-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Ukraine war Bullshit.
- Thread starter JAS-SH
- Start date
How would your daily life have improved if the U.S. did not support Ukraine?
Lowered taxes?
Lowered grocery bills?
Inquiring minds want to know…
-Stan
Lowered taxes?
Lowered grocery bills?
Inquiring minds want to know…
-Stan
Considering that fire-fighting equipment was sent from California to Ukraine, maybe some people would still have homes.
How is sending hundreds on billions of dollars to a random ass country across the world helping the US?
It’s a low cost way to do multi-generational damage to the Russian military / keep them busy so the U.S. can fully focus on the Indo-Pacific.
It is a low cost way for the U.S. to learn war lessons that were never / would never be learned in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is a low cost testing ground for new capabilities, and their employment.
The U.S. is learning from Ukraine to shape defense procurement the same way they did from the Yom Kippur War (https://www.history.army.mil/html/books/069/69-4-1/cmhPub_69-4-1.pdf)
-Stan
Russia hit the F-16 training area on the ground. Killed a pilot from Denmark there training. I believe some airframes were lost as well. Not sure.
Russia hit Kiev today too. Train station.
Russia hit Kiev today too. Train station.
How many US vehicles are equipped with anti-drone screens despite the prolific use of them for the last three years? None.
Does the US military have a program to train and equip units with <$1k FPV drones despite widespread prolific use during the last three years? No.
How many Patriot systems has the US built to replace one destroyed in Ukraine? None.
Is the US manufacturing enough ordinance to replace what was sent to Ukraine? No.
Is the US still adopting the SIG Spear despite offering a limited to no real world capability increases? Yes.
Are the Marines still being gutted? Yes.
Will the F-35 ever be reliable enough to do more than periodic sorties against sand people? Maybe.
How are you going with the new and more expensive Stinger and Javelins?
Russian Military is stronger now then they were four years ago, veterans might even go back and start fucking like the end of all wars, somewhat restoring their population demographic without importing the third world like western countries.
Russia is now driven closer to China, these countries were never really historically friendly and this is a colossal fuck up, this is not great for US Indo-pacific interests. Given that a large part of US power projection relies on aircraft carriers and the war in Ukraine plus the Red Sea events show that missle interception is not successful as the MIC brochures, things could certainly be better.
I'd say actually to your first point it did the exact opposite for the Russian Military.
Before the Ukraine war the Russian Military was a typical European style paper tiger with useless bloated generals and idiots in charge and stupid beaten up conscripts and ancient ideas about how to fight ancient wars by throwing enough bodies against the wall.
Their weapons were outdated cold war relics.
The Russians got a very costly but in the end well worth it lesson on modern warfare and if anything their understanding of modern warfare is actually going to be better than most of our generals and such.
They got a lot of their old ancient stuff blowed up for them and had an excuse to bring factories online to make new stuff and start training recruits and school children on how future wars would be fought.
They have learned a huge amount in a short time and the Chinese and North Koreans have been taking notes and attending class.
We also got them to start being Sovereign and not rely on their enemies for things they need...
We also forced them to start forging a new set of alliances and a new global trade order and new defense pacts.
The Chinese and North Koreans also just got a free update in their tactics and understanding of modern warfare.
I'm going to say in the end actually this war has made Russia stronger and more combat ready.
The pretty much illegal financial things the Western powers did to the Russians made a huge part of the world say, well you know about that whole Dollar business, let's stop feeding New Rome and letting them use their currency to control and plunder us.
I'd say in the end Russia actually will come to see this war as a turning point in building themselves back up again.
That was mainly under Russian puppet rule with Yanukovych and Zlochevsky as CEO over Burisma.
Zlochevsky was an ethnic Russian from Donbas.
Putin made billions off of Ukraine, since nobody wants rubles.
When Yanukovych was thrown out, he lost his puppet and went to plan B with US Vice President Biden’s retard son, Hunter Biden, as an insurance policy to block the investigation into how he was using Burisma to launder his money.
