- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
It’s ok boss it’s ok boss
-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
UA-RU-NATO | DISCUSSIONS (Closed)
- Thread starter Spyglass
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2016
I couldn't agree more.
I sometimes think that humans are the dumbest creatures on the planet.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
Are you saying those images are from an Israel battle and not Ukraine battle? Cite your proof.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2015
Those my friends are old Tiran 5 Tanks. Attempting to geolocate the Israeli armored combat course at Camp Shizafon.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
I love the argument of no subjective truth.Ok we can play this. I find such actions constantly repeating lately with no surprise. Amazing considering claims on Putin and shutting down people. Yet freedom of speech here could be related to such claims.ignorance is bliss is just a saying. Evidence exists, history is yet another i guess the enemies like to delete, eradicate and or ignore. Not unlike here.
Enjoy yourself. As im sure you do.
They were denied because they were unwilling to comply with membership rules of nato. And the move for them to join ended there
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule
The same year, according to the then-NATO chief George Robertson, Putin bluntly asked: “When are you going to invite us to join Nato?” Robertson advised the Russian president that he needs to “apply to join NATO” and not expect an invitation.
The following quotes are from the Moscow times
5 Reasons Why Russia Will Never Join NATO
Opinion | On Sept. 22 in New York, the NATO-Russia Council met for the first time after ties were severed in the aftermath of the Russia-Georgia war of 2008. On the eve of the meeting, Ivo Daalder, U.S. ambassador to NATO, dropped a hint about future NATO membership for Russia.
www.themoscowtimes.com
1. NATO requires that its members have civilian and democratic control over their armed forces. This is a fundamental principal that allows for military integration and inter-operability among members. Although NATO countries have different political systems — some are presidential republics, others are parliamentary — they all have transparent defense budgets and public and legislative oversight over their countries’ military affairs. This includes independent investigations into military failures and abuses, parliamentary control over how funds are allocating — or not allocated — for weapons programs and constitutional checks and balances on a leader’s ability to send troops to fight in foreign military operations.
In Russia, however, civil control over the military is anathema to the basic principles of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s vertical power structure, which has effectively folded all three branches of power into one huge executive branch. Any autocratic power, by definition, rejects public accountability in all spheres of government — and this is particularly true for its armed forces. In Russia, a lack of public and parliamentary accountability allows the Defense Ministry to cover up the true scope of its inefficiencies, blunders and overall backwardness. In addition, a closed military structure also allows rampant corruption at all levels of the military to continue unchecked. As long as the vertical power structure is in place — whether it be headed by Putin or his successor — there will never be civilian control over the military.
Another reason why Russia will fiercely resist NATO’s requirement for transparency in military affairs is that it is hypersensitive about sharing its “military secrets” with NATO — particularly concerning its nuclear forces — even when its so-called secrets are well-known in the West. Nonetheless, a commitment to transparency is a basis for cooperation among NATO members.
4. The Collective Security Treaty Organization. NATO membership would effectively mean the end of the CSTO, which Russia has worked so hard on since its creation in 2002 to compete with NATO for influence in the global security arena. “I believe it [Russia’s membership in NATO] is absurd,” said CSTO chief Nikolai Bordyuzha on Sept. 16. “What is the sense of NATO membership if Russia has created its own security framework with its allies and this system of collective security functions well?”
Rogozin, for his part, in an April 2009 interview with European-Asian News service, said: “We can handle our security problems independently. … We don’t need NATO.”
5. Russia’s global ambitions. Most important, Russian membership in NATO would all but mean the end of Russia’s dream of restoring its former superpower status. By joining NATO, Russia would effectively become “just another large European country” on the same level as Germany, Britain or France — a “sacrilege” for the derzhavniki, or great-power nationalists, who remember when the Soviet Union was much larger and more powerful than these three countries combined.
It would also be an admission that Russia is de facto subordinate to the United States in the world’s largest and most influential security organization, which is unacceptable even to moderate members of the political and military establishment. Although the Kremlin no longer has messianic ambitions to create a Third Rome or Third International, at the very least it will want to preserve its sovereignty and independence as a regional and global power. That will be impossible to accomplish if it becomes a member of NATO with the United States at the helm of the alliance.
The United States’ disingenuous peace feelers to Russia about NATO membership was clearly more PR and provocation than anything else. As President Dmitry Medvedev attends a NATO-Russia Council meeting in Lisbon on Saturday, it would be much better if both sides focus on smaller, more realistic NATO-Russian partnership projects — such as regional missile defense or fighting terrorism together — and forget once and for all about Russia ever becoming a member of NATO.
