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

h-hawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jan 29, 2002
39,565
30,210
113
FTRa2r1WIAEYHE4
 

fsu1jreed

HR Legend
Apr 1, 2002
48,136
4,805
113
Um no. Crimea was part of Russia since the time of the Tsar's, 1783 to 1917 and then part of the USSR , thus it's mostly Russians that live there. The mostly arbitraury lines occurred in the mess that was the breakup of the USSR.

It actually became autonomous republic in 1921, so while still affiliated with the SU, they governed themselves. By your logic, Russia has claim to everything west to East Germany.
 

noleclone2

HR Legend
May 4, 2015
13,328
38,539
113
It actually became autonomous republic in 1921, so while still affiliated with the SU, they governed themselves. By your logic, Russia has claim to everything west to East Germany.
I sometimes wonder if people like him and Natty Light are so clearly pro Russian because their family traces to back there. Never thought about it until now, but this event and war would suck if your great grandparents were all from Russia. You would have a Russian name and likely have studied their history and cultural with pride and now Putin is wiping his ass with it all and flushing it down the drain.
 

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
119,089
110,065
113
It actually became autonomous republic in 1921, so while still affiliated with the SU, they governed themselves. By your logic, Russia has claim to everything west to East Germany.

And the Dutch have claim to nearly the entire world outside Europe.....

#MAGAsDon'tReadHistoryBooksAnymore
 

torbee

HR King
Gold Member
Interesting to look at where the French are deploying these missiles. It’s on a coastal plain, with only a few buildings. NATO has been doing exercises for a few years there, and there are rows of berms around the place. It’s just north of Romania’s oil terminal, so it’s strategically important for several reasons. Agricultural exports go out a few miles to the south.
As much as the French are being knocked in this thread, I suspect they got this job because they are one of a few NATO nations that can move this hardware, and place the support troops quickly enough. If there is a move to free up Odessa, we will see more moves like this to protect critical infrastructure. Russia will have few moves left but to attack nations along the Black Sea. A mine was found and destroyed about 70 miles east of where the missiles have been placed last week.
The French Army is the largest and most modern in Europe. They have also been quite active in North Africa and have quite a few experienced troops. Don’t mistake the fecklessness of their leadership as a reflection of their military prowess.
 

torbee

HR King
Gold Member
Our Frontline troops are fundamentally made up of poor white kids from small towns.
Nope. Compared to general population, the military is much more demographically diverse:


The share of racial and ethnic minorities in the military has grown steadily in recent decades. Hispanics, in particular, are the fastest growing minority population in the military – a shift that aligns with larger demographic trends in the United States.

In 2004, 36% of active duty military were black, Hispanic, Asian or some other racial or ethnic group. Black service members made up about half of all racial and ethnic minorities at that time.


By 2017, the share of active duty military who were non-Hispanic white had fallen, while racial and ethnic minorities made up 43% – and within that group, blacks dropped from 51% in 2004 to 39% in 2017 just as the share of Hispanics rose from 25% to 36%.


 
Sep 23, 2011
2,173
2,560
113
Nope. Compared to general population, the military is much more demographically diverse:


The share of racial and ethnic minorities in the military has grown steadily in recent decades. Hispanics, in particular, are the fastest growing minority population in the military – a shift that aligns with larger demographic trends in the United States.

In 2004, 36% of active duty military were black, Hispanic, Asian or some other racial or ethnic group. Black service members made up about half of all racial and ethnic minorities at that time.


By 2017, the share of active duty military who were non-Hispanic white had fallen, while racial and ethnic minorities made up 43% – and within that group, blacks dropped from 51% in 2004 to 39% in 2017 just as the share of Hispanics rose from 25% to 36%.


Frontline, not in the rear with the gear.
 

Tenacious E

HR Legend
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
30,632
30,780
113
Frontline, not in the rear with the gear.
I am not weighing in on who is correct. Is there data on the demographics of people on the frontline, or is this anecdotal? Not saying anecdotal evidence cannot be correct or representative of the whole, I was just curious is there was data.
 

lucas80

HR King
Gold Member
Jan 30, 2008
92,052
115,419
113
I am not weighing in on who is correct. Is there data on the demographics of people on the frontline, or is this anecdotal? Not saying anecdotal evidence cannot be correct or representative of the whole, I was just curious is there was data.
I'm guessing there is no supportive data, and it came out of his ass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: torbee

torbee

HR King
Gold Member
I am not weighing in on who is correct. Is there data on the demographics of people on the frontline, or is this anecdotal? Not saying anecdotal evidence cannot be correct or representative of the whole, I was just curious is there was data.
It anusdotal. That is, he pulled it out of his ass.
 

hwk23

HR All-American
Nov 22, 2010
3,777
1,489
113
It actually became autonomous republic in 1921, so while still affiliated with the SU, they governed themselves. By your logic, Russia has claim to everything west to East Germany.

That's not my logic at all. My point was Crimea and the Donbas are unique when comparing former USSR areas in that mostly Russians live there, and it's been that way for a long time. Nothing like other former USSR, which are mainly different ethnic groups with a small % of Russians. Certainly not like Eastern Europe. Crimea was literally part of Russia in history. That's my point they aren't like the other former USSR or Eastern Europe.

To your other point, it was part of Russia 1783 to 1917. There are nuances but it basically was a part of the USSR from 1921 to 1991. They were called the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic and part of the USSR in 1922 (and joined Ukraine SSR in 1954). Many of the former USSR had the word "autonomous" in the name but they really weren't. Then the USSR breakup happed which was a complete mess. Maybe not everything got thought thru very well in the choas.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: 86Hawkeye

hawkeyetraveler

HR All-American
Gold Member
Aug 10, 2010
3,008
9,601
113
Lake rimmed cities of the midwestern states
Well argued blog post in the link below rebutting Chomsky and the “Putin appeasement wing” of US media/literati.

They are spot on

Excerpt from one of their rebuttals:

Pattern #7. Advocating that yielding to Russian demands is the way to avert the nuclear war

Since the Russian invasion, Ukraine lives in a constant nuclear threat, not just due to being a prime target for Russian nuclear missiles but also due to the Russian occupation of Ukrainian nuclear power plants.

But what are the alternatives to fighting for freedom? Unconditional surrender and then elimination of Ukrainians off the face of the Earth (see above)? Have you ever wondered why President Zelenskyy, with the overwhelming support of the Ukrainian people, is pleading with Western leaders to provide heavy weapons despite the potential threat of nuclear escalation? The answer to this question is not “Because of Uncle Sam”, but rather due to the fact that Russian war crimes in Bucha and many other Ukrainian citiesand villages have shown that living under Russian occupation is a tangible “hell on earth” happening right now, requiring immediate action.

Arguably, any concessions to Russia will not reduce the probability of a nuclear war but lead to escalation. If Ukraine falls, Russia may attack other countries (Moldova, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Finland or Sweden) and can also use its nuclear blackmail to push the rest of Europe into submission. And Russia is not the only nuclear power in the world. Other countries, such as China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea are watching. Just imagine what will happen if they learn that nuclear powers can get whatever they want using nuclear blackmail.
 

SalAunese

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jul 11, 2002
41,755
13,834
113
Minnesota
That's not my logic at all. My point was Crimea and the Donbas are unique when comparing to former USSR areas in that mostly Russians live there, and it's been that way for a long time. Nothing like any of the former USSR, which are mainly different ethnic groups with a small % of Russians. Certainly not like Eastern Europe. Crimea was literally part of Russia in history. That's my point they aren't like the other former USSR or Eastern Europe.

To your other point, it was a part of the Russia 1783 to 1917. There are nuances but it basically was a part of the USSR from 1921 to 1991. They were called the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic and part of the USSR in 1922 (and joined Ukraine SSR in 1954). Many of the former USSR had the word "autonomous" in the name but they really weren't. Then the USSR breakup happed which was a complete mess. Maybe not everything got thought thru very well in the choas.

The region has hardly been ethnically Russian until the 20th century. The area was depopulated several times, including the Soviet era, in which the indigenous peoples were resettled elsewhere in the USSR, much like what’s going on in the contested areas of Ukraine today. Also, Ukraine was partitioned and part of the Russian empire itself for centuries.
 

h-hawk

HR Legend
Gold Member
Jan 29, 2002
39,565
30,210
113
Among the borrowed Ukrainian arsenal, the Panzerfaust 3 has made an impressive showing against Russian armored columns. What is this shoulder-fired antitank rocket, where did it come from, and why is it striking fear into Vladimir Putin’s soldiers?

The Panzerfaust originated in World War II​

In 1943, with a resurgent Soviet army advancing on the Third Reich behind a phalanx of first-class tanks being produced in numbers that Germany has no hope of matching, Germany developed a small, simple, easy to use antitank weapon that could turn any wielder into a tank killer. Called the Panzerfaust (“armor fist”), it was essentially a tube that launched a rocket-propelled grenade with a shaped charge capable of penetrating armor at ranges up to 200 feet. The launching tube could be reloaded if extra warheads were available, but inexpensive enough to be discarded if they were not.

 
  • Like
Reactions: WhiteSoxClone