This might be a little tougher than Putin thought...

[h-hawk]

Another sign the status quo isn't working.



President Volodymyr Zelensky dismissed Oleh Huliak from the position of commander of Ukraine's Logistics Forces, replacing him with Volodymyr Karpenko, according to his decrees published on Feb. 29.

Zelensky replaces Logistics Forces commander​

 

[h-hawk]

 

[h-hawk]

 

[lucas80]

CSB, the wife and I were hiking in Saguaro NP (West), today and a pair of F-16s flew over in a tight formation. I hope one of them was being flown by a Ukrainian trainee.

 

[lucas80]

I thought some country like France or Romania did pledge to defend Moldova but can only find the multiple countries pledging military aid. It would be nice if Moldova could be the red line not to cross that Ukraine was not.

"Moreover, Chişinău is receiving support in the form of equipment from its Western partners, including on a bilateral basis. An example is the deal struck in October 2022 with Germany regarding the transfer of 19 Piranha IIIH armoured personnel carriers (nine units have been delivered so far, the rest are to be delivered to Moldova by the end of this year), drones and other equipment. In June 2023, Poland donated a large amount of equipment and ammunition to the Moldovan police. The United States regularly supplies the Moldovan army with significant amounts of equipment; a $3 million shipment containing personal protective equipment, reconnaissance drones, light infantry weapons and other equipment arrived in Chişinău this August.
The Moldovan government is interested in expanding and enhancing its cooperation with NATO, the EU and individual member states, and is also willing to start discussions on potentially joining the Alliance. Back in January 2023, President Sandu spoke about the possibility of shifting away from neutrality and joining a “larger alliance” in an interview for Politico. In July 2023, in turn, Moldova’s foreign minister Nicu Popescu argued that it was necessary to “intensify and accelerate” cooperation with NATO in order to ensure the country’s security. Nevertheless, a formal renunciation of neutrality seems impossible in the coming years, for both formal reasons (a two-thirds majority of MPs is required to change the constitution) and resistance from the public. The vast majority of Moldovans believe that the country’s neutral status guarantees their security because it does not provoke Russia. Although the number of people supporting Moldova’s accession to NATO has visibly increased since the invasion of Ukraine (in June 2023, it rose to about a third of Moldovans, compared to 20–25% in the years preceding the Russian aggression), more than half of the country’s residents (52–54%) are still opposed to such a move."

The Baltics, the Poles, and the Finnish need to lead the way on assisting Moldova. The playbook being used there will be used against them.

 

[h-hawk]

 

[h-hawk]

 

[h-hawk]

 

[SA_Hawk]

 

[h-hawk]

Brave people.

 

[h-hawk]

So it goes...

 

[Tenacious E]

 

[seminole97]

They don't really need to send ground troops. Just more boiling the frog.

Send aircraft and manned anti-air weapons. Europe could put 600+ modern warplanes in the skies of Ukraine, and Russian aircraft would disappear from Ukraine and the Black Sea.

Bomb any artillery, mlrs, or offensive actions and anti-air systems.

Then it's just the question of how quickly Russia's refineries, pipelines, port facilities, and tankers can all be hit and knocked out, and there goes 35% of Moscow's GDP, all in a couple months.

Yeah, Russians will probably do absolutely nothing if they start getting bombed by NATO.

I mean, what could they do?

FT

Vladimir Putin’s forces have rehearsed using tactical nuclear weapons at an early stage of conflict with a major world power, according to leaked Russian military files that include training scenarios for an invasion by China. The classified papers, seen by the Financial Times, describe a threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons that is lower than Russia has ever publicly admitted, according to experts who reviewed and verified the documents.

The cache consists of 29 secret Russian military files drawn up between 2008 and 2014, including scenarios for war-gaming and presentations for naval officers, which discuss operating principles for the use of nuclear weapons. Criteria for a potential nuclear response range from an enemy incursion on Russian territory to more specific triggers, such as the destruction of 20 per cent of Russia’s strategic ballistic missile submarines. “This is the first time that we have seen documents like this reported in the public domain,” said Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. “They show that the operational threshold for using nuclear weapons is pretty low if the desired result can’t be achieved through conventional means.” Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons, which can be delivered by land or sea-launched missiles or from aircraft, are designed for limited battlefield use in Europe and Asia, as opposed to the larger “strategic” weapons intended to target the US. Modern tactical warheads can still release significantly more energy than the weapons dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945. Although the files date back 10 years and more, experts claim they remain relevant to current Russian military doctrine. The documents were shown to the FT by western sources. The defensive plans expose deeply held suspicions of China among Moscow’s security elite even as Putin began forging an alliance with Beijing, which as early as 2001 included a nuclear no-first-strike agreement. In the years since, Russia and China have deepened their partnership, particularly since Xi Jinping took power in Beijing in 2012. The war in Ukraine has cemented Russia’s status as a junior partner in their relationship, with China throwing Moscow a vital economic lifeline to help stave off western sanctions. Yet even as the countries became closer, the training materials show Russia’s eastern military district was rehearsing multiple scenarios depicting a Chinese invasion. The exercises offer a rare insight into how Russia views its nuclear arsenal as a cornerstone of its defence policy — and how it trains forces to be able to carry out a nuclear first strike in some battlefield conditions.

