Russia vs. Ukraine Part 2

[Wolfhound]

What it basically boiled down to IMO is that the US/NATO goal for Russia after the Cold War was a neutered, compliant state that could be converted into a bottomless strip mine/oil well/timber forest to exploit at our lesiure. Europe happily closed up their industry and shifted to pumping out Russian gas. Yeltsin's buffoonery played right into that, until someone else came along and decided Russia should act like a nation again.

We have absolutely no intention of ever treating Russia like an equal. The whole motive behind our involvement in this war is the belief that we can run the Afghanistan cycle again, collapse them again, and loot them of resources for another couple decades. I think we have always related to Russia in bad faith, and they know it, and have frequently returned the favor.

Such a waste.

I sure wish we had something to show for the blood and treasure wasted in Afghanistan. If you have something to reference to show what we got in return I would sure like to see it. Seems like two trillion and thousands of lives given up for nothing.

 

[Ark]

I sure wish we had something to show for the blood and treasure wasted in Afghanistan. If you have something to reference to show what we got in return I would sure like to see it. Seems like two trillion and thousands of lives given up for nothing.

I am really afraid that we learned absolutely freaking nothing and will just do it all again in Ukraine or the next place.

 

[Wolfhound]

I am really afraid that we learned absolutely freaking nothing and will just do it all again in Ukraine or the next place.

I have to agree.

 

[smokingman]

Heritage Foundation Releases 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, Gives U.S. Military First-Ever ‘Weak’ Overall Rating

WASHINGTON—For the first time, The Heritage Foundation’s Index of U.S. Military Strength finds that as currently postured, the U.S. military is rated “weak” and at significant risk of not being able to meet the demands of a single major regional conflict while attending to various presence and...

www.heritage.org

 

[DadSmith]

Russia accuses British navy personnel of blowing-up Nord Stream gas pipelines

Britain denies the claims calling them ‘false claims of an epic scale’

www.irishtimes.com

Russia’s defence ministry on Saturday said that British navy personnel blew up the Nord Stream gas pipelines last month, directly accusing a leading Nato member of sabotaging critical Russian infrastructure.

 

[nra4ever]

 

[Wolfhound]

Russia accuses British navy personnel of blowing-up Nord Stream gas pipelines

Britain denies the claims calling them ‘false claims of an epic scale’

www.irishtimes.com

Russia’s defence ministry on Saturday said that British navy personnel blew up the Nord Stream gas pipelines last month, directly accusing a leading Nato member of sabotaging critical Russian infrastructure.

I was coming here to post this story. SKY news is saying the same thing but Russia is presenting absolutely no evidence at this point.

Ukraine latest news: Moscow blames UK navy for Nord Stream pipeline blasts - as Putin's troops 'likely' to withdraw from Kherson

Latest updates as Russia claims it repelled drone strike in Crimea, with one ship damaged; Putin's troops 'likely' to withdraw from Kherson, military expert says; Russia blames UK navy for Nord Stream gas pipeline blasts - but British experts rebuff "straight lie".

news.sky.com

 

[Libertarian01]

Heritage Foundation Releases 2023 Index of U.S. Military Strength, Gives U.S. Military First-Ever ‘Weak’ Overall Rating

WASHINGTON—For the first time, The Heritage Foundation’s Index of U.S. Military Strength finds that as currently postured, the U.S. military is rated “weak” and at significant risk of not being able to meet the demands of a single major regional conflict while attending to various presence and...

www.heritage.org

If this is a real analysis of our military strength, then the Heritage Foundation is a JOKE and unworthy of being considered anywhere near credible.

Our navy is weak? Really???

We have eleven (11) super-carriers. The rest of the world has... um... zero (0). The next best is the British with two (2) carriers total, both of which are about 40,000 tons less than ours.

All of our Nimitz and Ford class carriers are nuclear. Only the French have a single nuclear carrier. This grants our navy unlimited range and deployment.

The US navy is unequaled and will remain so for decades to come, and the morons at Heritage Foundation rate us as weak today??? Who exactly are they comparing us to? The US naval numbers at the end of WWII?

Regards,

Doug

PS - I ignored our two (2) America class carriers and our seven (7) Wasp class carriers.

 

[Shadow01]

I am really afraid that we learned absolutely freaking nothing and will just do it all again in Ukraine or the next place.

If you annihilate your enemy, the war machine producers have no way to make profits in the decades to come. Allowing them to survive and grow provides a future opportunity to those profits again.

 

[Ark]

If you annihilate your enemy, the war machine producers have no way to make profits in the decades to come. Allowing them to survive and grow provides a future opportunity to those profits again.

"Mowing the grass"

 

[actaeon277]

Strength isn't just carriers.
You need smaller stuff.
There needs to be LOTS of training and exercises.
There also needs to be a WARRIOR mentality.
Worrying about feelings is not important in conflict.

 

[Libertarian01]

Strength isn't just carriers.
You need smaller stuff.
There needs to be LOTS of training and exercises.
There also needs to be a WARRIOR mentality.
Worrying about feelings is not important in conflict.

I don't disagree about it "just" being carriers. I did, however, focus on carriers because they can destroy countries on their own. With aircraft they can destroy countries, or entire regions of continents. Oh, and they can destroy lots of smaller stuff (ships) all on their own. One Nimitz can single-handedly destroy almost any other navy in the world. Two (2) Nimitz's? Any navy, anywhere, anytime. And we have ten (10) of them.

We also have better submarines, destroyers, cruisers, etc.

Every branch always needs lots of training and exercises. However, the US Navy, just working daily, does much of what would be expected in wartime anyway. Look how horrible the Russians are doing now - today. They have already sent about 30,000 troops THEY JUST RECRUITED to the front in Ukraine. They are going to be practically useless there. I feel sorry for them. I really do.

There does need to be a warrior mentality and not worrying about feelings. However, whatever degradation to mindset we may perceive in our military certainly is NOT limited to just us.

And we do want soldiers who are disciplined enough to not anger the locals. Winning the hearts and minds is very important. Again, ask the Russians how well it's going when every angry Ukrainian can get on their cell phone and tell where General Blownupski is.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Leadeye]

I've heard that everytime an Ohio class sub leaves port it is the 5th largest nuclear power in the world, Act will have a more accurate idea though.

 

[BigRed]

Maybe we should use some of that nuclear know how to generate power instead of the windmill / solar panel bull****.

 

[BugI02]

Nope. They need to make cheap energy (coal, NG, nuclear) expensive so that will make their preferred, expensive energy (solar, windmill) look price-competitive by comparison

Energy costs in Commiefornia are approximately 3x the national average

 

[actaeon277]

I've heard that everytime an Ohio class sub leaves port it is the 5th largest nuclear power in the world, Act will have a more accurate idea though.

not exactly surgical instruments.
But, if you're telling someone, NO MATTER what they do to you, you'll pay it back with interest...

 

[Leadeye]

My guess is that if you started trying to build new nuc power plants today it would be decades before they started producing power. I remember when the industry collapsed and the debts incurred when plants under construction or operating were written off. I don't think a new one has been commissioned since the 70s.

 

[buckwacker]

I don't disagree about it "just" being carriers. I did, however, focus on carriers because they can destroy countries on their own. With aircraft they can destroy countries, or entire regions of continents. Oh, and they can destroy lots of smaller stuff (ships) all on their own. One Nimitz can single-handedly destroy almost any other navy in the world. Two (2) Nimitz's? Any navy, anywhere, anytime. And we have ten (10) of them.

We also have better submarines, destroyers, cruisers, etc.

Every branch always needs lots of training and exercises. However, the US Navy, just working daily, does much of what would be expected in wartime anyway. Look how horrible the Russians are doing now - today. They have already sent about 30,000 troops THEY JUST RECRUITED to the front in Ukraine. They are going to be practically useless there. I feel sorry for them. I really do.

There does need to be a warrior mentality and not worrying about feelings. However, whatever degradation to mindset we may perceive in our military certainly is NOT limited to just us.

And we do want soldiers who are disciplined enough to not anger the locals. Winning the hearts and minds is very important. Again, ask the Russians how well it's going when every angry Ukrainian can get on their cell phone and tell where General Blownupski is.

Regards,

Doug

Why didn't we use one of these carriers to win the war in Afghanistan?

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Why didn't we use one of these carriers to win the war in Afghanistan?

No political will. Which is why there's never been a formal declaration of war since WWII.

 

[KellyinAvon]

Why didn't we use one of these carriers to win the war in Afghanistan?

We did. In the early days of Operation Enduring Freedom we did win using Special Operations Forces and Airpower. USAF brought the heavies, USN brought the fighters.

Then after years of nation-building...