Posted on 01/27/2023 4:31:15 PM PST by UMCRevMom@aol.com
Good Lord your comments are hilarious. If US was attacked, NATO would aid with all it’s might? lol. US is the might. I’m Albertan, but even we know that. Western Europe is a bunch of cucked beta males. The men all died in WW2. All that’s left is bunch of males who don’t know which bathroom to use.
Can we email Russian tacticians the priority targets? I want to survive long enough to see Ottawa eat it heh.
“There was an attack a few weeks ago on Eglin AFB, which is where Russian first strike aircraft are based.”
The only Eglin I know about is in Florida.
Okay, I just looked it up: It was ENGELS AFB in Russia that was attacked by a drone that Russia said it shot down, and the debris caused some damage.
no.
zelensky is a dictator.
What is this thing that soldiers today full wear mask hoods and dark glasses for that inhuman terrorist look? Also they all seem to have a certain chubby look, and it isn’t just their armor.
Just an observation. That slim and fit look of our WWII-Vietnam guys, complete with even being able to see their faces was a more healthy look.
May TShirt Hitler and his ilk get the justice of God. May the innocent be spared further suffering. I pray.
No. fixed it: Putin is a dictator
Nope. Zelensky is a dictator. Shutting down churches and promoting faggotry, after shelling ethnic Russians since 2014? Sounds like a dictator to me.
Ruzzia may cut the Bakhmut supply line. It is time to act for Ukraine
Really, time to get US forces to ride to the rescue. Remembering our recent exit from Afghanistan when the most powerful military in the world watched its puppet state collapse under the blows of tribal nomads and herdsmen with Ak-47’s.
Where is Country Joe and the Fish when they are needed?
I believe she is Ukrainian; She has to be.
Her disturbing obsession with everything Ukraine isn’t normal for a Non-Ukrainian. She clearly doesn’t care about the invasion of the US or the US itself. Her entire life revolves around her “holy” Ukraine.
She seems like a good hearted person, but the fact that Ukraine consumes her life is offensive.
Sadly, there are a growing number of “Ukraine First” trolls who crawled out from underneath their bridges to demand that Americans sacrifice EVERYTHING for Ukraine. They are also willing to accept the idea of Nuclear War over that country.
Ukraine is none of NATO’s business. Last time I checked, Ukraine wasn’t in nato. To be honest, I wish the US wasn’t in nato and that nato would cease to exist. It has become a tool for the far left globalists.
Just ask the Serbs and Libyans.
Oh the irony! Good ole Rand Corporation (our government think tank) came out with a report in 2019 outlining steps the U.S. could take to “weaken, destabilize and encourage regime change in Russia.” Their strongest recommendation to achieve the goals was to provoke Russia militarily in Ukraine. They apparently have had a “change of heart” on the issue and have issued a new 32 page report outlining “It is disadvantageous for the United States to prolong the conflict in Ukraine.”
As one commenter noted: “The same RAND that consistently produced reports for Pentagon that suborning a Ukraine hostile to Russia was the key to effectively destroying Russia.
i.e. Splitting it apart into smaller fiefdoms, vulnerable to Chechnya style terrorist insurrections, and open to exploitation and looting by the West..”
Cyberspec News, [1/27/2023 2:54 AM]
RAND: It is disadvantageous for the United States to prolong the conflict in UkraineThis is the conclusion (https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PEA2510-1.html) reached by the experts of the well-known American information and analytical center RAND Corporation, having studied the current prospects of Washington, against the background of the growing escalation between NATO countries and Russia.
Experts believe that the United States needs to start taking steps right now to establish a lasting peace, despite calls from Kiev and the hawks of the North Atlantic Alliance to continue supplying weapons until Kiev fully returns the territories of the former Ukraine.
To create the ground for negotiations, RAND calls on Washington to do the following:
1️⃣Explain their plans for the future support of Kiev (just to be believed), assuming obligations to ensure security;
2️⃣Provide guarantees of Ukraine’s neutrality;
3️⃣Establish conditions for easing sanctions against Russia.RAND experts apocalyptically conclude that the alternative to peace is “a prolonged war that creates serious problems for the United States, Ukraine and the rest of the world.”
Interestingly, the RAND material came out before Victoria Nuland’s statements about the probability (https://t.me/c/1564771638/8635) of easing the anti-Russian sanctions and the impossibility (https://t.me/u_now/83955) to deliver Abrams tanks before the spring of this year. Although, many experts believe that these are just words that have nothing to do with reality.
Yes, obviously, and anyone advocating for a wider war IS a warmonger.
Hmm...was Biden’s announcement that we will be sending 31 Abrams M1 tanks just a “feint” to give cover to Germany so that they would send their Leopard tanks? This statement from Pentagon spokesperson certainly doesn’t jibe with Biden’s announcement.
“Pentagon Deputy Spokesperson Sabrina Singh said that the Abrams M1 tanks promised to Ukraine are now nowhere to be found: We simply do not have additional such tanks in the US arsenal, which is why it will take several months to transfer these Abrams M1A2 tanks to Ukraine. It will be necessary to purchase these tanks for Ukraine. The supply of tanks, as well as the training of Ukrainian troops in their use, will take a very long time. I think that the position of US Secretary of Defense Austin and the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, regarding Abrams has not changed. I mean it will be difficult to maintain and maintain these tanks.”
Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh Holds a Press Briefing /
Jan. 26, 2023
"Q: Sabrina, is there a shortage of M-1 Abram tanks? Is that why you're having to go through the procurement process that's not going to allow them to be there until, you know, almost a year's time? Why not just take them off the shelf to get them in the fight sooner?
MS. SINGH: That's a great question. We are using the USAI because that's exactly it. We just don't have these tanks available in excess in our U.S. stocks, which is why it is going to take months to transfer these M1A2 Abrams to Ukraine. And I think that you have to remember, I mean, as you probably know, these tanks are going to require training, maintenance, sustainment that is going to take a very long time to also train the Ukrainians on. And so, because of that -- and we took that into account -- that's why we are using the USAI capability in order to procure these tanks for the Ukrainians.
Q: And what changed from Tuesday to Thursday, when here at the podium we heard that the M1 Abrams was too difficult logistically to support, it was the wrong weapon to be sent, and then hearing that the President had authorized 31 to be sent?
MS. SINGH: Well, I don't think that -- I would just say that, you know, we stand by the statements that we made from here at the podium, and that you've heard Secretary Austin and the chairman say before. These are going to be difficult capabilities to maintain and sustain. We stand by that. There's going to be challenges to them."
ransomnote: Read the whole thing. Here's another quote:
"Q: Let me walk a little bit through “Tank Build 101.” You mentioned this is the M1A2.
MS. SINGH: Yeah, that's what I specialize in, yeah.
Q: That's why I asked. So this -- this implies that you're going to upgrade older-model M1A1s that are not in the active Army inventory into this A2 configuration. Is -- is that accurate?
MS. SINGH: We're working through the details right now. We're trying to procure new tanks through the USAI. But, again, we're working through those details right now, so I don't have any additional updates on that.
Q: So new tanks implies building from scratch, taking pieces together putting -- that's not the way the Army's done it for the last 20 years. Wanted to check into that, actually."
> “It is time to act for Ukraine”
Not only No, BUT ..... !
The leader of this dance troupe was none other than the world famous, gay-dancing, piano dick-playing grifter Zelenskyyyyyyy!! (He's dancing to save the West!! He is a hero for the ages!!!)
So, if you want more of this type of uKKKrainian progress in the leftist/globalist/RINO/WEF attempt to plunge the West into WWIII please send the gay-dancing grifter and his beard more money and more weapons, preferably more money!
Take that, Putin!!!!
Ukraine to receive 321 tanks from Western partners in total, says ambassador to France
https://english.nv.ua/nation/over-300-tanks-earmarked-for-delivery-to-ukraine-war-50300558.html
Western partners promise to provide Kyiv with 321 heavy tanks – Ukrainian ambassador to France
https://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/887589.html
Ukrainian Armed Forces kill 800 Russian invaders
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/01/28/7386903/
US Treasury Sanctions Chinese Firm Supplying Intelligence to Russia
https://www.theepochtimes.com/us-treasury-sanctions-chinese-firm-supplying-intelligence-to-russia_5016450.html
Liberation of Crimea with German tanks is legal, SPD chairman says
https://english.nv.ua/nation/germany-s-spd-states-ukraine-can-use-leopard-tanks-to-liberate-crimea-news-50300526.html
Hmm...was Biden’s announcement that we will be sending 31 Abrams M1 tanks just a “feint” to give cover to Germany so that they would send their Leopard tanks? This statement from Pentagon spokesperson certainly doesn’t jibe with Biden’s announcement.
“Pentagon Deputy Spokesperson Sabrina Singh said that the Abrams M1 tanks promised to Ukraine are now nowhere to be found: We simply do not have additional such tanks in the US arsenal, which is why it will take several months to transfer these Abrams M1A2 tanks to Ukraine. It will be necessary to purchase these tanks for Ukraine. The supply of tanks, as well as the training of Ukrainian troops in their use, will take a very long time. I think that the position of US Secretary of Defense Austin and the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, regarding Abrams has not changed. I mean it will be difficult to maintain and maintain these tanks.”
********************************I***************************************\
Looks like the Germans are being PLAYED FOR SUCKERS yet again.
“No, we have no idea who bombed the Germans’ Nord Stream pipeline network.” LOL - Suckers!
“NATO intentionally provoked war with Russia in order to bring about regime change. They spent 8 years building the Ukraine’s army for the express purpose of Russian regime change.”
That’s simply not true. No one intentionally provoked war with Russia; no one but a fanatic living in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan or sitting on a Persian carpet in Tehran would intentionally provoke a war with a nuclear power.
What’s more, NATO did not spend “...8 years building the Ukraine’s army for the express purpose of Russian regime change.” That’s just nonsense.
Stop for a minute and think: Russia’s most recent invasion of Ukraine was in 2022; eight years before that was 2014. Who was president in 2014? Obama. Russia first invaded Ukraine in February, 2014. How did Obama respond to that? He sent Ukraine blankets and MREs. Hardly the stuff of a military buildup. Trump’s was the only administration to provide Ukraine with any real military assistance, and that was a drop in the bucket compared to what Ukraine has received SINCE the 2022 invasion by Russia.
“Good ole Rand Corporation (our government think tank) came out with a report in 2019 outlining steps the U.S. could take to “weaken, destabilize and encourage regime change in Russia.”
The Rand Corporation is a think tank. That’s what they do: They work with hypotheticals and conduct research and analysis. Hell, that’s how it got its name! RAND: R (Research) and (AND) Develpment (D).
RAND is financed by the U.S. government and private interests, including universities and colleges, businesses, and even private citizens. Its focus is wide-ranging, and covers myriad subjects. It advises or assists global entities (governments, foundations, organizations, interests) around the world.
RAND deals with “what ifs” and “how tos.”
Conspiracy theorists are always seeking new boogeymen to blame for whatever current malevolence is in the news. Back in the 1970s and 1980s the favorite culprit was the “Illuminati.”
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.