Jump to content

War In Ukraine


Recommended Posts

Just now, Boges said:

Well the fact that nukes are even on the table is an indication this Special Military Operation isn't going to plan. 

What's the time table for taking Kyiv? 

 

I'm not following the details of this war like you fellows are. I just hear buzz about nuclear weapons. Those I know a bit about.

From my point of view, this is a civil war in the former USSR. You want to make it WW3? Be careful what you wish for.

cGc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DogOnPorch said:

 

I'm not following the details of this war like you fellows are. I just hear buzz about nuclear weapons. Those I know a bit about.

From my point of view, this is a civil war in the former USSR. You want to make it WW3? Be careful what you wish for.

cGc

Are you new to the idea of a Proxy War? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boges said:

Are you new to the idea of a Proxy War? 

 

The Viet-Nam war killed millions. Who started that conflict? There's a tricky one...was it the Commies sending troops down the Trail? Or was it the US looking for an excuse...any excuse...to exercise its role as top arbiter on planet Earth?

Big mystery. Perhaps we'll be able to muse about Ukraine in the same fashion providing you're nowhere near the button. Eh?

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

The Viet-Nam war killed millions. Who started that conflict? There's a tricky one...was it the Commies sending troops down the Trail? Or was it the US looking for an excuse...any excuse...to exercise its role as top arbiter on planet Earth?

Big mystery. Perhaps we'll be able to muse about Ukraine in the same fashion providing you're nowhere near the button. Eh?

?

You'll note, no matter how bad things got for the Americans in Korea or Vietnam or for the Russians in Afghanistan neither resorted to Nukes. 

Putin lost this war before it started. Even if the West didn't assist Ukraine with weapons, this would have been a protracted Guerilla conflict. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boges said:

You'll note, no matter how bad things got for the Americans in Korea or Vietnam or for the Russians in Afghanistan neither resorted to Nukes. 

Putin lost this war before it started. Even if the West didn't assist Ukraine with weapons, this would have been a protracted Guerilla conflict. 

 

I think we're missing the point of the war in Canada. Well...why would we get it? Even those of Ukrainian or Russian heritage are generally many generations removed from the Old Country. An Old Country that everybody scrambled to leave BACK THEN. This conflict goes back to the Middle Ages if you know a bit of history. Why get involved in Europe's problems? Sort of defeats coming to North America. No?

You're all set to fix bayonets. Right, soldier? So they've got some normally sane folks like you all worked-up WW1 style over this one. Chamberlain for all his...lol...bad press...did have places like the Somme, Ypres and Verdun on his mind when he made his deal with the Devil. Churchill had Gallipoli-like adventurism behind him and luckily, he was up for one more good one re: Their Finest Hour.

The media and government both pushing for war...well, that can't be good. And not just war...get used to the thought of nuclear war. Like one can survive it...perhaps under one's desk. What will be the fallout...there's that word...if and when it is discovered just who blew up that pipeline comes to light?

977525.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

The Viet-Nam war killed millions. Who started that conflict? There's a tricky one...was it the Commies sending troops down the Trail? Or was it the US looking for an excuse...any excuse...to exercise its role as top arbiter on planet Earth?

Big mystery. Perhaps we'll be able to muse about Ukraine in the same fashion providing you're nowhere near the button. Eh?

?

The US never sent troops into North Vietnam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Aristides said:

The US never sent troops into North Vietnam.

 

They did conduct a bombing campaign that was pretty much unrestricted at times. The 'Big Belly' SEA version of the B-52D carried 102 750 lbs bombs that could tear a swath through a jungle or a Hanoi neighborhood...depending. Conversely, Route Pack 6 as it was called was the most dangerous piece of sky ever. F-105s in particular suffered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

They did conduct a bombing campaign that was pretty much unrestricted at times. The 'Big Belly' SEA version of the B-52D carried 102 750 lbs bombs that could tear a swath through a jungle or a Hanoi neighborhood...depending. Conversely, Route Pack 6 as it was called was the most dangerous piece of sky ever. F-105s in particular suffered.

Yes, they did bomb extensively, kind of like Russia is doing to Ukraine but they never crossed the border, unlike what Russia has done in Ukraine. The North invaded the South, not the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Aristides said:

Yes, they did bomb extensively, kind of like Russia is doing to Ukraine but they never crossed the border, unlike what Russia has done in Ukraine. The North invaded the South, not the other way around.

 

Well aware of who invade who. The Communists started the war. No matter that Uncle Ho was actually an OSS asset during WW2. The first units came down in the late 1950s to assist the PLA (Viet-Cong) cadres forming in South Viet-Nam. US advisors arrived about the same time...with their brand new helicopters. The years before 1965 and full commitment were really Wild West. Nobody yet guessed how deep they'd be getting...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Well aware of who invade who. The Communists started the war. No matter that Uncle Ho was actually an OSS asset during WW2. The first units came down in the late 1950s to assist the PLA (Viet-Cong) cadres forming in South Viet-Nam. US advisors arrived about the same time...with their brand new helicopters. The years before 1965 and full commitment were really Wild West. Nobody yet guessed how deep they'd be getting...

 

And the Russians thought they'd be greeted as liberators. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US special forces did of course enter North Viet-Nam at times to rescue both downed air crew and make attempts to free POWs. The Son Tay raid of 1970 being the most famous, I suppose. BOTH sides saw fit to use Laos and Cambodia as a free fire zone pretty much the entire war.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

US special forces did of course enter North Viet-Nam at times to rescue both downed air crew and make attempts to free POWs. The Son Tay raid of 1970 being the most famous, I suppose. BOTH sides saw fit to use Laos and Cambodia as a free fire zone pretty much the entire war.

 

I think the point is that previous Proxy Wars would have led smart people in Russia to concede that annexing a country the size of Ukraine is a pointless and costly exercise. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boges said:

I think the point is that previous Proxy Wars would have led smart people in Russia to concede that annexing a country the size of Ukraine is a pointless and costly exercise. 

 

I doubt they want the whole thing for that reason. But they do want a Moscow friendly government there which makes sense. NATO broke an old rule about spheres of influence that the Big Three ironically created...shattering not only the post-Cold War environment, but WW2's in sympathy. Well, there goes the neighborhood...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/28/2022 at 9:29 PM, athos said:

 

Her children are returning to mother Russia

FdsADGSXEBMTTre?format=jpg&name=small

 

 

Not looking so good for you, Boris

 

Russia no longer has full control of any of four ‘annexed’ Ukrainian provinces

Kyiv’s troops advanced in southern Kherson province and made additional gains in east

 

 

Russia no longer has full control of any of the four provinces of Ukraine it says it annexed last week after Ukrainian troops reportedly advanced dozens of kilometres in Kherson province in the south of the country and made additional gains in the east.

On Monday, the Russian military acknowledged that Kyiv’s forces had broken through in the Kherson region. It said the Ukrainian army and its “superior tank units” had managed to “penetrate the depths of our defence” around the villages of Zoltaya Balka and Alexsandrovka.

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/03/russia-has-no-full-control-of-any-of-four-annexed-ukrainian-provinces

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

I doubt they want the whole thing for that reason. But they do want a Moscow friendly government there which makes sense. NATO broke an old rule about spheres of influence that the Big Three ironically created...shattering not only the post-Cold War environment, but WW2's in sympathy. Well, there goes the neighborhood...

If they want a Moscow friendly government, stop annexing chunks of their country. I'm sure Ukraine isn't happy with a hostile country next door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Aristides said:

If they want a Moscow friendly government, stop annexing chunks of their country. I'm sure Ukraine isn't happy with a hostile country next door.

 

That's Ukraine's problem. Not yours. But you seem pretty sure that victory is just around the corner...so what's to worry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

That's Ukraine's problem. Not yours. But you seem pretty sure that victory is just around the corner...so what's to worry?

Actually it is our problem for the same kind of reasons Hitler invading Poland was our problem. Yes, it looks like Ukraine is going to "win" at the cost of the destruction of half their country. Whether Ukraine joins NATO or not, Russia has guaranteed a country on its border who's people will now hate their guts for centuries.

Not to mention, two brand new NATO members.

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Actually it is our problem for the same kind of reasons Hitler invading Poland was our problem. Yes, it looks like Ukraine is going to "win" at the cost of the destruction of half their country. Whether Ukraine joins NATO or not, Russia has guaranteed a country on its border who's people will now hate their guts for centuries.

Not to mention, two brand new NATO members.

 

That's a possible result.

There are other possible results on the table...I notice.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Not really, Ukrainians are going to hate Russian guts regardless of what happens.

 

Yes...really.

As I understand it, the Russians inside Ukrainian borders have similar complaints re: their treatment at the hands of the Ukraine Army since the war's actual start years ago. Thus they want to be part of Russia.

They'll all figure it out if we let them. Less casualties if they do it. But NATO has their bio-lab interests not to mention all the money laundering via the corrupt Ukrainian government...so it's tough seeing them letting go. In for a penny...in for a pound as they say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

NATO has sent an intelligence note to member countries warning of the mobilization of the Russian nuclear submarine K-329 Belgorod, which carries the Poseidon nuclear missile, also known as the "weapon of the apocalypse". The US is unable to monitor the activation of torpedoes underwater.

FeGUz_uacAAHRhC?format=jpg&name=large

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, athos said:

 

NATO has sent an intelligence note to member countries warning of the mobilization of the Russian nuclear submarine K-329 Belgorod, which carries the Poseidon nuclear missile, also known as the "weapon of the apocalypse". The US is unable to monitor the activation of torpedoes underwater.

FeGUz_uacAAHRhC?format=jpg&name=large

 

You're back. Now threatening the use of SLBM's and nuclear torpedos. All over little Ukraine.

 You smell of desperation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,745
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    historyradio.org
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • User went up a rank
      Experienced
    • exPS went up a rank
      Contributor
    • DUI_Offender earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • exPS went up a rank
      Explorer
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...