Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Kavros posted:

This war has already been fascinatingly ground-based with relatively few air assets, and I'm assuming this will keep the trend strong for at least one side,

Hopefully though someone is working on getting Ukraine some modern(ish) airframes. Considering that some HARMs strapped to ancient Migs seem to be reasonably effective at loving up russia's air defenses, this would be an absolute gamechanger. NATO's whole strategy for fighting russia (or anyone else for that matter) is heavily dependent on the air forces.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Tuna-Fish posted:

The reason for that is that Ukraine has good heavy AA, which greatly limits the freedom of action of the VKS. The problem with this is that they don't have infinite missiles for their S-300 systems, and there is no substantial supply of them outside Russia. This means that eventually they will have to move to western AA systems.

It's the same with artillery. It's not that 155mm guns are that much better than the ones Ukraine already has (they are better, but a well-maintained soviet surplus 152mm gun with good ammo is close enough), but that there is simply not enough ammo supplies or production for Soviet heavy calibers outside Russia and China, so eventually the entire Ukrainian army needs to switch over to NATO calibers. Although on that front Russia is apparently helping supply Ukraine by leaving behind so much ammo when they rout.
I've no idea how many missiles Ukraine has for the S-300, russia supposedly has so many they can waste them in ground attack roles. But definitely not infinite and non-replenishable.

Some systems like NASMS and Iris-T are on the way, but no indication about the Patriot which would be an actual replacement in terms of range and capability.


Vincent Van Goatse posted:

"Cool story" how? That's a phrase that can have five or six contradictory meanings.
I visualized the reporters with a :jerkbag: motion but in any case, somehow Musky picked up and is parroting their propaganda line about "Kruschev's mistake" and other nonsense 1:1.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

beer_war posted:

I'm all for dunking on the FSB at every available opportunity, but in this case it doesn't seem warranted. The x-ray was of a different truck and trailer as it entered Russia from Georgia. Which the FSB knew and stated as such. That doesn't make the images very useful, but it's not a fuckup either.

https://twitter.com/OAlexanderDK/status/1580108135963820032

So what was the point? Look how useless our cool x-ray machines are?

This is btw how they're explaining the route:

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Dirt5o8 posted:

I wanted to quote you for a crab battle but also:

I just got done with 6 months of schoolin' in Russian offense and defense doctrine (the opponent being Russia was just to have an opponent to teach U.S. engineer doctrine). I'm pretty well schooled in it even if Russia doesn't seem to be using much of their own doctrine.

If they follow their own doctrine here, they should also be digging in vehicle fighting positions about 2-3 KM back to allow their armor to fire past that trench. 4-9 KM behind that should be different types of tube artillery they can use to fire HE or scatter mines as needed. 10-80 KM behind that should be rocket batteries and units held to reinforce or conduct counter attacks.

I hope we get more drone footage or imagery to see how extensive this will become.
Hopefully it doesn't become more extensive! Otherwise it would be a tremendous pain in the rear end to evict them out of there without air superiority.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
https://twitter.com/WTF_Over1/status/1580239237907030033

What bearing doing? I can't confirm 100% myself that it's from the bridge but if legit its probably quite a bit more hosed that suspected :thumbsup:


saratoga posted:

I'm more concerned what happens when Russia is pushed back to the 2014 lines. After 8 years of preparation those are likely to be a lot more defensible than an anti-tank ditch and some trenches manned by remnants of destroyed BTGs and raw conscripts.
Worrying about 2014 lines would be an improvement over worrying about 2022 lines I think , so we'll figure that out when we get there.

Marshal Prolapse posted:

Yeah, I wouldn't be shocked if they eventually abandon some naval assets, because no one ever expected those to be in danger of attacks and/or capture. I would love to have the Ukrainian navy rebuilt with Russian donations or traded to the US for some quality product.

They'll be able to get their navy out unless the whole bridge collapses instantly...

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Kavros posted:

Sometimes I really wonder what he thought he was going to be able to do, but with this nordstream stuff it just seems bafflingly irrational throughout. What was the play?

We still don't really know for sure that they did it, though I think so. The play was probably exactly this. "Wow that's terrible someone would do such a thing. Isn't energy infrastructure fragile? Anyway we're happy to continue selling you gas again through the only intact pipeline in order to fund our war crimes"

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Ynglaur posted:

I'm actually not convinced US doctrinal changes will be glacial. It changed remarkably quickly in both the 1930s and 1970s, and was not necessarily driven solely off of its own experience. Parts have remained consistent (we still don't bother with any double-envelopment complexity), but the state of US doctrine has not been static.

I do agree that the operational and even tactical depth of the fight is vastly different now than even 20 years ago. A British general was on one of the podcasts (MWI, I think) discussing this fact. Units 50km from the line of contact need to exercise significant noise, light, and EM discipline if they want to survive; if it's not mobile, it dies; and even logistics assets need at least some armored protection.
Agreed about the noise discipline etc but I think the US would be fighting a significantly different way. The level of capability is just absolutely elsewhere especially in terms of long range fires and aviation. Like the Kerch bridge wouldn't be a thing, neither any of the black sea fleet, or any supply depot within like 1000km range.

Nenonen posted:

Why is it okay to bomb the Antonovsky bridge and the crews that repair it, but not the Kerch bridge? Both are or were used by civilians.

One of them makes Putin very sad!

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Vincent Van Goatse posted:

Just wait until the workers go on break and then blow the bridge up.

:hmmyes:

The bridge is clearly how they're funneling supplies to the south, so it totally a legit target. It also didn't exist until 2018 and the world didn't end.

IIRC basically the requirement is that you do everything possible to minimize civilian casualties when they aren't completely avoidable. So yeah when the workers are on a break, or in the middle of the night if possible.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Plastic_Gargoyle posted:

The others I get, but what bug has Nicaragua got up its rear end lately to think siding with the crazy people is a good idea?

Amerikkka bad, I imagine. They have a good reason I imagine but it's still pretty stupid to vote for in favor of wars of conquest.

Also India playing the "neutrality" card again in the worst way possible.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Ynglaur posted:

If India and China want to be seen as global leaders, they need to start having opinions on questions such as "should one country genocide another country".

It's difficult when you want the answer to be "Yes" but without saying it out loud yourself

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Charliegrs posted:

So do countries like India, Iran, and Belarus just hate Ukraine? Because I don't get why they are literally helping Russia genocide their country. Do they actually hate Ukraine or is it like an ideological thing where might makes right to these countries? Or is it just simple dollars and sense? (India needs oil, Iran likes to sell weapons etc).
They just like russia and want their protection of when they do horrible poo poo. Well except Belarus, Luka probably just has no choice now or get annexed/couped.

Although I've tried talking to some Indians (on the web obviously) and they do seem to have a handy list of every time they think Ukraine wronged them somehow. Like, I kid you not, the 1998 UN vote to condemn nuclear testing

quote:

Prior to its adoption, separate votes were taken on preambular paragraph 2 and operative paragraph 1. The second preambular paragraph, by which the Assembly bore in mind recent nuclear tests that challenged the international non-proliferation regime, was adopted by a recorded vote of 159 in favour to 1 against (India), with 3 abstentions (Bhutan, Israel, Pakistan) (Annex XXI).
https://press.un.org/en/1998/19981204.ga9526.html


E: A few years ago in South Africa I met one of their MPs at the airport. I still have her business card somewhere, I'll try to reach out and see what's up. I'm sure she has no control over foreign policy but it could be interesting to hear the actual thinking and maybe find an angle to move the opinion a bit.

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Oct 13, 2022

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

The Lone Badger posted:

I mean I'm assuming it was Ukraine because when it comes to means-motive-opportunity they pretty much top the list for all three.
The thing is that Georgia, Armenia and Chechnya are right there and at least some factions there have their own issue with the current russian regime.

Ukraine could've done it of coursed and I do hope they blow it up again, but there are many plausible explanations that don't really require a massive :tinfoil:

PederP posted:

For those who do have the time and inclination to watch YouTube videos, Danish military analyst Anders Puck Nielsen made a new one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTSWKrGEAAA. He's a navy guy and I thought his early war analysis was way too "Russia has an actual army waiting in the wings", so I found his non-navy stuff a little meh (he was and is incredible when it comes to navy stuff), but I found over the last few months he has really hit a stride, and gained a much more nuanced and less 'pre-war biased' view of things. I hope he does more navy-focused stuff soon, though, as that is where is true skill lies.
Haven't watched this latest one yet. But I he was saying Ukraine can win it pretty early on, in recent videos he just wasn't completely dismissive that mobilization would have an impact.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

bird food bathtub posted:

I would imagine there's also a lot of performative security theater going on at the bridge right now as well. If the official line is that the x-ray'd truck was missed and made a boomie the bureaucratic response will be the Russian equivalent of every one spending four hours in line at TSA taking off their shoes and belts.

So logistics are probably screwed even without another attack.

Yes and that boat isn't going to do poo poo either


alex314 posted:

Anyone remember the craziest weapon buyer Poland? Turns out US might not be keen on selling 500 HIMARS systems, since it's pretty bonkers...
So Polish Gov went on another buying spree in South Korea and got 300 pieces of K239 Chunmoo, which to my untrained eye look comparible.
The kicker: there's no info about that HIMARS order being cancelled... I'm willing to bet those PiS idiots will buy at most 2 loads of cheapest missiles per launcher..
Lol that's nuts.
The K239 is a wheeled truck but has two pods of 6 missiles, like the M270. But, as far as I can tell from the wiki article, has incompatible missiles. That's... not a great idea!

I mean for Poland but also for SK to have made that in the first place, as having access to a gazillion missiles from your allies seem like would've been helpful if poo poo hits the fan.


quote:

ER GMLRS rockets with extended range of up to 150 km (93 mi).[59] Rockets use a slightly increased rocket motor size, a newly designed hull, and tail-driven guidance, while still containing six per pod. It will come in unitary and AW variants.[60] The first successful test flight of a ER GMLRS occurred in March 2021.[61] In early 2021, Lockheed Martin anticipated putting the ER into its production line in the fiscal year 2023 contract award and was planning to produce the new rockets at its Camden facility.[22] In 2022 Finland became the first foreign customer to order ER GMLRS.[62]

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Enjoy posted:

I was referring to the MANPADS
I thought you were talking about the attack dolphins

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
The masses of conscripts are probably also starting to fill in holes and slowing things down now somewhat

Tuna-Fish posted:

The Chunmoo is compatible with the 227mm system that the HIMARS uses. It just can also fire a bunch of different domestic Korean rockets. Those are different because they were designed before the M270 was.
Oh good, thanks.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
Southern Ukraine isn't super cold. I mean it's not like California with fake winters but we aren't talking about your piss freezing before it reaches the ground.




The bridge has to go. As we've seen, it can be blown up during the night with minimal civilian casualties.
vvvv

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Oct 13, 2022

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Alchenar posted:

If your long term national strategy for winning wars is to maintain a technology and innovation advantage over your opponents then this would be a terrible thing to do, particularly if you aren't actually conducting the war in question.

e: nationalising also doesn't solve the problem of needing to pay to keep the thing running
Why is that? It would be bought out at market rate, not confiscated like it's the USSR or something. Which I'm sure something Musk would actually want because there's no way that whole thing can be made profitable.

And it does solve the problem of Musk loving around with it.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
I said that with the understanding that SAM sites will have to be destroyed :v:

Russia launches cruise missiles from ships, submarines in the Black Sea and airplanes. All of those are fine to blow up.

As for why Starlink might need to be nationalized:

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Koos Group posted:

That is an interesting hypothetical. What sort of negotiations could have feasibly led to Ukraine peaceably allowing self-determination for its territories? It's difficult for me to imagine given recent history, but I'm not an expert on the region.
Probably the same sort of negotiations that would allow self determination for Chechnya.


E: some good news about the bridge, they want it repaired by July

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-63255611

Assuming nothing else unfortunate happens until then of course

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Oct 14, 2022

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
Are all of these actual C-SPAM mods or something, suddenly "just asking questions"?

Russia invaded and staged an illegal, fraudulent referendum. So any sort of discussion about self determination is completely moot.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Herstory Begins Now posted:

impressive that he manages a pro-ukraine bias while using almost entirely russian information/postings
Reality has a pro-ukraine bias

Paladinus posted:

Two conscripts opened fire on other soldiers at a shooting range of a military base near Belgorod. At least 13 dead, including the shooters. MoD say the shooters where from a CIS country, while right-wing telegram channels go further and specify the two were from Tajikistan.

https://ria.ru/20221015/terakt-1824340408.html

For context, at the start of Putin's partial mobilisation there were conflicting reports about immigrants being pressured into signing military contracts right in immigration centres. Holders of dual Tajik-Russian citizenships were also reportedly disproportionally targeted by military recruitment offices. Incidentally, yesterday president Rakhmon criticised Putin for still treating Tajikistan as a Soviet republic and mentioned that at least 600k Tajik citizens work in Russia.
Some random ru tweets were suggesting that this was done by Ukrainians that snuck in, but this seems way more likely if they've finally had enough

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Chalks posted:

Besides the obvious, after the pipeline strikes people have wondered about the potential for more significant Russian attacks against western infrastructure or other covert actions against European nations, for example.

Prior to their recent indiscriminate attacks against civilian infrastructure Ukraine had received minimal anti-air from the west, now they'll be getting a lot more. It's not clear if Russia has any competent strategists left, but if you were one and you looked at the effect of this recent strike the obvious conclusion would be that it was a really bad move. "Don't do poo poo like that again" might be your advice. You want every decision being viewed through that lens - what might the west do in response to this? Having many cards left to play is a good thing.

But if Ukraine had received proper AA months ago, like they should've, hundreds of civilians and billions worth of infrastructure would've been intact. So what exactly have we achieved with this strategy?

Deteriorata posted:

The main issue with ATACMs, as I understand it, is that they're out of production and its successor isn't going to be available until 2024.

The US is keeping what remains for its own needs and just doesn't have a lot to supply to Ukraine.
I'm pretty sure the US would do just fine with zero ATACMs in stock. Let alone, say, 70%.

mobby_6kl fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Oct 16, 2022

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Warbadger posted:

What specialized long range missiles are for targeting "Crimea" or the Kerch bridge? Anything with long enough legs to do that can also take the fight to Russia. HIMARS and HARM are examples of things that can already "take the fight to Russia" a pretty fair distance across the long border Ukraine shares with it.

In fact it looks like Ukraine might've HARMed something in russia today:


https://twitter.com/herooftheday10/status/1581566558437969922?s=20&t=nrY1jRUz8Z4lNw9cWS5tRw

https://twitter.com/MichaelYartys/status/1581574673975779328

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Dirt5o8 posted:

It's my understanding that European NATO countries have some pretty fantastic ADA but in very limited quantity. The U.S. has a lot of poo poo-tier ADA that was "good enough" for counter insurgency work but are in the middle of a big modernization program and won't have anything good available for ~5-10 years.

