That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
I hate to be a stinker, but it looks on closer inspection to not be the same boat in the two pictures. Simular, for sure - but the windows on the hull, and then the shape of the top molding over the banaster. Also, they appear to display different names.
I read a news report yesterday that said the Russians had been sending "mobile crematoriums" into Ukraine, something they have done in the past. The idea is that they cremate bodies on the spot so the Russian public doesn't see lots of body bags.Kraken wrote: ↑Wed Mar 02, 2022 7:53 pm I read somewhere today that the Russians are letting their dead lie where they fell because they don't want their people to see large numbers of body bags coming in.
There's a large amount of propaganda propagating, so IDK what to believe of reports like this.
LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:26 amBy many accounts several won't be coming home at all. The conscript forces are unprofessional and unorganized and aren't great about retrieving bodies. There are also unproven reports of their mobile crematoriums being used to avoid the whole body bag thing.
The ministry said that based on the documents, Russia approved its invasion of Ukraine on January 18.
The operation was meant to last 15 days from February 20 to March 6, the ministry said based on its review of the documents. Insider could not independently verify this conclusion.
Swedish diplomat and former co-chair of Sweden's NATO delegation writes today (link in Swedish, translation is clumsily mine):
Sadly, everyone in the parking lot at the harbor as he excitedly stripped down while running to the ramp of the Au Naturale II. They found a jock strap in a tree three blocks away, it had been thrown so hard.
Mobile crematoria aren't the best look when your invasion has a whiff of ethnic cleansing.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 12:04 amLawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Fri Feb 25, 2022 11:26 amBy many accounts several won't be coming home at all. The conscript forces are unprofessional and unorganized and aren't great about retrieving bodies. There are also unproven reports of their mobile crematoriums being used to avoid the whole body bag thing.
“ Konanykhin said he was putting up the bounty to "facilitate the denazification of Russia."
It's a few things. In one aspect it isn't Sweden's job to put pressure on Finland to join NATO. They also probably have no desire to force the issue. It is about respecting that Finland should seek membership because they self-determine that it is the right decision for them. They may talk about it and try to influence each other normally. However, it recognizes the reality that Finland is at most risk so they seem to be saying it is Finland who should set the pace. At least that's how I'd read that. Otherwise, it is sort of akin to making yourself stronger at someone else's expense and it seems that Sweden has no desire to do that.Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:22 am Pardon my ignorance, but why would Sweden’s applying for NATO membership be irresponsible (without Finland)?
I understand the geography, but is the argument that Russia would threaten to invade Finland (again) if Sweden joins? That seems unlikely.
If anything, I think it would prompt or encourage Finland to join.
I also get the sense that I’m missing something obvious here.
Now, if we can just get a few dozen other billionaires to start adding to the pot...Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:30 am“ Konanykhin said he was putting up the bounty to "facilitate the denazification of Russia."
Damn. Balls o’ steel. Hope he’s got plenty of poison antidote at the ready.
Yeah, I have a feeling a million is a little light given the risk involved.Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:07 amNow, if we can just get a few dozen other billionaires to start adding to the pot...Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:30 am“ Konanykhin said he was putting up the bounty to "facilitate the denazification of Russia."
Damn. Balls o’ steel. Hope he’s got plenty of poison antidote at the ready.
My guess is that any officer that contacts him about the bounty magically disappears. It's a honeypot.Blackhawk wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 11:07 amNow, if we can just get a few dozen other billionaires to start adding to the pot...Carpet_pissr wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 10:30 am“ Konanykhin said he was putting up the bounty to "facilitate the denazification of Russia."
Damn. Balls o’ steel. Hope he’s got plenty of poison antidote at the ready.
That was an interesting read. Thanks for posting. I found this paragraph to be really on point:xwraith wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:17 am Interesting commentary on the Ukraine invasion being professionally wargamed before it started:
https://warontherocks.com/2022/03/the-w ... s-ukraine/
It must now be dawning upon senior commanders and possibly even Putin that they have grossly miscalculated, and are now in violation of Clausewitz’s most important dictum: “The first, the supreme, the most far reaching act of judgement that the statesman and a commander have to make is to establish … the kind of war on which they are embarking; neither mistaking it for, nor trying to turn it into, something that is alien to its nature. This is the first of all strategic questions and the most comprehensive.” What Ukraine must figure out now is Russia’s likely next moves, as Putin concludes that his invasion is not going to be a modern day Anschluss.
Nice article, thanks for posting!xwraith wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 9:17 am Interesting commentary on the Ukraine invasion being professionally wargamed before it started:
https://warontherocks.com/2022/03/the-w ... s-ukraine/
I'm of the opinion "If it ain't NATO, hands off." Aside from standard money/arms/training aid. That doesn't mean I don't care about the Ukranian people, but we need to be very careful when f-ing around with a nuclear superpower whose mindset we don't have a clear read on.Kurth wrote:At what point do we cross a line from supporting Ukraine to being sucked into a proxy war against Russia?
If Russian bombers targeted US troops in Afghanistan or Iraq, how would we react?Kurth wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 12:56 pm I’m seeing more and more calls to step up the military support for Ukraine. This guy wants to transfer 3 squadrons of A-10s to Ukraine, presumably so they can blast the hell out of that stalled Russian convoy.
At what point do we cross a line from supporting Ukraine to being sucked into a proxy war against Russia? I don’t think there’s any de escalation on the horizon here. Also, to be clear, I’m not opposed to this. I think it’s necessary and the right thing to do. I just think it’s important to note that we are moving to a very interesting and dangerous place.
What if WWIII has already started and we can end it before Russia gets more allies? IE, what if the world had crushed Germany before Italy and Japan joined them?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:16 pmIf Russian bombers targeted US troops in Afghanistan or Iraq, how would we react?Kurth wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 12:56 pm I’m seeing more and more calls to step up the military support for Ukraine. This guy wants to transfer 3 squadrons of A-10s to Ukraine, presumably so they can blast the hell out of that stalled Russian convoy.
At what point do we cross a line from supporting Ukraine to being sucked into a proxy war against Russia? I don’t think there’s any de escalation on the horizon here. Also, to be clear, I’m not opposed to this. I think it’s necessary and the right thing to do. I just think it’s important to note that we are moving to a very interesting and dangerous place.
I wish Ukrainians had their own A-10s to brrrt Russian columns but they don't. We can't make up for that mistake by sending in our own. It wouldn't be a proxy war, it would be the prelude to WWII.
What if Germany had nukes?noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:19 pmWhat if WWIII has already started and we can end it before Russia gets more allies? IE, what if the world had crushed Germany before Italy and Japan joined them?LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:16 pmIf Russian bombers targeted US troops in Afghanistan or Iraq, how would we react?Kurth wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 12:56 pm I’m seeing more and more calls to step up the military support for Ukraine. This guy wants to transfer 3 squadrons of A-10s to Ukraine, presumably so they can blast the hell out of that stalled Russian convoy.
At what point do we cross a line from supporting Ukraine to being sucked into a proxy war against Russia? I don’t think there’s any de escalation on the horizon here. Also, to be clear, I’m not opposed to this. I think it’s necessary and the right thing to do. I just think it’s important to note that we are moving to a very interesting and dangerous place.
I wish Ukrainians had their own A-10s to brrrt Russian columns but they don't. We can't make up for that mistake by sending in our own. It wouldn't be a proxy war, it would be the prelude to WWII.
I'm not even sure what support should be offered other than humanitarian or support committed to before hand (you know the stuff Trump wanted to pull because... Hunter) That said I fully endorse sanctions unto the point of asset seizure. Russia needs to be completely isolated. If that means we pay $7 a gallon for gas, then so be it. If that means we lose trade relations with China to prop up Russia. So be it. If Russia wants to go war over cutting ties with them, then all hope was always lost.YellowKing wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:03 pmI'm of the opinion "If it ain't NATO, hands off." Aside from standard money/arms/training aid. That doesn't mean I don't care about the Ukranian people, but we need to be very careful when f-ing around with a nuclear superpower whose mindset we don't have a clear read on.Kurth wrote:At what point do we cross a line from supporting Ukraine to being sucked into a proxy war against Russia?
If he takes Ukraine, he's bogged down in an insurgency for years while his economy tanks. That's not a terrible outcome for the US, and certainly preferable to a war with Russia. Let Putin dig his own hole.
Then I guess we should let Russia do whatever they want. Don't forget China is watching.
I'm no millitary expert, but at some point that convoy needs to spread out and become a Forward Operating Base, yes? A long linear line of vehicles is not the most efficient way to resupply and refuel vehicles in the convoy. Which begs the question - where are they going to go so they can spread out and make a FOB? They're already 19 miles from the city center, so presumably, their artillery and rockets are already in range. If they're trying to recreate the 3rd ID's Thunder Run into Baghdad and consolidate gains closer to the city I'd say they're failing.Kurth wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 12:56 pm I’m seeing more and more calls to step up the military support for Ukraine. This guy wants to transfer 3 squadrons of A-10s to Ukraine, presumably so they can blast the hell out of that stalled Russian convoy.
At what point do we cross a line from supporting Ukraine to being sucked into a proxy war against Russia? I don’t think there’s any de escalation on the horizon here. Also, to be clear, I’m not opposed to this. I think it’s necessary and the right thing to do. I just think it’s important to note that we are moving to a very interesting and dangerous place.
Our intelligence and diplomatic services are operating at multi-decade lows after the previous Administration. They are still operating at a high level but caution is the rule of the day. We don't know what the limit is for Putin. He probably doesn't know.noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:25 pmThen I guess we should let Russia do whatever they want. Don't forget China is watching.
I'm not saying it's easy. This is why we have intelligence agencies. I don't know what the right answer is, but "because they have nukes" isn't an acceptable answer to me. We need to find out (above our pay grade) what situation would raise the risk profile of Putin using nukes to an unacceptable level.
Anti-tank weapons can be provided by just about any nation. Ukraine already has them That isn't seen as artificially tipping the balance. A-10s can only be supplied by the US and they are the absolute best at what they do. 3 squadrons of A-10s could turn the Russian column into a 40-mile river of flaming steel, slag and carbon in a day. It is nearly equivalent to entering the conflict.noxiousdog wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:25 pm I'm curious why you feel that sending them A-10s would be such a tremendous escalation over tons of anti-tank weapons?
Kurth wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 12:56 pm I’m seeing more and more calls to step up the military support for Ukraine. This guy wants to transfer 3 squadrons of A-10s to Ukraine, presumably so they can blast the hell out of that stalled Russian convoy.
That's very much overrating their capability. Russian SAMs and fighter cover would not allow that to happen.LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Thu Mar 03, 2022 1:36 pm Anti-tank weapons can be provided by just about any nation. Ukraine already has them That isn't seen as artificially tipping the balance. A-10s can only be supplied by the US and they are the absolute best at what they do. 3 squadrons of A-10s could turn the Russian column into a 40-mile river of flaming steel, slag and carbon in a day. It is nearly equivalent to entering the conflict.