Ukraine: The Aristoblyats

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Ukraine: The Aristoblyats

Kazinsal: Dec 13, 2011

A shitload of Russia's land-based nuclear weapons are mobile. In theory they could be anywhere.

In practice I'm sure that :nsa:

knows exactly where every nuke-equipped TEL in Russia is at any given point in time.

# ? Oct 13, 2022 23:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 6, 2024 08:39

Comrade Blyatlov: Aug 4, 2007; should have picked four fingers

Soul Dentist posted:

Tagging a tailed boat (or other asset) seems a good guess. I'm not an expert in any way though

I would have assumed intel would know the sites where nuclear material is stored, and is already watching all the missile launches. Again not an expert

I think it's a pretty fair assumption that there are a few US attack subs silently sitting in torpedo range of the Black Sea Fleet too.

# ? Oct 13, 2022 23:58

GD_American: Jul 21, 2004; LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AS IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT!

Comrade Blyatlov posted:

I think it's a pretty fair assumption that there are a few US attack subs silently sitting in torpedo range of the Black Sea Fleet too.

Not that I'm doubting our capabilities, but sneaking them past the Turks into the Black Sea is certainly....a task

# ? Oct 14, 2022 02:36

Carth Dookie: Jan 28, 2013

Marshal Prolapse posted:

A lot to be a fly on the wall at the Pentagon as they plan contigency strike plans and packages. I wonder how long it would take from nuke to first NATO attack?

Sunk Russian ships/subs within 24 hours. Russian air force defeated and no fly zone semi-active/active within 3 days (allowing for deployment ring rust) and pretty much anything still in Ukraine with a Z on it eating an F-16 dopped GBU/HARM/JDAM before the week is out.

GD_American posted:

Not that I'm doubting our capabilities, but sneaking them past the Turks into the Black Sea is certainly....a task

if they aren't already there, I imagine Erdogan would stop loving around pretty quick and wave them through if Russia really did drop a tac nuke. He's an evil greedy fucker, but he knows what the winning side is.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 02:57

GD_American: Jul 21, 2004; LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AS IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT!

I can't imagine Turkey keeping a US sub transit quiet. Even if they wanted to or were supposed to. They just wouldn't be capable of it.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 03:02

Marshal Prolapse: Jun 23, 2012; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Could Turkey even detect our current stuff if we didn�t tell them? We could also claim it�s from a P-8 (which would be deployed too) and then everyone can enjoy plausible deniability.

Not that I want the act needed to cause this. Wish we could just do it to Russia already (and yes yes I know why, but pink misting those war criminals and making their military worse then the DPRK would be nice).

# ? Oct 14, 2022 03:11

A.o.D.: Jan 15, 2006

Marshal Prolapse posted:

Could Turkey even detect our current stuff if we didn�t tell them? We could also claim it�s from a P-8 (which would be deployed too) and then everyone can enjoy plausible deniability.

Not that I want the act needed to cause this. Wish we could just do it to Russia already (and yes yes I know why, but pink misting those war criminals and making their military worse then the DPRK would be nice).

The Dardanelles are max 55m deep and the Bosporus is max 110m deep. You can't sneak a serious sub through there.

edit: to be clear, the answer for the Russian presence in the Black Sea isn't NATO subs, but anti ship missiles that target anything on the surface, and a smothering anti sub helicopter presence that targets anything below it that isn't permanently settled to the bottom.

A.o.D. fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Oct 14, 2022

# ? Oct 14, 2022 03:14

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Even if you could sneak subs around, locking such a rare and important asset inside the Black Sea with a frankly pretty unimportant Russian fleet seems unwise.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 03:35

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

why would Turkey, a member of NATO, be keeping NATO submarines out of the black sea

the straits have been locked to participants in the ongoing ukrainian conflict. NATO countries aren't that.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 04:17

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Also if Turkey started 'leaking' info about US sub movements through their territory there'd be diplomatic hell to pay.

