Russian Invasion of Ukraine Megathread - Episode III - Revenge of the Ruski (now unlocked with new skins and gameplay modes!!!)

Status
Not open for further replies.
If Russia is no threat to the US, why all the a-bloo-blooing about Russia starting WWIII? Also while the US has done some shit in recent memory like topple Iraq, the US didn't ANNEX Iraq.

Also, remember a lot of this "Billions in arms" the MSRP on new systems. Yes, Stingers delivered to Ukrain need to be replaced, but the systems are perishable and would have needed to be replaced anyway. And this argument is largely waved by Putaboos who believe that Ukraine's culture should be steam rolled and erased by Russia because if Russia doesn't finish the job of eliminating Ukrainian culture they started when they were comminist, Globohomo will make them have pride parades.

Arms manufacturing is also mostly a domestic industry, so that money printer is at least putting money back into the country instead of sending it directly to China.

East_Clintwood said:
Basically the only thing potentially stopping NATO's air power from bending Russia over on day 1 of any war, like we did to Saddam, was the potential threat of Russia's massive air defenses. However given their performance in Ukraine, and the fact they still haven't neutralized the Ukrainians it's pretty clear they wouldn't stand a hope of stopping a concerted NATO air campaign.
Click to expand...

Small quibble on this:
The bulk of Russian Airdefenses are being held back to counter a potential NATO strike. The only reason Putin believed his balls were big enough to take over Ukraine was because thanks to Joepedo pissing of the Taliban by renegging on Trump's pullout agreement, the US lost strike options from Afghanistan, allowing Russia to no longer need to fear a south-west strike. China also agreed to sit out their adventure in Ukraine, so western russia is rife with anti-air & point-defense.
Even getting publicly pantsed and spanked like they are in Ukraine, even if we take nukes off the table, Russia is still a threat. Just very clearly not as big of one as believed. Lol.

Even if before their abysmal showing, these defenses wouldn't stop a determined and dedicated strike on Moscow, they'd just make it prohibitively costly.
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
  • Agree
Reactions: ChefKiss, MrJokerRager, Thatguywholikesdeadspace and 9 others
Ghostse said:
Small quibble on this:
The bulk of Russian Airdefenses are being held back to counter a potential NATO strike. The only reason Putin believed his balls were big enough to take over Ukraine was because thanks to Joepedo pissing of the Taliban by renegging on Trump's pullout agreement, the US lost strike options from Afghanistan, allowing Russia to no longer need to fear a south-west strike. China also agreed to sit out their adventure in Ukraine, so western russia is rife with anti-air & point-defense.
Even getting publicly pantsed and spanked like they are in Ukraine, even if we take nukes off the table, Russia is still a threat. Just very clearly not as big of one as believed. Lol.
Click to expand...
That's a fair point, although I'd counter that while the bulk of their numbers have been held back, we've still seen all the individual systems themselves in action in some capacity which allows us to gauge their effectiveness. Consider the fact that Russian AA was regularly getting shit on by everything from cheap TB-2 drones, to crappy soviet planes with jury rigged AGM-88s to HIMARS. Now consider that NATO has access to shit like stealth, superior EW systems, and far better stand off capability than the Ukrainians have


Ghostse said:
Even if before their abysmal showing, these defenses wouldn't stop a determined and dedicated strike on Moscow, they'd just make it prohibitively costly.
Click to expand...
I've always thought their penchant for spamming AA around Moscow was a bit silly because
a)As you note if we really wanted to hit it, and were willing to pay the price we could
b)We don't want to attack Moscow because it's one of the things almost guaranteed to cause Russians to press the button.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: MrJokerRager and IAmNotAlpharius
East_Clintwood said:
That's a fair point, although I'd counter that while the bulk of their numbers have been held back, we've still seen all the individual systems themselves in action in some capacity which allows us to gauge their effectiveness. Consider the fact that Russian AA was regularly getting shit on by everything from cheap TB-2 drones, to crappy soviet planes with jury rigged AGM-88s to HIMARS. Now consider that NATO has access to shit like stealth, superior EW systems, and far better stand off capability than the Ukrainians have
Click to expand...
The Russians have a S400 battery down in Syria and the Syrians serveral S300s but the kikes still dab on the Damascus Airport on a regular basis with the F-35. Just check out Israel on Livemap from time to time. Sure you can also argue, that the S400 can absolutely track the F-35 but the Russians just don't shoot at the Israeli jets out of goodwill......
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
  • Disagree
Reactions: MrJokerRager, Derka Derka and Fanatical Pragmatist
Merry Christmas everyone. Praying for all the victims of war. And may the average Ukrainian Hardcore Gay Porn enjoyer turn his heart to Baby Jesus and the Virgin mother Mary!
1671888775470.png
 
  • Feels
  • Winner
Reactions: ResignedCustodes, MrJokerRager, Mav52ri and 4 others
I wonder, whilst Pelosi was busy smoochin' on Regina Jew Zelensky the other day, did she happen perchance to ask him about the body parts that are being trafficked out of the Ukraine at an alarming rate?
I would have guessed she'd be ripe for a new liver or something soon.

There's a rumor going around in "News" (reputable) circles, that a Euro country stopped a massive black market shipment of Ukrainian body parts last week... it's getting the Do Not Report treatment as it's "liable to promote conspiracy theories".

It's funny how things that were well known and acknowledged before this "war" are a crazy conspiracy theory now....
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Autistic
Reactions: trashdustry, ChefKiss, Broken Printer and 6 others
Snekposter said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-War

Technically not a war (since it was never declared as one by either side), but Continental war and politics dragged us into a shooting conflict with the French, and to the point of the British quietly giving the US Navy the cannons necessary to get its first true warships launched and our merchants traveling in English convoys for safety.

That is of course not mentioning the French and Indian War that was fought between the British and French colonies in North America as an extension of the worldwide Seven Years' War that would be the first of many global-scale European grudge matches, nor the fact the French and Spanish were active participants on our side in the Revolutionary War.

The only reason we didn't get dragged into any more Great Power wars until the 20th Century was because the only ones that might have involved us had the French and English teaming up to beat up the Russians
Click to expand...

The Quasi-War is not a good example of the US getting dragged into a Great Power war, since it's not a war, it's not us taking sides with Britain against France, and it ended as soon as our specific problem with France was resolved. The War of 1812, which someone else mentioned, also isn't a Napoleonic war, even though that conflict is in the background. First time we really take a side militarily in a European Great Power war is 1917. Even if I were to grant you the massive stretch of the Quasi-War, it ended in 1800.

You're trying to defend the claim that there is an "unbroken trend" of getting dragged into Great Power wars, when the shortest break in the trend anyone can come up with, under the most generous conditions, is over a century. That's not an "unbroken trend."

Fanatical Pragmatist said:
Let's say we do.
What good thing happens?
Does Bidenflation end?
Do outrageous gas prices go down?
Does the worker shortage stop?
Do housing prices go down?

Like fuck, I am so tired of this false dichotomy.
Click to expand...

People stop being killed, Western weapon stockpiles don't get depleted, and energy prices go down. Not as much, now that we blew up Nord Stream, but hey, no time like the present to stop throwing gas on a fire. And yes, every dollar we print has some effect on inflation. Every last bit of wealth Washington sends to Ukraine is prosperity taken from you and me. And are you saying we should be involved in wars as long as we can't prove nothing good will happen to us if we stay out?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Winner
Reactions: Radola Gajda, MrJokerRager, Thatguywholikesdeadspace and 5 others
Ghostse said:
If Russia is no threat to the US, why all the a-bloo-blooing about Russia starting WWIII? Also while the US has done some shit in recent memory like topple Iraq, the US didn't ANNEX Iraq.
Click to expand...
You clearly haven't spent much time on Reddit. OTOH Russia is an aggressive and powerful bully that is an existential threat to it's neighbours, on the other Russia is a paper tiger with the military might of Belgium.

The Reddit bros who post on this thread are obviously retarded so there's also that to consider.
 
  • Dumb
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: A Proud Black Woman, Ndnd, Foreign Merc and 11 others
Ghostse said:
If Russia is no threat to the US, why all the a-bloo-blooing about Russia starting WWIII? Also while the US has done some shit in recent memory like topple Iraq, the US didn't ANNEX Iraq.
Click to expand...

The threat now is wholly a consequence of us getting involved in a proxy war with them, part of which is to try and take control of their access to the Black Sea. Any threat would immediately end if the USA stopped trying to use gotcha moves to get control of Sevastopol.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with annexing territory. A lot of territory has switched hands under a lot of governments in the last 100 years. You know what a common cause for losing territory is? Violent overthrow of the sitting government that isn't recognized by the whole country - which is exactly the situation in Ukraine. We backed a coup and created a government in 2014 that has spent the last 8 years failing to secure all the territory it's claiming the right to rule, and now Russia's bit off a chunk.

To some degree, that's tough shit, and it certainly doesn't obligate the American people in any way. Maybe we should just not back coups in the first place.
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
  • Disagree
Reactions: Radola Gajda, MrJokerRager, Thatguywholikesdeadspace and 11 others
The Ugly One said:
The threat now is wholly a consequence of us getting involved in a proxy war with them, part of which is to try and take control of their access to the Black Sea. Any threat would immediately end if the USA stopped trying to use gotcha moves to get control of Sevastopol.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with annexing territory. A lot of territory has switched hands under a lot of governments in the last 100 years. You know what a common cause for losing territory is? Violent overthrow of the sitting government that isn't recognized by the whole country - which is exactly the situation in Ukraine. We backed a coup and created a government in 2014 that has spent the last 8 years failing to secure all the territory it's claiming the right to rule, and now Russia's bit off a chunk.

To some degree, that's tough shit, and it certainly doesn't obligate the American people in any way. Maybe we should just not back coups in the first place.
Click to expand...
TFW there is "nothing intrinsically wrong" with annexing territory, but coups are somehow big bad unholy sins that cannot be forgiven.
 
  • Winner
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, CrazyKahoots, MrJokerRager and 5 others
I think the US thing can be resolved thusly:
The US military completed its objectives given the scope and permissions allowed it.

It was never allowed to exterminate the Taliban thus they remained a force of opposition and reclaimed the country when we left. It was never allowed to wipe out North Vietnam this they reclaimed the country when we left.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: The Demon Pimp of Razgriz, MrJokerRager, Thatguywholikesdeadspace and 4 others
TheSockiestSock said:
I think the US thing can be resolved thusly:
The US military completed its objectives given the scope and permissions allowed it.

It was never allowed to exterminate the Taliban thus they remained a force of opposition and reclaimed the country when we left. It was never allowed to wipe out North Vietnam this they reclaimed the country when we left.
Click to expand...
It also relies on technical solutions to problems that are better resolved with items that are far less grandiose than expensive military drones and focuses on building governments that please the people in DC but fail to get the population to their side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hubelublub, MrJokerRager and TheDarknessGrows
TheSockiestSock said:
I think the US thing can be resolved thusly:
The US military completed its objectives given the scope and permissions allowed it.

It was never allowed to exterminate the Taliban thus they remained a force of opposition and reclaimed the country when we left. It was never allowed to wipe out North Vietnam this they reclaimed the country when we left.
Click to expand...

Why the fuck can't burgers take an L? Why do we have to be constantly subjected to their endless cope?

Burgers are really really good at bombing the ever living crap out of countries they've targeted for invasion. The 'prowess' of the US military is almost exclusively air power. They're shit at close infantry combat, they suck balls at running a coherent occupation and they're terrible at dealing with insurgents.

There are hundreds of examples but 2 spring to mind. The decision to liquidate the entire Iraqi government system and then feigning shock when chaos ensued and the pushing of LGBQT+ faggotry in Afghanistan of all places in the latter part of the occupation. A policy so fucking tone deaf that even the most pro western Afghan ran into the arms of the Taliban in horror.

It's been one geopolitical disaster after another and the Ukraine will be no different.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Golfing on the Moon 1971, madethistocomment, LikeRivenIRL and 23 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back