- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
I am unaware of anyone in Russia referencing us. At least, no one of authority.
-
Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.
NATO involvment
- Thread starter Obreid
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
It was a Sputnik article post below.
They referenced US defcon level of 3 off of a defcon warning site. Looking back It probably was one of the other defcon sites they referenced. The dates for us going to 3 don’t match. So it was my mistake on which of the web sites sites. Sputnik still referenced a private website to note US defcon level.
US Defenсe Readiness Increased to Cuban Crisis Level Due to Ukraine, Defcon Monitor Says
MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The defence readiness condition (Defcon) of the US armed forces has reached level 3 amid escalation on the Ukraine-Russia border, among other factors, the Defcon Level Warning System, a private organisation monitoring...
sputniknews.com
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2017
- Location
- Franklinton , NC
We need a sacrifice right now , if anybody thinks it’s going to get better,………its not . If we or anyone in the west has some special program …..we might want to consider this very soon , time is running out. Putin has nothing to loose right now , and the Russia army in not playing by any rules
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
Sacrifice who, what?
I am sorry if my views on de-escalation conflict with those who believe war should escalate.
I simply don't see a way out of an escalation path other than a total change of government in Russia, including military leadership, which I cannot see happening anytime soon.
I would believe those advocating for that also are giving Putin's regime ammunition to build up morale with many of the Russia people as well.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
On Sunday, I listened to the U.S. Secretary of State Blinken stating on CBS News that the U.S. has given the “green light” to Poland and NATO countries if they choose to provide fighter jets to Ukraine. I don't know how that can be perceived as anything other than a war escalation by NATO. I believe Poland has walked this discussion back. But the chilling part to me is that the U.S. Secretary of State would not have had authority to make such statements on CBS News, without White House approval. If President Biden believes this will not be an escalation, then I just don't know where the future of de-conflicting this terrible war is going to go.
If USA decides it is going to escalate in a war against Russia, then it needs to evacuate the Washington DC area. If it started such an evacuation today, it would take weeks.
If USA leadership wants to escalate in a war against an unstable thermonuclear Russia, during a hot war, then at least have the human mercy to get the American people out of the DC area.
If USA decides it is going to escalate in a war against Russia, then it needs to evacuate the Washington DC area. If it started such an evacuation today, it would take weeks.
If USA leadership wants to escalate in a war against an unstable thermonuclear Russia, during a hot war, then at least have the human mercy to get the American people out of the DC area.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
So I’ll repeat what I posted the other day only in a much more constructive manner.
Then screw it all, just let Russia have Ukraine the Baltic’s and a good chunk of Romania and Poland as well.
Because when he talks about his view of history and the 18th century Russia and the USSR And what was once part of Russia. Those nations are included in that.
You are working from the premise that his bluff is more real than ours.
Then make it real make him understand it won’t work and his gambit has failed.
Make him and the Russia army and the Russian people know his bluff is called and it’s up to their president to decide, or remove him.
You’ve got to be willing to fight or mutually assured destruction means nothing. Except we’ll always walk away.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
We should of course encourage the Russia people to seek to change their administration and leadership.
But war advocates and war advocates within USA and NATO simply do not understand Russia and its potential brutality.
From their cruel perspective, Russia genuinely does believe it has been showing "restraint" in Ukraine.
I don't believe there is any true understanding of the depth and magnitude of the Russia nuclear threat: a nation that has tested 50 megaton nuclear warheads.
Two-three years ago, USA missile defense failures couldn't even shoot down blanks, while their heated debate with mini-nation North Korea.
NATO and the West need to buy time for the Russian people to seek a change in governance, not escalate a hot war with a nation that literally could destroy planet Earth.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2014
For the love of god, why would we want to evacuate DC?
The problem we are having as a civilization are the direct fallout of a poisonous civil service and the corrupt communist demagogues feeding on it.
It has to go, and, as much as I would miss the Paul. F. Garber and Silver Hill, slagging it down to the bedrock seems to be the only way ahead.