They are not doing that

# ? Oct 14, 2022 04:20

The X-man cometh: Nov 1, 2009

If there's a full NATO response, the Turks are NATO members and probably have their own plan to destroy the Black Sea fleet.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 04:24

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

why would Turkey, a member of NATO, be keeping NATO submarines out of the black sea

Submarines are to make the passage surfaced. So even when passage is open, it's public.

quote:

the straits have been locked to participants in the ongoing ukrainian conflict. NATO countries aren't that.

I haven't checked to see if it is still true, but initially Turkey canceled passage for all warships that aren't returning to home port in the Black Sea. So if you are a warship and don't live and operate there, you can't come or go.

The very simple answer: I dunno, could be wrong, but it would be a waste of time to put a sub in the Black Sea when it could be doing more important and useful things.

I might be misremembering, but I don't think non-Black Sea subs are allowed into the Black Sea, period? even in peacetime?

# ? Oct 14, 2022 04:35

GD_American: Jul 21, 2004; LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AS IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT!

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

why would Turkey, a member of NATO, be keeping NATO submarines out of the black sea

the straits have been locked to participants in the ongoing ukrainian conflict. NATO countries aren't that.

The Montreux Convention, which apparently has some pretty silly restrictions on countries not bordering the Black Sea, and not just in type but tonnage and maximum time allowed.

https://www.mfa.gov.tr/implementation-of-the-montreux-convention.en.mfa

# ? Oct 14, 2022 04:51

Baconroll: Feb 6, 2009

I wonder how many tactical nukes the Russians would have to fire to get one that would actually go off ? Considering the lack of testing, Russian corruption and maintenance standards.

Even American warheads have historically had issues with corrosion, components aging/breaking down, and even a safety mechanism that would have stopped most of one type from going bang when we wanted them to.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 05:12

Joke Miriam: Nov 17, 2019

What would happen if they did launch a tactical nuke but it was a dud and just landed in a field or in the middle of a Kyiv street? Would the attempt be enough to trigger the promised retaliation?

# ? Oct 14, 2022 06:06

Elviscat: Jan 1, 2008; Well don't you know I'm caught in a trap?

Yeah, we're not sneaking SSNs into the black sea. If we need to deal with the Black Sea Fleet MPRAs and attack aircraft are what we'll use.

The SSNs are for sinking the rest of the Russian fleet if they do some stupid rear end nuclear poo poo.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 06:10

BIG HEADLINE: Jun 13, 2006; "Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

Elviscat posted:

Yeah, we're not sneaking SSNs into the black sea. If we need to deal with the Black Sea Fleet MPRAs and attack aircraft are what we'll use.

The SSNs are for sinking the rest of the Russian fleet if they do some stupid rear end nuclear poo poo.

We could poo poo a ton of CAPTOR mines into the Black Sea. It's not like they'd sink all the submarines the Ukrainians don't have.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 06:51

Basticle: Sep 12, 2011

Uh excuse me Ive read the technical document on secretly transiting the Bosporus while submerged

the really insane Clancy-on-coke plotline is the Iraqi sleeper agent joining the Israeli navy and then getting trained by the US to captain submarines

# ? Oct 14, 2022 08:24

Comrade Blyatlov: Aug 4, 2007; should have picked four fingers

Wasn't that the Suez?

# ? Oct 14, 2022 08:46

Herman Merman: Jul 6, 2008

orange juche posted:

Pro flying by the Ukrainian drone operator, knew to not attack from below but drop from above to break the other drones props.

Why would you post this? Pro flying by the operator, knowing the single most basic fact about drones.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 11:05

Alan Smithee: Jan 4, 2005; A man becomes preeminent, he's expected to have enthusiasms.

Enthusiasms, enthusiasms...

tbf the russian operator probably thought he could lawn mower it

# ? Oct 14, 2022 11:07

my kinda ape: Sep 15, 2008; Everything's gonna be A-OK; Oven Wrangler

The Russian drone was facing the other direction so he never saw it coming. At best he suddenly got an obstacle warning from the rear collision sensors, which would have been pretty confusing for someone flying high up in an open area :v:

# ? Oct 14, 2022 14:11

Marshal Prolapse: Jun 23, 2012; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Hey Iran, and all the others who want to help Russia out, get hosed.

Sincerely,
USA.

https://twitter.com/firstsquawk/status/1580931655413698560?s=46&t=54eGLe_TKRto01YMgSYCGw

# ? Oct 14, 2022 15:43

GD_American: Jul 21, 2004; LISTEN TO WHAT I HAVE TO SAY AS IT'S INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT!

�Oh no, sanctions�, says the one Iranian who has never read a newspaper or book about his nation�a history

# ? Oct 14, 2022 16:04

Grip it and rip it: Apr 28, 2020

Herman Merman posted:

Why would you post this? Pro flying by the operator, knowing the single most basic fact about drones.

Not everyone knows about drone operation?

# ? Oct 14, 2022 18:03

Hyrax Attack!: Jan 13, 2009; We demand to be taken seriously

GD_American posted:

�Oh no, sanctions�, says the one Iranian who has never read a newspaper or book about his nation�a history

Wonder how Israel is reacting to Iran protests. Gotta imagine they�d want to boost chances of their nuclear aspirant neighbor switching from a fundamentalist government.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 19:17

Marshal Prolapse: Jun 23, 2012; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Hyrax Attack! posted:

Wonder how Israel is reacting to Iran protests. Gotta imagine they�d want to boost chances of their nuclear aspirant neighbor switching from a fundamentalist government.

Publicly they have been, but I also wonder if there is some better the enemy you know thinking. Still this is also clearly a revolution for liberal democratic values, so that may help tip the scale.

# ? Oct 14, 2022 19:20

BIG HEADLINE: Jun 13, 2006; "Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

Marshal Prolapse posted:

Publicly they have been, but I also wonder if there is some better the enemy you know thinking. Still this is also clearly a revolution for liberal democratic values, so that may help tip the scale.

I'd argue that it's in their best interests to passively support the protesters simply because a regime change is very likely going to stop or hobble their nuclear program if/when the checks stop coming.

BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Oct 15, 2022

# ? Oct 15, 2022 00:47

orange juche: Mar 14, 2012

Herman Merman posted:

Why would you post this? Pro flying by the operator, knowing the single most basic fact about drones.

You'd be surprised how many dumb drone pilots exist

# ? Oct 15, 2022 01:30

Marshal Prolapse: Jun 23, 2012; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

BIG HEADLINE posted:

I'd argue that it's in their best interests to passively support the protesters simply because a regime change is very likely going to stop or hobble their nuclear program if/when the checks stop coming.

I think that makes sense.

Russia on the other hand continues to suck�.long and hard.

https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1581072741683585024?s=46&t=sw_T46CQ9tyTQvPx_vI5eg

# ? Oct 15, 2022 01:40

highme: May 25, 2001; I posted my food for USPOL Thanksgiving!

orange juche posted:

You'd be surprised how many dumb drone pilots exist

I feel seen. bounced mine off the neighbor�s roof a few weeks back drunk trying to get cool moon pics

# ? Oct 15, 2022 02:02

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Intro and excerpts as I decide etc blah.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3189340/senior-military-official-holds-a-background-briefing-on-ukraine/

Highlights/Other:
Other
-There was a separate brief with the Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary, and she was asked every which way what the deal is with SpaceX and demands for payments, and all she could really say was that the DOD is talking to SpaceX regarding Starlink. About something. For some reason. And that Starlink service in Ukraine has been funded by some private people at least in part. And maybe the US government, but didn't know for sure. And that she hadn't seen all of Elon Musk's tweets. It was weird and can be read here if you like https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3189495/sabrina-singh-deputy-pentagon-press-secretary-holds-a-press-briefing/
Latest PDA: https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3189571/725-million-in-additional-security-assistance-for-ukraine/

SMO:
-Russia's use of precision-guided munitionis (PGMs) has been indiscriminate and imprecise. "Most" of the recent strikes struck civilians and/or civilian infrastructure. Some of this is the result of indiscriminate targeting. Other times Russia appears deliberately to target civilians, with the specific examples given of electricity, bridges, etc.
-Kharkiv: Lines are mostly static, and Russia is digging in. Not zero movement but "really limited in terms of movement this week."
-Bakhmut: Russia has made "very small" gains around Bakhmut. Sometimes Ukraine counterattacks and retakes land. "All of those attacks on both sides are coming with pretty high impact in terms of the employment of artillery and the losses to the sides who are making those advances."
-Zaporizhzhia: No real movement of the line. "We have seen artillery that's landed in and around the Zaporizhzhia area, but nothing that's caused us a great concern over the week. "
-Kherson: Ukraine has gained from the north toward Kherson. Not a lot of advancement but "some" on the central approach to Kherson. Russia has established new lines in Kherson defense since this started six weeks ago, but will need to make a decision on how/'where to defend along the Kherson axis. Neither side really making a move at the edge of Kherson city itself.
-Of ~80 missiles fired by Russia in the first 24 hours of retaliation over Kerch strait bridge [My note: SMO did not confirm that Ukraine attacked Kerch Strait bridge, though refers to Russia retaliation in response to bridge attack], roughly half reported intercepted. Ukraine likely firing more than one SAM in many of those defensive engagements, which is part of why Ukraine requires air defense support.
-SMO does not comment on whether or not the Ukrainian assessment of Russia's remaining stock of PGMs is accurate. Says it is telling that Russia is now relying on Iranian one-way attack UAS.
-SMO on Starlink: It is very useful to be able to communicate. Did not want to address questions on Musk and his recent comments
-The press had a lot of questions about air defense, but the SMO today wasn't terribly knowledgeable on air defense specifics and wasn't sharing what are probably still ongoing somewhat sensitive discussions of who can/will/might provide what and when

quote:

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL: Thanks, (inaudible). Hi, everybody. How are you? This is -- this is different for me, so I'll get to see you all roll your eyes when I -- when I give you the answer that you may not want, as opposed to just doing it on the phone.

So this is the 233rd day of Russia's illegal, unprovoked large-scale invasion of Ukraine, and a lot of activity this week, as you all know, overseas in Europe in terms of folks who have gathered, and a number of press engagements. So quite honestly, other than maybe some atmospherics on the ground, I'm probably not going to give you a great amount of things that will be helpful, right? I hate to say that up front, but I'll certainly talk to what I can talk to.

We do assess that the Ukrainians continue to make some advances on the battlefield, and I'm very happy to talk about what we're seeing in that regard. We also have seen, as you know, particularly since the attack at the Kerch Strait Bridge last week, we've seen the Russians continue to retaliate. The use of precision-guided munitions in a very imprecise way has continued over the course of the week. I think it's fair to say we're in the hundreds in terms of the number of missiles that the Russians have launched against Ukrainian targets, and in many -- in most, I would tell you, cases, they have been used at civilian targets either indiscriminately or certainly in a deliberate way, as it relates to infrastructure targets like electricity or bridges or otherwise. And as you've heard others other than me talk about, certainly, in violation of what the international rules of war stand for.

Around the battlefield, so just working kind of north to south, in Kharkiv, we've seen limited Ukrainian gains over the course of the week. We have seen the Russians continue to strengthen their defenses in the Kharkiv area, and so it's at a stop, is probably the wrong term. There are some very minor incremental gains, really, all the way from the northern portion of the Kharkiv area of operation down towards Lyman, but really limited in terms of movement this week.

In Bakhmut it's similar, but the other way. So we've seen -- so now moving down to -- the center portion of the eastern front there around Bakhmut, we've seen the Russians continue to work to attack the Ukrainians around Bakhmut. Those gains have also been very small for the Russians, and in times we've seen the Ukrainians counterattack with effectiveness to retake land that the Russians had previously taken. All of those attacks on both sides are coming with pretty high impact in terms of the employment of artillery and the losses to the sides who are making those advances.

Nothing really new in Zaporizhzhia in terms of advances. You know, like you all, we continue to watch Zaporizhzhia with added care, just given the nuclear power plant. We have seen artillery that's landed in and around the Zaporizhzhia area, but nothing that's caused us a great concern over the week.

And then in Kherson, probably more movement in Kherson than anywhere else on the battlespace. And so Kherson, if you describe it, has three different axes in the Kherson area of operation: the north, the central and the south. We've seen them continue to advance in the north, and so we have seen gains in the north now. Really, the line of advance for the Ukrainians just north of the city of Milove, or Milove, -- however you'd like to pronounce it, all of them probably incorrect.

And then extending, essentially, to the north and west with a number of small towns and villages that the Ukrainians have been able to clear of the Russians, and the Russians have moved back from what was their front lines as they reestablish front lines after the beginning of this six weeks ago, and are establishing defenses further south. So the Ukrainians now continue to advance on that northern axis, but at the same time, we've seen incremental gains in that central axis. So not a lot of advancement, but some. So we're talking kilometers as they move. And what you're seeing, if you'd put that on a map and there are a number of good ones out there -- but if you look at that on a map, you're getting these two coinciding axes that are starting to force the Russians to make some decisions in terms of how they want to choose to defend.

It's also placed a good portion of that battlespace under artillery range of standard artillery, not GMLRS. And so you've seen them employ fewer GMLRS recently because they just don't need to. They can range the Russian targets they want to hit with standard artillery.

And then outside Kherson city itself, not a huge number of movements outside of Kherson city in terms of the Ukrainians, but certainly, not any Russian gains in that portion of the battlespace.

In the maritime environment, so about a half-dozen ships that are underway for the Russians. That does include Kalibr-capable ships. I'll say about half of those that are Kalibr-capable. We did get indications yesterday of some Kalibr missiles being fired from the sea, and our understanding is that they were all intercepted by the Ukrainian air defenses. And then we continue to train.

I'll hold there. I'm happy to talk about what I know anything about, and so I'll pass it back to (inaudible).

...

Q: Hi, thank you very much for doing this. As you mentioned, the Russian -- the distance between the two forces is closing in right now in this part of the battle. Does that change the Ukrainians' immediate needs? Instead of having a longer range rocket or missile, are there other things you're looking at that might be more advantageous for this particular phase?

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL: Yes, ma'am. It's a good question, and certainly a lot of conversation in the past week about what the Ukrainians would need for the longer term. I think the biggest piece -- and it was discussed in great detail last week -- or this week in Europe has been air defense.

You know, if you look at -- and I'll just give you a 24 hour period. In that first period of retaliation, 80-plus missiles that were fired at the Ukrainians at all sorts of different targets -- and roughly 40 of those, so 50 percent-ish, were intercepted by Ukrainian air defenses.

What I don't know is how many missiles are fired at one inbound missile. And so you can assume it's more than one, in a lot of cases. And so just every time, you know, they employ one, it -- it certainly increases the need to replace that.

You know, that's one thing that -- you know, if you look at the Russians and their conduct of this fight, what's different in the conduct of this fight that is different, say, in some of the events that we've fought in over the past -- go back a long way -- is the ability to establish air superiority.

The Russians have never been able to do that, and that changes the character of -- of the fight on the ground. We have always, up to this point, been able to do that and that -- that changes. And I'd just tell you, having been in a bunch of them, the fact that you don't have to be concerned with something above you in large measure changes the fight. And so the Russians have never been able to get that.

The conversation this week about the criticality of air defense goes straight to that, I believe.

Q: (Inaudible) average of -- of roughly -- the 80 missiles that were fired, do you have a sense of what types of missiles the Russians are firing?

And there's been a lot of chatter about the Russian stockpiles are dwindling. Is that what you're seeing, based on what they're firing at these targets?

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL: I think -- I haven't seen this but I was told that the Ukrainians released some views as to what they believe the munitions totals are for the Russians. I don't know what those are, quite honestly, but I do know that the numbers of precision missiles that the Russians have fired since the beginning of the fight are pretty extensive, and I think the fact that they're now going to the Iranians to use drones speaks to their concern associated with precision munitions.

So every one of them fired is probably a very careful consideration for the Russians. If you look at -- and I'm not an economics expert certainly -- but if you look at the sanctions, you have to believe that the sanctions are having an impact on their defense industrial base and the ability to regenerate, in particular, those precision munitions, so.

...

Q: (Inaudible), you -- a couple of days ago mentioned the need for an integrated air defense system. At the Joint Staff level, what are you doing? What would the -- what would an integrated air defense system look like in three weeks that you don't have now, or three months? And what will the NASAMS system give the Ukrainians by way of capability that they do not now possess, once it's delivered?

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL: So on the last one, sir -- and I'm not an expert on NASAMS, other than some of the ranges in particular -- but I think it -- it adds to their ability to kind of layer their defenses. And so if you look at some of the higher end systems they have, they're able to detect targets further out, to choose the type of munitions that they want to use against various targets, depending on how far out they can -- they can pick it up.

A great example would be if I can determine that something is a helicopter vice an airplane or a cruise missile, I then can choose the type of munition to employ against it with better effectiveness. So using, as an example -- and I'll use an example from somewhere else -- if I was to take a quadcopter and shoot a quadcopter down with a Patriot missile, that's a pretty bad choice. And so in a different way, they're able to generally choose to do the same things.

Now, the integrated air and missile defense system allows them greater ability to do that. So if they can determine you know, we generally know where an opponent flies. They can -- if they can integrate all of their different layers of air defense, then it allows them to make those kinds of decisions.

I don't know if I described that very well or not.

Q: -- integrated air defense system now with the capabilities they have in their country (inaudible) what's been provided today?

SENIOR MILITARY OFFICIAL: You know, sir, just watching what they're doing, it's hard to believe that it's nascent. I mean, I think they clearly understand and have understood the criticality of air defenses for a while. If they didn't, I think we would go back to that air superiority conversation and you'd see the Russians have a much greater opportunity to interdict what they're doing with air power.

# ? Oct 15, 2022 04:00

Nuclear Tourist: Apr 7, 2005

mlmp08 posted:

-There was a separate brief with the Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary, and she was asked every which way what the deal is with SpaceX and demands for payments, and all she could really say was that the DOD is talking to SpaceX regarding Starlink. About something. For some reason. And that Starlink service in Ukraine has been funded by some private people at least in part. And maybe the US government, but didn't know for sure.

I feel like my dislike of Elon Musk has gone from mild annoyance to intense hatred in a very short amount of time.

# ? Oct 15, 2022 04:22

Arrath: Apr 14, 2011

highme posted:

I feel seen. bounced mine off the neighbor�s roof a few weeks back drunk trying to get cool moon pics

I have crashed three in my duties as licensed drone pilot at work. :v:

One wasn't my fault.

Nuclear Tourist posted:

I feel like my dislike of Elon Musk has gone from mild annoyance to intense hatred in a very short amount of time.

Y'know, for anyone who doesn't already dislike musk, somehow.

Edit: "like" should have been "dislike"

Arrath fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Oct 15, 2022

# ? Oct 15, 2022 04:39

Marshal Prolapse: Jun 23, 2012; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

Arrath posted:

I have crashed three in my duties as licensed drone pilot at work.

One wasn't my fault.

Y'know, for anyone who doesn't already like musk, somehow.

He just has the most kick in the dick personality ever.

# ? Oct 15, 2022 06:01

Wasabi the J: Jan 23, 2008; MOM WAS RIGHT

Basticle posted:

Uh excuse me Ive read the technical document on secretly transiting the Bosporus while submerged

the really insane Clancy-on-coke plotline is the Iraqi sleeper agent joining the Israeli navy and then getting trained by the US to captain submarines

Holy poo poo I read that garbage in HS hahahah

# ? Oct 15, 2022 06:54

Midjack: Dec 24, 2007

Arrath posted:

I have crashed three in my duties as licensed drone pilot at work.

One wasn't my fault.

Y'know, for anyone who doesn't already dislike musk, somehow.

Edit: "like" should have been "dislike"

World's "richest" "man" looking for a handout from the United States.

# ? Oct 15, 2022 07:12

Soul Dentist: Mar 17, 2009

Musk is Backpfeifengesicht: The Person

# ? Oct 15, 2022 09:48

Kesper North: Nov 3, 2011; EMERGENCY POWER TO PARTY

I can't wait for the https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCQGQ5qBQTA

# ? Oct 15, 2022 10:06

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 6, 2024 08:39

A.o.D.: Jan 15, 2006

An adult child.

# ? Oct 15, 2022 12:06

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Ukraine: The Aristoblyats

«‹›987 »