• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

bilby said:
barbos said:
Georgian Border Security intercepted 14kg of C4 bombs sent from Odessa to Voronezh through Georgia.
I guess we now know what Nuland meant when she spoke about surprises for Russia.
I think it's time to put Nuland on Interpol wanted list.
She probably brought C4 to Kiev herself.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, the only person who gives shit the first about this "Nuland" character is you.

I certainly don't care one iota about him.
Click to expand...
Last few US presidents cared about what Nuland thinks, and "ukrainians" care about her opinion as well.
Not to mention every US puppet regime she runs.
 
bilby said:
barbos said:
bilby said:
barbos said:
yes, you signed that agreement
Click to expand...
I can assure you I did not.
Click to expand...
Yes you did. You are a part of the West.
Click to expand...
I never signed any agreements. And I am at 153°E, which is further East than the "Far East". I am more than twenty degrees East of Vladivostok, ffs.
Click to expand...
The west is not a geographic location in this context. It's a sphere of influence.
Japan is the West too. Even though they are neither geographic West, nor even really culturally that western.
People are thinking about joining Australia to NATO. Imagine that.
 
barbos said:
Reminded me a story which old lady which got infected with Covid along with me told me recently.
She recovered by the way. Anyway, she is a russian but originally from Ukraine and has a bunch of relatives there including sister or cousin. She regularly skypes with them.
And she was once talking with one of her grand-something no older than 7 I think. And he said he wants to kill russians. Go figure. Of course she told him that she herself is russian. Kids just repeat shit the hear.
Click to expand...

Well, that explains the Nashi, doesn't it?
 
barbos said:
TomC said:
Big, heavily armed, ships aren't particularly capable of defending themselves from small drones, designed for the task. That's why Russia's fleet got their butts kicked in the Black Sea by a country without a navy.
Click to expand...
I would not call it butt kicking. But yeah, Black Sea Fleet is liability in this war. Russia spends resources on protecting it and NATO spends resources on attacking it. In the end, it has no effect on the outcome of the war, whatsoever.
From a military point of view Russia can "resolve" the problem by kicking out NATO planes out of the black Sea by extending security zone. But NATO will do the same in Baltic Sea. So Russian military decided to let it happen.
These 40 year old ships are junk anyway.

For the record. 90% of NATO successful attacks come from attacks on ships in port with no active defence or even crew on it.
When it's in the open sea ukro-nazis usually fail, but it does not get reported by Nazi News sources.
So yeah, Nazi regime spends significant nazi resources on nazi PR victories.
Click to expand...
A ship sunk in port is still sunk. Of course they are hitting them when they are easiest to find and easiest to hit.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
A ship sunk in port is still sunk. Of course they are hitting them when they are easiest to find and easiest to hit.
Click to expand...
You are trying to represent it as some kind of great victory.
Yes, NATO is capable to target stationary targets in ports.
Russia can do that too. Russia can do even more with very little effort.
 
barbos said:
Loren Pechtel said:
A ship sunk in port is still sunk. Of course they are hitting them when they are easiest to find and easiest to hit.
Click to expand...
You are trying to represent it as some kind of great victory.
Yes, NATO is capable to target stationary targets in ports.
Russia can do that too. Russia can do even more with very little effort.
Click to expand...
The sinking of any Russian ship in the Black sea area is a victory! Ukraine wants the Black sea to open for commerce. I'm sure that you'd agree that it's much better for the world to have free commerce going through there. We all benefit, win-win. Having Russian ships through there could lead to harassment of commerce and even sinking barges. That's no good!
 
Harry Bosch said:
barbos said:
Loren Pechtel said:
A ship sunk in port is still sunk. Of course they are hitting them when they are easiest to find and easiest to hit.
Click to expand...
You are trying to represent it as some kind of great victory.
Yes, NATO is capable to target stationary targets in ports.
Russia can do that too. Russia can do even more with very little effort.
Click to expand...
The sinking of any Russian ship in the Black sea area is a victory! Ukraine wants the Black sea to open for commerce. I'm sure that you'd agree that it's much better for the world to have free commerce going through there. We all benefit, win-win. Having Russian ships through there could lead to harassment of commerce and even sinking barges. That's no good!
Click to expand...
Grain shipments are moving again because aggressor ships aren't there to harass. Ukraine is definitely winning this part of the battle.
 
barbos said:
Loren Pechtel said:
A ship sunk in port is still sunk. Of course they are hitting them when they are easiest to find and easiest to hit.
Click to expand...
You are trying to represent it as some kind of great victory.
Yes, NATO is capable to target stationary targets in ports.
Russia can do that too. Russia can do even more with very little effort.
Click to expand...
If you can't defend your ports you have a problem.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
barbos said:
Loren Pechtel said:
A ship sunk in port is still sunk. Of course they are hitting them when they are easiest to find and easiest to hit.
Click to expand...
You are trying to represent it as some kind of great victory.
Yes, NATO is capable to target stationary targets in ports.
Russia can do that too. Russia can do even more with very little effort.
Click to expand...
If you can't defend your ports you have a problem.
Click to expand...
Maybe Barbos has never heard of Pearl Harbor?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom