🇩🇪 Coincidences:
— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) June 12, 2024
1) Zelensky comes to Berlin
2) They find 450 kg cocaine pic.twitter.com/Zm1kQTlyhl
The Official Russian Invasion of Ukraine Thread
872,719 Views |
9916 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by bear2034
Because in MAGAt Moron Land, correlation is causation.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
movielover said:Big C said:Cal88 said:‼️Serbia's President Vucic gives a dark outlook -All signs point to a major war in Europe‼️
— etirol 𝕊 (@MEtirol) June 9, 2024
“We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more… pic.twitter.com/P2r1wk24xi
"We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more war. The West thinks it can win and take out Russia. I think the West is wrong. Both sides now believe it is existential for them, so I don't think they will find a solution other than war and everything, everything is at stake. In Europe, the leaders act as the big heroes, but they are not honest and do not tell their citizens that they will all pay a big price if it comes to war."
"Cal88, remembering that, for what it's worth, you and I are in general agreement vis-a-vis significant aspects of this conflict, let me ask you this: Who is it that seems to be in favor of this war spreading beyond Russia-Ukraine? Because I can't imagine anybody is.
MLover wrote: Some argue Israel is, so that we, for one, can take out Iran. Which might then include the Israeli lobby. Colonel McGregor today said the Israeli breached border was previously 'expertly' defended, hinting that the incursion was a possible setup.
The DC MICC is also probably giddy, and corporate land barrons are probably hopeful.
"For example, I am in favor of us aiding Ukraine as long as they truly want it... within certain parameters. But it is certainly not "existential" for me (or for the US, imo). If Russia really wants it that badly and their leaders are able to survive this politically, then I guess they will get Ukraine eventually. But they will pay a steep price. And if Russia were to continue westward (unlikely), that's where it starts to become existential."
MLover wrote: What price would they pay? They're now the 5th largest economy in the world, their military is far stronger than two years ago, and they're close to inking a partnership deal with Iran.
Westward where? For decades their focus has been on a neutral Ukraine, and NATO ceasing its eastward expansion.
"I feel like Biden, Trump and all of Western Europe are on the same page here. If there is a gray area, it might involve giving Ukraine our better and more offensive weapons and multiple other "small scale escalations" such as that."
MLover wrote: President Trump isn't on the same page; he wants immediate peace talks.
Oh my, the graphics made deciphering this a bit of a challenge. Moreover, in your knee-jerk attempt to disagree with all of my points, it seems as if you didn't notice that we largely agree on this, even to the extent of misreading what I wrote, or failing to take smaller phrases in their larger context.
But no matter. My main point to Cal88 was that I think leaders and experts in the West almost universally wish to see this war contained to Russia/Ukraine. (And that is where Trump and Biden are on the same page.)
President Trump wants peace; the thinking of Sullivan and NATO is muddled. The war is a disaster. They've been gearing up for it for over 10 years, and NATO / Ukraine are routed.
Okay, just for discussion's sake... when Russia invaded Ukraine, what should we have done, nothing? Or was there something else we should have done?
Cal88 said:bearister said:
Putin is running out of time to achieve breakthrough in Ukraine | Stars and Stripes
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-08/putin-is-running-out-of-time-to-achieve-breakthrough-in-ukraine
no-paywall here:
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/russia-central-asia/article/3265893/ukraine-gets-fresh-arms-west-putin-running-out-time-achieve-breakthrough
The article is mostly spin, the article states that Russia has manpower issues, when in fact the Russians have been signing up around 25k volunteers every month, accumulating reserves that are mostly sitting on the sidelines in anticipation of a large NATO deployment, which their mere presence would dissuade.Quote:
To be sure, both sides face formidable challenges, particularly in recruiting replacements for killed or wounded troops. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a new mobilisation law lowering the age of the draft, though manpower remains a problem for the military.
The Kremlin is determined not to repeat Putin's September 2022 order to draft 300,000 reservists, a mobilisation that shook public support and triggered an exodus of as many as a million Russians from the country. It's relying instead on offering generous pay and signing bonuses to attract recruits as the defence ministry aims to enlist at least 250,000 more soldiers this year.
While the policy avoids social tensions inside Russia over the war, it's unlikely to allow the army to amass enough troops for a successful offensive in Ukraine, according to Pukhov, the Moscow-based military analyst. "For a real breakthrough the Kremlin would need far more people," he said.
In reality, time is on Russia's side, they are conducting the war of attrition at their own pace.
TIme is never on the side of the aggressor unless they can lay siege to the opponent and Russia has not done that.
Big C said:
Okay, just for discussion's sake... when Russia invaded Ukraine, what should we have done, nothing? Or was there something else we should have done?
1- Enforce the Minsk Agreements, which would have altogether prevented Russia from invading.
2- Not actively scuttle the Istanbul peace treaty, which would have saved over half a million Ukrainian soldiers' lives.
Not to mention that the whole plan to use Ukraine as a battering ram against Russia, set up years (or even decades before the war), should not have been put in place by the US/NATO.
dimitrig said:Cal88 said:bearister said:
Putin is running out of time to achieve breakthrough in Ukraine | Stars and Stripes
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-08/putin-is-running-out-of-time-to-achieve-breakthrough-in-ukraine
no-paywall here:
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/russia-central-asia/article/3265893/ukraine-gets-fresh-arms-west-putin-running-out-time-achieve-breakthrough
The article is mostly spin, the article states that Russia has manpower issues, when in fact the Russians have been signing up around 25k volunteers every month, accumulating reserves that are mostly sitting on the sidelines in anticipation of a large NATO deployment, which their mere presence would dissuade.Quote:
To be sure, both sides face formidable challenges, particularly in recruiting replacements for killed or wounded troops. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a new mobilisation law lowering the age of the draft, though manpower remains a problem for the military.
The Kremlin is determined not to repeat Putin's September 2022 order to draft 300,000 reservists, a mobilisation that shook public support and triggered an exodus of as many as a million Russians from the country. It's relying instead on offering generous pay and signing bonuses to attract recruits as the defence ministry aims to enlist at least 250,000 more soldiers this year.
While the policy avoids social tensions inside Russia over the war, it's unlikely to allow the army to amass enough troops for a successful offensive in Ukraine, according to Pukhov, the Moscow-based military analyst. "For a real breakthrough the Kremlin would need far more people," he said.
In reality, time is on Russia's side, they are conducting the war of attrition at their own pace.
TIme is never on the side of the aggressor unless they can lay siege to the opponent and Russia has not done that.
If the "aggressor" is a lot bigger, better equipped and is attriting his opponent by a factof greater than 5 to 1, then time would indeed be on his side.
I kind of would have agreed with you a year or two ago, because I thought that NATO would come up with new weaponry in sufficient quantities to counter the Russians, but it turned out that NATO's response was incredibly anemic and largely impotent, while the Russians improved by leaps and bounds the last two years, introducing new weapon systems that are efficient and cheap to mass produce, like the Lancet drones or the FAB gliding bombs.
With that in mind, the Russian strategies have proven to be sound.
Cal88 said:Big C said:
Okay, just for discussion's sake... when Russia invaded Ukraine, what should we have done, nothing? Or was there something else we should have done?
1- Enforce the Minsk Agreements, which would have altogether prevented Russia from invading.
2- Not actively scuttle the Istanbul peace treaty, which would have saved over half a million Ukrainian soldiers' lives.
Not to mention that the whole plan to use Ukraine as a battering ram against Russia, set up years (or even decades before the war), should not have been put in place by the US/NATO.
Agree that US/NATO policy and action in the 30 year lead-up to the Russian invasion of Feb. '22 was problematic. Doesn't matter which political party inhabited the White House or controlled Congress.
Cal88 said:dimitrig said:Cal88 said:bearister said:
Putin is running out of time to achieve breakthrough in Ukraine | Stars and Stripes
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-08/putin-is-running-out-of-time-to-achieve-breakthrough-in-ukraine
no-paywall here:
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/russia-central-asia/article/3265893/ukraine-gets-fresh-arms-west-putin-running-out-time-achieve-breakthrough
The article is mostly spin, the article states that Russia has manpower issues, when in fact the Russians have been signing up around 25k volunteers every month, accumulating reserves that are mostly sitting on the sidelines in anticipation of a large NATO deployment, which their mere presence would dissuade.Quote:
To be sure, both sides face formidable challenges, particularly in recruiting replacements for killed or wounded troops. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signed a new mobilisation law lowering the age of the draft, though manpower remains a problem for the military.
The Kremlin is determined not to repeat Putin's September 2022 order to draft 300,000 reservists, a mobilisation that shook public support and triggered an exodus of as many as a million Russians from the country. It's relying instead on offering generous pay and signing bonuses to attract recruits as the defence ministry aims to enlist at least 250,000 more soldiers this year.
While the policy avoids social tensions inside Russia over the war, it's unlikely to allow the army to amass enough troops for a successful offensive in Ukraine, according to Pukhov, the Moscow-based military analyst. "For a real breakthrough the Kremlin would need far more people," he said.
In reality, time is on Russia's side, they are conducting the war of attrition at their own pace.
TIme is never on the side of the aggressor unless they can lay siege to the opponent and Russia has not done that.
If the "aggressor" is a lot bigger, better equipped and is attriting his opponent by a factof greater than 5 to 1, then time would indeed be on his side.
I kind of would have agreed with you a year or two ago, because I thought that NATO would come up with new weaponry in sufficient quantities to counter the Russians, but it turned out that NATO's response was incredibly anemic and largely impotent, while the Russians improved by leaps and bounds the last two years, introducing new weapon systems that are efficient and cheap to mass produce, like the Lancet drones or the FAB gliding bombs.
With that in mind, the Russian strategies have proven to be sound.
BBC: Russia's glide bombs devastating Ukraine's cities on the cheap
"The concept is not new. The Germans deployed the Fritz-X during World War Two. In the 1990s the US military developed the Joint Attack Direct Munition, or JDAM, which added steerable tail fins and GPS guidance to traditional free-fall bombs. They have been used extensively since, including in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"The destruction that the glide bombs create is extraordinary. The ordnance thought to be most commonly used for glide bombs is the FAB-1500, which weighs 1.5 tonnes....
"They turn even well-fortified Ukrainian positions into vulnerable targets."
"Ukrainian security analyst Mariia Zolkina tells the BBC that the use of glide bombs is a worrying development, and that the bombs are creating a "new era" for the military situation on the ground.
"They allow Russia to wipe out Ukrainian defensive lines without using their infantry," Ms Zolkina says. "They have a completely different effect to artillery fire or even missile strikes."
"George Barros from the US-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) says that while Ukraine's situation is difficult, another worrying development could be just around the corner.
"He notes there is evidence that a factory about 400km (250 miles) east of Moscow is setting up a production line capable of churning out glide bombs weighing more than three tonnes."
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz5drkr8l1ko
On top of this, European leaders - Germany, France - were routed in recent elections.
The talk about "wanting peace talks" is meaningless. Of course everyone wants peace! The trouble is getting something both Ukraine and Russia would agree to.Big C said:movielover said:Big C said:Cal88 said:‼️Serbia's President Vucic gives a dark outlook -All signs point to a major war in Europe‼️
— etirol 𝕊 (@MEtirol) June 9, 2024
“We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more… pic.twitter.com/P2r1wk24xi
"We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more war. The West thinks it can win and take out Russia. I think the West is wrong. Both sides now believe it is existential for them, so I don't think they will find a solution other than war and everything, everything is at stake. In Europe, the leaders act as the big heroes, but they are not honest and do not tell their citizens that they will all pay a big price if it comes to war."
"Cal88, remembering that, for what it's worth, you and I are in general agreement vis-a-vis significant aspects of this conflict, let me ask you this: Who is it that seems to be in favor of this war spreading beyond Russia-Ukraine? Because I can't imagine anybody is.
MLover wrote: Some argue Israel is, so that we, for one, can take out Iran. Which might then include the Israeli lobby. Colonel McGregor today said the Israeli breached border was previously 'expertly' defended, hinting that the incursion was a possible setup.
The DC MICC is also probably giddy, and corporate land barrons are probably hopeful.
"For example, I am in favor of us aiding Ukraine as long as they truly want it... within certain parameters. But it is certainly not "existential" for me (or for the US, imo). If Russia really wants it that badly and their leaders are able to survive this politically, then I guess they will get Ukraine eventually. But they will pay a steep price. And if Russia were to continue westward (unlikely), that's where it starts to become existential."
MLover wrote: What price would they pay? They're now the 5th largest economy in the world, their military is far stronger than two years ago, and they're close to inking a partnership deal with Iran.
Westward where? For decades their focus has been on a neutral Ukraine, and NATO ceasing its eastward expansion.
"I feel like Biden, Trump and all of Western Europe are on the same page here. If there is a gray area, it might involve giving Ukraine our better and more offensive weapons and multiple other "small scale escalations" such as that."
MLover wrote: President Trump isn't on the same page; he wants immediate peace talks.
Oh my, the graphics made deciphering this a bit of a challenge. Moreover, in your knee-jerk attempt to disagree with all of my points, it seems as if you didn't notice that we largely agree on this, even to the extent of misreading what I wrote, or failing to take smaller phrases in their larger context.
But no matter. My main point to Cal88 was that I think leaders and experts in the West almost universally wish to see this war contained to Russia/Ukraine. (And that is where Trump and Biden are on the same page.)
Same applies to Israel and Palestine/Hamas. Just wanting something doesn't mean it's going to happen.
sycasey said:The talk about "wanting peace talks" is meaningless. Of course everyone wants peace! The trouble is getting something both Ukraine and Russia would agree to.Big C said:movielover said:Big C said:Cal88 said:‼️Serbia's President Vucic gives a dark outlook -All signs point to a major war in Europe‼️
— etirol 𝕊 (@MEtirol) June 9, 2024
“We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more… pic.twitter.com/P2r1wk24xi
"We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more war. The West thinks it can win and take out Russia. I think the West is wrong. Both sides now believe it is existential for them, so I don't think they will find a solution other than war and everything, everything is at stake. In Europe, the leaders act as the big heroes, but they are not honest and do not tell their citizens that they will all pay a big price if it comes to war."
"Cal88, remembering that, for what it's worth, you and I are in general agreement vis-a-vis significant aspects of this conflict, let me ask you this: Who is it that seems to be in favor of this war spreading beyond Russia-Ukraine? Because I can't imagine anybody is.
MLover wrote: Some argue Israel is, so that we, for one, can take out Iran. Which might then include the Israeli lobby. Colonel McGregor today said the Israeli breached border was previously 'expertly' defended, hinting that the incursion was a possible setup.
The DC MICC is also probably giddy, and corporate land barrons are probably hopeful.
"For example, I am in favor of us aiding Ukraine as long as they truly want it... within certain parameters. But it is certainly not "existential" for me (or for the US, imo). If Russia really wants it that badly and their leaders are able to survive this politically, then I guess they will get Ukraine eventually. But they will pay a steep price. And if Russia were to continue westward (unlikely), that's where it starts to become existential."
MLover wrote: What price would they pay? They're now the 5th largest economy in the world, their military is far stronger than two years ago, and they're close to inking a partnership deal with Iran.
Westward where? For decades their focus has been on a neutral Ukraine, and NATO ceasing its eastward expansion.
"I feel like Biden, Trump and all of Western Europe are on the same page here. If there is a gray area, it might involve giving Ukraine our better and more offensive weapons and multiple other "small scale escalations" such as that."
MLover wrote: President Trump isn't on the same page; he wants immediate peace talks.
Oh my, the graphics made deciphering this a bit of a challenge. Moreover, in your knee-jerk attempt to disagree with all of my points, it seems as if you didn't notice that we largely agree on this, even to the extent of misreading what I wrote, or failing to take smaller phrases in their larger context.
But no matter. My main point to Cal88 was that I think leaders and experts in the West almost universally wish to see this war contained to Russia/Ukraine. (And that is where Trump and Biden are on the same page.)
Same applies to Israel and Palestine/Hamas. Just wanting something doesn't mean it's going to happen.
US has been instrumental and vocal about making peace with HAMAS and not labeling them the bad guy. US has been instrumental and vocal about fighting Russia and labeling them the bad guy.
The talk about "wanting peace talks" is meaningless. Of course everyone wants peace!
Perhaps, but this isn't the neocon objective which is making the US dominant in every theater. And when peace comes into conflict with that objective, it isn't the objective that is sacrificed.
Perhaps, but this isn't the neocon objective which is making the US dominant in every theater. And when peace comes into conflict with that objective, it isn't the objective that is sacrificed.
I think US has been vocal about labeling them the bad guys. They are classified, and have been called, terrorist organization. I would not confuse the nutty far left and stupid student protesters with the State Department.oski003 said:sycasey said:The talk about "wanting peace talks" is meaningless. Of course everyone wants peace! The trouble is getting something both Ukraine and Russia would agree to.Big C said:movielover said:Big C said:Cal88 said:‼️Serbia's President Vucic gives a dark outlook -All signs point to a major war in Europe‼️
— etirol 𝕊 (@MEtirol) June 9, 2024
“We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more… pic.twitter.com/P2r1wk24xi
"We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more war. The West thinks it can win and take out Russia. I think the West is wrong. Both sides now believe it is existential for them, so I don't think they will find a solution other than war and everything, everything is at stake. In Europe, the leaders act as the big heroes, but they are not honest and do not tell their citizens that they will all pay a big price if it comes to war."
"Cal88, remembering that, for what it's worth, you and I are in general agreement vis-a-vis significant aspects of this conflict, let me ask you this: Who is it that seems to be in favor of this war spreading beyond Russia-Ukraine? Because I can't imagine anybody is.
MLover wrote: Some argue Israel is, so that we, for one, can take out Iran. Which might then include the Israeli lobby. Colonel McGregor today said the Israeli breached border was previously 'expertly' defended, hinting that the incursion was a possible setup.
The DC MICC is also probably giddy, and corporate land barrons are probably hopeful.
"For example, I am in favor of us aiding Ukraine as long as they truly want it... within certain parameters. But it is certainly not "existential" for me (or for the US, imo). If Russia really wants it that badly and their leaders are able to survive this politically, then I guess they will get Ukraine eventually. But they will pay a steep price. And if Russia were to continue westward (unlikely), that's where it starts to become existential."
MLover wrote: What price would they pay? They're now the 5th largest economy in the world, their military is far stronger than two years ago, and they're close to inking a partnership deal with Iran.
Westward where? For decades their focus has been on a neutral Ukraine, and NATO ceasing its eastward expansion.
"I feel like Biden, Trump and all of Western Europe are on the same page here. If there is a gray area, it might involve giving Ukraine our better and more offensive weapons and multiple other "small scale escalations" such as that."
MLover wrote: President Trump isn't on the same page; he wants immediate peace talks.
Oh my, the graphics made deciphering this a bit of a challenge. Moreover, in your knee-jerk attempt to disagree with all of my points, it seems as if you didn't notice that we largely agree on this, even to the extent of misreading what I wrote, or failing to take smaller phrases in their larger context.
But no matter. My main point to Cal88 was that I think leaders and experts in the West almost universally wish to see this war contained to Russia/Ukraine. (And that is where Trump and Biden are on the same page.)
Same applies to Israel and Palestine/Hamas. Just wanting something doesn't mean it's going to happen.
US has been instrumental and vocal about making peace with HAMAS and not labeling them the bad guy. US has been instrumental and vocal about fighting Russia and labeling them the bad guy.
I don't believe we have identified Russia as a terrorist organization. And Ukraine cannot defend itself and crush Russia like Israel can with Hamas. As such, we need to use different leverage to pressure Russia.
This is it right here. Russia and Gaza both have awful governments, but they have very different capabilities and as such the approach to them will not be the same. Any 1-to-1 comparison is not valid.calbear93 said:
And Ukraine cannot defend itself and crush Russia like Israel can with Hamas. As such, we need to use different leverage to pressure Russia.
sycasey said:The talk about "wanting peace talks" is meaningless. Of course everyone wants peace! The trouble is getting something both Ukraine and Russia would agree to.Big C said:movielover said:Big C said:Cal88 said:‼️Serbia's President Vucic gives a dark outlook -All signs point to a major war in Europe‼️
— etirol 𝕊 (@MEtirol) June 9, 2024
“We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more… pic.twitter.com/P2r1wk24xi
"We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more war. The West thinks it can win and take out Russia. I think the West is wrong. Both sides now believe it is existential for them, so I don't think they will find a solution other than war and everything, everything is at stake. In Europe, the leaders act as the big heroes, but they are not honest and do not tell their citizens that they will all pay a big price if it comes to war."
"Cal88, remembering that, for what it's worth, you and I are in general agreement vis-a-vis significant aspects of this conflict, let me ask you this: Who is it that seems to be in favor of this war spreading beyond Russia-Ukraine? Because I can't imagine anybody is.
MLover wrote: Some argue Israel is, so that we, for one, can take out Iran. Which might then include the Israeli lobby. Colonel McGregor today said the Israeli breached border was previously 'expertly' defended, hinting that the incursion was a possible setup.
The DC MICC is also probably giddy, and corporate land barrons are probably hopeful.
"For example, I am in favor of us aiding Ukraine as long as they truly want it... within certain parameters. But it is certainly not "existential" for me (or for the US, imo). If Russia really wants it that badly and their leaders are able to survive this politically, then I guess they will get Ukraine eventually. But they will pay a steep price. And if Russia were to continue westward (unlikely), that's where it starts to become existential."
MLover wrote: What price would they pay? They're now the 5th largest economy in the world, their military is far stronger than two years ago, and they're close to inking a partnership deal with Iran.
Westward where? For decades their focus has been on a neutral Ukraine, and NATO ceasing its eastward expansion.
"I feel like Biden, Trump and all of Western Europe are on the same page here. If there is a gray area, it might involve giving Ukraine our better and more offensive weapons and multiple other "small scale escalations" such as that."
MLover wrote: President Trump isn't on the same page; he wants immediate peace talks.
Oh my, the graphics made deciphering this a bit of a challenge. Moreover, in your knee-jerk attempt to disagree with all of my points, it seems as if you didn't notice that we largely agree on this, even to the extent of misreading what I wrote, or failing to take smaller phrases in their larger context.
But no matter. My main point to Cal88 was that I think leaders and experts in the West almost universally wish to see this war contained to Russia/Ukraine. (And that is where Trump and Biden are on the same page.)
Same applies to Israel and Palestine/Hamas. Just wanting something doesn't mean it's going to
happen.
False. The MICC, NeoCons, and imbeciles want war. We don't even have regular talks with the Russian diplomats and peace negotiators? Ludicrous and idiotic. Biden calling Putin a "thug" doesn't lead to peace.
The Biden Administration not replying to Putin's direct, serious letter months before the SMO just another example of arrogance, or intent. Probably both. Because both Merkle and France's leader said Minsk I and II were delay-game ploys to build up Ukraine for our proxy war.
