The UA needs to stick it to Rus. They just need to avoid committing reprisals. Using precision weapons on civilian targets, specifically apartments is indescribably evil. The Russians are basically putting the civilian population to the sword. Fuck Russia. Comeuppance is at hand.
-
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
- Jan 27, 2018
- Location
- Guayaquil - Ecuador
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
The advantage NATO has over China is that China basically sucks as a military. NATO doesn't need numbers. One NATO soldier can take out how many Chinese? That's the problem when you send wave after wave of people at the enemy. Just that many more bull's-eyes. China's plan is simply to overwhelm the enemy. Like Germany's in WWII. Problem is when that doesn't work.
NATO's problem is how many casualties will the public accept? That is what China is banking on. The weakness of the Western public.
your comment I classify it in American propaganda
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2018
- Location
- Guayaquil - Ecuador
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
What do you feel is in error about my comment?
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
You could argue it is propaganda. but that does not mean it is inherently incorrect.
In a head to head battle across a land boarder China would indeed be formidable. Especially With their numbers and dramatically improved military tech. They would be a handful.
Just as they were when they crossed the Yual river during the Korean conflict.
But can they utilize there size advantage In a war against NATO?
For one thing they would have to transport those numbers and equipment across the entire Asian continent to Europe to reach nato armies by land. It would possibly be logistically impossible for their navy to help in Europe. They would have access to too few ports to refuel their ships that far from west pac. Not that they would because they would keep their entire fleet along the coast for protection.
It would take months to move that army and equipment into position. While also they would be engaged in a two front war on their pacific coast. While also having to race against time to accomplish all of this before they use up their oil reserves they have on hand. Which right now are admittedly high I believe.
They have a huge navy, correct. But how long can they keep it operational when ALL of their refueling locations are just a handful ports along their coast facing out towards open sea and few coastal barriers to the navies and air forces of Australia Japan and the US. Not to mention India might possibly have seized any tankers bound to the straights. That would leave one moderately sized pipeline from Russia. So China would be running on fumes within a month or two of wartime operation and logistics on two fronts.
Of course that is all assuming it doesn’t go nuclear and little is left of the northern hemisphere.
Would the CCP risk annihilation to aid Russia in a war with nato? Or keep their armies at home to ensure they retain their control of power in China? And then leisurely cross the boarder with Russia to occupy their oil fields.
Hell China would be just as likely to throw in with nato just to take possession of some of their oil fields.
But that just opinion on the last bit.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2017
- Location
- Perth Western Australia
Wave after wave worked for africans. Spears against guns. Even though the English won it was devastating to forces. Vets from Vietnam claimed the same with waves.
Last edited:
Hmm. In Korea the Chinese brought more soldiers (peasant, bullet magnets)
to the fight then we (UN Forces) brought bullets. They could and did carry the day by accepting insane levels of casualties. I have read the Chinese suffered over 1 million all cause casualties in the active phase of the war. Didn’t bother them one bit. Im scared of the Chinese. If they get their shit wired tight they will be unstoppable with conventional arms. My 2¢
Addendum I am very glad I’m not on the same continent with them like Russia.
The Red Hoard would be nearly impossible to stop at this point. In fact If I was China I would bluster about the US, ROC and half the Pacific belonging to them. Then as soon as Nato and the UA are through mauling Russia, I would smack the crap out of them and take all of Manchuria back and maybe more.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
Then why did they stop fighting? They could have run us off the peninsula apparently according to this logic.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
Also, how do they get their millions of zombies across the sea? One torpedo or missile and all hands lost.
We would have used atomic bombs on them if that happened. We had them, they didn’t. In fact we fielded atomic ARTILLERY rounds to the ROK. We were NEVER going to let them run us off past the 38 again. Today thats simply not a threat.
I said “same continent”
You are correct that we would oppose a fleet landing in the Americas. Our west coast would have a new artificial reef system.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2016
Yes but Russia had nukes and wasn’t going to be very happy with us dropping nukes in their neighbor’s yard. Nukes were never a real option. MacArthur was sacked for considering it.
No he wasn’t. He was relieved for insubordination and directly countering the President publicly.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2010
- defconwarningsystem
- DEFCONWSALERTS
- YOUTUBE
- DefconWarningSystem
This is kind of untrue. The US won both Vietnam and Korea militarily. In fact, I think it was Vietnam where the US never actually lost a battle.
The US lost Vietnam and took a draw on Korea because of politics back home.
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2022
- Location
- Tropical Queensland, Australia
would be great diving and a good fish habitat.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2016
Тихоокеанский флот начал крупные учения в Японском и Охотском морях
Более 60 кораблей и судов Тихоокеанского флота (ТОФ), свыше 11 тыс. военнослужащих проведут с 5 по 20 июня в Японском и Охотском морях учения с практическими
www.interfax.ru
LOOK LIKE RUSSIA IS READY TO HELP!
The Pacific Fleet began major exercises in the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk
Moscow. June 5. INTERFAX.RU - More than 60 ships and vessels of the Pacific Fleet (Pacific Fleet), over 11 thousand military personnel will conduct exercises with practical missile and artillery firing from June 5 to June 20 in the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk, the press service of the fleet reported on Monday."More than 60 warships and fleet support vessels, about 35 naval aircraft, coastal troops and more than 11,<> military personnel are involved in the exercise of the Pacific Fleet grouping of forces," the report said.
"At present, the fleet forces are deployed in the designated areas and have begun to practice tasks according to the exercise plans," the press service of the fleet said.
According to the Pacific Fleet, during the exercises, the military will search for and track submarines of a mock enemy, perform combat training exercises on surface and air targets with practical missile and artillery firing.
It is also reported that during the exercises, naval tactical groups, together with naval aviation, "will work out the organization of air defense of detachments of ships, as well as the organization of logistics of forces at sea."
According to the press service, in accordance with the plan for 2023, from June 5 to June 20, the Pacific Fleet began major exercises in the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk under the leadership of Fleet Commander Admiral Viktor Liina.
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2023
- Location
- Georgia, US
I'd like to explore a thought.
The west views NATO as a voluntary treaty organization. (I agree with this point of view). Perhaps Russia does not view NATO as a voluntary treaty organization.
The Warsaw Pact was imposed upon its members. The USSR had a strong interventionist policy in the internal policies of member countries, such as the Hungarian Revolution or the invasion of Czechoslovakia. Looking at a "treaty organization" through this lens (i.e. when something goes on in a member country you don't like, intervene and impose your will), I'd like to suggest that Russia does not see NATO membership as a voluntary thing. Why? Because that is not how they executed their own "pact". Perhaps they see NATO the same way we envisioned the Warsaw Pact (while it existed). Couple that with a steady eastward march of NATO despite the dissolution of the USSR, and the Orange Revolution, it's easy for me to see how they could warp themselves into thinking NATO is a military and security risk.
NATO expansion could be viewed as a form of western imperialism in the eyes of an adversary. Russia invasion of neighboring countries (e.g. Georgia, Ukraine) is viewed as Russian imperialism by the west. This is how you could get to the oversimplified statement that the conflict (ok... war) in Ukraine is about US and Russia imperialism.
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2022
- LOCATION
- Fly over country
I do think they perceive it as imperial aggression. Or at least to the degree they can use it as just cause to raise domestic support.
Russia Europe and Turkey have been dancing this dance for at least 200 yrs.
I was not supportive of whatever involvement we might of had with the Maiden revolution. It is hard to say how much material support we gave to the organizers of the revolution. There was all kind of speculation. But I really didn’t want us involved because it would be seen exactly as aggression by Russia.
But I’ve also recognized Ukraine has had two elections since the revolution and they had tracked a similar course both times and the population overwhelmingly is in support of no more overt Russian influence. As well as strong support to repel the invasion.
So I have come to recognized that the revolution was real with widespread Popular support. Not just a coup supported by the CIA. If it ever was anything like that to start with. It happened and Ukrainians on the whole seem supportive of their new found independence.
There’s that old saying “just because your paranoid doesn’t mean people aren’t out to get you.
I believe at times that can be true. But most of the time you can’t let your paranoia take over your life and ruin it.
Sometimes you just have to recognize your paranoia is conflating rejection as a sign of aggression.
So in that sense Russias paranoia has turned them into a stalker. There view of the world doesn’t match what real intentions of those they think are after them.
Russia has had this everyone’s out to get us mentality for over 200 yrs. It’s is a nation who’s systems and world view stand in opposition to their neighbors. Were they see it as perfectly normal that they have undo influence and control of their neighbors because it serves Russia. And that is enough justify their actions.
So is this reasoning of theirs enough to justify letting them control these regions unopposed.
I don’t think it is. At some point this national paranoia has to end. It’s not good for anybody especially the Russian people.
I don’t know if that’s a good reply or not. I feel like it isn’t but there you go. Appreciate your comments.
- Status