So, really, no I don't think there's any magic bullet to the air defense problem other than Russia is running out of the good stuff

The Patriot would be definitely good enough to shoot down russian's ancient fleet of flying tractors. For everything else like drones and poo poo, the Gepards, Iris-T, and NASMS also exist. It's not that NATO doesn't have it, they're just now finally getting to deliver this stuff for whatever reason.

Not to mention the thousands of F-16s that would be moved to the farm in the desert soon anyway.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
Some indication that Hungary is gonna ratify Sweden and Finland. Dunno how reliable of a source someone from the Hungarian "Party of European Socialists" is, considering it's Orban's party that has all the power. Hopefully true though. This would leave only Turkey.

quote:

Hungary, one of the two NATO member states that have not yet approved the bloc’s expansion, will ratify the protocol on the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO on October 24, Eero Heinaluoma, a member of the European Parliament and former chairman of the Finnish Social Democratic Party, said on Sunday.

The lawmaker said he had received confirmation on this matter from his Hungarian colleagues from the Party of European Socialists (PES) during their two-day meeting in Berlin.

“Hungarian lawmakers said that there was firm support for Finnish and Swedish NATO membership and that the parliament would ratify the accessions at its session on October 24,” Heinaluoma told the Ilta-Sanomat newspaper, but declined to reveal the names of these lawmakers.
Socialist lawmakers in the Hungarian parliament proposed to hold a vote on Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO on October 4, but the motion was voted down by the ruling Fidesz party led by Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Hungarian media reported. This past summer, Orban said that the treaties on NATO enlargement would be considered in the fall.
https://www.kbc.co.ke/hungary-to-ratify-nato-membership-of-sweden-finland-on-october-24-eu-lawmaker/

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Did they actually manage to shoot it down? I've watched it a couple of times but with the potato quality it's hard to say if it just crashes somewhere or if it was controlled descent.

Anyway, speaking of these loving drones,

quote:

DUBAI, Oct 17 (Reuters) - Iran said on Monday that it had not provided Russia with drones to use in Ukraine.

"The published news about Iran providing Russia with drones has political ambitions and it's circulated by western sources. We have not provided weaponry to any side of the countries at war," said Iran's Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Nasser Kanaani during a weekly press conference.
Are they counting on it being "technically correct" because it's a SMO and not a war? What a bunch of a assholes.
https://www.reuters.com/world/iran-says-it-has-not-provided-russia-with-drones-use-ukraine-2022-10-17/

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
Ok check this out.

POV drones with machine guns on them.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
Rheinmetall has a cool Skynex 35mm AA gun too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pb5_F4_Eod8&t=80s

Really there are a lot of things that could shoot down these drones, the problem is, as was mentioned, that it's impossible to cover all possible civilian targets.

The most cost-effective would be IMO to a) target the launch location/supplies, and b) identify them in time and have a TDF guy with a Stinger blow them the gently caress up.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

PederP posted:

Hit is not knocked out. Lots of media have been using an exaggerated and incorrect headline.

Yes and that's good but it doesn't really diminish the war criming


cinci zoo sniper posted:

Our national media are citing Expressen as reporting that at least 50 metres of pipeline have been destroyed.

https://twitter.com/mike_eckel/status/1582302162012753921

Whoa. Rally want to read the official report, this is nuts. I thought it'd be a relatively small breach, but I guess it makes sense if the explosion could be detected as a seismic event

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Still, I doubt sanctions against civilian aviation have anything to do with it. Probably just the regular lovely maintenance and more flight hours than normal.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Hannibal Rex posted:

https://twitter.com/yaffaesque/status/1582016373588254721?t=vfCrzK6YiM2GUU7FTPHVzA&s=19

An account on how dysfunctional the Russian foreign office is, by the diplomat who resigned in protest.

quote:

One official, a respected expert on ballistic missiles, told me that Russia needed to “send a nuclear warhead to a suburb of Washington.” He added, “Americans will poo poo their pants and rush to beg us for peace.” He appeared to be partially joking. But Russians tend to think that Americans are too pampered to risk their lives for anything, so when I pointed out that a nuclear attack would invite catastrophic retaliation, he scoffed: “No it wouldn’t.”
:stonklol:

Well. Hopefully the recent statements have made it clear that MAD is still a thing.


Pleasant Friend posted:

I thought guns on drones wouldn't work because the recoil of shooting would knock the drone out of the sky?
I'm guessing it's just a joke because there's no way that quadcopter could catch even a slow drone like Shahed

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Willo567 posted:

They don't mean it. They're just trying to act tough like they always do

The whole article paints a picture of everyone huffing their own propaganda about how russia stronk and everyone else is a bunch of pussies. Clearly some are aware that this is bullshit, like the author, but it seem that they're all sending "yes the decadent westerners are all trembling now" to their superiors, all the way to the top.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Deltasquid posted:

It never fails to amaze me that apparently the Russian military has to rely on looting/foraging so much of the local population. Do they also use billeting to provide for lodging?

If only Ukraine had the 3rd amendment!

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Deteriorata posted:

No, it's been reported numerous times that they're being evacuated to Crimea.

That's not going to be far enough

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

Enjoy posted:

Can you translate

You can translate using google.

But tl;dr:

First tweet: "Take a photo, as if I'm at the front"

Second tweet: the rumors of a firefight between FSB and military goons this summer seems to be confirmed, a son of a high-ranking FSB guy wanted to be a governor of an occupied territory (that was never taken) but instead got into a drunken firefight with other fascists and was kicked out

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy
^^^
:argh:

"Released" could be fired as well. If a missile just fell off, would anyone even notice it unless the plane like right in front of them?

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

I hope they pass this because I really don't trust the republicans not to gently caress everything up, even if it does look like there are enough of them not on russian payroll now.

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

OAquinas posted:

Considering we've only just confirmed that Iranian soldiers are on the ground helping to invade Ukraine, that would be a super fast discovery. Plus I don't think any launch sites for the terror weapons are in HIMARS range, but russia being russia that could yet be true.
I remember reading about Iranians a few days ago already, so I'd assume the big-brained intel people knew about it before that. Although yeah, they were supposedly in Crimea which is out of HIMARS range, unless there's something we don't know :tinfoil:

BoldFace posted:

Honestly, this has been the best bang for the buck US has put on defense since WW2. At least part of these packages are used to directly weaken their enemies, unlike all that expensive posturing during the Cold War and the War on Terror. It's a rare treat to still be able to claim moral high ground in such a clear proxy war. If the general economic situation was better in US, this would be even more well-received.
I'm obviously very biased but even from the US perspective this is kind of a no-brainer. It's like 5% of annual military spending and would cement American and Western position in the world.

Some dipshit like McCarthy going... nah and torpedoing everything would be an incredible self-own for the world order we've been trying to create in opposition to fuckers like Putin and Xi.

Rigel posted:

Even if there are enough you'd still want to pass it now to not have a financial hostage situation where the GOP demands some lovely domestic spending cuts as an offset in exchange for agreeing to Ukraine aid. Thats probably what the actual gameplan would be in the house if the GOP won.

Yes. The intention here would be to make the next congress irrelevant wrt Ukraine.

Oh absolutely, wouldn't want the whole thing being held up by some chud, this is no joke life or death poo poo

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

OAquinas posted:

That's inaccurate. There's tons of physical evidence, most damningly that it exploded from the inside out.

Everyone made their conclusion way before that was revealed though :)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

mobby_6kl
Aug 9, 2009

by Fluffdaddy

A big flaming stink posted:

Their presence has been all but assured by the US's repeated hostility and attacks on their country.

Of course they're allying with our enemies! We unilaterally scuttled a nuclear deal with them and then sanctioned them for doing so! Not to mention assassinated a war hero, remember?

Poor Iran! Has no choice but support genocide, why Amerikka made them do it? :qq:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5