The smart ones will run away, and display adaptability. The fearful NPC's who can't live without doordash bucket o' soy will stay.
P.S. Xi? Vlad? Really slag Kanadastan down, hard. That thing is end to end filth, and is the source of the pathogen destroying the United States.
I figure 5 DF-41's or Topol's (max load and yield - no penaids req'd. kanadastan is totally defenseless. ) would totally saturate it, and give us a 90% SKP of rainbow and alphabet marxists...I'll take care of the remnants
P.P.S. If you paint the warheads green, you can apply for carbon offset credits from Elizabeth May( Green, MP left coast )...if the warheads are bilingual, further funding may be had from...multi-cultural inclusive non-trans exclusionary BIPOC-furry D.I.E. compliant warheads are eligible for further international development monies...
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
They are human beings. And for those USA commenters, they are fellow American human beings.
If we want a hot war with a thermonuclear Russia, then USA Government needs to have the human decency of at least evacuating a 100 mile diameter around Washington DC, and help those people, most of who are just trying to do a job and raise families, many of who are POOR and certainly not wealthly (like the politicians who get all of the TV attention), a chance to save their families and their lives.
But for a nation that shrugs when there are 1 million Americans dead from COVID-19, and 2,000 dead a day last month, perhaps the concept of concern about human life is just too much to ask. Guarantee one thing, however, if USA gets in hot war with Russia, the victims in America are going to blame the USA government. Those in other countries may not be able to "read that room."
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2021
I have some doubts that is possible to give the fighter jets to Ukraine. It is true that they are old Mig (isn't it?) and that Ukraine military is theorically capable to drive them. But 1-they are old jets, against a lot and much more modern jet. 2-these jets are been modified with NATO standars: are there Ukrainian pilots able to really drive them?
My worry is on the NFZ. Its true that NATO denies the NFZ, but Zelensky speaks continnually about NFZ. He asks for it every day, many times a day. I understand his request, but I wonder why we "hear" him every time he speaks about it, even if NATO has said "NO". We have to be honest: during a war, the information is regimented. For example, they say that Russians are against the war. Actually, Russia is plenty of people demostrating in favor, many cars have a big Z and the Russian flag: we can see that in a lot of videos posted on geopolical channels. For Russia, people are all in favor of the war. What is the true? In the middle of course, but the information is regimented on both sides. So, if we always hear the Zelensky request of a NFZ, it is because it have to be heard. Why? My dreadful suspect is that is finalized to create the popular acceptance that a NFZ is a moral a necessity, that we can't continue to watch without doing nothing, that we can't conitinue to listen to the pleadings of a president in war, representing suffering people. I start to think that a NFZ is still a likely possibility and I feel a very bad presentiment.
My worry is on the NFZ. Its true that NATO denies the NFZ, but Zelensky speaks continnually about NFZ. He asks for it every day, many times a day. I understand his request, but I wonder why we "hear" him every time he speaks about it, even if NATO has said "NO". We have to be honest: during a war, the information is regimented. For example, they say that Russians are against the war. Actually, Russia is plenty of people demostrating in favor, many cars have a big Z and the Russian flag: we can see that in a lot of videos posted on geopolical channels. For Russia, people are all in favor of the war. What is the true? In the middle of course, but the information is regimented on both sides. So, if we always hear the Zelensky request of a NFZ, it is because it have to be heard. Why? My dreadful suspect is that is finalized to create the popular acceptance that a NFZ is a moral a necessity, that we can't continue to watch without doing nothing, that we can't conitinue to listen to the pleadings of a president in war, representing suffering people. I start to think that a NFZ is still a likely possibility and I feel a very bad presentiment.
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2014
That would be kino. I'd go just to enjoy the spectacle.
I am thinking in terms of 'human life', just not the way of the typical progressive soylenated greedhead who causes just this sort of problem. The beltway chud's are the reason we are here, today. We have talked, reasoned, debated, tried to get along, been accommodating and inclusive.
Nope. Not enough. Never enough. If one actually listens to what the aristocracy thinks has to happen to redeem our society, you will understand why we are now sleepwalking into a global charnel house.
They want omniscient government, who will tell the eaters what to think. Monitored. Inventoried. Controlled. Unthinking. Obedient.
Do it, or we kill you.
I want much less government, where the citizen will exercise initiative, forbearance, restraint and absolute self determination.
Such a society would go out of it's way to teach citizens how to think, instead of what to think.
In such a society, citizens will personally assume responsibility for the body politic; and the tyrant will not stand a chance.
In such a society, the species will survive and prosper despite abiding in an unfathomably hostile cosmos.
The elite tell me this is grounds for summary execution. The elite tell me they are elite, and I will be punished, re-educated, injected with experimental serums, censored, cancelled, have whiteness, opinion and gender removed surgically at gunpoint until I comply with climate hysteric-BDS-BLM psychosis de jour.
Oh. Pay your taxes, the elite have to put fuel in that executive Dreamliner to get to the climate orgy...and wars are expensive, too, you know.
They will continue to burn down the world to keep you safe.
Their way leads to extinction. Classical liberal philosophy is an existential threat to their way, so that is proscribed thought.
So, I go limp. I won't resist the inevitable, I won't fight for it any more. This is what those whose opinions matters want.
No matter what happens over the next six months, final catastrophe is inevitable now. A nuclear arms race, and general arms race ensues, and MAD does not work in a multi-axis nuclear-political dynamic. Nothing will stop that.
So. I'll simply put all those E&E courses and war lessons to work, get the hell out of the way.
Try to enjoy it, if it happens. It's not an ending, it's change, and they can only kill me once.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
That’s ok, your vote, but remember what is happening in Ukraine today is not a one off.
This process has happened twice before already.
And it will happen again.
MAD is dead
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2016
- Location
- Indiana, US
I have news for you... If the war goes so hot that Russia is nuking Washington DC, the US will also need to evacuate New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Omaha, Baltimore, Bangor, Seattle, San Antonio, Norfolk, Annapolis, Colorado Springs, the entire SE corner of Wyoming, the western half of Montana, most of North Dakota, just to name a few.
Not to mention that if Russia sees the US evacuating cities, they will see that as an indication that the US is preparing a nuclear first strike, whether that's the case or not.
Evacuations in the event of a nuclear exchange simply aren't logistically possible.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
Fighter jets from other countries isn't going to happen. It's all good. Putin made it quite clear any country-countries that would like to have free admission into war with Russia are welcome. Otherwise keep your fighter jets in your own borders.
Besides America has no where to evacuate too. Except private bunkers. Population in areas you refer to would not be possible. Just a shit fight mess full of clogged arteries due to panic and vehicle accidents. Blocking exits. And no public bunkers for mass populations.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2022
by the 80s, the last stated plan before I assume the field was given up forever, was for civil defense the US would evacuate most of all major cities during the escalation of the conflict. obviously this plan only existed because it is hard to say to the american people that you have no plan, because the reality is there was no plan. with modern strategic nuclear weapons if we really wanted to survive some kind of conflict with russia we would have to have been building 3 mile deep bunkers at undisclosed locations in far northern canada for decades. frankly though, first of all I really doubt we will do a no-fly zone, the fact that we deny planning one every time it is brought up, and then explain in detail why should be evidence enough that we do not plan this. second, maybe this jet debacle is a show, maybe we provide them. If we provide them we do so in a way that skirts the imaginary red lines that putin can change on a whim, i.e. we repaint the planes and do not allow them to land at any nato airbases. the poles seem keen to deny this is happening, I assume we will try and keep this in a bureaucratic quagmire until the opportunity passes, as to not deny the image of giving Ukraine aid. plus the more effective arms are already flowing freely, the jets are mostly for show relative to several c-17 loads of manpads and turkish drones. basically I say that nato doesnt look to get involved with this, will this be enough to keep them out? who knows. but nato policy it looks is to still keep the burden of escalation on the russians, basically we will do anything but fire the first shot.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
We’re already involved you know, nato has armed drones in Ukraine already from Turkey, their nato most of the time.
I am beginning to wonder if the migs are just a distraction to keep out there for Russian planners to be distracted with.
As you you said the manpads and Javelins are being really effective
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
There is advocacy and there is hard work. USA needs a defense more focused on hard work and a priority in the actual word "defense" to be credible in stopping ruthless enemies. Too many are straining at the leash to fight Russia and China on their terms and in their way. I would suggest it is time for USA to stop losing wars and focus on hard work and thinking to stop deaths.
To be clear Obreid on "my vote." My vote is: (a) USA develops an actual missile defense that is not literally embarrassing - that could show public tests without head-shaking failures; (b) we develop advanced non-lethal weapons that will shut down conventional war forces (sonic, etc.) which we provide to the front line of conflict areas - to **STOP** the killilng; (c) if we want a real defense, we stop throwing billions of USD to the world in conflicts that are not their responsibility, and we harden USA utilities, fuel, information, health infrastructure, and actually ***DO*** it this time, not just make speeches, write reports, and basically actually do nothing; (d) for USA to stop foreign wars it can't win and focus on saving millions of its OWN people first and get those out of USG institutions who believe that the way to cover up failures of actual DEFENSE capabilities is to encourage more offensive warfare; (e) if we want a real defense, we have one based on not antagonizing nuclear superpowers in wars that we can't fight, but we have a defense that ENCOURAGES the people in those nations to change their government (not simply hate OURS for hypocrisy); (f) USA develops an actual federal law enforcement agency, not hypocritical spies with badges; (g) we ARREST and put in JAIL cyber criminals attacking the world (including those from USA), so that we end the double-standard that only foreign hackers are evil and USA-HQ'd hackers are good - rest of the world sees that double-standard clearly; (h) spend less funds on information warfare and information operations and build global bonds of trust by actually encouraging media sources to report ALL of the facts, not just one "narrative" - end the belief we can win the war of being the best liars; (i) OBVIOUSLY - if we plan a thermonuclear war with superpowers, we have preparedness in the USA (which we have absolutely ***NONE***); (j) USA actually have weapons advanced and powerful enough that MAD concept has some credibility, including weapons tests that prove we have weapons to stop thermonuclear antagonists.
On the last point, who remembers the LAST USA thermonuclear weapons test? I believe it was March 26, 1992.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
So due to your political views, you believe the lives are expendable of all the children, working class, average human beings that live in the Washington DC metropolitan area... simply because you believe the problem is "typical progressive soylenated greedhead"? This is the anti-defense thinking. Just like it is the anti-health thinking. To those who would believe in any national defense (USA or other), it would have no credibility to make defense decisions that vulnerable individuals targeted by foreign enemies have lives that are not worth protecting, because of political views of some in their area. I see this all the time in USA. People cheering when others suffer in USA "blue states" or "red states." And then they would have the hypocrisy to tell us that foreign nations are the real threat.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2017
USA and UK are fine with.... someone else... taking war to Russia. To Poland: "You are my number one guy." U.S. Secretary of State "Blinken says NATO countries have "green light" to send fighter jets to Ukraine." White House press secretary Jen Psaki reiterated Monday the U.S. would be in "no way opposed" to Poland's "sovereign decision" to transfer its planes. GOP Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), tweeted: "There is absolutely no reason we can’t supply airplanes to Zelensky and the Ukrainians. Our allies are willing and able to provide them, the admin needs to get out of the way."
Per Reuters, UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace "I would support the Poles and whatever choice they make," Wallace told Sky News, adding that the United Kingdom could not offer aircraft that the Ukrainians would be able to use. "We would protect Poland, we'll help them with anything that they need," he said. "Poland will understand that the choices they make will not only directly help Ukraine, which is a good thing, but also may bring them into direct line of fire from countries such as Russia or Belarus."
www.reuters.com
Calling a Wall Street Journal report about the potential MiG-F16 deal "FAKE NEWS" on Sunday, the office of the Polish prime minister tweeted: "Poland won't send its fighter jets to Ukraine as well as allow to use its airports. We significantly help in many other areas." A government spokesman clarified to a public broadcaster on Monday: "It is a very delicate matter. The Polish authorities have not made any decisions on the transfer of the planes to Ukraine."
www.axios.com
Per Reuters, UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace "I would support the Poles and whatever choice they make," Wallace told Sky News, adding that the United Kingdom could not offer aircraft that the Ukrainians would be able to use. "We would protect Poland, we'll help them with anything that they need," he said. "Poland will understand that the choices they make will not only directly help Ukraine, which is a good thing, but also may bring them into direct line of fire from countries such as Russia or Belarus."
UK says it will back Poland if decides to send jets to Ukraine
British defence minister Ben Wallace said on Tuesday Britain would support Poland if it decided to provide Ukraine with fighter jets, but warned that doing so might have direct consequences for Poland.
www.reuters.com
Calling a Wall Street Journal report about the potential MiG-F16 deal "FAKE NEWS" on Sunday, the office of the Polish prime minister tweeted: "Poland won't send its fighter jets to Ukraine as well as allow to use its airports. We significantly help in many other areas." A government spokesman clarified to a public broadcaster on Monday: "It is a very delicate matter. The Polish authorities have not made any decisions on the transfer of the planes to Ukraine."
Plans to supply fighter jets to Ukraine could be doomed
The risk of being deemed a "co-combatant" by Russia continues to permeate every U.S. and NATO decision about weapons transfers and intelligence sharing.
www.axios.com
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2016
No mostly I just wished and hoped that Russia hadn’t invaded Ukraine on some trumped up convoluted history and ideology and dreams of restoring Russia to their territorial glory days.USA and UK are fine with.... someone else... taking war to Russia. To Poland: "You are my number one guy." U.S. Secretary of State "Blinken says NATO countries have "green light" to send fighter jets to Ukraine." White House press secretary Jen Psaki reiterated Monday the U.S. would be in "no way opposed" to Poland's "sovereign decision" to transfer its planes. GOP Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho), tweeted: "There is absolutely no reason we can’t supply airplanes to Zelensky and the Ukrainians. Our allies are willing and able to provide them, the admin needs to get out of the way."
Per Reuters, UK Defense Minister Ben Wallace "I would support the Poles and whatever choice they make," Wallace told Sky News, adding that the United Kingdom could not offer aircraft that the Ukrainians would be able to use. "We would protect Poland, we'll help them with anything that they need," he said. "Poland will understand that the choices they make will not only directly help Ukraine, which is a good thing, but also may bring them into direct line of fire from countries such as Russia or Belarus."
UK says it will back Poland if decides to send jets to Ukraine
British defence minister Ben Wallace said on Tuesday Britain would support Poland if it decided to provide Ukraine with fighter jets, but warned that doing so might have direct consequences for Poland.
Calling a Wall Street Journal report about the potential MiG-F16 deal "FAKE NEWS" on Sunday, the office of the Polish prime minister tweeted: "Poland won't send its fighter jets to Ukraine as well as allow to use its airports. We significantly help in many other areas." A government spokesman clarified to a public broadcaster on Monday: "It is a very delicate matter. The Polish authorities have not made any decisions on the transfer of the planes to Ukraine."
Plans to supply fighter jets to Ukraine could be doomed
The risk of being deemed a "co-combatant" by Russia continues to permeate every U.S. and NATO decision about weapons transfers and intelligence sharing.
Wouldn’t be worrying about any of these questions if Russia wasnt having dreams of empire.