FAFO.
movielover said:sycasey said:The talk about "wanting peace talks" is meaningless. Of course everyone wants peace! The trouble is getting something both Ukraine and Russia would agree to.Big C said:movielover said:Big C said:Cal88 said:‼️Serbia's President Vucic gives a dark outlook -All signs point to a major war in Europe‼️
— etirol 𝕊 (@MEtirol) June 9, 2024
“We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more… pic.twitter.com/P2r1wk24xi
"We are heading for a major catastrophe and it seems that the train has already left the station and can no longer be stopped. No one in the West is talking about peace anymore - only more war. The West thinks it can win and take out Russia. I think the West is wrong. Both sides now believe it is existential for them, so I don't think they will find a solution other than war and everything, everything is at stake. In Europe, the leaders act as the big heroes, but they are not honest and do not tell their citizens that they will all pay a big price if it comes to war."
"Cal88, remembering that, for what it's worth, you and I are in general agreement vis-a-vis significant aspects of this conflict, let me ask you this: Who is it that seems to be in favor of this war spreading beyond Russia-Ukraine? Because I can't imagine anybody is.
MLover wrote: Some argue Israel is, so that we, for one, can take out Iran. Which might then include the Israeli lobby. Colonel McGregor today said the Israeli breached border was previously 'expertly' defended, hinting that the incursion was a possible setup.
The DC MICC is also probably giddy, and corporate land barrons are probably hopeful.
"For example, I am in favor of us aiding Ukraine as long as they truly want it... within certain parameters. But it is certainly not "existential" for me (or for the US, imo). If Russia really wants it that badly and their leaders are able to survive this politically, then I guess they will get Ukraine eventually. But they will pay a steep price. And if Russia were to continue westward (unlikely), that's where it starts to become existential."
MLover wrote: What price would they pay? They're now the 5th largest economy in the world, their military is far stronger than two years ago, and they're close to inking a partnership deal with Iran.
Westward where? For decades their focus has been on a neutral Ukraine, and NATO ceasing its eastward expansion.
"I feel like Biden, Trump and all of Western Europe are on the same page here. If there is a gray area, it might involve giving Ukraine our better and more offensive weapons and multiple other "small scale escalations" such as that."
MLover wrote: President Trump isn't on the same page; he wants immediate peace talks.
Oh my, the graphics made deciphering this a bit of a challenge. Moreover, in your knee-jerk attempt to disagree with all of my points, it seems as if you didn't notice that we largely agree on this, even to the extent of misreading what I wrote, or failing to take smaller phrases in their larger context.
But no matter. My main point to Cal88 was that I think leaders and experts in the West almost universally wish to see this war contained to Russia/Ukraine. (And that is where Trump and Biden are on the same page.)
Same applies to Israel and Palestine/Hamas. Just wanting something doesn't mean it's going to
happen.
False. The MICC, NeoCons, and imbeciles want war. We don't even have regular talks with the Russian diplomats and peace negotiators? Ludicrous and idiotic. Biden calling Putin a "thug" doesn't lead to peace.
The Biden Administration not replying to Putin's direct, serious letter months before the SMO just another example of arrogance, or intent. Probably both. Because both Merkle and France's leader said Minsk I and II were delay-game ploys to build up Ukraine for our proxy war.
FAFO.
Not to mention that both Ukraine and Russia were on the verge of signing the Istanbul Peace Agreement in April 22, which would have prevented over one million Ukrainian casualties, and counting, before that deal was scuttled by Boris Johnson and co...
And now Russia sent an advanced sub to Cuba as part of military excercises.
"An advanced sub"? What the actual fu$& does that mean? Do you even think about what you type? All military subs are "advanced". It would be newsworthy if they had sent a Cold War era sub.
Your tactics are clumsy and ineffective. You will never advance at The Ministry of Information.
Your tactics are clumsy and ineffective. You will never advance at The Ministry of Information.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
🇺🇸🇺🇦‼️🚨 “Everything we have will go to Ukraine until their needs are met”
— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) June 13, 2024
The supply of air defense systems to foreign buyers will be delayed.
But other countries gave their stuff fo Ukraine, in exchange for new deliveries and now they’re defenseless. pic.twitter.com/gJJngvApuJ
Z drunk, or high?
🇺🇦🇨🇳 Zelensky had a “phone conversation by phone” with Xi, and Xi promised not to sell weapons to Russia.
— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) June 13, 2024
-> Zelensky sounds drunk or high … pic.twitter.com/CVL69iQke5
AunBear89 said:
"An advanced sub"? What the actual fu$& does that mean? Do you even think about what you type? All military subs are "advanced". It would be newsworthy if they had sent a Cold War era sub.
Your tactics are clumsy and ineffective. You will never advance at The Ministry of Information.
