Ukraine Protests

Status
Not open for further replies.
#8,552
#8,552
volprof said:
If they're not writing extremely hateful op-eds for publications like Pravda, they're talking about how jazzy their military is.

I think this is what's called leading from a position of weakness.

Putin: Russia's military strength is unmatchable - Business Insider
Click to expand...

lol, in a stand up, sit down fight, not a chance. they are going to have to decomission most of their navy in a few years before they get anything built to replace. oh, no a second carrier. oh wait. No, Russia isn’t building a giant new aircraft carrier

Russia is limited to a ground based war, which means it has lost any fight before it has begun.
 
#8,553
#8,553
Pacer92 said:
Count the US bases across the globe and compare to Russia's. Get back with me then....
Click to expand...

So you are back to the "everyone else is doing it" argument again? You are saying that America is 'bad' for their actions but Russia is fine to do them because America did it....good logic. America's imperialism is greater in amount so nevermind Russia's? I've already told you I am not a defender of US policy. Not sure why you keep going down that logical fallacy route with me. It's cute and all but this is about YOUR defense of Russia doing the same thing that America does that you say is bad. If what America does is wrong, then Russia doing it should be wrong as well. If American 'government' media is bad, then Russian actual government media should be bad. You just don't seem to apply your own standards across the board. Rules only apply to the ones you hate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,555
#8,555
Pacer92 said:
Count the US bases across the globe and compare to Russia's. Get back with me then....
Click to expand...

They have time and principle going against them. Once the truth is revealed, and they realize that the Anglo-American powers have been the aggressors in many of these conflicts throughout the world, it will be too late for them. They will have already sold their souls to for the dollar.
 
#8,556
#8,556
LouderVol said:
lol, in a stand up, sit down fight, not a chance. they are going to have to decomission most of their navy in a few years before they get anything built to replace. oh, no a second carrier. oh wait. No, Russia isn’t building a giant new aircraft carrier

Russia is limited to a ground based war, which means it has lost any fight before it has begun.
Click to expand...

You may need to do a little research on the Russian navy's prowess! Are nuclear subs counted toward the army?!
 
#8,557
#8,557
Pacer92 said:
You may need to do a little research on the Russian navy's prowess! Are nuclear subs counted toward the army?!
Click to expand...

Even in Soviet times the Soviet Navy was never great. Their surface fleet is nothing spectacular and is aging.
 
#8,559
#8,559
Rasputin_Vol said:
They have time and principle going against them. Once the truth is revealed, and they realize that the Anglo-American powers have been the aggressors in many of these conflicts throughout the world, it will be too late for them. They will have already sold their souls to for the dollar.
Click to expand...

So your argument is to stop drinking the US kool aid and switch to the fascist Russian kool aid. Gotcha.
 
#8,561
#8,561
Rasputin_Vol said:
They have time and principle going against them. Once the truth is revealed, and they realize that the Anglo-American powers have been the aggressors in many of these conflicts throughout the world, it will be too late for them. They will have already sold their souls to for the dollar.
Click to expand...

When the US dollar collapses, please be sure to share with your new Chinese friends your insights about the Pacific War during WWII.

I'm sure they'll be glad to hear your thoughts.
 
#8,563
#8,563
Pacer92 said:
You may need to do a little research on the Russian navy's prowess! Are nuclear subs counted toward the army?!
Click to expand...

The Russian Navy sucks.

But, to your point (I think), all it takes is one or two boomers, which they do indeed have (and more), out there to keep things honest.
 
#8,567
#8,567
Pacer92 said:
So the Russian navy would be a non factor in a war against anyone, including the US?!

Come on dude..
Click to expand...

Non-factor? No.

But it's hardly what most would consider a "credible power" these days.

In 1991 before the Soviet union fell maybe. Now? It's going to take a while to get back anywhere near where they were.
 
#8,568
#8,568
Pacer92 said:
How great was North Vietnams navy?!
Click to expand...

Sucked even worse than Russia's navy.

And the fact that the US could not defeat an insurgency in Vietnam, just like Russia couldn't in Afghanistan (which was even more pathetic, in my opinion, since they shared a land border), is all the more reason why neither side is going to be invading the other. No NATO invading Russia; no Russia invading NATO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#8,569
#8,569
Pacer92 said:
So the Russian navy would be a non factor in a war against anyone, including the US?!

Come on dude..
Click to expand...

What everyone is saying the Russian surface combatants are severely lacking and this was even true in Soviet times. They instead decided to focus mostly on submarines than surface ships.
 
#8,571
#8,571
volprof said:
Sucked even worse than Russia's navy.

And the fact that the US could not defeat an insurgency in Vietnam, just like Russia couldn't in Afghanistan (which was even more pathetic, in my opinion, since they shared a land border), is all the more reason why neither side is going to be invading the other. No NATO invading Russia; no Russia invading NATO.
Click to expand...

Disagree here.

Had the military been allowed to do what they wanted (full on invasion of North Vietnam) the war might have turned out differently.

You have to remember, pound for pound, the US gave a lot more than it got in Vietnam. And brought the North Vietnamese to the peace tables through airstrikes alone.
 
#8,572
#8,572
Burhead said:
What everyone is saying the Russian surface combatants are severely lacking and this was even true in Soviet times. They instead decided to focus mostly on submarines than surface ships.
Click to expand...

And cruise missiles/manned bombers.

The Tu-22M was (and kind of still is) a badass cruise missile carrier.
 
#8,574
#8,574
Grand Vol said:
Disagree here.

Had the military been allowed to do what they wanted (full on invasion of North Vietnam) the war might have turned out differently.

You have to remember, pound for pound, the US gave a lot more than it got in Vietnam. And brought the North Vietnamese to the peace tables through airstrikes alone.
Click to expand...

After Tet the VC were more or less defeated. The people back home just bought into the propaganda.
 
#8,575
#8,575
Pacer92 said:
You may need to do a little research on the Russian navy's lack of prowess! Are nuclear subs counted toward the army?!
Click to expand...

FYP

The whole point they ramrodded the Crimea seizure action was to get the shipyards there. They had base leases but desperately needed the shipyards. Much of their navy is old and was built there. The loss of these shipyards was the greatest blow to the transitioning Soviet to Russian navy. Without these shipyards they've been forced to retool what they could in other bases sinking a lot of money in places they really shouldn't. One reason they went with France is a lack of means of building their own. Amazing how such a "noble" gesture in Crimea turns out to be more about military survival. But only America makes such underhanded aggressive moves like this right?
 
New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top