Europe under extreme duress

[ChuckMK23]

Ukraine has own design/manufacture ATGM. Seen here put to good use against a KA-52.

Reaction @Max the Mad Russian ?

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

Reaction

LIKE!!!! Stugna have destroyed several tanks to the date.

Not only that, UA antiship missile hit RU frigate Adm Essen. Probably X-35 based Neptune, made in Ukraine. Severe damages, probably fire is still burning. Maybe British Sea Eagle or something Brits shipped. Brits. When Boris Johnson says they are ready to give Ukraine some new weapon it usually means that weapon is already in Ukraine and near ready to fight.

 

[Gatordev]

Ah yes, nothing says modern tactics like hovering your lumbering helicopter in someone's WEZ. It's like they didn't even bother to pay attention to the last 20 years.

 

[Mirage]

I'm not an old fart like some of you guys, but I was in grade school when the Berlin Wall fell and, later, when the USSR did as well. I agree. And I think we were stupid for ever thinking that they weren't the most profound enemy of the US. They always have been, and our societies will never coexist peacefully. It is now very obvious that we will have a nuclear exchange in my lifetime. We need to be ready to annihilate them completely (counter value in Cold War terms), should an attempt be made on a single inch of NATO soil.

Do you suspect that if we launched a bunch of ICBMs at Russia they just wouldn't respond in kind, or do you just not care and think it's worth it?

Said it before, but again, which is a better outcome... Russia taking Estonia for awhile and then being unable to hold it long term, or all of Europe, the US, and Russia at a minimum being destroyed in nuclear war? I sure hope if it comes to that then cooler heads prevale.

I'd also challenge you to go to Russia when things calm down a bit. I think you'll find the regular people there are wonderful. It's their leaders that consistently suck. If they can solve that then I have no doubt we could all coexist happily.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

I'd also challenge you to go to Russia when things calm down a bit

Don't do it. Seriously. At least 40 years. Until the last one who was born in USSR and still states that USSR was good will die. This is fatal mental disease that's uncurable after Feb 24th.

 

[Flash]

If I understand the problem there, it was the lack of due process. And, as I see it, Canada did not HAVE to do anything. They chose to do what they did under the circumstances. Whether it was necessary or worth it big picture wise is still being debated. If I was Canadian I think I would find it a worthy debate.

The Emergencies Act is uniquely Canadian and very un-American, allowing the government to do extra-constitutional stuff that would never be legal in modern America. They utilized it, for the first time in history, because their toolbox against illegal activity like the trucker stupidity is much more limited than what we have in this country. While some of the trucker folks and their supporters might bleat the vast majority of Canadians and their leaders supported the usage of the Emergencies Act by the government and the actions they took under it, especially since they used it in a very limited fashion for a very limited time.

All that in one word, TRANSPARANCY. No way around it. It is a damned Communist country.

Actually it isn't transparency that makes our financial system so attractive to so many, along with other financial powerhouses like the UK and EU, the biggest reason can be summarized simply as the Rule of Law. Everyone knows that the US has a comprehensive, stable set of criminal, civil and administrative laws governing all aspects of finance and its supporting structure. This is backed by a legal system that enforces those laws in as fair a manner as pretty much anywhere in the world, and one that is as open and transparent as anywhere as well.

While we certainly have some very big issues and flaws in our financial house, even becoming a haven for money laundering in recent years (that includes Russian oligarchs) due to laws that are nothing more than open invitations to financial shenanigans, ours remains a pretty good bet. Coupled with being the largest economy in the world it is common sense that the dollar is dominant and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

P.S. You mean transparency, right? Auto-correct no worky on CAPITOLIZED words.

 

[Flash]

Do you suspect that if we launched a bunch of ICBMs at Russia they just wouldn't respond in kind, or do you just not care and think it's worth it?

Said it before, but again, which is a better outcome... Russia taking Estonia for awhile and then being unable to hold it long term, or all of Europe, the US, and Russia at a minimum being destroyed in nuclear war? I sure hope if it comes to that then cooler heads prevale.

A conflict with Russia doesn't have to go nuclear, the risk is certainly quite high if we do come in direct conflict with them but it isn't a foregone conclusion. Conversely, a weak response to a Russian incursion into NATO territory would spell the doom of the alliance and make Europe a far more dangerous place for a whole host of reasons.

I think our responses so far, making it clear that NATO territory is a red line and not responding to Russia's nuclear provocations have been good and balanced.

I'd also challenge you to go to Russia when things calm down a bit. I think you'll find the regular people there are wonderful. It's their leaders that consistently suck. If they can solve that then I have no doubt we could all coexist happily.

I think individually some might be wonderful but Putin has a lot of real popular support as does the war, though that s helped by massive disinformation. Also the widespread targeted killings of civilians isn't because of their leaders, the scale and scope uncovered so far indicates that average soldiers across a wide part of the invading force are almost certainly involved. That is not the hallmark of a 'wonderful people'.

 

[Max the Mad Russian]

That is not the hallmark of a 'wonderful people'

Indeed. That is just image in mirror of overall society of RU. Believe me, until civil war is not solved and all parts unrepentant, the "average soldier" is beast.

 

[JoeBob1788]

Also the widespread targeted killings of civilians isn't because of their leaders, the scale and scope uncovered so far indicates that average soldiers across a wide part of the invading force are almost certainly involved. That is not the hallmark of a 'wonderful people'.

“Ordinary Men” by Christopher Browning is a book that will stay with you. Highly recommend. It follows an Einsatzgruppen consisting of family men. Sobering stuff.