Dear Narcissist:
Business Insider: The Russian submarine that just showed up off Cuba is one of a new class of subs that has worried the US and NATO for years
"The Yasen-class subs are hard to track and armed for attacks against land- and sea-based targets...."
"One of Russia's most advanced new submarines has pulled up off the coast of Cuba ahead of planned military exercises in the area.
"The Kazan, a nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine, is one of a relatively new class of subs that has worried the US and Western militaries for years because of its stealth and strike capabilities."
https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-submarine-in-cuba-us-nato-worried-about-for-years-2024-6
The word sub titilates you?
New, not advanced. The Navy sends its new tech to similar joint exercises with allies. It's how you you test new equipment in the field in combat and other environments.
Why do you and your ilk like fear mongering so much?
Also: you should not use words you do not understand, like narcissist and titillate. Another bad habit of right wing morons.
Why do you and your ilk like fear mongering so much?
Also: you should not use words you do not understand, like narcissist and titillate. Another bad habit of right wing morons.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89 said:
New, not advanced. The Navy sends its new tech to similar joint exercises with allies. It's how you you test new equipment in the field in combat and other environments.
Why do you and your ilk like fear mongering so much?
Also: you should not use words you do not understand, like narcissist and titillate. Another bad habit of right wing morons.
Here's Chris' email at the BI, you can quibble w him by email over his choice of adjectives.
cpanella@businessinsider.com
So you're just another parrot, repeating words you don't understand.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89 said:
So you're just another parrot, repeating words you don't understand.
Were you not breast fed as a child?
AunBear89 said:
New, not advanced. The Navy sends its new tech to similar joint exercises with allies. It's how you you test new equipment in the field in combat and other environments.
Why do you and your ilk like fear mongering so much?
Also: you should not use words you do not understand, like narcissist and titillate. Another bad habit of right wing morons.
Little angry bear getting owned yet still trying to earn the cracker. I applaud your resilience.
AunBear89 said:
New, not advanced. The Navy sends its new tech to similar joint exercises with allies. It's how you you test new equipment in the field in combat and other environments.
Why do you and your ilk like fear mongering so much?
Also: you should not use words you do not understand, like narcissist and titillate. Another bad habit of right wing morons.
As I recall, "titillate" was one of George Carlin's "seven words you can't say on television".
I know times have changed, but on a classy site like Bear Insider, I feel like "breastillate" would be more appropriate.
Littlecuck003 is confused again. You twits are arguing semantics, my point is that the adjective "advanced" is irrelevant and intended to foment fear.
Of course the subs are advanced - they are nuclear submarines, armed with nuclear warhead tipped missiles, and using the most sophisticated and ADVANCED equipment Just like ours.
The intent of movielover was to stoke fear. As if what is happening is in any way different from similar events worldwide. Does movielover get equally worked up when the US Navy sends "advanced submarines" to engage in exercises with allied navies in their territorial waters.
Of course the subs are advanced - they are nuclear submarines, armed with nuclear warhead tipped missiles, and using the most sophisticated and ADVANCED equipment Just like ours.
The intent of movielover was to stoke fear. As if what is happening is in any way different from similar events worldwide. Does movielover get equally worked up when the US Navy sends "advanced submarines" to engage in exercises with allied navies in their territorial waters.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89 said:
Littlecuck003 is confused again. You twits are arguing semantics, my point is that the adjective "advanced" is irrelevant and intended to foment fear.
Of course the subs are advanced - they are nuclear submarines, armed with nuclear warhead tipped missiles, and using the most sophisticated and ADVANCED equipment Just like ours.
The intent of movielover was to stoke fear. As if what is happening is in any way different from similar events worldwide. Does movielover get equally worked up when the US Navy sends "advanced submarines" to engage in exercises with allied navies in their territorial waters.
"Later submarines featured updated designs, designated as part of the Yasen-M class. The Kazan was the second sub of the class but the first of the new, upgraded subs. It is noticeably smaller and features a quieter nuclear reactor.
The subs' newer, more advanced features make them difficult to track, and they're heavily armed and capable of attacks against land- and sea-based targets with little to no warning. These warships can carry Oniks and Kalibr cruise missiles and, eventually, the new Zircon missiles.
The shift in capability with the emergence of the Yasen-M class submarines suggested a change in use. Per a 2021 Royal United Services Institute analysis, the Kazan's "capacity to launch a range of anti-ship and land attack missiles" suggests that "long-range strike missions appear to be superseding sea lines of communication (SLOC) interdiction as a primary task."
In 2021, US Air Force Gen. Glen VanHerck, the head of US Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command, said that the subs "are designed to deploy undetected within cruise-missile range of our coastlines to threaten critical infrastructure during an escalating crisis.""
Ignorance leads to an angry bear who won't get his cracker. You probably are better off with just your lame insults and making no effort to say anything of substance.
Group chat / weapons Inspector Scott Ritter claims NATO held a military exercise, and couldn't move a few hundred troops & gear from Norway to Finland. (Maybe also the EUs way to get us suckers to pay for their infrastructure improvements.)
He also claims the Pentagon's nuclear plan is for 30% of the country to survive a nuclear war, and then rebuild as the world's leader.
He claims that both JFK and LBJ told the Pentagon, "I need options (outside of worldwide annihilation)." And none exist.
He also claims the Pentagon's nuclear plan is for 30% of the country to survive a nuclear war, and then rebuild as the world's leader.
He claims that both JFK and LBJ told the Pentagon, "I need options (outside of worldwide annihilation)." And none exist.
NBC News: Biden and Zelenskyy sign bilateral security agreement as they push Europe to continue fight against Russia
President Joe Biden and his counterparts from the wealthiest democratic nations also reached a deal to give Ukraine a $50 billion loan this year backed by frozen Russian assets.
President Joe Biden and his counterparts from the wealthiest democratic nations also reached a deal to give Ukraine a $50 billion loan this year backed by frozen Russian assets.
The only ignorant person here is you. I am not impressed by your copy and paste abilities. The information is irrelevant to this discussion. To get all flustered by this and tell people they should be even more afraid is nonsense.
Our Navy has similar if not better technology. None of us know for sure. But let's make sure we clutch our pearls because a super secret advanced class of submarine is in Cuba. We are so utterly helpless now. Biden has failed us. We are doomed. If only we had comparable or even better technology then the country with which we've been in a 7 decade long arms race.
Our Navy has similar if not better technology. None of us know for sure. But let's make sure we clutch our pearls because a super secret advanced class of submarine is in Cuba. We are so utterly helpless now. Biden has failed us. We are doomed. If only we had comparable or even better technology then the country with which we've been in a 7 decade long arms race.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89 said:
The only ignorant person here is you. I am not impressed by your copy and paste abilities. The information is irrelevant to this discussion. To get all flustered by this and tell people they should be even more afraid is nonsense.
Our Navy has similar if not better technology. None of us know for sure. But let's make sure we clutch our pearls because a super secret advanced class of submarine is in Cuba. We are so utterly helpless now. Biden has failed us. We are doomed. If only we had comparable or even better technology then the country with which we've been in a 7 decade long arms race.
It is definitely notable that we are in a proxy war with a country who is sending an advanced, stealth nuclear sub next to bordering Cuba, which is the same place we feared missile strikes coming from during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Yes, we have advanced subs too. Now, if you don't feel that this concerns us, that is fine and certainly okay to opin. Feel free to argue that without being so dismissive by saying stupid ridiculous things like "all submarines are advanced, gotcha!".
I'm saying that what is happening now is no different than similar exercises all of the world throughout history.
If you righties are going to fetishize military might, you should learn a thing or two about the military.
Like, when engaged in military training exercises with an ally, countries use their most advanced weapons and systems. It is therefore not the earth shattering, sky is falling moment that movielover wanted to create when it came here feverishly exclaiming that Russia sent an advanced sub to Cuba.
It was clumsy scare tactics intended to frighten ignorant voters about how dire things are because Biden. And it worked on at least one ignorant voter: you.
If you righties are going to fetishize military might, you should learn a thing or two about the military.
Like, when engaged in military training exercises with an ally, countries use their most advanced weapons and systems. It is therefore not the earth shattering, sky is falling moment that movielover wanted to create when it came here feverishly exclaiming that Russia sent an advanced sub to Cuba.
It was clumsy scare tactics intended to frighten ignorant voters about how dire things are because Biden. And it worked on at least one ignorant voter: you.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -- (maybe) Benjamin Disraeli, popularized by Mark Twain
AunBear89 said:
I'm saying that what is happening now is no different than similar exercises all of the world throughout history.
If you righties are going to fetishize military might, you should learn a thing or two about the military.
Like, when engaged in military training exercises with an ally, countries use their most advanced weapons and systems. It is therefore not the earth shattering, sky is falling moment that movielover wanted to create when it came here feverishly exclaiming that Russia sent an advanced sub to Cuba.
It was clumsy scare tactics intended to frighten ignorant voters about how dire things are because Biden. And it worked on at least one ignorant voter: you.
When was the last time that Russia sent a nuclear sub to Cuba for military exercises?
Featured Stories
See All
Cal Hosts Stanford In 127th Big Game
by Cal Athletics
Cal Wins Thriller Over Auburn
by Cal Athletics
Depleted Bears Hold Off Air Force, 78-69
by Jim McGill
Bears Host Big Group For 127th Big Game
by Jim McGill