 

[Slappy Pappy]

Yeah, Russians will probably do absolutely nothing if they start getting bombed by NATO.

I mean, what could they do?

FT

Vladimir Putin’s forces have rehearsed using tactical nuclear weapons at an early stage of conflict with a major world power, according to leaked Russian military files that include training scenarios for an invasion by China. The classified papers, seen by the Financial Times, describe a threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons that is lower than Russia has ever publicly admitted, according to experts who reviewed and verified the documents.

The cache consists of 29 secret Russian military files drawn up between 2008 and 2014, including scenarios for war-gaming and presentations for naval officers, which discuss operating principles for the use of nuclear weapons. Criteria for a potential nuclear response range from an enemy incursion on Russian territory to more specific triggers, such as the destruction of 20 per cent of Russia’s strategic ballistic missile submarines. “This is the first time that we have seen documents like this reported in the public domain,” said Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. “They show that the operational threshold for using nuclear weapons is pretty low if the desired result can’t be achieved through conventional means.” Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons, which can be delivered by land or sea-launched missiles or from aircraft, are designed for limited battlefield use in Europe and Asia, as opposed to the larger “strategic” weapons intended to target the US. Modern tactical warheads can still release significantly more energy than the weapons dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945. Although the files date back 10 years and more, experts claim they remain relevant to current Russian military doctrine. The documents were shown to the FT by western sources. The defensive plans expose deeply held suspicions of China among Moscow’s security elite even as Putin began forging an alliance with Beijing, which as early as 2001 included a nuclear no-first-strike agreement. In the years since, Russia and China have deepened their partnership, particularly since Xi Jinping took power in Beijing in 2012. The war in Ukraine has cemented Russia’s status as a junior partner in their relationship, with China throwing Moscow a vital economic lifeline to help stave off western sanctions. Yet even as the countries became closer, the training materials show Russia’s eastern military district was rehearsing multiple scenarios depicting a Chinese invasion. The exercises offer a rare insight into how Russia views its nuclear arsenal as a cornerstone of its defence policy — and how it trains forces to be able to carry out a nuclear first strike in some battlefield conditions.

And yet, nothing I listed would meet those standards.

America's standards are much simpler (as revealed back in '93): If we detect someone is going to use a nuke, we nuke them first.

 

[seminole97]

And yet, nothing I listed would meet those standards.

America's standards are much simpler (as revealed back in '93): If we detect someone is going to use a nuke, we nuke them first.

So you think Russia can beat NATO in a conventional war, because the Russians sure as hell don’t.

Did you see Putin’s comment the other day, where he acknowledged that the militaries are not comparable, but that Russia has nukes, and article V against Russia means nukes in response?

Do you think it’s safe ignore this warning, the way the neocons ignored the warnings about extending NATO into Ukraine in the first place?

How did that work out?

 

[Joes Place]

So you think Russia can beat NATO in a conventional war, because the Russians sure as hell don’t.

Did you see Putin’s comment the other day, where he acknowledged that the militaries are not comparable, but that Russia has nukes, and article V against Russia means nukes in response?

Do you think it’s safe ignore this warning, the way the neocons ignored the warnings about extending NATO into Ukraine in the first place?

How did that work out?

I think if Russia uses tactical nukes in Europe, their days of being any part of the world's economy are effectively over.

 

[h-hawk]

 

[MitchLL]

I think if Russia uses tactical nukes in Europe, their days of being any part of the world's economy are effectively over.

The longer this war goes, the more I believe Russia has nonfunctional nukes.

I still say make Moscow/St. Petersburg 2024's version of Nagasaki/Hiroshima.

 

[h-hawk]

 

[seminole97]

The longer this war goes, the more I believe Russia has nonfunctional nukes.

I still say make Moscow/St. Petersburg 2024's version of Nagasaki/Hiroshima.

What’s the worst that could happen, amirite?

Did you think Merkel was wrong when she stated that Russia would view a Ukrainian invitation to NATO as a declaration of war?

That judgement has been borne out as correct.

How does one witness the callous disregard for human life shown by the Russians thus far and think, ‘they wouldn’t pop a nuke’?

Is it really that you’ve convinced yourself that the thousands of warheads they have won’t work? How few would need to work to create the worst calamity in Western civilization?

Some of y’all are talking yourselves into batshit insane positions, like starting WW3.

 

[Joes Place]

Did you think Merkel was wrong when she stated that Russia would view a Ukrainian invitation to NATO as a declaration of war?

That judgement has been borne out as correct.

LOWUT?

Ukraine was never offered any invitation to NATO.

Finland & Sweden were, though

 

[jneffer]

LOWUT?

Ukraine was never offered any invitation to NATO.

Finland & Sweden were, though

ukraine and NATO have been "flirting" since ukraine was established as an independent country

and russia has been (to varying degrees of success, depending on the ukrainian leadership) trying to influence/subjugate ukraine for just as long

strongman dictators like putin are going to do what they do and retroactively justify it however they want

 

[Joes Place]

 

[Joes Place]

 

[Joes Place]

 

[seminole97]

LOWUT?

Ukraine was never offered any invitation to NATO.

Finland & Sweden were, though

Your obtuseness doesn’t change reality.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm

NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations. We welcome the democratic reforms in Ukraine and Georgia and look forward to free and fair parliamentary elections in Georgia in May. MAP is the next step for Ukraine and Georgia on their direct way to membership. Today we make clear that we support these countries’ applications for MAP.

 

[Slappy Pappy]

So you think Russia can beat NATO in a conventional war, because the Russians sure as hell don’t.

Did you see Putin’s comment the other day, where he acknowledged that the militaries are not comparable, but that Russia has nukes, and article V against Russia means nukes in response?

Do you think it’s safe ignore this warning, the way the neocons ignored the warnings about extending NATO into Ukraine in the first place?

How did that work out?

You just posted Russia admitting they would only use nukes if struck strategically (missile subs, central command bunkers, etc.), and now you're crying about more Putin bullshit. Do you think he wants to lose fast or lose slow? I said Russia's air force would be done in days over Ukraine and the Black Sea, as well as any anti air systems shooting at them. Thus so would any chance of further offenses in Ukraine.

Then it's just a matter of Ukraine drone attacks on their fossil fuel exporting infrastructure. No need for foreign troops on the front lines, though putting individual countries manning anti-missile systems in Ukraine and deploying troops on the border with Belarus to free up Ukraine troops would be fine as well.

Sorry, your hero Putin doesn't get to threaten to destroy the world if he's not allowed to invade and annex foreign countries. He gets away with it here, Moldova and the Baltics are next, and no doubt ninnies like you who love carrying water for their authoritarian dictator heros will scream about the US daring to oppose Russia's invasion of Latvia as well.

 

[Slappy Pappy]

View embedded media

Now do one with Putin holding Trump as a puppet as well.

 

[seminole97]

You just posted Russia admitting they would only use nukes if struck strategically

Your reading comprehension is terrible, which explains much about your views.

I quoted it, and even put in bold for your dumb ass, and you still didn’t comprehend it.

What does this mean to you:

Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. “They show that the operational threshold for using nuclear weapons is pretty low if the desired result can’t be achieved through conventional means.”

 

[GES4]

Do you think it’s safe ignore this warning, the way the neocons ignored the warnings about extending NATO into Ukraine in the first place?

This again? GTFO with your Ukraine's skirt was too short b*llsh&t.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

These profiteers still feeding the Russian army. Think you all would figure it out that war is ALWAYS about the money. Fools and hypocrites.

Jan 17 (Reuters) - Western companies supplied Russia with $2.9 billion worth of components that can be used for military production in the first 10 months of 2023 despite sanctions on Moscow, the Ukrainian president's office said on Wednesday.
Kyiv has been pressing its allies to tighten sanctions on Russia and close export control loopholes, saying that Moscow is still able to import military goods for its war in Ukraine.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-got-components-worth-29-bln-west-despite-sanctions-kyiv-says-2024-01-17/

 

[Slappy Pappy]

Your reading comprehension is terrible, which explains much about your views.

I quoted it, and even put in bold for your dumb ass, and you still didn’t comprehend it.

What does this mean to you:

Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin. “They show that the operational threshold for using nuclear weapons is pretty low if the desired result can’t be achieved through conventional means.”

EXACTLY.

So European leaders are finally waking up to the fact that if they allow Putin's threat of nukes to make them back down and let him have Ukraine, then he will know he can do the same thing to seize Moldova, seize Estonia and Lithuania, seize Poland and Berlin. He just has to keep waving the threar of nukes around, right, and he can CONQUER THE WORLD!

European leaders have finally figured out that Putin *has* to be stopped in Ukraine, or they will be fighting him in Europe. That's why they have finally realized they must send troops, and warplanes.

You will see countries start sending forces piecemeal. Boil the frog. Denmark will send 6 manned (trainers!) anti-missile systems. France depoys 20k "peacekeepers" to Belarus/Ukraine border. British troops are already launching missiles at Russia from Ukraine. Netherlands will send forces to service and maintain 40 Ukrainian F-16s, which will somehow, strangely, start to look like 80, then 160. Boil the frog.

Right now Russians are in Yemen, coordinating and participating in the attacks on US and international shipping. 800 Russian pilots fought against the US in Korea. John McCain was shot down by a Russian-manned anti-aircraft battery over Hanoi.

Russia's already lost about 50% of the ground they took in the initial invasion. Would a breakthrough of the land bridge cause them to give up on the rest and commit national suicide by tossing a nuke? Do you *really* think Russia wants to start nuking the land that Really Has Been Always Part Of Russia!

Does Putin realize that's the point he's most likely to get a bullet in the head?

 

[seminole97]

This again? GTFO with your Ukraine's skirt was too short b*llsh&t.

Is that what prompted JFK? Castro’s skirt was too short?

Ambassador (now CIA Director) Burns cable is there for everyone to see.

Merkel certainly understood.

Were the neocons clueless, or did they prefer this outcome, where they could get Russia to ‘fire the first shot’?

In 2014 I truly thought the former. After 2022 it’s clear the latter was always the goal. And now we have another failed war, with hundreds of thousands dead, and some folks cheering for it to turn into millions.

 

[seminole97]

Do you *really* think Russia wants to start nuking the land that Really Has Been Always Part Of Russia!

No, I think they’d start by nuking a city like Lvov. If that didn’t get enough attention cities in Western Europe and the U.S.

How many of those do you want to trade for “land that Really Has Been Always Part Of Russia!”

 

[MitchLL]

No, I think they’d start by nuking a city like Lvov. If that didn’t get enough attention cities in Western Europe and the U.S.

How many of those do you want to trade for “land that Really Has Been Always Part Of Russia!”

Even Putin knows that the US has the most potent military in the world.

He's not nuking anything because he knows what the response will be.

Your crap gets old.

 

[GES4]

No, I think they’d start by nuking a city like Lvov. If that didn’t get enough attention cities in Western Europe and the U.S.

How many of those do you want to trade for “land that Really Has Been Always Part Of Russia!”

Interesting choice of spelling for Lviv. Sort of gives away your alliances.

 

[seminole97]

Interesting choice of spelling for Lviv. Sort of gives away your alliances.

LOL
You dolt.
Read any books on WW2?
That’s how it’s always spelled.
I guess we could go with Lwow, when the Poles controlled it, or perhaps Lemberg, from when Austria-Hungary controlled it.

But really, I need you to call up the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Musuem and tell them you think their spelling ‘gives away their alliances’.

Tell us what they say to you when you do that.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/lvov

 

[GES4]

LOL
You dolt.
Read any books on WW2?
That’s how it’s always spelled.
I guess we could go with Lwow, when the Poles controlled it, or perhaps Lemberg, from when Austria-Hungary controlled it.

But really, I need you to call up the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Musuem and tell them you think their spelling ‘gives away their alliances’.

Tell us what they say to you when you do that.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/lvov

“Like it always was….” LMAO

 

[Joes Place]

Your obtuseness doesn’t change reality.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm

NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations. We welcome the democratic reforms in Ukraine and Georgia and look forward to free and fair parliamentary elections in Georgia in May. MAP is the next step for Ukraine and Georgia on their direct way to membership. Today we make clear that we support these countries’ applications for MAP.

Not seeing any "invitation" there.

You seem confused.

 

[seminole97]

Not seeing any "invitation" there.

You seem confused.

What does this mean: "We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO."