Russia-Ukraine war has begun
- Thread starter TheOriginalHappyGoat
- Start date
Yep. Think back to the Vietnam War. As long as the North Vietnamese Army was in Cambodia, Laos, or North Vietnam…they were essentially in a sanctuary
The Pentagon had a different answer than Blinken
Well the Ho Chi Minh trail did get bombed. Not targeting ammo dumps seems just wrong.
From the politico article linked above…
“The Russians are smart now because they know there is a restriction for Ukrainians to shoot at the Russian territory. And we saw all of their military equipment sitting one or two kilometers from the border [near Kharkiv] and there was nothing we could do.”
“And the Secretary, in his conversations with Minister Umerov, talks through how best those capabilities can be used, and we believe that is within Ukrainian territory.”
Which is a non answer. Did they claim they put a restriction on use? No.
“But during a media round table event in Washington, the Ukrainian lawmakers expressed palpable frustration that the U.S. is still against the policy.”
“It’s like if somebody were to attack Washington D.C. from the Virginia state, and you say we’re not going to hit Virginia for some reason.”….David Arahamiya, head of a Ukrainian parliamentary group on U.S. relations and the lawmaker who led the delegation this week.
I wonder if the Ukrainians could get around that by not using weapons supplied by the US to strike inside Russia, but close to the border?
Or does the US control other NATO countries in this regard? (I have no idea)
You believe Ukraine is lying, or are you arguing that Ukraines claims are true but the Pentagon didn’t verify?
I don't think anyone is lying. I think Ukraine is probably telling the truth, and I think Blinken and the Pentagon are giving purposefully vague responses that don't actually claim anything.
But when Blinken said they don't encourage use against Russian territory, what does that mean?
If you give the keys to your car to your son and say "I don't encourage you to speed......" and you get a ticket, what's the implication?
They can play word games all they want - everyone knows the reality.
Come on man. The Ujrainians are saying we restrict their use and the Pentagon is saying we provide direction on how best to use them within Ukrainian territory. Quite a bit of between the lines context there, however, even brushing that away you have actual actions where the Ukrainians appear to be acting against their interests by not using these weapons to hit Russian staging areas outside their territory. This is counterintuitive UNLESS the rest of the context rings true and we have asked (told) them not to use our weapons systems to hit targets inside Russia.
Not everything will be spelled out but you and I both know the score here. The administration is worried that Russia will see use of American weapons against their territory as an escalation so they are telling the Ukrainians not to do it. You know that. I know that. The Russians know that.
.....every time his lips are moving.
I guess the T-90 isn't invincible
www.forbes.com
Spinning Turret Syndrome: The Disastrous Bug In Russia’s Most Modern Tank
Putin claims the T-90M "Breakthrough" is the best tank in the world. But a bug causes the turret to spin uncontrollably when the tank is hit, putting it out of action.
www.forbes.com
Those Bradleys are bad ass. I didn't see the tank even get off a shot.I guess the T-90 isn't invincible
Spinning Turret Syndrome: The Disastrous Bug In Russia’s Most Modern Tank
Putin claims the T-90M "Breakthrough" is the best tank in the world. But a bug causes the turret to spin uncontrollably when the tank is hit, putting it out of action.
HIMARS, and most tech relying on satellites, aren't very useful any longer.
www.yahoo.com
US-supplied Himars ‘completely ineffective’ as Russia jams skies with new tech
Himars rocket launchers supplied to Ukraine by the US have been left “completely ineffective” because of Russian electronic jamming systems.
I'll bet we - or they - will figure a way around it.HIMARS, and most tech relying on satellites, aren't very useful any longer.
US-supplied Himars ‘completely ineffective’ as Russia jams skies with new tech
Himars rocket launchers supplied to Ukraine by the US have been left “completely ineffective” because of Russian electronic jamming systems.
Or find a way to find the jamming location and take it out.
War is always this move and counter move. We will develop a counter
They say Russia started it in 1975. I wonder if Gore sold them the idea ?
How can they continue to do the same thing, in the same spots, with the same results? Wow just wow.
Gotta wonder how old that is? I find it hard to believe either side can mass mobile armor like that today.
Reports I see say that Russia may still have up to 12 months +/- supply of tanks and APV's. They started a huge amount left over from the USSR days (that I think we actually helped to pay for....
)China is probably gearing up its tank production for Russia. Still, have columns in the open like that is just insane.Reports I see say that Russia may still have up to 12 months +/- supply of tanks and APV's. They started a huge amount left over from the USSR days (that I think we actually helped to pay for....
Hard to believe this was attempted in the daylight hours, as witnessed by the dark tanks and green grass.
Perhaps the off road capabilities of Russian armor are over stated.
Infiltration seems to be the tactical response to getting cut up in a road bound column.
They have laid so many mines, that they now don't know where they are that they stick to roads mostly. Ukraine is now mining roads around previously kersplatted russian armor. There a a lot of videos of the orcs drive around their old burnt out hardware, just to hit a mine with the lead vehicle and then drones and artillery (which already have the area targeted) start popping like popcorn.
didn't ww1 and 2 become WW's because everyone yielded to the possibility of "escalation"? Do we never learn to stop fires, when they are merely a smoldering, unorganized pile of trash? WTF?
The two wars were different. In one, massive alliances played a big role. There also were people in all the countries involved that wanted war for various reasons. WW1 was the attempt to go all in from the beginning. 2 was far more the "one more chance and we may mean it this time".
