War in Ukraine

#89,901
#89,901
distrovol said:
I think I remember him saying we should've provided Ukraine with every conventional weapon we have and put virtually zero restraints on how the used them. Which would likely lead to a direct confrontation with Russia. If I'm wrong, please correct me. Seems pretty implausible considering they wouldn't have the technical capability to use our good stuff.
Click to expand...

You can give them 2,000 F-22s, 20,000 Abram tanks, 100m artillery shells, etc and they would still lose the war. Heck, go ahead and give them a few aircraft carriers. The Russians only have shovels and old washing machines anyway.
 
#89,902
#89,902
LSU-SIU said:
As long as he can lead from the rear behind his keyboard.

Seriously, the present leaked proposal is really a win for the U.S., so if Europe/Ukraine don't want to make realistic counter proposals - the Orange man can simply move on without them. Turn a loss into at least a neutral or winning hand, getting the money back would be a win at this point and normal relations.

The Ukraine lost, the Europeans will lose, and the U.S. has lost... the Orange bastard only has the potential ability to turn the U.S. loss into a possible win on some level. It is not realistically possible to turn Europe and the Ukraine into a win.
Click to expand...
I see you don't mind over extending our military to enter a conflict that accomplishes nothing but a short gain. This fight will continue until someone puts an end to it which could have be accomplished back in the Biden Administration.
 
#89,903
#89,903
Sudden Impact said:
I see you don't mind over extending our military to enter a conflict that accomplishes nothing but a short gain. This fight will continue until someone puts an end to it which could have be accomplished back in the Biden Administration.
Click to expand...

There is nothing to gain here, only something to lose - the U.S. can potentially mitigate its damages... the Ukraine and Europe not so much.

The winner i.e. the good guys will write the history, the U.S. can somewhat salvage itself by mitigating its damages, at least in part.
 
#89,904
#89,904
Sandman 423 said:
I take it you can't come up with anything feasible that doesn't involve us attacking. I'll wait while you sip your coffee.
Click to expand...
Oh I've stared numerous times over the last 3 years in this thread what I think the US should do to aid Ukraine; feel free to use the search function and familiarize yourself with my position.
 
#89,905
#89,905
LSU-SIU said:
Because there is no requirement for Russia to do anything. The Ukraine has nothing to do with any of this and most likely won't exist.
Click to expand...
Ok, so there's no point in Ukraine signing any agreement with Russia. The only path forward is Ukraine gaining NATO membership, since the only protection from Russia, is being a member or NATO.
 
#89,906
#89,906
BeardedVol said:
Ok, so there's no point in Ukraine signing any agreement with Russia. The only path forward is Ukraine gaining NATO membership, since the only protection from Russia, is being a member or NATO.
Click to expand...

I would say we are still on track for the first part, the second part is moot as NATO has no intention of admitting the Ukraine. If anything, you could probably even take that out as well and just have the Russians take that option off the table militarily i.e. no more Ukraine.
 
#89,907
#89,907
LSU-SIU said:
There is nothing to gain here, only something to lose - the U.S. can potentially mitigate its damages... the Ukraine and Europe not so much.

The winner i.e. the good guys will write the history, the U.S. can somewhat salvage itself by mitigating its damages, at least in part.
Click to expand...
The winner will be China.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#89,909
#89,909
BeardedVol said:
Oh I've stared numerous times over the last 3 years in this thread what I think the US should do to aid Ukraine; feel free to use the search function and familiarize yourself with my position.
Click to expand...
Man, you think a lot of yourself.

Your position may have worked when Obama sent blankets, but we are way beyond that point. There is no amount of military support we can give them without using our children's lives to end this.

Why are you not calling for us to punish anyone buying from Russia? Hell, Nato is pretty much funding this war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, hog88 and LSU-SIU
#89,910
#89,910
Sandman 423 said:
Man, you think a lot of yourself.

Your position may have worked when Obama sent blankets, but we are way beyond that point. There is no amount of military support we can give them without using our children's lives to end this.

Why are you not calling for us to punish anyone buying from Russia? Hell, Nato is pretty much funding this war.
Click to expand...

You asked me to rehash my position, don't get upset when I point you to the numerous times I've already done so.

Ukraine has never been given US military aid at a significant enough level, or without severe restrictions in how they use that aid, to strike Russia where it would have the most impact.

It was a terrible decision by Biden that has been made worse by Trump.
 
#89,911
#89,911
BeardedVol said:
You asked me to rehash my position, don't get upset when I poo to you to the numerous times I've already done so.

Ukraine has never been given US military aid at a significant enough level, or without severe restrictions in how they use that aid, to strike Russia where it would have the most impact.

It was a terrible decision by Biden that has been made worse by Trump.
Click to expand...

There is no amount of weapons that the U.S. has that is or was going to solve that problem that the U.S. helped them get into.
 
#89,912
#89,912
BeardedVol said:
You asked me to rehash my position, don't get upset when I poo to you to the numerous times I've already done so.

Ukraine has never been given US military aid at a significant enough level, or without severe restrictions in how they use that aid, to strike Russia where it would have the most impact.

It was a terrible decision by Biden that has been made worse by Trump.
Click to expand...
Why would you ask me to use the search function if you knew I already knew your position? Maybe putting it in bold will help you- Your position isn't feasible, So what else you got?
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
#89,914
#89,914
Sandman 423 said:
Why would you ask me to use the search function if you knew I already knew your position? Maybe putting it in bold will help you- Your position isn't feasible, So what else you got?
Click to expand...
What is not feasible about giving Ukraine the weapons it needs to strike Russia's logistics and petroleum processing facilities without restrictions?
 
#89,915
#89,915
BeardedVol said:
Thanks for reiterating your poorly formed opinions and your open denial of historical facts, I'm sure @Sandman 423 appreciates you doing so for his benefit.
Click to expand...

Your comments out here have been retarded in nature over many years. I mean according to you years ago Russia was on the verge of economic collapse, its literally insane.
 
#89,916
#89,916
BeardedVol said:
What is not feasible about giving Ukraine the weapons it needs to strike Russia's logistics and petroleum processing facilities without restrictions?
Click to expand...

Its not feasible that it will have any real change of the direction of the war. The Ukraine is actually buying Russian products.
 
#89,917
#89,917
BeardedVol said:
What is not feasible about giving Ukraine the weapons it needs to strike Russia's logistics and petroleum processing facilities without restrictions?
Click to expand...

It would cheaper and more effective to "strike" (sanction) our allies that are funding Russia's war through oil and gas purchases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#89,920
#89,920
BeardedVol said:
Tomahawks
AGM-158s
ATACMS (we've sent less then 40 and limited their use)
Click to expand...
If Russia gave Iraq or Afghanistan weapons that could hit our homeland, and they were then used to hit America, would we consider that an act of war by them on us? And I don't need a explanation of distance.
 
#89,921
#89,921
volfanhill said:
If Russia gave Iraq or Afghanistan weapons that could hit our homeland, and they were then used to hit America, would we consider that an act of war by them on us? And I don't need a explanation of distance.
Click to expand...

Russia actually sent Wagner to directly attack our troops in Syria and had had a bounty program with the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan so yeah...don't really care what Russia thinks.

They can leave Ukraine and not eat US ordinance at any time.
 
#89,922
#89,922
BeardedVol said:
Tomahawks
AGM-158s
ATACMS (we've sent less then 40 and limited their use)
Click to expand...

None of that is going to change where the war was going, the Russians have launched 1,000s of similar devices and yet the war continues. What you are talking about doesn't even exist in large numbers but even if it did they would still lose the war.

Just like your stupid posts of F-14s and Abram tanks are going to solve it, you have no idea how any of this works.

War in Ukraine

F-14's are technically obsolete when put up against 5th generation fighters.

However, Russia is not deploying 5th generation fighters in Ukraine, hence why they are still useful in this conflict.

The same goes for the older models Abrams and other weapons being sent, as they are technically obsolete, if they are deployed against their modern counterparts, but Russia is deploying 30+ year old equipment in Ukraine.

Technically obsolete =/= ineffectual
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#89,923
#89,923
LSU-SIU said:
None of that is going to change where the war was going, the Russians have launched 1,000s of similar devices and yet the war continues. What you are talking about doesn't even exist in large numbers but even if it did they would still lose the war.

Just like your stupid posts of F-14s and Abram tanks are going to solve it, you have no idea how any of this works.

War in Ukraine
Click to expand...

Targeting apartment buildings doesn't have the same economic impact as having your petroleum processing infrastructure destroyed when you have a war economy that is maintained by your ability to process and export fossil fuels.
tvpworld.com

Russian oil and gas revenue could fall by 35% in November: report

Oil and gas revenue bankrolls Russia’s war in Ukraine.
tvpworld.com tvpworld.com
dean-supernatural.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: MontyPython
#89,924
#89,924
volfanhill said:
If Russia gave Iraq or Afghanistan weapons that could hit our homeland, and they were then used to hit America, would we consider that an act of war by them on us? And I don't need a explanation of distance.
Click to expand...
So is Iran technically at war with Ukraine? China?

Should we interdict all Iranian shipping?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeardedVol
#89,925
#89,925
BeardedVol said:
Targeting apartment buildings doesn't have the same economic impact as having your petroleum processing infrastructure destroyed when you have a war economy that is maintained by your ability to process and export fossil fuels.
tvpworld.com

Russian oil and gas revenue could fall by 35% in November: report

Oil and gas revenue bankrolls Russia’s war in Ukraine.
tvpworld.com tvpworld.com
dean-supernatural.gif
Click to expand...

Again, why destroy Russia’s petroleum facilities when we could just eliminate the market for their products by forcing our allies to quit buying them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol and LSU-SIU
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top