Russia did not want to go thru the acceptance policies like other nato member
Thank you for that much needed dose of reality and facts. Very well put together post. OutstandingI love the argument of no subjective truth.
They were denied because they were unwilling to comply with membership rules of nato. And the move for them to join ended there
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule
The same year, according to the then-NATO chief George Robertson, Putin bluntly asked: “When are you going to invite us to join Nato?” Robertson advised the Russian president that he needs to “apply to join NATO” and not expect an invitation.
The following quotes are from the Moscow times
5 Reasons Why Russia Will Never Join NATO
Opinion | On Sept. 22 in New York, the NATO-Russia Council met for the first time after ties were severed in the aftermath of the Russia-Georgia war of 2008. On the eve of the meeting, Ivo Daalder, U.S. ambassador to NATO, dropped a hint about future NATO membership for Russia.
1. NATO requires that its members have civilian and democratic control over their armed forces. This is a fundamental principal that allows for military integration and inter-operability among members. Although NATO countries have different political systems — some are presidential republics, others are parliamentary — they all have transparent defense budgets and public and legislative oversight over their countries’ military affairs. This includes independent investigations into military failures and abuses, parliamentary control over how funds are allocating — or not allocated — for weapons programs and constitutional checks and balances on a leader’s ability to send troops to fight in foreign military operations.
In Russia, however, civil control over the military is anathema to the basic principles of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s vertical power structure, which has effectively folded all three branches of power into one huge executive branch. Any autocratic power, by definition, rejects public accountability in all spheres of government — and this is particularly true for its armed forces. In Russia, a lack of public and parliamentary accountability allows the Defense Ministry to cover up the true scope of its inefficiencies, blunders and overall backwardness. In addition, a closed military structure also allows rampant corruption at all levels of the military to continue unchecked. As long as the vertical power structure is in place — whether it be headed by Putin or his successor — there will never be civilian control over the military.
Another reason why Russia will fiercely resist NATO’s requirement for transparency in military affairs is that it is hypersensitive about sharing its “military secrets” with NATO — particularly concerning its nuclear forces — even when its so-called secrets are well-known in the West. Nonetheless, a commitment to transparency is a basis for cooperation among NATO members.
4. The Collective Security Treaty Organization. NATO membership would effectively mean the end of the CSTO, which Russia has worked so hard on since its creation in 2002 to compete with NATO for influence in the global security arena. “I believe it [Russia’s membership in NATO] is absurd,” said CSTO chief Nikolai Bordyuzha on Sept. 16. “What is the sense of NATO membership if Russia has created its own security framework with its allies and this system of collective security functions well?”
Rogozin, for his part, in an April 2009 interview with European-Asian News service, said: “We can handle our security problems independently. … We don’t need NATO.”
5. Russia’s global ambitions. Most important, Russian membership in NATO would all but mean the end of Russia’s dream of restoring its former superpower status. By joining NATO, Russia would effectively become “just another large European country” on the same level as Germany, Britain or France — a “sacrilege” for the derzhavniki, or great-power nationalists, who remember when the Soviet Union was much larger and more powerful than these three countries combined.
It would also be an admission that Russia is de facto subordinate to the United States in the world’s largest and most influential security organization, which is unacceptable even to moderate members of the political and military establishment. Although the Kremlin no longer has messianic ambitions to create a Third Rome or Third International, at the very least it will want to preserve its sovereignty and independence as a regional and global power. That will be impossible to accomplish if it becomes a member of NATO with the United States at the helm of the alliance.
The United States’ disingenuous peace feelers to Russia about NATO membership was clearly more PR and provocation than anything else. As President Dmitry Medvedev attends a NATO-Russia Council meeting in Lisbon on Saturday, it would be much better if both sides focus on smaller, more realistic NATO-Russian partnership projects — such as regional missile defense or fighting terrorism together — and forget once and for all about Russia ever becoming a member of NATO.
Russia did not want to go thru the acceptance policies like other nato member
- Joined
- May 19, 2023
- Location
- Southern New Hampshire
Losses are going to be had on both sides. If you thought we wouldn’t lose anything and are so giddy the West’s equipment is getting destroyed you thought wrong. I understand it’s hard to fathom your army being pushed back by a country with a military size a fourth of Russia’s. Russia has faced insurmountable losses during this “special military operation” and I don’t doubt will continue to do so.
Whilst I understand supporting your country and all despite the harsh truths, facts are facts. You are losing. Do we know what the future will hold for this war? No. But as it stands right now, I have my chips on Ukraine. Information hasn’t come out from the Ukrainian media side of things due to an information blackout. Why would they want to share any information about their operations for what? A couple likes on twitter? This offensive is going to continue for weeks with several stages, and i’m sure plenty of footage will come out of dead Russian platoons and equipment.
You said:
“Like here is the actual video of Ukrainian armored battalion being decimated without even getting into a contact.”
Two comments on your quoted statement.
1) That is at most a screening force in size, larger then a platoon smaller then a company. In the photos and videos it is not a battalion.
2) Getting “decimated” in an attack is pretty good performance. I don’t think that term means what you think it does.
Last edited:
They look legitimate to me. Not ever attack is going to succeed. These guys ran into mines, attack helicopters and pre registered artillery. The Russians actually gave a good accounting of themselves.A video circulated on the internet, purporting to show something new: a western-supplied Leopard tank being destroyed. The BBC has not yet verified the video.
Ukraine's counter-offensive against Russia under way
It's been talked of for months, now it looks like Ukraine is finally launching its plan to recapture land.www.bbc.co.uk
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2016
Where was this tech the whole war?One Ka-52 helicopter deflected 18 MANPADS by jamming all warheads
One Ka-52 helicopter deflected 18 MANPADS by jamming all warheads
bulgarianmilitary.com
Thats outstanding. We have a similar system on the Apaches and Blackhawks.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2016
Have you guys been seeing the attitude some Americans have been having towards the war on social media platforms? Russian propaganda is doing a number on the small brain population. Unless it’s all anti Ukraine bots.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2015
Which Counterattack?How Ukraine finally launched its counter-offensive – and whether it will succeed
“Tonight is the night of nights”
How Ukraine finally launched its counter-offensive – and whether it will succeed
Ukrainian military opted for a series of mini-offensives in phase one of their counter attackwww.telegraph.co.uk
The counter-attack details in 5 minute read.
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2015
Weak minds eat what is put in front of them.
It exists. We (USA) just finish a couple of months ago putting it on EVERY manned aircraft in the military. Russians have had a similar system for several years and offered it for sale. In the past it was just placed on Presidential/Vip AC due to the expense. Both Russia and the USA systems use two lasers to blind or burnout seekers heads. Uber effective. We bite the bullet a few years ago and started putting it on all AC. The expense no longer matters, you won’t keep you ship alive without it on today’s battlefield. The Russians didn’t put it on their AC, either the expense or corruption.
There are systems to defend tanks against missiles. Russias were very early adopters and sellers of a system. The Israeli have never lost a tank with their system intact. We have it on most but not all armor. Again the Russians got slaughtered in the Ukraine because they didn’t either install a missile defense system or they were fakes. I’m sure they are fixing that now.
Darpa is trying to get a system together that uses high power lasers to cut missiles in half (or pieces) it’s in the demo stage now.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2015
Absurd!
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
The most important element in all this is Russians in Ukraine are being eliminated. The West should not stop until all Russians are removed from Ukraine including Crimea. Even if that means going directly in. There I said it. We are already past the point of no return. We are exactly where I thought we would be right now. A huge frigging mess with no end in sight. Even after we remove Russia from Ukraine, it will not be over until Russia overthrows their leadership.
- Joined
- May 19, 2023
- Location
- Southern New Hampshire
That’s a whole other bag of things, I think the west are doing what they think is best, supplying Ukraine with everything they can without going to that “point”. A red line that Russia crosses will have to occur before boots on the ground get negotiated, and it’s got to be a red line that threatens a NATO nation biologically or ecologically. Imo we aren’t there yet. I like the play we have now, and it’s a watching game to see the next steps.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2018
- Location
- Guayaquil - Ecuador
RQ-4 Global Hawk, 10-2046 is again flying a more North South versus the East West oriented track. I wonder what has caught its attention in the Eastern Black Sea.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2022
- Location
- Tropical Queensland, Australia
But why stop there. There are ethnic groups in Russia wishing to break the shackles of their overlords for independence. They also need support.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
Any confirmation when it starts.
Australian mainstream channel 7 last night commented it was a disaster for Ukraine offensive which I nearly fell of my chair. Not in laughter but in confusion and shock that such report was aired on mainstream. One minute it is reconnaissance next its offensive, I'm confused.
Clarify please. To many conflicting reports as expected i suppose. I would have thought any real offensive would wait until air support arrives, which to me would make sense to hold lines until such. Than again maybe the plan isn't to use planes for boots support ?
Australian mainstream channel 7 last night commented it was a disaster for Ukraine offensive which I nearly fell of my chair. Not in laughter but in confusion and shock that such report was aired on mainstream. One minute it is reconnaissance next its offensive, I'm confused.
Clarify please. To many conflicting reports as expected i suppose. I would have thought any real offensive would wait until air support arrives, which to me would make sense to hold lines until such. Than again maybe the plan isn't to use planes for boots support ?
- Status