Jump to content

Putin's anal sphincter just got water tight to 500ft


Recommended Posts

US considering sending warships to Black Sea amid Russia-Ukraine tensions

 

 

The United States is considering sending warships into the Black Sea in the next few weeks in a show of support for Ukraine amid Russia's increased military presence on Ukraine's eastern border, a US defense official told CNN Thursday. 

The US Navy routinely operates in the Black Sea, but a deployment of warships now would send a specific message to Moscow that the US is closely watching, the official said. 

The US is required to give 14 days notice of its intention to enter the Black Sea under a 1936 treaty giving Turkey control of the straits to enter the sea. It is unclear if a notice has yet been sent. 

The Defense official also said the Navy is continuing to fly reconnaissance aircraft in international airspace over the Black Sea to monitor Russian naval activity and any troops movements in Crimea.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-considering-sending-warships-to-black-sea-amid-russia-ukraine-tensions/ar-BB1frve8?li=BBnb7Kz 

Link to post
Share on other sites

More importantly (perhaps) who's dick is Erdogan going to suck?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ishmael said:

His own. He has priorities.

Erdogan can either grant the USA the right of passage through the strait of Bosporus, or deny it.

If he grants the USA rights of passage, he pisses off Putin. If he denies the USA rights of passage, he pisses off the USA, and the rest of NATO, which now likes us again.

 A difficult position to be in if you're a dictator who wants to be in power forever.... Funny things happen in Turkey. People end up in many pieces in several suitcases. It's a very strange place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Erdogan can either grant the USA the right of passage through the strait of Bosporus, or deny it.

If he grants the USA rights of passage, he pisses off Putin. If he denies the USA rights of passage, he pisses off the USA, and the rest of NATO, which now likes us again.

 A difficult position to be in if you're a dictator who wants to be in power forever.... Funny things happen in Turkey. People end up in many pieces in several suitcases. It's a very strange place.

Erdogan is going to have to decide who has the best playbook here.

Putin doesn't have a strong hand despite being granted Galactic Overlord status in his home town.

Biden is a lot more difficult to deal with than Turnip and has momentum.

IMHO

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rest of the world (Sans perhaps China, and a few minor players like Venezuela) will back Biden up over Pooty, and be very happy to give the former guy the thumb up his ass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

America, starting another fight in someone else's country.  I'm thinking that Putin is willing to do another Crimea, he will not tolerate Ukraine hosting NATO bases.

America should get the fuck out of Europe, none of their fucking business.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Randro said:

America, starting another fight in someone else's country.  I'm thinking that Putin is willing to do another Crimea, he will not tolerate Ukraine hosting NATO bases.

America should get the fuck out of Europe, none of their fucking business.

Except that "America" is a NATO member, and is supposed to protect our fellow NATO members from aggression, specifically by the former Soviet Bloc.

 What was it that Tiny hands used to say?.... "Punch me, and I'll punch you back ten times harder!"..... And his base loved it.

 Thing is, Tiny hands was getting rim jobs, or giving them to Pooty for 4 years, and now Pooty is having a little hissy fit. We'll see how Sleepy Joe does.

 I'm guessing that the Trumpistas will have a fit if Biden flexes the USAs muscles, while they applauded Trump sucking up to Lil' Kim, Pooty. Erdogan, MBS, Netanyahoo, and the other strong arms.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mrleft8 said:

Except that "America" is a NATO member, and is supposed to protect our fellow NATO members from aggression, specifically by the former Soviet Bloc.

 What was it that Tiny hands used to say?.... "Punch me, and I'll punch you back ten times harder!"..... And his base loved it.

 Thing is, Tiny hands was getting rim jobs, or giving them to Pooty for 4 years, and now Pooty is having a little hissy fit. We'll see how Sleepy Joe does.

 I'm guessing that the Trumpistas will have a fit if Biden flexes the USAs muscles, while they applauded Trump sucking up to Lil' Kim, Pooty. Erdogan, MBS, Netanyahoo, and the other strong arms.

I presume everyone in favour of sending in the Navy will be signing up for duty there.

Or at least providing their children for service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

I presume everyone in favour of sending in the Navy will be signing up for duty there.

Or at least providing their children for service.

Duh, Canada is a founding member of NATO. Please tell your children to get ready.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a non story. The US sends Navy ships there very routinely and Turkey routinely grants passage.  Just have to be destroyer size or under. Not sure if subs are allowed at all. 

No Aircraft carriers allowed (but doesn't mean that they can't park just outside Turkish waters in the Med. ~500 miles flight distance to Sevastopol

 

Wikipedia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits#:~:text=The Montreux Convention Regarding the,the transit of naval warships.

Non-Black-Sea powers willing to send a vessel must notify Turkey 8 days prior of their sought passing. Also, no more than nine foreign warships, with a total aggregate tonnage of 15,000 tons, may pass at any one time. Furthermore, no single ship heavier than 10,000 tonnes can pass.[15] An aggregate tonnage of all non-Black Sea warships in the Black Sea must be no more than 30,000 tons (or 45,000 tons under special conditions), and they are permitted to stay in the Black Sea for no longer than twenty-one days. Only Black Sea states may transit capital ships of any tonnage, escorted by no more than two destroyers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Zonker said:

It's a non story. The US sends Navy ships there very routinely and Turkey routinely grants passage.  Just have to be destroyer size or under. Not sure if subs are allowed at all. 

No Aircraft carriers allowed (but doesn't mean that they can't park just outside Turkish waters in the Med. ~500 miles flight distance to Sevastopol

 

Wikipedia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits#:~:text=The Montreux Convention Regarding the,the transit of naval warships.

Non-Black-Sea powers willing to send a vessel must notify Turkey 8 days prior of their sought passing. Also, no more than nine foreign warships, with a total aggregate tonnage of 15,000 tons, may pass at any one time. Furthermore, no single ship heavier than 10,000 tonnes can pass.[15] An aggregate tonnage of all non-Black Sea warships in the Black Sea must be no more than 30,000 tons (or 45,000 tons under special conditions), and they are permitted to stay in the Black Sea for no longer than twenty-one days. Only Black Sea states may transit capital ships of any tonnage, escorted by no more than two destroyers.

Hell, that would stop Joli from going.

Oh, tons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Putin's anal sphincter just got water tight to 500ft

 

Still pushing for war with Russia you stupid little cocksucker?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mid said:

wait

Wait for stupid? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Putin's anal sphincter is just fine.  Trump never shit his Depends in Putin's company, because he was clenched tighter than a 16-year-old fair-cheeked cabin boy on an early-1900's whaling ship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

I presume everyone in favour of sending in the Navy will be signing up for duty there.

Or at least providing their children for service.

I can think of worse jobs than being in the Navy and going on a Med cruise with a Black Sea visit. Why is this trip going to be any different than the 1001 other times the Navy goes there?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Randro said:

America, starting another fight in someone else's country.  I'm thinking that Putin is willing to do another Crimea, he will not tolerate Ukraine hosting NATO bases.

America should get the fuck out of Europe, none of their fucking business.

Never knew you were a Trumper, but you learn something new every day. He was reviled for doing his best to walk out on our NATO commitments and that seems to be your position as well. The new boss is NOT the same as the old boss, no more sucking off Putie while asking Erdogan for a reach-around. 

If Europe collectively wants us to leave it is incredibly easy to get that done, resign from NATO en masse and we are gone, call the moving vans. Somehow they keep not doing that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I bet he would prefer your Vienna sausage.

who said she has a vienna sausage?

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Never knew you were a Trumper, but you learn something new every day. He was reviled for doing his best to walk out on our NATO commitments and that seems to be your position as well. The new boss is NOT the same as the old boss, no more sucking off Putie while asking Erdogan for a reach-around. 

If Europe collectively wants us to leave it is incredibly easy to get that done, resign from NATO en masse and we are gone, call the moving vans. Somehow they keep not doing that.

Can I put it this way. You're welcome to the party as long as you don't piss in the punch, put ketchup on the caviar, bonk the beagle or put "god bless the USA" on repeat on the Karaoke machine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Can I put it this way. You're welcome to the party as long as you don't piss in the punch, put ketchup on the caviar, bonk the beagle or put "god bless the USA" on repeat on the Karaoke machine. 

For now at least we have a grown-up in charge ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Duh, Canada is a founding member of NATO. Please tell your children to get ready.

Since when is Ukraine a member of NATO?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

I can think of worse jobs than being in the Navy and going on a Med cruise with a Black Sea visit. Why is this trip going to be any different than the 1001 other times the Navy goes there?

Does the term "Sabre Rattling" mean anything to you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Since when is Ukraine a member of NATO?

Ukraine–NATO relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Jump to navigation Jump to search
300px-Location_NATO_Ukraine.svg.png
 
  Current NATO members   
  Ukraine
Lesser Coat of Arms of Ukraine.svg
This article is part of a series on the
politics and government of
Ukraine
 
 
Presidency
 
Executive
 
 
 
 
 
 
See also
Flag of Ukraine.svg Ukraine portal
Ukraine-NATO relations
 
40px-Flag_of_NATO.svg.png
NATO
45px-Flag_of_Ukraine.svg.png
Ukraine

Relations between Ukraine and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) started in 1994.[1] Ukraine applied to begin a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 2008.[2][3] Plans for NATO membership were shelved by Ukraine following the 2010 presidential election in which Viktor Yanukovych, who preferred to keep the country non-aligned, was elected President.[4][5] Amid the Euromaidan unrest, Yanukovych fled Ukraine in February 2014.[6] The interim Yatsenyuk Government which came to power initially said, with reference to the country's non-aligned status, that it had no plans to join NATO.[7] However, following the Russian military invasion in Ukraine and parliamentary elections in October 2014, the new government made joining NATO a priority.[8]

Russia's reaction to the 2008 plan of the then Ukrainian Government to start a MAP was hostile. Nevertheless, the following year, NATO spokesman said that despite Russian opposition to NATO's eastward expansion the alliance's door remained open to those who met the criteria.[9]

According to polls conducted between 2005 and 2013, Ukrainian public support of NATO membership remained low.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] However, since Russian military intervention in Ukraine and Crimea, public support for Ukrainian membership in NATO has risen greatly. Since June 2014, polls showed that about 50% of those asked supported Ukrainian NATO membership.[17][18][19][20] Some 69% of Ukrainians want to join NATO, according to a June 2017 poll by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation, compared to 28% support in 2012 when Yanukovich was in power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Since when is Ukraine a member of NATO?

But we were talking about Turkey...

 And yes, AFAIK Turkey is still a NATO member.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Does the term "Sabre Rattling" mean anything to you?

Sure - a hobby for the US and USSR/Russian navies since 1946. As explained to me by a Soviet Air Force Officer - "Cold war is good. Pay and status of fighting in war without messy fighting" ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Zonker said:

It's a non story. The US sends Navy ships there very routinely and Turkey routinely grants passage.  Just have to be destroyer size or under. Not sure if subs are allowed at all. 

No Aircraft carriers allowed (but doesn't mean that they can't park just outside Turkish waters in the Med. ~500 miles flight distance to Sevastopol

 

Wikipedia.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits#:~:text=The Montreux Convention Regarding the,the transit of naval warships.

Non-Black-Sea powers willing to send a vessel must notify Turkey 8 days prior of their sought passing. Also, no more than nine foreign warships, with a total aggregate tonnage of 15,000 tons, may pass at any one time. Furthermore, no single ship heavier than 10,000 tonnes can pass.[15] An aggregate tonnage of all non-Black Sea warships in the Black Sea must be no more than 30,000 tons (or 45,000 tons under special conditions), and they are permitted to stay in the Black Sea for no longer than twenty-one days. Only Black Sea states may transit capital ships of any tonnage, escorted by no more than two destroyers.

That's the non-story alright, but there is a story to this. The Donbass rebels have been acting up, Zelinsky has responded by moving stuff to that side of his country, and Putin moved a bunch of stuff closer in response. A lot of chicken-littles are thinking a major war is imminent. 

 IMO probably not. I see no reason for the Ukes to think they are ready to re-take Donbass or take the risks that entails,  and no reason to suspect Putin want's to re-take the eastern part of the Ukraine.  Biden thinks he's being tested so he wants a bit of gun-boat diplomacy there is all. Some of the chickens are running around claiming the Biden intends to re-take Donbass for the Ukes. I suspect they have no heads. I do wonder wtf those guys on the border between the two Ukes are thinking though. Are they shooting out of sheer boredom? Perhaps. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mrleft8 said:

Ukraine–NATO relations

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Jump to navigation Jump to search
300px-Location_NATO_Ukraine.svg.png
 
  Current NATO members   
  Ukraine
Lesser Coat of Arms of Ukraine.svg
This article is part of a series on the
politics and government of
Ukraine
 
 
Presidency
 
Executive
 
 
 
 
 
 
See also
Flag of Ukraine.svg Ukraine portal
Ukraine-NATO relations
 
40px-Flag_of_NATO.svg.png
NATO
45px-Flag_of_Ukraine.svg.png
Ukraine

Relations between Ukraine and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) started in 1994.[1] Ukraine applied to begin a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 2008.[2][3] Plans for NATO membership were shelved by Ukraine following the 2010 presidential election in which Viktor Yanukovych, who preferred to keep the country non-aligned, was elected President.[4][5] Amid the Euromaidan unrest, Yanukovych fled Ukraine in February 2014.[6] The interim Yatsenyuk Government which came to power initially said, with reference to the country's non-aligned status, that it had no plans to join NATO.[7] However, following the Russian military invasion in Ukraine and parliamentary elections in October 2014, the new government made joining NATO a priority.[8]

Russia's reaction to the 2008 plan of the then Ukrainian Government to start a MAP was hostile. Nevertheless, the following year, NATO spokesman said that despite Russian opposition to NATO's eastward expansion the alliance's door remained open to those who met the criteria.[9]

According to polls conducted between 2005 and 2013, Ukrainian public support of NATO membership remained low.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] However, since Russian military intervention in Ukraine and Crimea, public support for Ukrainian membership in NATO has risen greatly. Since June 2014, polls showed that about 50% of those asked supported Ukrainian NATO membership.[17][18][19][20] Some 69% of Ukrainians want to join NATO, according to a June 2017 poll by the Democratic Initiatives Foundation, compared to 28% support in 2012 when Yanukovich was in power.

So not a member of NATO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

So not a member of NATO.

Despite the population, and certain leaders wishes,,,, KAFLOOOM! Putin's boy wins the election, and talks are off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Since when is Ukraine a member of NATO?

A sovereign, independent and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the rule of law, is key to Euro-Atlantic security. Relations between NATO and Ukraine date back to the early 1990s and have since developed into one of the most substantial of NATO’s partnerships. Since 2014, in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, cooperation has been intensified in critical areas.

 

  • Dialogue and cooperation started after the end of the Cold War, when newly independent Ukraine joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (1991) and the Partnership for Peace programme (1994).
  • Relations were strengthened with the signing of the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership, which established the NATO-Ukraine Commission (NUC) to take cooperation forward.
  • The Declaration of 2009 to Complement the NATO-Ukraine Charter mandated the NUC, through Ukraine’s Annual National Programme, to underpin Ukraine’s efforts to take forward reforms aimed at implementing Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations, in line with the decisions of the 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest.
  • Cooperation has deepened over time and is mutually beneficial with Ukraine actively contributing to NATO-led operations and missions.
  • Priority is given to support for comprehensive reform in the security and defence sector, which is vital for Ukraine’s democratic development and for strengthening its ability to defend itself.
  • In response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, NATO has reinforced its support for capability development and capacity-building in Ukraine. The Allies continue to condemn Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea, and its destabilising and aggressive activities in eastern Ukraine and the Black Sea region. NATO has increased its presence in the Black Sea and stepped up maritime cooperation with Ukraine and Georgia.
  • Since the NATO Summit in Warsaw in July 2016, NATO’s practical support for Ukraine has been subsumed in the Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP) for Ukraine.
  • In June 2017, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted legislation reinstating membership in NATO as a strategic foreign and security policy objective. In 2019, a corresponding amendment to Ukraine’s Constitution entered into force.
  • President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has underlined his eagerness to give new impetus to his country’s engagement with NATO.
  • Since 12 June 2020, Ukraine is one of six countries (known as ‘Enhanced Opportunity Partners’¹ under the Partnership Interoperability Initiative) that make particularly significant contributions to NATO operations and other Alliance objectives. As such, the country has enhanced opportunities for dialogue and cooperation with the Allies.
  • https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_37750.htm

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, badlatitude said:

A sovereign, independent and stable Ukraine, firmly committed to democracy and the rule of law, is key to Euro-Atlantic security. Relations between NATO and Ukraine date back to the early 1990s and have since developed into one of the most substantial of NATO’s partnerships. Since 2014, in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, cooperation has been intensified in critical areas.

 

  • Dialogue and cooperation started after the end of the Cold War, when newly independent Ukraine joined the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (1991) and the Partnership for Peace programme (1994).
  • Relations were strengthened with the signing of the 1997 Charter on a Distinctive Partnership, which established the NATO-Ukraine Commission (NUC) to take cooperation forward.
  • The Declaration of 2009 to Complement the NATO-Ukraine Charter mandated the NUC, through Ukraine’s Annual National Programme, to underpin Ukraine’s efforts to take forward reforms aimed at implementing Ukraine’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations, in line with the decisions of the 2008 NATO Summit in Bucharest.
  • Cooperation has deepened over time and is mutually beneficial with Ukraine actively contributing to NATO-led operations and missions.
  • Priority is given to support for comprehensive reform in the security and defence sector, which is vital for Ukraine’s democratic development and for strengthening its ability to defend itself.
  • In response to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, NATO has reinforced its support for capability development and capacity-building in Ukraine. The Allies continue to condemn Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea, and its destabilising and aggressive activities in eastern Ukraine and the Black Sea region. NATO has increased its presence in the Black Sea and stepped up maritime cooperation with Ukraine and Georgia.
  • Since the NATO Summit in Warsaw in July 2016, NATO’s practical support for Ukraine has been subsumed in the Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP) for Ukraine.
  • In June 2017, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted legislation reinstating membership in NATO as a strategic foreign and security policy objective. In 2019, a corresponding amendment to Ukraine’s Constitution entered into force.
  • President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has underlined his eagerness to give new impetus to his country’s engagement with NATO.
  • Since 12 June 2020, Ukraine is one of six countries (known as ‘Enhanced Opportunity Partners’¹ under the Partnership Interoperability Initiative) that make particularly significant contributions to NATO operations and other Alliance objectives. As such, the country has enhanced opportunities for dialogue and cooperation with the Allies.
  • https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_37750.htm

 

NATO is nothing but a military alliance against Russia. NATO thinks the members are willing to commit themselves to war with Russia, their primary source of nat gas and oil, for that fucked up place run by an ex-comedian? 

 I believe they have another think coming. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

NATO is nothing but a military alliance against Russia. NATO thinks the members are willing to commit themselves to war with Russia, their primary source of nat gas and oil, for that fucked up place run by an ex-comedian? 

 I believe they have another think coming. 

NATO is an arguably necessary military alliance against Russia. NATO membership is also too large for Russia to consider it anything but a menace to its own security. Nothing will happen between the two as long as they remain mutually dependent upon each other for fuel and money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, badlatitude said:

NATO is an arguably necessary military alliance against Russia. NATO membership is also too large for Russia to consider it anything but a menace to its own security. Nothing will happen between the two as long as they remain mutually dependent upon each other for fuel and money.

That's why I don't blame them much for reacting to the US fomenting color revolutions within their economic sphere, and not just their sphere, but the Ukraine, Russia's bread basket and the only year round ice-free access to the sea in the west. The Russians are intensely proud of all the battles they fought for Crimea, both against Turkey and Hitler. Trying to take that away from the Russians would be on a par with trying to take the Alamo away from Texans.  

  I strongly suspect Putin's support of Trump was had nothing to do with Trump, or "trying to destroy democracy", it was purely anyone-but-Hillary.  During the nomination of that election his boys tried to help Bernie.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

China admits its vaccines aren't very good

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/11/china-covid-vaccines-480802

I suspect the recent belligerence (Chinese military aircraft flying into Taiwan airspace) has something to do with this. Nothing diverts from domestic ineptitude quite like military misadventure. Argentina invading the Falklands comes to mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Olsonist said:

China admits its vaccines aren't very good

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/11/china-covid-vaccines-480802

I suspect the recent belligerence (Chinese military aircraft flying into Taiwan airspace) has something to do with this. Nothing diverts from domestic ineptitude quite like military misadventure. Argentina invading the Falklands comes to mind.

I thought it was the Brits who invaded the Malvinas.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a bit of reading up on Russia's new nuclear torpedo. Putin announced that it would have a range of 10,000 kilometres, depths of 3,000 metres, speeds of 100 knots-plus, and be able to destroy and irradiate major coastal cities by causing a radioactive monster tsunami.

Current information is that long-range control and targeting is doubtful, top speed is around 40 knots, and depth capability unknown.

Don't sell your New York properties just yet...............

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

I thought it was the Brits who invaded the Malvinas.....

The islands have an interesting history with French, Spanish, American and Argentine rule. From a military POV, going up against Britain was the dumbest thing the junta could have done. They were better suited to repression. And it was the luckiest thing to ever happen to Thatcher.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

The islands have an interesting history with French, Spanish, American and Argentine rule. From a military POV, going up against Britain was the dumbest thing the junta could have done. They were better suited to repression. And it was the luckiest thing to ever happen to Thatcher.

It wasn't luck

She asked the professionals, "Can we kick their asses?" and the reply was "With an expenditure of $X billion (well, pounds rather than dollars) and Y,000 lives, almost certainly yes." So she made the call GO! and let the pros handle it. And they did

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

It wasn't luck

She asked the professionals, "Can we kick their asses?" and the reply was "With an expenditure of $X billion (well, pounds rather than dollars) and Y,000 lives, almost certainly yes." So she made the call GO! and let the pros handle it. And they did

- DSK

It was luck that it happened on her watch. She didn't go hunting for it. I'm not a Thatcher fan by any means but I'd easily root for her over the Dirty War Junta. That's not a close decision.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Battlecheese said:

Yes. Warships are tiny compared to cargo ships.

We had a vivid illustration of that fact years ago - the New Jersey visited here and anchored in the inner harbour. It looked like a destroyer next to the container ships.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the Iowa class battleships were wide and were among the original Panamax boats. The USS Missouri 108 ft 2 beam squeezed through the (original) 110.0 ft wide Panama Canal with inches to spare on each side. But the Missouri was only 887' long compared to the Ever Given is 1312'.   

image.png.3b4406516f6000d93cce710531aca61c.png

Ironically, the Ever Given is Panama flagged but her 59m beam isn't going to fit through even the new 55m Agua Clara locks.

image.png.b3a8a318827862b4b95ce22c161ab0ce.png

Did I mention that I docked the USS Missouri single handed? I feel like I should have mentioned that at some point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/8/2021 at 6:16 PM, Randro said:

America, starting another fight in someone else's country.  I'm thinking that Putin is willing to do another Crimea, he will not tolerate Ukraine hosting NATO bases.

America should get the fuck out of Europe, none of their fucking business.

Well, for starters, "America" is a whole continent.  One of the countries on that continent is the United States of Mexico.  Another is Canada.  There is a third one.  

In other words, you've got your panties in a bunch, but you don't even know the name of your country.  

Never mind.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Left Shift said:

Well, for starters, "America" is a whole continent.  One of the countries on that continent is the United States of Mexico.  Another is Canada.  There is a third one.  

Never mind.  

Being an obtuse cunt.

My point remains valid dispute your deflection.  American has been the global terrorist for 60 years.  Imagine having drones flying over your place picking off anyone who posted a nasty on farcebook?  Imagine an innocent country being invaded and trashed ... for ... nothing really, other than oil?

Reality hurts don't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Randro said:

Being an obtuse cunt.

My point remains valid dispute your deflection.  American has been the global terrorist for 60 years.  Imagine having drones flying over your place picking off anyone who posted a nasty on farcebook?  Imagine an innocent country being invaded and trashed ... for ... nothing really, other than oil?

Reality hurts don't it?

So, you want to dispute my deflection?  Go ahead.  

There are three global terrorists, the US of A, China and Russia.  All depending on where you live.  It takes three to do this dance - Orwell got that mostly right.  However, the US of A is, in fact, pretty much of a dipshit when it comes to foreign policy and international relations.   Largely driven by it's greed for certain resources.  No question.  So is China.  It's been the "Middle Kingdom" for 2,000 years.  Russia seems to just want to be a bully - it's been one for 1,500 years - and to sell it's oil as fast as possible, as an economic weapon.   60 years isn't a flyspeck on history.

The US of A notably has has a penchant for doing more of those dipshit things under several scenarios:  Corporate greed (Largely Republican-based), Demented Anti-Castro Florida politics (Everybody is in on that game) and/or universal kowtowing to the Israeli lobby and PAC money (Also everybody).  Real-politik.  

Carry on.  However, lose the "America" thing.  And if you want to get into state management of and punishment for internet behaviour, please start with China.  And watch out for slavic-types carrying sharp-tipped umbrellas in London.  It ain't pretty out there.  

 

Oh, and quit Facebook.  The sooner it disappears the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Left Shift said:

Oh, and quit Facebook.  The sooner it disappears the better.

I quit farcebook 12 months after it was available.

I can pick bullshit early, clearly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Randro said:

I quit farcebook 12 months after it was available.

I can pick bullshit early, clearly.

It took you a year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Left Shift said:

So, you want to dispute my deflection?  Go ahead.  

There are three global terrorists, the US of A, China and Russia.  All depending on where you live.  It takes three to do this dance - Orwell got that mostly right. 

 

Even worse, you can never get rid of them because when one quits, another takes it's place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Randro said:

I quit farcebook 12 months after it was available.

I can pick bullshit early, clearly.

I use Facebook. Not much but one of my cousins is on it. i also use Twitter. Most disgusting of all, I use this sailing website, you've probably never heard of it, called Sailing Anarchy. It's basically a bunch of wanks on a site run by Sir Wank-a-Lot. I even use a free classified advertisements website called Craigslist run by a local billionaire by the name of Craig.

Facebook monetizes you whether you like it or not. I use WhatsApp which is extremely well done and FWIW uses the same protocol as Signal. Indeed Moxie Marlinspike and Brian Acton are buddies. Basically, Facebook and its ilk employ insanely smart people who are incented to find ways to make money off of you and me. Not using FB doesn't stop this. It reduces it and probably by less than you think.

I only point this out to say that this is the way the world is. I hate Uber but in so many ways it is insanely better than cabs ever were. BTW, Uber lost $6.7B in 2020. Don't even get me started on the destructive forces of modern capitalism.

FWIW, I use AdBlock, uOrigin, ... I turn off tracking, ... I'm not kidding anyone.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

I use Facebook. Not much but one of my cousins is on it.

naNEzNm.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Randro said:

naNEzNm.gif

The devil wins. I use FB about once a month unless I'm on a parts crawl in which case I'm all over Facebook Marketplace, Searchtempest (Craigslist countrywide) + EBay + various forums. I just drove out to Colorado to buy a museum quality Look 595 I found on Facebook Marketplace. Mark didn't make money off the transaction. I paid cash. But I'm not kidding myself. Mark made money off the transaction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-kremlin-mouthpiece-warns-inevitable-105301739.html

"All-out cyberwarfare, nation-wide forced blackouts, and the targeted disruption of internet services—for one of the Kremlin’s top propagandists, all of those tactics are fair game in what she describes as a fated war-to-come against the U.S.

“War [with the U.S.] is inevitable,” declared Margarita Simonyan, editor in chief of the state-funded Russian media outlets RT and Sputnik, who believes the conflict will break out when, not if, Vladimir Putin moves to seize more territory from Ukraine."

 

Well, here we go, this could get interesting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://news.trust.org/item/20210413103817-sjzzo

"MOSCOW, April 13 (Reuters) - Russia on Tuesday called the United States an adversary and told U.S. warships to stay well away from Crimea "for their own good", calling their deployment in the Black Sea a provocation designed to test Russian nerves.

Moscow annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and two U.S. warships are due to arrive in the Black Sea this week amid an escalation in fighting in eastern Ukraine, where government forces have battled Russian-backed separatists in a conflict Kyiv says has killed 14,000 people.

"The United States is our adversary and does everything it can to undermine Russia's position on the world stage," Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov was cited as saying by Russian news agencies.

"We do not see any other elements in their approach. Those are our conclusions," the agencies quoted him as saying.

The comment suggests that the veneer of diplomatic niceties that the former Cold War enemies have generally sought to observe in recent decades is wearing thin.

U.S. President Joe Biden said in March that he thought his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin was a killer who would "pay a price" for alleged meddling in U.S. elections - an accusation that Moscow denies.

Ryabkov's remarks suggest Russia will in turn robustly push back against what it sees as unacceptable U.S. interference in its own backyard.

"We warn the United States that it will be better for them to stay far away from Crimea and our Black Sea coast. It will be for their own good," said Ryabkov.

The West is sounding the alarm over what it says is a large unexplained build-up of Russian forces close to Ukraine's eastern border and in Crimea, which NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg on Tuesday called on Moscow to unwind.

Russia has said it moves its forces around as it sees fit, including for defensive purposes, and has regularly accused NATO of destabilising Europe by moving its military infrastructure closer to Russia's borders."

'STAY AWAY'

 

Are there new red lines being drawn here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has been annoying the fuck out of me.

It starts with a premise that Putin should be worried if the US shuffles a few assets around Europe.  The reverse is true, the US is pannicing because all the time and effort they have put into ring-fencing Russia with NATO bases looks under threat.

Putin will not allow Ukraine to host NATO bases and missile systems on their border.  Simple as that.

Many have tried over the last few hundred years to make Russia do what they want, even attempted to invade them, so how did that work out?

I tell you what would happen ... conflict if started would result in Russia taking Ukraine in about 3 days, at the same time they would invade a few other '...stans' on their border.

The US cannot afford to start and lose yet another war.  It would yet again get its arse handed to it on a plate by the people who live in the countries they are fucking with.  How many fucking times does this have to happen for it to learn?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Randro said:

This thread has been annoying the fuck out of me.

It starts with a premise that Putin should be worried if the US shuffles a few assets around Europe.  The reverse is true, the US is pannicing because all the time and effort they have put into ring-fencing Russia with NATO bases looks under threat.

Putin will not allow Ukraine to host NATO bases and missile systems on their border.  Simple as that.

Many have tried over the last few hundred years to make Russia do what they want, even attempted to invade them, so how did that work out?

I tell you what would happen ... conflict if started would result in Russia taking Ukraine in about 3 days, at the same time they would invade a few other '...stans' on their border.

The US cannot afford to start and lose yet another war.  It would yet again get its arse handed to it on a plate by the people who live in the countries they are fucking with.  How many fucking times does this have to happen for it to learn?

It's a very dangerous game they are playing. 

Sorry but I just can't see benefit to humanity other than increased profits for the war industry. 

Could one of you fascist interventionist scumbags please clue me in? 

Quote

 

Russia deploys two armies, three airborne units to counter threat from 40,000 NATO troops on its border
Rick Rozoff

Major Russian officials today have warned of military threats posed by the U.S.-led thirty-nation North Atlantic Treaty Organization to its western border: its entire western border. And its northern one as well.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced that Russia has redeployed two armies and three Airborne Forces units to its western border as part of what he termed an ongoing readiness inspection.

In one of the sternest warnings issued by a Russian official in the post-Cold War era, Shoigu added, “We’ve taken proper measures in response to the alliance’s military activities which threaten Russia.” Regarding the ground and airborne forces, the defense minister said: “The troops have manifested complete preparedness and the ability to perform their duties to guarantee the country’s military security. At the present time, these units are involved in exercises.”

He also warned that NATO is now concentrating over 40,000 troops and 15,000 items of armaments and military hardware as well as strategic aircraft near the Russian border, stating: “The troops in Europe are moving towards Russian borders. The basic forces are being amassed in the Black Sea area and in the Baltic region.” He also mentioned the preponderance of U.S. military personnel in those deployments, as the Pentagon is reinforcing troops in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland.

In addition he highlighted the fact that: “The alliance annually holds up to 40 large operational training measures of a clearly anti-Russian bias in Europe. In the spring of this year, the NATO allied forces launched Defender Europe 2021 drills, the largest exercise over the past 30 years.” (Estimates range as high as 37,000 U.S. and NATO troops involved in the several-weeks-long war games from the Baltic to the Black Seas and the Balkans.)

The Russian defense minister pointed out that Russia’s western border wasn’t the only location where the U.S. and NATO were threatening his nation. He also expressed alarm over the U.S. and NATO military build-up on Russia’s northern flank, the Arctic. He said: “The competition between the world’s leading powers for access to the Arctic Ocean’s resource and transport routes is increasing. The US and its NATO allies increase their naval and ground groups in the Arctic, increase the combat training intensity, extend and upgrade the military infrastructure.”

In general Shoigu stated that over the past three years NATO has increased its activity along Russia’s borders.

Also today Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov warned that American warships deployed in the Black Sea off Russia’s coast were a provocation. He was speaking as two U.S. guided-missile destroyers, USS Donald Cook and USS Roosevelt, both equipped to carry 56 Tomahawk cruise missiles and an undisclosed number of Standard Missile-3 anti-ballistic missiles, are to enter the Black Sea tomorrow and the following day. Earlier this year the guided-missile destroyers USS Donald Cook, USS Thomas Hudner and USS Porter and the guided-missile cruiser USS Monterey were in the Black Sea for exercises, often two at a time. (The most, in terms of tonnage, allowed by the 1936 Montreux Convention, though Turkey’s proposed Istanbul Canal may eliminate that limit.)

Ryabkov said that American warships sailing thousands of miles from U.S. naval bases “always involves a geopolitics element.”

His comments are worth citing extensively:

“I wouldn’t like to go too much into particulars of various interpretations of what freedom of navigation and freedom of the seas is, especially in this context. I know one thing: American ships have absolutely nothing to do near our coasts, and this is a purely provocative undertaking. It’s provocative in the literal sense of this word: they’re testing our patience and getting on our nerves. This won’t work.”

And he issued this stark admonition in the context of the Western threats to Russia over Ukraine:

“Apparently seeing itself as the queen of the seas […] the U.S. should understand after all that the risks of various incidents are very high. We warn the U.S. that it should steer clear of Crimea and our Black Sea coast. This would be to their own benefit.”

His warning is a timely one as Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba is at NATO headquarters today, where U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin arrives tomorrow and Secretary of State Antony Blinken shortly after him.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlike Afghanistan, Russia has some strategic assets to put into the world chess game.

They also have lots of expensive toys we can blow up. The USA is absolutely the world's number-one heavyweight champ at blowing shit up. THAT is the kind of war that the military-industrial complex understands and has mastered.

Cyberwar? Hmmm. That could get interesting. The fact that the Russians de-facto control the Republican Party now and probably 1/4 to 1/3 of the US economy is a very bad sign. Of course, they can't do much cyber-war if they don't have electricity.

If I were a European leader, I'd be looking for a sign that the western allies against Russia have good chance of overcoming all the "unconventional warfare" that would be emerging... of course, Putin is exerting a lot of effort now, not sure how much more he's got in the bag.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Unlike Afghanistan, Russia has some strategic assets to put into the world chess game.

 

But they're going to dismantle all their nukes and never, ever build another one any day now.

Because a big bunch of countries - none of which have a single nuke - said they have to.

So there.

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...