Posted on 05/08/2024 4:16:43 PM PDT by Roman_War_Criminal
“deploying French troops”
I think I read those would be along the border with Belarus to free up Ukrainian troops for active fighting with Russia.
True, as far as it goes. I fear though that the wishful thinking and moral confusion of the US and NATO are not being remedied.
If you mean as in fixed, or repaired, I doubt that we can return to the past on that, but for all those years I was desperate to stop or at least slow the decay of Western militaries and allies I am grateful for the huge improvements that are taking place from Russia launching this war.
If Russia did that, both the UK and US have means to retaliate in kind. It’s a moot point though, you would have to be crazy to launch missiles at another nuclear power.
If Russia attacks NATO then NATO will have to defend itself.
OMG!
There you go again. The pot calling the kettle black.
Ever heard of proxy wars like.....
-Ukraine
-Vietnam
-Syria
-Afghanistan
-Iraq
-Libyia
Not to mention the constant "color revolutions" we've launched to destroy one country after another and murder their leaders all across the globe. We've accomplished all of this while racking up debts that our great, great grandchildren will be dealing with. And at the same time, we've got people in our own country living in tent cities and sh**#t-hole cities that are worse than third-world countries.
Look in a mirror.
You mean like the Russians did during Vietnam?
I still don’t understand why we didn’t obliterate Iran for their conduct during our time in Iraq.
A lot of dim bulbs don't realize that Russia has a larger nuclear missile arsenal than we do and that they also have hypersonic missiles that we do not. Are they really dumb enough to realize that a nuclear war would incinerate both countries?
Yeah, like YOU could do one damned thing about it. Sheesh, what a moronic thing to write.
You are always trolling.
Yeah, and you have to be kind of crazy to have your proxies start shooting your equipment at targets -inside- Russia. Seriously, if some British missile hits the victory day parade and kills 100 people, are the Kerch bridge gets dropped, let’s say Russia then hits a British base, or drops London bridge, or sinks a British carrier. What would be our response? The British army has a grand total of 75,000 men, about 100,000 including reserves. And they have less than 200 tanks. Our military has been decimated by 2 decades of chasing Apaches and faggotry and woke.
Do you think we would try to engage Russia in a conventional war? With our pasty soft and female soldiers? Do you think we would use nukes? Because the minute we do… It goes all out. What do you think the response would be if Russia does strike back if France or NATO hits a serious blow inside Russia, even by proxy. People bring up Vietnam a lot, and both sides do supply weapons. But what would we have done in 1969 if Russia found a way on behalf of the Vietnamese for some proxy to conduct air strikes inside the United States? They’re really hasn’t been anything quite like this in anybody’s past.
Not with nukes. I think the lunatics in DC think they can have a congressional war with Russia, keep it conventional, and force Putin out of office.
Look at the background of our national security leaders. There’s that woman academic. There’s a Jake Sullivan that was nothing but a political hack with no security background. When we bring up the Cold War, we need to remember there were some very professional people on our side at that time. Not today.
Ok, I’ll bite. What did you actually do to stop or at least slow the decay of Western militaries and allies? I really, really want to know Ansel.
Is that what you really think that rushed sentence was saying?
Now you want to do a big troll bunch of posting and pretending over a simple awkward wording that is absolutely meaningless?
Why not respond instead to the substance of my posts, it makes more interesting reading for a thread.
I was desperate to stop or at least slow the mental decay of militant morons and Zeepers and I am grateful for the huge improvements that are taking place from Russia launching this war.
That didn’t make any sense, but it sure sounded childish.
Your entire posting on this thread is going to be the usual nasty, angry trolling it looks like.
I see that you finally got the point I was making.
He may not even believe what he posts.
Genuine warriors are a rare and sometimes troublesome breed. Even our military often now seems to shun them. If we get in a shooting war, we may not have the time though to find, recruit, and train the warriors we will need for victory. I have a distressing image of entire battalions of American soy boys who are politically correct and know the DEI mantra and have the best weapons -- but who are whining and crying and hiding from combat because they are not willing and eager to kill and be killed.
NATO troops are far better trained and equipped than Ukrainian ones, and actually have air forces that aren’t relying on old Soviet junk. Despite all that, Ukraine is holding out against Russia’s ‘3 day special military operation’ for over 2 years now.
I don’t really understand why people are so scared of Putin’s puffing and blowing. Where nukes are concerned, MAD applies, conventionally, Russia is way overmatched by the US alone, never mind NATO collectively. The military may well have been infested by LGBTQWERTYUIOP BS, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of warriors still in the military who know what they are doing.
I will tell you what would be potentially dangerous for global conflict and nuclear escalation though, letting Ukraine fall unsupported after they voluntarily surrendered the nuclear weapons on their territory under the Budapest Memorandum in 1994, which obligates the US and UK, as well as Russia, to stand up for Ukraine’s territorial integrity (russia obviously failed to live up to their side of the bargain).
Failing to fulfil those treaty obligations will tell every scumbag regime on the planet as well as every small nation with a powerful hostile neighbor that nukes are the only path to national security, because the US and the west aren’t going to have their back.
So that would mean Saudi Arabia, with its wahhabist population, getting nukes, Bangladesh, Egypt, Turkey, Eastern European countries, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Phillipines, Japan, South Korea all scrambling to acquire nuclear weapons and the more countries have them, especially the unstable ones, the more likely there will be a nuclear war happening eventually.
Russia has to pay for what they are doing in Ukraine, and they are doing, and they have to because if they don’t it won’t end there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.