even think about and even more ridiculous when it seems to be something not completely off the table to our leaders. After nearly two decades of permanent war, people cosplaying at being serious leaders are just picking up verbal cues from other people who've used tough guy language in the past without really thinking about what they're saying or who they're saying it about. Plus Trump's verbal tic that makes him say everything is the hugest or biggest obviously doesn't help, like when he says relations with Russia are worse than they've ever been, including the Cold War, which is just insanely false.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 14:50
|
|
|
Is it more dangerous to have the us say "were definitely not going to bomb Russians" then bomb targets in Syria that may or may not have Russians or to say "were going to do what we want deal" and then bomb targets in Syria that may or may not have Russians?
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 14:55
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Is it more dangerous to have the us say "were definitely not going to bomb Russians" then bomb targets in Syria that may or may not have Russians or to say "were going to do what we want deal" and then bomb targets in Syria that may or may not have Russians? We could just not bomb targets in Syria that might have Russians.  That's kind of the whole point of the deconfliction channel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 15:00
|
|
|
The US already killed a shitload of Russians in Syria. The Russians just pretended it didn't happen and nothing changed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 15:03
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:The US already killed a shitload of Russians in Syria. The Russians just pretended it didn't happen and nothing changed. That's because that time the Russians were the ones on the offensive, and there was deniability since they weren't Russian military. If we just bomb an area with actual Russian military in an area that's established to be under their control, it's a completely different story. This really isn't that complicated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 15:13
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:That's because that time the Russians were the ones on the offensive, and there was deniability since they weren't Russian military. If we just bomb an area with actual Russian military in an area that's established to be under their control, it's a completely different story. This really isn't that complicated. We probably shouldn't do that then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 15:23
|
|
|
Mattis pretty clearly doesn't want to attack Syria. https://twitter.com/jseldin/status/984444186589057025 https://twitter.com/PaulSonne/status/984444281917267968
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 15:59
|
|
|
Simple. Create a fake Twitter server in the White House. Edit the HOSTS files on any and all of Trump's Internet-connected devices so that they redirect all Twitter traffic to this fake server. Have an intern tasked with monitoring and filtering whether Trump tweets are allowed to reach the real Internet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 16:07
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:That's because that time the Russians were the ones on the offensive, and there was deniability since they weren't Russian military. If we just bomb an area with actual Russian military in an area that's established to be under their control, it's a completely different story. This really isn't that complicated. The US has already killed Russians (as in Russian armed services, not just russian nationals) in airstrikes and, again, nothing happened. It's only not complicated in the sense that what options would they really have for retaliation? Any retaliation risks further retaliation and while the US really doesn't want any conflict blowing up, the US can handle several more escalations of retaliation before losing critical force-projection assets. The US could lose half of its navy and still have the biggest navy on the planet, if Russia loses a ship, much less one of its handful of fully functioning ships it loses a major fraction of it's naval capability. The writing is very clearly on the wall with all this stuff. Russia is in a very strong position because they've been really quite savvy for a long time, not because they have the military force to back up their position relative to the US or China. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Apr 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:The US has already killed Russians (as in Russian armed services, not just russian nationals) in airstrikes and, again, nothing happened. If you're just talking about east of the Euphrates, there's at least a convenient fiction that they were all mercenaries acting without authorization in an area that was agreed to be under US control, so Russia had no reason to escalate. If you're referring to something else, you should probably provide more details. Herstory Begins Now posted:The US has already killed Russians (as in Russian armed services, not just russian nationals) in airstrikes and, again, nothing happened. It's only not complicated in the sense that what options would they really have for retaliation? Any retaliation risks further retaliation and while the US really doesn't want any conflict blowing up, the US can handle several more escalations of retaliation before losing critical force-projection assets. The US could lose half of its navy and still have the biggest navy on the planet, if Russia loses a ship, much less one of its handful of fully functioning ships it loses a major fraction of it's naval capability. Everyone knows the US is stronger, but Russia is more heavily invested here, and has their back against the wall to some extent because Syria's their last significant "overseas" ally left we haven't taken away from them. Of course we could defeat them in a purely conventional conflict, but it's not remotely worth the effort or risk involved just so we can slap a dictator on the wrist and feel good about ourselves years too late to save lives. Trump doesn't want to topple Assad's regime anyway, so picking a response that doesn't make things worse seems like a really good idea. Outside of Syria, one underrated thing we probably wouldn't enjoy much if Russia decided to get back at us is if they started destroying our satellites. We have a lot more to lose in space than they do, both in terms of military and civilian applications. Yeah, that would be a big escalation well beyond the established rules of the game, but so would directly bombing their forces just because we feel like we can (which we aren't going to do, because our actual generals aren't as cavalier as armchair generals itt about war with a major power). Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Apr 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/HallieJackson/status/984457725823406080 It feels like Al-Saqr's inching towards a correct prediction, but we've still got time, folks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 17:03
|
|
|
We need to leave the very bad Iran deal because it leaves them too close to a nuclear weapon we're now admitting they weren't rushing to build in the first place? https://twitter.com/attackerman/status/984460490695987201 https://twitter.com/attackerman/status/984463347667087361 Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Apr 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 17:06
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:We need to leave the very bad Iran deal because it leaves them too close to a nuclear weapon we're now admitting they weren't rushing to build in the first place? So you have no loving reason to decertify them then.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:We need to leave the very bad Iran deal because it leaves them too close to a nuclear weapon we're now admitting they weren't rushing to build in the first place? You probably know this, but no serious observer thought Iran was racing towards a bomb. More likely they were going for breakout capability.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:You probably know this, but no serious observer thought Iran was racing towards a bomb. More likely they were going for breakout capability. Yeah, it's just weird for the people trashing the deal to admit it. He completely gave away the game with his answers, and made it clear that his problem with the deal is more about wanting to punish Iran for the sake of punishing Iran (which they may deserve for other reasons, but should be handled through other means) than anything having to do with what the deal is actually about.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 11:31 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/DrDenaGrayson/status/984481277930819586?s=19
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2018 18:28
|
|
