Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
5 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

This feels true to me.

 

Also to note that, after the atrocities in Bucha and the reports of Russians castrating POWs and then murdering them will make it very hard for Ukraine to accept any agreement that leaves parts of Ukraine under Russian control.

 

Ultimately, whatever deal is to be made must be made by the Ukrainians and I just don't see them agreeing to anything that keeps Ukrainians under Russian control.

So what's the answer Goose?  There has to be a better way than all of this carnage and destruction....no?

Posted
3 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

So what's the answer Goose?  There has to be a better way than all of this carnage and destruction....no?

I'm not sure what the answer is or if there even is one.

 

But from what I can tell, the only thing that might accomplish both:

  1. Recovering all of, or enough Ukraine territory to allow the Ukrainians to feel comfortable with a peace deal; and
  2. Punching Russia in the face enough that they have to accept their losses and acquiesce to a deal

Would be to supply the Ukrainians with enough weapons, ammo, and intelligence, to enable them to push Russia back, at least to the 2014 ceasefire borders, if not further.

 

Already, the HIMARS are changing the game. Give them more, and give them additional weapons like MLRS, drones, maybe even planes, and tons and tons of ammo.

 

There is no scenario I can think of in which a peace is reached without things getting a lot bloodier first.

  • Agree 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

 Give them more, and give them additional weapons like MLRS, drones, maybe even planes, and tons and tons of ammo.

 

 

Absolutely not.

The Ukrainians have come to the conclusion that airplanes are not the answer.

The A-10 proposal was a really bad idea.

Posted
13 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

Absolutely not.

The Ukrainians have come to the conclusion that airplanes are not the answer.

The A-10 proposal was a really bad idea.

 

Ah, I didn't realize they had changed their minds. I recall them asking for F-15's and F-16's, but the Biden administration was worried about them using the planes to strike inside Russian territory.

 

In any case, they need to be able to destroy Russian artillery to level the playing field. HIMARS seem to be doing a good deal there, but they only have a couple and Russians are already adjusting their tactics.

Posted
53 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Thanks....and I think everyone would agree with you there. But that doesn't mean that it isn't time for some serious diplomacy. What's the alternative?  Just keep bombing and killing, bombing and killing? I sure hope not.

 

This is why I made the parrallel to Israel and Palestine.  The discussion might be nuanced but there is also the big picture in which one side will never truly accept the other and always claim grievances.  The result is a 70 year ongoing conflict.

Posted
1 hour ago, ChiGoose said:

 

Ah, I didn't realize they had changed their minds. I recall them asking for F-15's and F-16's, but the Biden administration was worried about them using the planes to strike inside Russian territory.

 

In any case, they need to be able to destroy Russian artillery to level the playing field. HIMARS seem to be doing a good deal there, but they only have a couple and Russians are already adjusting their tactics.

 

They have no way of using any of these aircraft effectively, on so many levels

Giving them those airplanes would be a big mistake

Posted
19 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

They have no way of using any of these aircraft effectively, on so many levels

Giving them those airplanes would be a big mistake

 

If the choice is between gradually losing their airforce, or learning to fly planes their benefactors can actually replace...then its a pretty easy choice. 

Posted
31 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

If the choice is between gradually losing their airforce, or learning to fly planes their benefactors can actually replace...then its a pretty easy choice. 

 

Not possible, and not a good idea.

The simple reality is that they have absolutely no way of utilizing such systems.

Total waste of effort.

Posted
3 minutes ago, sherpa said:

 

Not possible, and not a good idea.

The simple reality is that they have absolutely no way of utilizing such systems.

Total waste of effort.

 

From what I've read, there is discussion on training them, but I agree that doing that in a war is too difficult. There also had been discussion of transferring NATO planes to former Eastern Bloc countries so those countries can send their MiGs and SUs to Ukraine, but I don't get the impression that this is happening either.

Posted
15 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

 

From what I've read, there is discussion on training them, but I agree that doing that in a war is too difficult. There also had been discussion of transferring NATO planes to former Eastern Bloc countries so those countries can send their MiGs and SUs to Ukraine, but I don't get the impression that this is happening either.

 

Its got to be an equipment thing. We're not at war, and we train pilots for our allies all the time.

 

The Ukrainians dont have to qualify top gun, the just have to be better than the Russians flying against Ukraine. 

Posted
2 hours ago, meazza said:

 

This is why I made the parrallel to Israel and Palestine.  The discussion might be nuanced but there is also the big picture in which one side will never truly accept the other and always claim grievances.  The result is a 70 year ongoing conflict.

Or both will never accept anything. Prods and Catholics in Ireland might also be a sort of parallel. Either way there are going to be people living under a gov they do not support 

1 hour ago, Coffeesforclosers said:

 

If the choice is between gradually losing their airforce, or learning to fly planes their benefactors can actually replace...then its a pretty easy choice. 

Or maybe a full drone air force? I'd rather have some of those drones than A-10s. 

 

I do wonder how well the A-10's would do though. Interesting plane

Posted

I had to step away and get some actual work done and came back to read this back and forth about ‘mutually assured destruction’ (kidding). Hard to believe my left-leaning friends on here found a war that they support so strongly. I honestly hope there’s a better way. These conflicts seem rather archaic in the 21st Century. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

I had to step away and get some actual work done and came back to read this back and forth about ‘mutually assured destruction’ (kidding). Hard to believe my left-leaning friends on here found a war that they support so strongly. I honestly hope there’s a better way. These conflicts seem rather archaic in the 21st Century. 


And all your right leaning friends probably oppose any aid to Ukraine and call zielinsky a nazi.

 

Funny how things have changed. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, meazza said:


And all your right leaning friends probably oppose any aid to Ukraine and call zielinsky a nazi.

 

Funny how things have changed. 

I’m not sure on that one (you may be correct). What I find most troubling is that the very mention of diplomacy gets no air time from either side. Which is a real shame…for sure. 

  • Agree 1
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m not sure on that one (you may be correct). What I find most troubling is that the very mention of diplomacy gets no air time from either side. Which is a real shame…for sure. 


It’s what I have been seeing on twitter and from some of the old posters here on another site .

 

Letting France lead the assault on qaddafi was considered leading from behind but aiding Ukraine against an aggressor is just contributing to the swamp.  
 

The diplomacy has to come from Russia.  They and they alone have the power to stop this. They won’t.  

Edited by meazza
  • Agree 1
Posted

UN nuclear chief: Ukraine nuclear plant is `out of control’

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. nuclear chief warned that Europe’s largest nuclear power plant in Ukraine “is completely out of control” and issued an urgent plea to Russia and Ukraine to quickly allow experts to visit the sprawling complex to stabilize the situation and avoid a nuclear accident.

 

“Every principle of nuclear safety has been violated” at the plant, he said. “What is at stake is extremely serious and extremely grave and dangerous.”

 

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-science-accidents-d2e0077af104f2692b76f737c58e1984

 

The Chernobyl disaster was a nuclear accident that occurred on 26 April 1986 at the No. 4 reactor in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, near the city of Pripyat in the north of the Ukrainian SSR in the Soviet Union.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

Posted
12 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m not sure on that one (you may be correct). What I find most troubling is that the very mention of diplomacy gets no air time from either side. Which is a real shame…for sure. 

 

I agree.  So how do we help Ukraine win the war? 

Posted
29 minutes ago, ALF said:

UN nuclear chief: Ukraine nuclear plant is `out of control’

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The U.N. nuclear chief warned that Europe’s largest nuclear power plant in Ukraine “is completely out of control” and issued an urgent plea to Russia and Ukraine to quickly allow experts to visit the sprawling complex to stabilize the situation and avoid a nuclear accident.

 

“Every principle of nuclear safety has been violated” at the plant, he said. “What is at stake is extremely serious and extremely grave and dangerous.”

 

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-science-accidents-d2e0077af104f2692b76f737c58e1984

 

The Chernobyl disaster was a nuclear accident that occurred on 26 April 1986 at the No. 4 reactor in the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, near the city of Pripyat in the north of the Ukrainian SSR in the Soviet Union.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

oh boy 

×
×
  • Create New...