When the new president Poroshenko was elected by the Ukrainian people, he made his close friend chief prosecutor, who took over the investigation into Burisma.
That was Viktor Shokin. Then Vice President Biden told Poroshenko, “You’re not getting the billion dollars until you fire the prosecutor."
Biden has been on Russian payroll since 1972. Obama has been doing Putin’s bidding his whole political career.
Notice how the MSM covered for Biden all during those times, and said it was really Ukraine who was corrupt, nothing to the story about Biden extorting Poroshenko.
How did dumb as a rock Biden know that Poroshenko didn’t fire Shokin?
Poroshnko secretly kept Shokin on to continue the investigation into these corrupt Russian front shell companies because they knew they were dirty.
That’s when Putin ordered Shokin to be assassinated.
They tried sniping him through his office window, then he was poisoned with mercury.
He barely survived the mercury poisoning and went into hiding.
What did Putin not want the world finding out about in his money-laundering operations in Ukraine?
Speaking of faggots, I see you brought the same bitching and moaning to the new thread.
It’s not my fault old moron couldn’t google and started posting his pedophile fantasies. I just wanted to quote them all for the world to see before he could edit them(which he did), and he was too stupid to stop posting them.
Back to Ukraine, the place that’s not America but gets all of our money.
Last edited:
No one gives a fuck about you, please try contribute something interesting about the war in ukraine.
Someone doesn’t understand baiting the butthurt, remember you brought this to the new thread… cry more.
Something something “control their egos”
Last edited:
It would be nice to keep this thread free of any personal fights, say talk only about military, political and related economic events. Just a suggestion.
Fake news there Bud. That's not what MSNBC, CNN and the others are saying as well as the defense department spokesman.
On line mappers claiming Velyka Novosilka is surrounded and forcing a retreat.
Russians also inching toward an encirclement of Pokrovsk
Russians also inching toward an encirclement of Pokrovsk
cool map....both sides should avail themselves of the car[tank] wash /nail salon /stadium/market and of course the pistol stops are a must for any attacking/retreating horde to stop for a break
Haven't been paying much attention because most of the "information" being given to us does indeed seem to be bullshit...
But a few thoughts based on what little attention and focus I've given the conflict:
• Just like carrier-based aircraft were the death knell of battleships in WW2... It seems the advent and proliferation of man-portable weapons and UAV's are the death knell of reliance on massive armored columns.
• Artillery is still the biggest killer
• Comms and logistics still win wars
• Smaller, mobile ground forces supported by artillery and UAV's... Infantry equipped with MANPAD's, Shotguns, and good radios to call for fire missions.
Seems to me we are looking at a combination of a return to WW1 trench warfare and Terminatoresque "War against the machines" style of conflict.
With the technological advancements in portable anti-aircraft/armor weapons... Conventional armor and manned aircraft have become too easy to destroy. They will have to advance OR we will see the proliferation of light, fast, maneuverable, and CHEAP mass-produced unmanned platforms.
We've all seen the robot "dogs" equipped with machine guns and such... I'm waiting for the robot "dog" with an 81 mm mortar platform and sub-platforms to carry the ammo... (They probably already exist) Now your ground guys don't have to worry about giving away their position via radio. They can spot a target, set up Fido, and start pissing bad news on the enemy without anyone knowing they were there until rounds start coming in.
Just thinking out loud. I might be all wrong. But it seems like maneuverability and versatility are going to rule the battlefield.
Mike
But a few thoughts based on what little attention and focus I've given the conflict:
• Just like carrier-based aircraft were the death knell of battleships in WW2... It seems the advent and proliferation of man-portable weapons and UAV's are the death knell of reliance on massive armored columns.
• Artillery is still the biggest killer
• Comms and logistics still win wars
• Smaller, mobile ground forces supported by artillery and UAV's... Infantry equipped with MANPAD's, Shotguns, and good radios to call for fire missions.
