Russia begins moving troops into eastern Ukraine

[Au165]

(02-24-2022, 03:08 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: Missile strikes were observed from Kharkiv, in the northeast of the country. There are unconfirmed reports of people hearing missile strikes in Kiev, 100 miles west. There is nothing wrong with the live satellite feed I'm watching.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2022/feb/24/ukraine-russian-missile-strikes-reported-in-kharkiv-and-kyiv-video

Again, it was confirmed by the Ukrainian ministry and mayor of Kyiv. There are now pictures this morning of aftermath including missile remains in the city. It’s all moot as troops have entered the country through Belarus on their way towards Kyiv, so the larger point of occupation is looking more and more likely by the hour.

[GMDino]

I will preface by saying that during any war there are those who oppose it.  People in the media who speak out against our own government because they do not believe in the war.  There were those in America who supported Hitler...still are.

But I don't remember a former POTUS speaking out against the current one AND lying/being mistaken about the facts of the attack.

Laura Ingraham says president of Ukraine asking Putin not to invade his country was a “pathetic display.” Then has to explain to Trump that America wasn’t launching an amphibious attack on Ukraine. (Which Trump thought should be kept secret). pic.twitter.com/q9MXu09Zr4

— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahDispatch) February 24, 2022

 

[Bengalzona]

(02-24-2022, 08:36 AM)Au165 Wrote: Again, it was confirmed by the Ukrainian ministry and mayor of Kyiv. There are now pictures this morning of aftermath including missile remains in the city. It’s all moot as troops have entered the country through Belarus on their way towards Kyiv, so the larger point of occupation is looking more and more likely by the hour.

If there are missile remains in the city, it is a wayward strike. The Russians are not bombing or shelling population centers. The initial attacks are on command and control centers, the military communication grid, the Ukrainian air defense network, etc., all of which are located in the countryside outside of major cities. They especially need that air defense network down to establish air superiority. This is why they are reporting that the Russians have lost six jets so far.

The Russians don't need to direct attacks against civilian population centers. News of the missile strikes and Russians crossing the borders are more than sufficient to spread terror without causing civilian casualties. The unfortunate fact is that most Ukrainians did not think that Putin would do it.

[Au165]

(02-24-2022, 12:46 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: If there are missile remains in the city, it is a wayward strike. The Russians are not bombing or shelling population centers. The initial attacks are on command and control centers, the military communication grid, the Ukrainian air defense network, etc., all of which are located in the countryside outside of major cities. They especially need that air defense network down to establish air superiority. This is why they are reporting that the Russians have lost six jets so far.

The Russians don't need to direct attacks against civilian population centers. News of the missile strikes and Russians crossing the borders are more than sufficient to spread terror without causing civilian casualties. The unfortunate fact is that most Ukrainians did not think that Putin would do it.

Who said they were direct attacks on civilians? I said they were bombing Kyiv, they did. The airports and installations bombed are in fact in Kyiv among other places, point being it was never just about the eastern territories Putin claimed and was the context of my reply to the poster you tried to contradict, and failed to do so. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

I'm wondering if this would not be the perfect time to declare war on Russia.

Now, here me out, because I already know that first sentence is going to rile people up. What I am discussing would not be a ground war, at all. The US could declare war, a just war against an aggressor, and then solely target Russian air and naval assets. In both areas the US has a massive advantage. You would also be able to take out Russian shipping as well. Now, this would not cause them significant economic grief, because China will give them whatever they need. But it would cripple their ability to project power beyond bordering neighbors, all of which will be on high alert against them. Russia does not have the economy to recoup even middling losses to their air force and navy, so any damage we inflict, which would be considerable, would take an extremely long time to replace, if they could be replaced at all. Plus it gives us a chance to really damage Russia without China intervening militarily, as China has already declared themselves essentially neutral in this conflict.

I know there is always the risk of escalation, or even the use of nuclear weapons. But I do think that delaying conflict with Russia is just that, delaying it. And it's likely that when the time of such conflict is chosen by someone other than us it will not be just Russian we are facing. Anyways, I thought I'd throw it out there for discussion as we all impotently look on at the first war of aggression in Europe since WW2.

[GMDino]

Perhaps Texas would like to be part of Russia now too.

Steve Bannon and Erik Prince say we should be supporting Russia because Putin is anti-woke and has no tolerance for LGBTQ. pic.twitter.com/qzHl2TkwxJ

— Ron Filipkowski (@RonFilipkowski) February 24, 2022

 

[Bengalzona]

(02-24-2022, 12:52 PM)Au165 Wrote: Who said they were direct attacks on civilians? I said they were bombing Kyiv, they did. The airports and installations bombed are in fact in Kyiv among other places, point being it was never just about the eastern territories Putin claimed and was the context of my reply to the poster you tried to contradict, and failed to do so. 

I encourage you to go back and re-read our exchanges.

[Au165]

(02-24-2022, 01:15 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I encourage you to go back and re-read our exchanges.

I’d do the same if I were you, you said “there are currently no bomb strikes in Kyiv” and that was false. You made the same claim when I was speaking to another poster about the overall goal. Never was it mentioned there was any attack on civilians you brought that qualifier in just recently unprompted.

[Au165]

(02-24-2022, 12:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm wondering if this would not be the perfect time to declare war on Russia.

Now, here me out, because I already know that first sentence is going to rile people up. What I am discussing would not be a ground war, at all. The US could declare war, a just war against an aggressor, and then solely target Russian air and naval assets. In both areas the US has a massive advantage. You would also be able to take out Russian shipping as well. Now, this would not cause them significant economic grief, because China will give them whatever they need. But it would cripple their ability to project power beyond bordering neighbors, all of which will be on high alert against them. Russia does not have the economy to recoup even middling losses to their air force and navy, so any damage we inflict, which would be considerable, would take an extremely long time to replace, if they could be replaced at all. Plus it gives us a chance to really damage Russia without China intervening militarily, as China has already declared themselves essentially neutral in this conflict.

I know there is always the risk of escalation, or even the use of nuclear weapons. But I do think that delaying conflict with Russia is just that, delaying it. And it's likely that when the time of such conflict is chosen by someone other than us it will not be just Russian we are facing. Anyways, I thought I'd throw it out there for discussion as we all impotently look on at the first war of aggression in Europe since WW2.

If your doing it, you do it through article 5 of NATO agreement as I don’t think they stop at Ukraine with Moldova right there and being considered similarly in the eyes of Putin. At least going via Article 5 you know your not alone.

[Bengalzona]

(02-24-2022, 12:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm wondering if this would not be the perfect time to declare war on Russia.

Now, here me out, because I already know that first sentence is going to rile people up.  What I am discussing would not be a ground war, at all. The US could declare war, a just war against an aggressor, and then solely target Russian air and naval assets.  In both areas the US has a massive advantage.  You would also be able to take out Russian shipping as well.  Now, this would not cause them significant economic grief, because China will give them whatever they need.  But it would cripple their ability to project power beyond bordering neighbors, all of which will be on high alert against them.  Russia does not have the economy to recoup even middling losses to their air force and navy, so any damage we inflict, which would be considerable, would take an extremely long time to replace, if they could be replaced at all.  Plus it gives us a chance to really damage Russia without China intervening militarily, as China has already declared themselves essentially neutral in this conflict.

I know there is always the risk of escalation, or even the use of nuclear weapons.  But I do think that delaying conflict with Russia is just that, delaying it.  And it's likely that when the time of such conflict is chosen by someone other than us it will not be just Russian we are facing.  Anyways, I thought I'd throw it out there for discussion as we all impotently look on at the first war of aggression in Europe since WW2.

Interesting points.

I was also sort of wondering about a limited U.S. military intervention (say, attacks on the Russian air defense network in and around Ukraine). And I totally agree about their economy not being able to re-coup air and naval losses. But I think China is the big wild card in this. Personally, I suspect China and Russia are a lot closer than we might think. And I am wondering if China is eyeing the situation with the idea that this may be the perfect time to invade Taiwan (and they really, really want to do that). I think the leadership in Washington is playing it more conservative because of that.

[Au165]

(02-24-2022, 01:24 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Interesting points.

I was also sort of wondering about a limited U.S. military intervention (say, attacks on the Russian air defense network in and around Ukraine). And I totally agree about their economy not being able to re-coup air and naval losses. But I think China is the big wild card in this. Personally, I suspect China and Russia are a lot closer than we might think. And I am wondering if China is eyeing the situation with the idea that this may be the perfect time to invade Taiwan (and they really, really want to do that). I think the leadership in Washington is playing it more conservative because of that.

China has committed to purchase Russian grain to prop up their economy. They will provide material support enough to draw it out.

[Bengalzona]

(02-24-2022, 01:19 PM)Au165 Wrote: I’d do the same if I were you, you said “there are currently no bomb strikes in Kyiv” and that was false. You made the same claim when I was speaking to another poster about the overall goal. Never was it mentioned there was any attack on civilians you brought that qualifier in just recently unprompted.

At the time I wrote that last night, that was correct. And when you say someone is bombing a city rather than bombing the outskirts of a city, that does tend to make people think the civilians are being targeted, eh.

[Bengalzona]

(02-24-2022, 01:26 PM)Au165 Wrote: China has committed to purchase Russian grain to prop up their economy. They will provide material support enough to draw it out.