The EOD problems over there almost come across as throwbacks, like listening to your dad’s favorite band and thinking “oh hey I could get into this”

 

[taxi1]

Said it before, but again, which is a better outcome... Russia taking Estonia for awhile and then being unable to hold it long term, or all of Europe, the US, and Russia at a minimum being destroyed in nuclear war?

The new goal is to bleed them out in Ukraine. At some point I hope other peoples under the Russian thumb of influence will take advantage of Russia's focus on Ukraine. That's an awful big land border.

Ukraine is showing a lot of restraint in not taking the fight out of their territory, for strategic reasons I assume. Near territory in Russia, to Russian commercial interests anywhere else on the globe are all open targets for when the time comes. Oligarch yachts, Oligarch mansions in exotic islands, shipping in the Black Sea, etc.

 

[wink]

Actually it isn't transparency that makes our financial system so attractive to so many, along with other financial powerhouses like the UK and EU, the biggest reason can be summarized simply as the Rule of Law. Everyone knows that the US has a comprehensive, stable set of criminal, civil and administrative laws governing all aspects of finance and its supporting structure. This is backed by a legal system that enforces those laws in as fair a manner as pretty much anywhere in the world, and one that is as open and transparent as anywhere as well.

Oh, I agree. But transparency is part and parcel of the rule of law. Transparency is required by many financial regulations and is a goal of markets. No one will invest unless they can be sure of the data/information they base their investment on, from financial filings to conflicts of interest. And when companies or individuals get cross wise with the law, their trials are open. That is why caveat emptor has meaning in the west.

P.S. You mean transparency, right? Auto-correct no worky on CAPITOLIZED words.

No idea auto correct doesn't work in caps. Learning has occurred. It is a good day.

 

[Flash]

“Ordinary Men” by Christopher Browning is a book that will stay with you. Highly recommend. It follows an Einsatzgruppen consisting of family men. Sobering stuff.

I read it in college, indeed very sobering. 'The banality of evil' is a great descriptor for it.

 

[Mirage]

A conflict with Russia doesn't have to go nuclear, the risk is certainly quite high if we do come in direct conflict with them but it isn't a foregone conclusion. Conversely, a weak response to a Russian incursion into NATO territory would spell the doom of the alliance and make Europe a far more dangerous place for a whole host of reasons.

I think our responses so far, making it clear that NATO territory is a red line and not responding to Russia's nuclear provocations have been good and balanced.



I think individually some might be wonderful but Putin has a lot of real popular support as does the war, though that s helped by massive disinformation. Also the widespread targeted killings of civilians isn't because of their leaders, the scale and scope uncovered so far indicates that average soldiers across a wide part of the invading force are almost certainly involved. That is not the hallmark of a 'wonderful people'.

I was replying to MIDN who said if they touch a NATO Ally then we need to destroy all of Russia. But using your scenario instead.. which is better for Europe..having a weakened NATO that is protecting Estonias best interest, for example, long term by not getting it nuked, or a Europe that is destroyed in a nuclear war?

War with Russia means everything goes boom, with great certainty. I'd be curious if there's a coherent argument why that is a better outcome than something else, like a weakened or nonexistent NATO.

With respect to the Russian people... There are bad people in every society, and if you give a bunch of 18 year olds guns, send them far from home, and tell them to kill some people but not others with little supervision, bad things happen. I can list dozens of examples of Americans committing atrocities, but that doesn't mean we are tainted as a people. Likewise for the Russians.

 

[Flash]

Ukraine is showing a lot of restraint in not taking the fight out of their territory, for strategic reasons I assume. Near territory in Russia, to Russian commercial interests anywhere else on the globe are all open targets for when the time comes. Oligarch yachts, Oligarch mansions in exotic islands, shipping in the Black Sea, etc.

There is also a lack of capability, as they don't have the long-range weapons necessary to strike at anything very far beyond their borders.

 

[Flash]

I was replying to MIDN who said if they touch a NATO Ally then we need to destroy all of Russia. But using your scenario instead.. which is better for Europe..having a weakened NATO that is protecting Estonias best interest, for example, long term by not getting it nuked, or a Europe that is destroyed in a nuclear war?

War with Russia means everything goes boom, with great certainty. I'd be curious if there's a coherent argument why that is a better outcome than something else, like a weakened or nonexistent NATO.

I'd say a weakened or non-existent NATO makes the possibility of everything going boom as great as a direct conflict with Russia right now, it would just take a little bit longer as Russia would have much more incentive to keep going and less deterrent to him escalating to a nuclear conflict.

With respect to the Russian people... There are bad people in every society, and if you give a bunch of 18 year olds guns, send them far from home, and tell them to kill some people but not others with little supervision, bad things happen. I can list dozens of examples of Americans committing atrocities, but that doesn't mean we are tainted as a people. Likewise for the Russians.

There are certainly incidents of Americans committing atrocities in the past, to include several in the last 20 years, but it has been over 50 years since the last unit-wide atrocity that approaches what has been discovered so far in Ukraine, and even in that case it was much more isolated than what has happened in Ukraine.

Again, the scale and scope of what has happened in Ukraine hasn't been seen in Europe for at least 30 years, if not 80. That it was so widespread, so casual and indifferent to the possible consequences it indicates much deeper and systemic issues in Russia than a few individuals who commit war crimes like we had in Afghanistan and Iraq. Coupled with the Russian indifference to targeting and the invasion itself I think the Russian leadership is much more reflective of the Russian people than you seem to think. Propaganda is a helluva drug.