I absolutely do. I’ve seen at least a couple “gators” fantasize about murdering the “opposition” (liberals) on this very forum. A bunch I think moved on to that other forum, where presumably they are free to express their more vile thoughts. I also still firmly believe Trump fancies himself as a dictator/authoritarian, and if given a second chance he won’t be deposed by any future election. Only by death. Trump is an old man, so that in itself might not seem threatening as he has limited shelf life, yet if the Steve Bannon types succeed at destroying our checks and balances, I’m not sure where you think that leaves democracy in America. It’s survival was perilously close on 1/6, it literally came down to a handful of people choosing one path vs. another, some just refuse to admit that.
Aaand…one of only a handful of threads that has been worth coming back for is derailing into the exact same Trump Biden garbage as everything else here. It’s as predictable as it is sad.
The A-10’s cannon is great and the defining characteristic of the plane that everyone knows but that wouldn’t be the primary use on this convoy. It can carry somewhere around ten guided bombs depending on type and configuration. Those would prove much more effective and useful.
Sadly, it was an encouraging stand but it probably won’t be standing for long. Occupation for Russia will be a B though.
MP, former chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Dmytro Razumkov reported about the shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces using the Tochka-U tactical missile system of the airfield in the city of Berdyansk, Zaporizhia region, captured by Russian occupation-forces. AFU launches Tochka-U attack on Berdyansk airfield seized by occupiers – Razumkov
The front mount cannon is not the only firepower that the A-10 has. It can also be fitted with the USAF Advanced Targeting Pod to deliver laser guided munitions. But if that was necessary, those would most likely be delivered from a distance or from higher altitude.
There's no way this ends well for Putin. His 200k soldiers, most of whom don't want to be there, are abandoning their vehicles and are out of food. Even if he wins which is likely via escalated bombings, he can't occupy a country of 42M people with 200k troops.
It’s actually pretty pathetic. Almost like many from both sides of the table don’t actually think for themselves…
That makes no sense. The only situation where Russia would need nukes is if NATO intervenes, and NATO would not intervene without our involvement. The solution to your proposed problem is thus just to ignore it like we've ignored Ethiopia. Russia already has control of Chernobyl, so just let them take the rest of Ukraine if you're concerned about escalation to nuclear war.
Well, India is officially indifferent to what’s going on, so I assume the Indians are indifferent to this as well.
Even that isn’t true in my opinion. Russia only NEEDS to use nuclear weapon if NATO were not only to intervene in Ukraine but also to make, like, a demand for unconditional surrender and threaten to march on Moscow after clearing Ukraine. That MIGHT rise to the level of an existential threat to Russia. Absent that, nukes are an optional, first-strike weapon, wholly at cross-purposes to Russia’s desired ends.
It’s been done before: Highway of Death - Wikipedia The key, of course, it to take out the lead and rear vehicles with precision-guided munitions, then hit the long axis with cluster munitions, and after that you can take your time, like punching someone you’ve already knocked unconscious. Of course, I’m just talking about how to take out a convoy in a forensic sense. If we aren’t even willing to deny Russian aircraft access to Ukrainian skies, then the idea of attacking Russian forces on the ground is simply ludicrous.
Not that the Russians care but didn't they coauthor and are part of a NPT? So they'd be violating their own treaty. Again like they care.
From CNN... "Mexico's president says he will not impose sanctions on Russia From Karol Suarez in Mexico City Mexico will not impose economic sanctions on Russia, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said in a daily news conference on Tuesday morning. “We’re not going to take any kind of economic reprisal because we want to have good relations with all the governments in the world, and we want to be able to talk with the parties in conflict,” López Obrador said after he was asked about his stance on the matter. “We do not consider that it corresponds to us, and we think that the best thing is to promote dialogue to achieve peace,” he said. López Obrador also criticized the “censorship” of Russian state media, after social media companies announced they would take action to limit the reach of Russian-backed news channel RT. "I don't agree that there is censorship in the media; I spoke out against it when President Trump's account was canceled, as I also do not agree with the fact that the media, from Russia or any other country, are censored," he said."
From CNN "US secretary of state floats kicking Russia off of UN Human Rights Council From CNN's Kylie Atwood and Zachary Cohen As US Secretary of State Antony Blinken condemned Russia’s human rights abuses and violations of international humanitarian law as it carries out its assault on Ukraine, he floated the idea of kicking Russia off of the UN Human Rights Council during a speech before the council on Tuesday morning. “One can reasonably ask whether a UN member state that tries to take over another UN member state – while committing horrific human rights abuses and causing massive humanitarian suffering – should be allowed to remain on this council,” Blinken said.
I agree. If any direct NATO involvement warranted nukes then the Red Army and NATO wouldn't have needed such massive armies during the Cold War. A smaller, more NBC-toughened army would've been better suited for a nuclear winter scenario. You're veering too far off topic, I don't see how our concern or intervention can change Putin's sanity.
It was in direct response to the statement Putin only needs to use the nukes if NATO gets involved to counter concerns about nukes being threatened. My argument is Putin could just as likely say screw it & use them anyway to get Ukraine to fall. To Putin he feels justified in whatever he decides so the NATO involvement thing is a thin excuse.
