381–390 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A 1 in 36 million chance for three breaks in one day. https://mathb.in/80217
“Knowing that 200 undersea cables break every year globally, estimate the probability that 3 cables break in the baltic sea on the same day.” I’m stealing this to use for grad-student mock-interviews—thank you!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because he needed all that time (2014-2022) to build up his forces and cash reserves. Also, he needed a green light. Which was provided in the form of the chaotic Afghanistan pullout in 2021. Not that he was counting on it -- but once it went through, it seems very likely that tipped the scales in his mind in favor of deciding to actually go through with the full-scale invasion in 2022.
Its also been widely reported that when Trump first met Putin he said if he invaded Ukraine, he would turn Moscow and several other cities into a parking lot. Trump in several interviews has said he warned Putin not to do it, that he would pay a very, very heavy cost and he would see to it that he would. This is all Trump had to do. He was able to leverage the media's reporting on him that he was reckless, dangerous…
So what's the solution ? Assign a surveillance UAV to every Russian ship parked "without a good reason" over a cable ? It would be expensive, but doable, and create a reserve of vehicles for wartime use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ask yourself, when was the last time a nation officially declared war? It doesn't happen anymore for legal reasons. NATO will 100% not be the first to declare war despite even very serious provocations. Maybe they'll take a leaf out of Russia or Israel's book and declare a 'special' or 'limited' operation though...
> Maybe they'll take a leaf out of Russia or Israel's book As you yourself just pointed out a few lines line above this, there's no need to take a leaf out of anybody else's book: all the US' and NATO wars of the past decades have been presented as "special operations": e.g. the war against Serbia, the war against Iraq, the war against Afghanistan, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The West was actively supplying Ukraine since 2014, especially after the Debaltsevo embarrassment. Yes, it pales in comparison to the post 2022 levels, but it still was far from insignificant. Even your Wikipedia link lists a lot of pre-2022 aid and I am pretty sure this page is far from being comprehensive. And it's even without mentioning the direct role of Boris Johnson in tanking the Istanbul accords.
> it still was far from insignificant Stil far from closing the gap between the 6th and 13th largest armies. Russia invaded an inferior force and got stymied. This would be like America's Vietnam being Cuba, where we fully committed the U.S. military and economy to the task and still continued to fail. The fact that Russia has never even established air superiority knocks it out of the category of running a modern mi…
US cannot claim a single victory in the past 4 decades, it's been debacle after debacle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. Do you want to sign up and go fight in a war? Or should other people besides you die? It's easy to say it "needs to be dealt with" but it's not an easy thing to do.
> Or should other people besides you die? Yes. We literally have a country willing to do this for us if we give them the weapons. Otherwise, a country whose population is unwilling to fight for itself isn't a country, just a convenient demarcation on a map.
So when you say, "country willing to do this for you" (how nice!), what you mean is a bunch of politicians and officers are willing to go in the street and capture random civilians to conscript them. Because that's the reality of how Ukraine is "willing to fight".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What exactly would "properly" arming Ukraine look like? The entire Western world doesn't produce enough Patriot missiles to meet Ukraine's air defense needs, just as one critical example. We are aiming for a global production target of 750 missiles/year ( https://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/15354795 ).... Russia has fired about 6,000 missiles and large drones per year ( https://kyivindependent.com/defense-ministry-ove…
> What exactly would "properly" arming Ukraine look like? More long-range offensive weapons and clearance to hit sites in Russia. Let Israel know that we wouldn't mind them taking out the Iranian drone factories supplying Russia.
"Go on my little goyim, go spill your blood so we can invest in a free Ukraine!"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s a good point, there’s no formal mechanism to punish any country that has ‘anchor accidents’ 12.1 nm offshore. It’s probably not even a de jure crime, so what is there to punish on the record?
In what country is intentional property destruction not a crime? You’re not arguing that it’s really accidental, right?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Nato is a defensive alliance against any offensive act. Russia, ...as in: the mafia of the few profiteering rulers currently at the helm, is not fighting back anything. Firstly, its mad Ukrainian adventure has meant it has made its border very defence-free on its border with Nato countries. Secondly, it is constantly attacking in hybrid warfare mode, paying local lowlife to do propaganda graffiti and sabotage. The ap…
What kind of monster could possibly be against it?