Seems to me we are looking at a combination of a return to WW1 trench warfare and Terminatoresque "War against the machines" style of conflict.
With the technological advancements in portable anti-aircraft/armor weapons... Conventional armor and manned aircraft have become too easy to destroy. They will have to advance OR we will see the proliferation of light, fast, maneuverable, and CHEAP mass-produced unmanned platforms.
We've all seen the robot "dogs" equipped with machine guns and such... I'm waiting for the robot "dog" with an 81 mm mortar platform and sub-platforms to carry the ammo... (They probably already exist) Now your ground guys don't have to worry about giving away their position via radio. They can spot a target, set up Fido, and start pissing bad news on the enemy without anyone knowing they were there until rounds start coming in.
Just thinking out loud. I might be all wrong. But it seems like maneuverability and versatility are going to rule the battlefield.
Mike
Sounds like it's well past time for us to be involved with NATO.
NATO has become a death cult, and personally I don't want to be a part of the destiny they are currently trying to self-manifest right now.
That's because it's the most propagandized conflict of our lifetime.
It's not about today or necessarily tomorrow.
It would be if our government actually put our country and Americans first, which it doesn't.
If our money wasn't going to Ukraine, the money would be going to some other global conflict that doesn't benefit Americans. Stopping the funding of Ukraine won't have immediate benefits to Americans, because that money will never be reallocated to Americans.
But it's all part of the bigger picture. Our country is now what? $35T in debt? And growing at a seemingly exponential rate. A large part of this is due to our rampant spending on our military and intelligence industrial complex, among other things.
What happens to Americans and that debt when say the day comes that the US dollar is no longer the worlds reserve currency?
Another aspect is blowback. How many Americans are going to get killed in the future by weapons we sold to Ukraine? Are we going to have Ukrainian terrorists in 10 years, who want to attack the US and Americans because we helped destroy their country and a generation of Ukrainians?
And how does increasing tensions with another nuclear power help Americans? The trend in escalation between us and Russia is pretty worrisome. Where does this all lead to? Are Americans going to be better off when we have more adverse relationships with nuclear adversaries?
This neocon thinking is exactly the result of our disastrous foreign policy implemented in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Libya, etc.
And it's currently turning out to be a disaster in Ukraine.
Spending billions to fight monsters abroad does nothing to help Americans at home. It only makes us worse off.
Saying it's "cheaper to fight them over there" is a false dichotomy.
We have zero business engaging Russia in proxy wars. It does not benefit Americans, it only makes us worse off.
if you watch this film, you may also be convinced that the UN is evil and needs to be kicked out of the country.
this sort of thing has happened in virtually every country the UN is deployed in numbers.
of course, this is just one of the issues i have, along with their funding of hamas terrorists, and their programs to flood america with migrants.
Honest question: do you consider $175 billion in aid to Ukraine (a material percentage of which has been taken via corruption in Ukraine) and the loss of a couple generations of Ukrainian men to be low-cost? What number of Ukrainian deaths would you consider to be high cost?
I can only comment from a U.S. perspective.
$175 billion is a rounding error compared to the $4 trillion spent in Afghanistan and Iraq combined.
And please note, “What I consider” isn’t me or my beliefs or my opinions or me trying to convince anyone of anything, it is the reality that I see, and it truly doesn’t matter because I don’t have the power to influence anything anyway.
-Stan
Last edited:
Putin walks past everybody else to shake DJT's hand.
no power of influence? welcome to the club.
Last edited:
I like how adding an -(insert faggot name) at the end of some retard paragraph makes ones arguments superior.
Have you, witnessed, that blood and, flesh can't be trusted
and only, this one, holy, medium brings me peace of mind- MJK
and only, this one, holy, medium brings me peace of mind- MJK
I don’t care if it ends. I just want all U.S. involvement, weapons, and funding out of it.
Similar threads
