• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU-NATO War | Discussions | Jun. 1st/Sep. 13th 2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
the drones shouldn't be explosive if we did send them over. Just them knowing that we are watching and going to continuedly watch them if they are going to be sending strays willy nilly. Plus you know it would make Putin steamed to see reports of mq-9s flying all over st petersburg and Kaliningrad. Not like they can use the argument that we are violating their airspace, when they are doing shit like this. If they did argue that it would make them out to be a massive bunch of dolts.
 
7gtz said:
When NATO does it, it's a sure way to escalation, but when Russia does it, it's likely a malfunction - that doesn't sound right. Can't apply two different sets of rules to both involved parties.
Click to expand...
It's because one side is expected to take measured responses, because civil society hasn't been strangled by authoritarianism yet, Putin on the other hand could shoot a dog in the face in the red square and throw a parade in the same spot the next day. The backlash especially in the states would be extreme, especially considering that some are likely to see any reaction provided by the Current WH administration as negative. Even if it is the right way to go.
 
Now might be a good time to strap Lindsey Graham to some Rods from God and put a speaker in his hand playing fortunate son, he does seem to be itching to fight 😂
 
Peter Griffin said:
Putin on the other hand could shoot a dog in the face in the red square and throw a parade in the same spot the next day. The backlash especially in the states would be extreme.
Click to expand...
Funny you should say that - since, as we know, shooting puppies and bragging about it is no longer any impediment to holding a high office in the US gov't. Backlash? What backlash?

You've freely allowed monsters into your shared home. Now they're gonna devour you. 💁‍♂️
 
Socom7 said:
Funny you should say that - since, as we know, shooting puppies and bragging about it is no longer any impediment to holding a high office in the US gov't. Backlash? What backlash?

You've freely allowed monsters into your shared home. Now they're gonna devour you. 💁‍♂️
Click to expand...
Maybe not any official backlash but the public scrutiny has been immense. The public image matters less to Putin because he knows he can send a drone or hack critical infrastructure in NATO territory and now he's placated dissidence once again. Trump on the other hand really, really, isn't proving very well at creating distractions from important topics pertinent to himself...
 
7gtz said:
When NATO does it, it's a sure way to escalation, but when Russia does it, it's likely a malfunction - that doesn't sound right. Can't apply two different sets of rules to both involved parties.
Click to expand...
Yes you can. Because we can't look at this logically. We have to look at it as Russia would look at it.

NATO has shown it is willing to look the other way when a Russian drone violates its airspace. Do you think Russia would do the same?

This isn't about fairness. "They did it. We can, too!" This is about how an actor will react.
 
Snowfall said:
Even if we got away with it, what’s the benefit here? We blew up an empty field for the sake of a pissing contest?
Click to expand...
Ultimately, I did say NATO should stay out of it for the time being. There is no benefit for NATO to have errant drones enter Russian airspace other than risk of escalation at this time. If NATO does launch a done that "accidentally" strays into Russia, it does provide NATO with an opportunity to test and evaluate a Russian response.
 
teekay99 said:
Ultimately, I did say NATO should stay out of it for the time being. There is no benefit for NATO to have errant drones enter Russian airspace other than risk of escalation at this time. If NATO does launch a done that "accidentally" strays into Russia, it does provide NATO with an opportunity to test and evaluate a Russian response.
Click to expand...
Personally, I believe NATO is in it up to their eyeballs and the US is violating russian airspace all the time and you won't hear about till 50 years from now. Oh, but I forget, the 71 was taken out of service but the US kept the U2 operational. You know, because it's better. :ROFLMAO:
 
Socom7 said:
Funny you should say that - since, as we know, shooting puppies and bragging about it is no longer any impediment to holding a high office in the US gov't. Backlash? What backlash?

You've freely allowed monsters into your shared home. Now they're gonna devour you. 💁‍♂️
Click to expand...
Not me because I am MAGA and the right is going to crush the left under our boots. The big thing in the latest news cycle is the political map redistricting led by Texas the left is squealing about. Newsom is threating to do the same in california but just wait till Trump orders the redistricting of the blue states that have zero representees in the house when the state has 30 to 40% republicans registered. The right is going to pick up enough house seats to control the house forever. (y):ROFLMAO:
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPod
DEFCON Warning System said:
Yes you can. Because we can't look at this logically. We have to look at it as Russia would look at it.

NATO has shown it is willing to look the other way when a Russian drone violates its airspace. Do you think Russia would do the same?

This isn't about fairness. "They did it. We can, too!" This is about how an actor will react.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I think it has been a huge mistake on NATO's part to demonstrate that they're willing to look the other way. Leads you to this position.

I still believe that NATO should at least shoot down any violating Russian aircraft.
 
william said:
Not me because I am MAGA and the right is going to crush the left under our boots. The big thing in the latest news cycle is the political map redistricting led by Texas the left is squealing about. Newsom is threating to do the same in california but just wait till Trump orders the redistricting of the blue states that have zero representees in the house when the state has 30 to 40% republicans registered. The right is going to pick up enough house seats to control the house forever. (y):ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
At the risk of derailing the thread, I will say that engineered one-party rule (or domination) should make us all pause for a moment, even if the dominating party is the party you agree with. I think we put way to much emphasis on and allegiance to political parties. Are there any examples of single-party dominated states that have not engaged in civil rights violations, territorial conquest, or war?

Trying to bring this back to the main topic of this thread - Single party domination in the US could make it blind to avenues of diplomacy or, heck, avenues of strategic engagement with Russia because the nation becomes beholden to a specific ideology instead of remaining open other appropriate courses of action outside of the single-party ideology. Single party systems tend to promote conformity at the expense of innovation.
 
teekay99 said:
At the risk of derailing the thread, I will say that engineered one-party rule (or domination) should make us all pause
Click to expand...
I agree with this statement actually. That's why the democratic party is going to have to move closer to the center where I do believe the majority of Americans are.
teekay99 said:
for a moment, even if the dominating party is the party you agree with. I think we put way to much emphasis on and allegiance to political parties. Are there any examples of single-party dominated states that have not engaged in civil rights violations, territorial conquest, or war?

Trying to bring this back to the main topic of this thread - Single party domination in the US could make it blind to avenues of diplomacy or, heck, avenues of strategic engagement with Russia because the nation becomes beholden to a specific ideology instead of remaining open other appropriate courses of action outside of the single-party ideology. Single party systems tend to promote conformity at the expense of innovation.
Click to expand...
I agree. This is why we can't have any nice things. 🤷‍♂️
 
Socom7 said:
Words of wisdom from a DWS Member of the Year.

Yep - these, ladies and gentlemen, are the kinds of attitudes that the Defcon Warning System actively promotes and rewards. Just so you know what kind of neighborhood you've walked into. :)
Click to expand...
To be fair, I've never seen Defcon Warning System (DWS) promote any specific philosophy. Even though voices on the right side of the spectrum tend to outnumber voices on the left, the director has been very open that this forum remain a venue for free speech except for a very specific and narrow list of items.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
Yes you can. Because we can't look at this logically. We have to look at it as Russia would look at it.

NATO has shown it is willing to look the other way when a Russian drone violates its airspace. Do you think Russia would do the same?

This isn't about fairness. "They did it. We can, too!" This is about how an actor will react.
Click to expand...
I generally agree. This is about judging outcomes - or at least, it should be about that. What happens if we retaliate in kind? What happens if we don't retaliate in kind?

Bottom line: there are no easy options left. War with the China/Russia axis is coming. NATO (by which I mean the US) can either accept that reality now and get its proverbial ducks in a row, or simply keep retreating and accept the fact that its odds of winning the coming war are dwindling.

Since the US is not currently being led by anyone, I expect the latter to materialize.
 
Socom7 said:
Words of wisdom from a DWS Member of the Year.

Yep - these, ladies and gentlemen, are the kinds of attitudes that the Defcon Warning System actively promotes and rewards. Just so you know what kind of neighborhood you've walked into. :)
Click to expand...
I wouldn't agree - nobody speaks for DWS except the Director. While he too may have his personal political preferences (as do you and I and everyone else), officially & in our analysis, we lie neutral. We allow everyone to speak their mind as we endorse full free speech on here, which sometimes does mean discussions get heated and polarised.
 
7gtz said:
I wouldn't agree - nobody speaks for DWS except the Director. While he too may have his personal political preferences (as do you and I and everyone else), officially & in our analysis, we lie neutral. We allow everyone to speak their mind as we endorse full free speech on here, which sometimes does mean discussions get heated and polarised.
Click to expand...
Giving awards to specific members goes beyond any of that. It shows whose side you're on.
 
Socom7 said:
these, ladies and gentlemen, are the kinds of attitudes that the Defcon Warning System actively promotes and rewards
Click to expand...
You do know the Member of the Year is elected by the members, not Staff. Staff aren't even allowed to vote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom