Ukraine to Protect Its F-16 Fighter Fleet by Basing Planes ‘in Other Countries’
Ukraine to Protect Its F-16 Fighter Fleet by Basing Planes ‘in Other Countries’
The Kremlin has vowed any NATO personnel helping Kyiv attack Russia would be legitimate targets.
You're viewing a single thread.
While I think that’s dope it does feel like it gives Russia valid cause to strike them in host countries and kind of feels like a deliberate provocation to do so?
Russia doesn’t actually want NATO get involved so they wouldn’t strike the host nation.
Permanently Deleted
Russia has stated many things which are often contradictory and false.
Regardless, attacking NATO countries would be strategic insanity.
they are insane tho, but putin don't want to die, and their fuxked up defense system can't cope with the ammount of missiles that gonna rain in his head
They're not insane: everything they've done are things they sincerely thought they could get away with, and up until Ukraine Putin has been correct in that regard.
Pretending to be crazy is an effective strategy: ironically Nixon popularized it during the cold war.
Attacking targets in NATO countries (even if "justified") is going to drastically increase the odds NATO gets directly involved in Ukraine -- something Putin absolutely doesn't want.
Permanently Deleted
It's not even politics, It's just math. NATO has superiority in economy, industrial output, operational equipment and manpower.
Plus they're too close to Russia for asymmetric warfare rules.
I would bet on it, but I'd sure as hell wish we could all get along instead.
Permanently Deleted
Um.... Is NATO weaker with the addition of Sweden and Finland? I'm not sure what your definition of "weak" means. I thought having more allies is not weak.
"Russia states" lmao
They also stated they won't attack Ukraine.
Here's what Russia actually stated as explained by the chief of NATO
The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.
The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.
So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite.
Permanently Deleted
lmao, shut up, people enter nato because they don't russia fucking with them, and ukraine couldb't enter nsto because of crimea, stop vomiting russia propaganda
also good luck with your "nuclear destruction" they can't even win against ukraine
people enter nato
the famous nato referendums
stop vomiting russia propaganda
citing nato is russian propaganda lmao
If it's a NATO country the F-16s are the least of their worries and find out what a real 3 day operation looks like.
Russia can't afford to escalate.
It already worked once.
Well the second best army is not performing anywhere near expectations. Russia should finish one fight theycan't go the distance on before picking on NATO.
Russia already stated that they will do precisely that, so this moves us one step closer to a nuclear holocaust. Hope it was worth it.
This comment is for anyone who is experiencing nuclear-phobia, kinda like I do, to which I strictly mean living with a state of fear or dread about a nuclear apocalypse, this development does puts the world one step closer. It's okay to be scared by that, I know I am. It doesn't mean the world is one step away from a nuclear apocalypse. The world has been closer to the brink of nuclear war before and we're all still here. It's okay to breathe.
I don’t know where you get your nuclear vibes from, but we have hardly been closer, actually.
Six months ago: Doomsday Clock remains at a minute and a half to midnight in 2024—closest ever to apocalypse
And things have only worse since then. This week: Russian warships, nuclear submarine enter Havana Harbor under watch of U.S. destroyers
Russia has stated many things they will do, but haven't then actually done. Why would this time be different? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_lines_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
Pretty much none of those were actually stated by Russia. The trend has been that it's the west that make up these red lines, then crosses them and says, see nothing happened. Last I checked, the actual red line Russia set out was Ukraine joining NATO, and when that red line was ignored the war started. This notion that you can just keep pushing a nuclear superpower and nothing bad will happen is imbecilic beyond belief.
There are sources given for the claims. If they are inaccurate you should remove the sources, and the claim itself if there are no good sources supporting it anymore.
If you bother reading the sources, then you'll see that these aren't primary sources of anything the Russian government said. These are articles and interpretations by western analysts and think tanks. Feel free to link statements from the Russian government though.
Again, if a source is incorrect, feel free to remove it.
Russia is well aware that if they use nuclear weapons it's over for them, will the rest of the world fall too is another question.
Either way I truly don't believe they will do it simply because that ends Russia in its current form, and I don't think we should allow them to be an aggressor just because they have nukes. Russia needs to be stopped and their saber rattling should rightly be ignored.
Feel free to @ me if you die in a nuclear apocalypse to prove me wrong. Till then let's keep enabling Ukraine to fight back and continue Russias massive embarrassment and degradation of power and capabilities.
This is the most unhinged thing I've read in a while. Also, what degradation are you talking about?
Pretty much every western news source now admits that Russia is stronger than at the start of the war, and that it's massively outpacing the west in terms of weapons production.
Mind sharing some sources on that? Since it is a bit of a bold statement.
here are just a few recent ones
- https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/26/politics/russia-forces-ukraine-war-cavoli/index.html
- https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
- https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/11/christopher-cavoli-russian-military-losses-00151718
- https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/10/politics/russia-artillery-shell-production-us-europe-ukraine/index.html
- https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68823399
- https://raport.valisluureamet.ee/2024/en/1-russian-armed-forces-and-the-war-in-ukraine/1-3-russian-military-industry/
The first one is from Thu April 27, 2023 more then a year ago. And does not state what you think it does. I mean it ends with: "“[A]ccording to the modeling that we’ve very carefully done with them, the Ukrainians are in a good position,” he said. “They have some weaknesses that I prefer not to talk about in public … But we are confident — in terms of their surprise and things like that. of course, we’ve worked on all that with them.” "
The second one is literally called "The Attritional Art of War" and is trying to sell russia losing men and equipment as a good thing, basically as practice for when they go up against the west "for real". This is not saying they are stronger.
The third one is about russia replacing losses faster with new troops. Oh and the whole statement is from a US general trying to get congress to release money with the dire warring that Ukraine could lose if they don't. And even after all that the statement is: "The overall message I would give you is [Russia’s military has] grown back to what they were before,” not stronger.
The forth one is about how with russia's managed economy they have been able to ramp up shell production faster then any other nation (no shit) and now are set to make 3,000,000 shells a year. This does not say they are "stronger" then before since russia has used about 10,000 shells a day on average (according to the western estimates) making a short fall of about 650000 shells a year.
The fifth one is about the IMF upgrading its forecast, really?
The last one is neat but does not back your claims up. It even says things like: "The Russian Armed Forces’ inability to realise the Kremlin’s imperialist ambitions in Ukraine within the initially planned timeframe in early 2022, coupled with the resilient Ukrainian resistance to the invasion, has led to significant losses for Russia not only in terms of personnel but also in military equipment. The need to compensate for equipment losses and to produce the required artillery ammunition[1] to sustain the conflict in Ukraine has posed a serious challenge to the Russian military-industrial complex "
So, just to sum up. Russia is producing more weapons ammunition than NATO, has a bigger army than before the war that's actually seen real combat unlike any NATO army, and Russian economy is growing. You wrote a whole giant rant that doesn't actually contradict anything I said or what the sources I linked say.
Rant? I read everyone of your sources (none that where primary) and could not find where anyone claimed russia is stronger then they where in 2021. Yes they are producing more shells then any one NATO nation but as their deal with north Korea shows it is not enough to maintain the level of shelling they want to do. The russian economy is in tatters (according to russains) so yeah it should grow, that would be what most would think would happen. They have seen combat yes, but by that rational so has Ukraine.
I mean just from the navel losses alone russia has taken a beating. The tank losses massively outstrip production (highest production numbers I found was 1500/year vs 4400/year losses). I just don't get how they are somehow stronger then before this 3 day special operation. I am not even saying they are out of the fight but come on.
Russia said they would nuke the west 10 times already, they have rattled the saber too much and nobody believes the threat.
Where, please provide an ofgicial statement from Russia saying that.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/1/how-real-is-putins-threat-to-nuke-the-west
Or do you mean the ones made on state TV in 2022 that the Kremlin now says never happened?
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kremlin-says-putin-didnt-threaten-use-nuclear-weapons-us-took-him-out-context-2024-03-14/
These are reminders that Russia is a nuclear superpower, and that continued escalation can lead to a direct war between west and Russia which will almost certainly be nuclear.
Almost like saying that Russia would "nuke" the west.......
almost like you're projecting
Please explain, as that statement does not seem to make much sense to me.
You're projecting your own interpretation onto a statement that doesn't say what you claim it says. Hope that clears things up for you.
That is not what projection means though?
"Projection is a type of defense mechanism or means of coping. People may use defense mechanisms and unconscious mental strategies to cope with stressful or anxiety-provoking thoughts and experiences. When someone unconsciously attributes their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors to another person, they are projecting."
good, now we know that they are in fact not do that
Permanently Deleted
I would be shocked if Russia did, the west has been pretty limited with allowing Ukrainian strikes with western systems on Russia even to this day. Like it or not I don't think they would attempt to strike another country because they are scared of relatiation.
I would be happy to be wrong, because if they do I think the west would join the war or allow Ukraine more Freedom with their systems. Either way the net outcome is Russians still loosing the long game, like they currently are