Good point. I'm wondering if China may start (if they aren't already) propping up the Russians with loans.

[WeezyBengal]

(02-24-2022, 12:54 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm wondering if this would not be the perfect time to declare war on Russia.

Now, here me out, because I already know that first sentence is going to rile people up.  What I am discussing would not be a ground war, at all. The US could declare war, a just war against an aggressor, and then solely target Russian air and naval assets.  In both areas the US has a massive advantage.  You would also be able to take out Russian shipping as well.  Now, this would not cause them significant economic grief, because China will give them whatever they need.  But it would cripple their ability to project power beyond bordering neighbors, all of which will be on high alert against them.  Russia does not have the economy to recoup even middling losses to their air force and navy, so any damage we inflict, which would be considerable, would take an extremely long time to replace, if they could be replaced at all.  Plus it gives us a chance to really damage Russia without China intervening militarily, as China has already declared themselves essentially neutral in this conflict.

I know there is always the risk of escalation, or even the use of nuclear weapons.  But I do think that delaying conflict with Russia is just that, delaying it.  And it's likely that when the time of such conflict is chosen by someone other than us it will not be just Russian we are facing.  Anyways, I thought I'd throw it out there for discussion as we all impotently look on at the first war of aggression in Europe since WW2.

Based on this quote: 

“A couple of words for those who would be tempted to intervene. Russia will respond immediately and you will have consequences that you never have had before in your history,” -Putin


I would say that sounds like an absolutely terrible idea. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-24-2022, 01:22 PM)Au165 Wrote: If your doing it, you do it through article 5 of NATO agreement as I don’t think they stop at Ukraine with Moldova right there and being considered similarly in the eyes of Putin. At least going via Article 5 you know your not alone.

Ideally, yes.  However, I don't think the EU has the huevos for that type of move.  Hell, I don't we do right now either, but we are speaking speculatively.

(02-24-2022, 01:24 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Interesting points.

I was also sort of wondering about a limited U.S. military intervention (say, attacks on the Russian air defense network in and around Ukraine). And I totally agree about their economy not being able to re-coup air and naval losses. But I think China is the big wild card in this. Personally, I suspect China and Russia are a lot closer than we might think. And I am wondering if China is eyeing the situation with the idea that this may be the perfect time to invade Taiwan (and they really, really want to do that). I think the leadership in Washington is playing it more conservative because of that.

China and Russia are essentially allies at this point.  However, if China throws in with Russia on this unprovoked war their days of trading with the West are done and their economy, which I strongly suspect is much weaker than presented, collapses.  They would certainly assist Russia "under the table", but it wouldn't be close to enough.  For them to make really meaningful contributions to Russia they'd have to do so openly, which brings about the same problem.

(02-24-2022, 01:30 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Good point. I'm wondering if China may start (if they aren't already) propping up the Russians with loans.

That's a guarantee, but they'd do so surreptitiously.  They can't risk becoming a global pariah (which they already should be) at the present time.

I neglected to mention, you cease all Russian assets held in other countries (that would go along with it) and ban all Russian exports.  Yes, China will help them, but that will still hurt and the asset seizure would be permanent.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-24-2022, 01:39 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Based on this quote: 

“A couple of words for those who would be tempted to intervene. Russia will respond immediately and you will have consequences that you never have had before in your history,” -Putin


I would say that sounds like an absolutely terrible idea. 

You think Putin will start a nuclear war that will end in the utter destruction of his country and all its people?  You're clearly not familiar with the concept of the small dog barking the loudest.  In any event, what's to stop him from making the same threat when he invades anywhere else?  You want to curl into a ball because of the above statement?  Well, that's exactly what he's counting on.

[Au165]

(02-24-2022, 01:30 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Good point. I'm wondering if China may start (if they aren't already) propping up the Russians with loans.

I believe so. Russia’s big export of natural gas to Germany even beyond Nord Stream 2 may be killed off so I am guessing China will prop them up on that front too.

[Sled21]

(02-22-2022, 06:45 PM)Nately120 Wrote: There has been a lot of right wing admiration for Putin starting in the Obama era.  I think the propaganda for Biden to get his ass kicked and a Trump/Flynn ticket to save us is going to gain steam. 

As bleh as Biden is, he's not bad at the foreign policy thing, but reality ain't gonna rule the day. 

Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy decision in last 4 decades - Washington Times

Quote:Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy decision in last 4 decades

[Sled21]

Russian troops are trying to take the area around Chernobyl. That is sinister.

[*Nately120*]

(02-24-2022, 02:09 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy decision in last 4 decades - Washington Times

He doesn't fall in love with murderous dictators, so the bar is pretty low, I'll admit.