Tiberius Posted June 5 Author Posted June 5 8 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: Thanks for replying. What caused you to do a complete 180? The invasion
Tenhigh Posted June 5 Posted June 5 49 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The invasion Why the second one but not the first one? It's a pretty drastic change. 1
Tiberius Posted June 5 Author Posted June 5 3 minutes ago, Tenhigh said: Why the second one but not the first one? It's a pretty drastic change. I wish I was paying better attention back then. The first one was bad, too, but this one with kidnapping children, torture, bombing cities, rapes and mass killings is worse. Hopefully Ukraine is able to get all it's territory back Yes, I was totally wrong on that one, no doubt 👍 1
Tenhigh Posted June 5 Posted June 5 4 hours ago, Tiberius said: I wish I was paying better attention back then. The first one was bad, too, but this one with kidnapping children, torture, bombing cities, rapes and mass killings is worse. Hopefully Ukraine is able to get all it's territory back Yes, I was totally wrong on that one, no doubt 👍 Excellent post Tibs 1
L Ron Burgundy Posted June 6 Posted June 6 23 hours ago, Tenhigh said: Excellent post Tibs Many of us have expressed that this is a stain on the Obama presidency which all in all was very good. 2
Irv Posted June 6 Posted June 6 46 minutes ago, L Ron Burgundy said: Many of us have expressed that this is a stain on the Obama presidency which all in all was very good. Obama presidency good? Which one of the three? What a mess.
L Ron Burgundy Posted June 6 Posted June 6 10 minutes ago, Irv said: Obama presidency good? Which one of the three? What a mess. Get ready for 4 biatch!!!! 1
Coffeesforclosers Posted June 6 Posted June 6 (edited) 18 hours ago, B-Man said: MOSCOW, February 9. /TASS/. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova on Wednesday said Russia doesn’t plan to invade Ukraine and blamed the US for "aggressive plans." Edited June 6 by Coffeesforclosers
sherpa Posted June 7 Posted June 7 On 6/5/2024 at 7:30 PM, Tiberius said: For an insightful, realistic appraisal of the F-16 issue, after initial introductions, go to the 14 min mark. The discussion goes on for about ten minutes and points out the reality of the issue, 1
Tiberius Posted June 8 Author Posted June 8 16 hours ago, sherpa said: For an insightful, realistic appraisal of the F-16 issue, after initial introductions, go to the 14 min mark. The discussion goes on for about ten minutes and points out the reality of the issue, That was very, very good! I suggest everyone watch that. Way more than just F-16 info there. They cover an incredible amount of information on many levels about the war on the ground, the strategic implications, where the war is headed, how the GOPs blocking of aid to our dear ally has had crippling implications to Ukraine and why there is reasons to be both pessimistic and hopeful. I'm glad we have people like that working on our side.
sherpa Posted June 8 Posted June 8 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: That was very, very good! I suggest everyone watch that. Way more than just F-16 info there. They cover an incredible amount of information on many levels about the war on the ground, the strategic implications, where the war is headed, how the GOPs blocking of aid to our dear ally has had crippling implications to Ukraine and why there is reasons to be both pessimistic and hopeful. I'm glad we have people like that working on our side. I'm glad you found it worthwhile. Ward Carroll is excellent and gets excellent guests. He is an ex F-14 RIO, (backseater), Naval Academy Professor and ex editor of Military.com. He gets the real guys, like both Commanders Naval Forces Pacific and Atlantic, Commander Naval Air and a host of others who are front line operators, not media pukes. He gets information on what is going on, ie Houthi missile firings and how they were defended way before the news media, because he "know guys." This guest, Dr. Justin Bronk is, in my view, the most knowledgeable and informative source on NATO air forces and the Ukraine conflict. He was a pilot wannabe, but has a physical issue that disqualified him, so he got into the intel world and now works in the Royal United Services Institute. No bs, just realistic appraisals from guys who know the business and its' challenges. 1
Coffeesforclosers Posted June 8 Posted June 8 1 hour ago, sherpa said: This guest, Dr. Justin Bronk is, in my view, the most knowledgeable and informative source on NATO air forces and the Ukraine conflict. He was a pilot wannabe, but has a physical issue that disqualified him, so he got into the intel world and now works in the Royal United Services Institute. No bs, just realistic appraisals from guys who know the business and its' challenges. Sounds like a good watch. RUSI position papers are my bread-and-butter for information about this war, and their scholars are usually very grounded and informative.
Tiberius Posted June 9 Author Posted June 9 51 minutes ago, BillStime said: jfc NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — Former President Donald Trump again said Wednesday that if he returns to the White House, he would not defend NATO members that don’t meet defense spending targets, days after he set off alarms in Europe by suggesting he would tell Russia to attack NATO allies he considered delinquent. Speaking at a campaign rally in South Carolina, he retold the story of his alleged conversation with the head of a NATO member country that had not met its obligations. This time, though, he left out the line that drew the most outrage — encouraging Russia “to do whatever the hell they want.”
BillStime Posted June 9 Posted June 9 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP) — Former President Donald Trump again said Wednesday that if he returns to the White House, he would not defend NATO members that don’t meet defense spending targets, days after he set off alarms in Europe by suggesting he would tell Russia to attack NATO allies he considered delinquent. Speaking at a campaign rally in South Carolina, he retold the story of his alleged conversation with the head of a NATO member country that had not met its obligations. This time, though, he left out the line that drew the most outrage — encouraging Russia “to do whatever the hell they want.” Russia First! 1
sherpa Posted June 9 Posted June 9 Again Tibs, I am pleased you found it worthwhile. But.....You asserted that there was something in there that there wasn't, and you did that to inject some political thing that was not in that interview. They never said a thing related to politics. They mentioned how the weapons supply would have helped them more if it came earlier. That has been a most obvious point of this whole situation, but they always avoid politics, something you can't do and cheapens the discussion. It is frustrating to bring interesting, well thought out and expressed views into this and many other subjects, and have someone absolutely determine to sully the conversation with an attempt at blatant political nonsense. The reasons the aid was not provided at the earliest time was because of US politics involving far more that aid to Ukraine. It involved border issues and aid to Israel. That is how US politics works.
Recommended Posts