- Moderator
- #7,521
Offline
For sure.That ought to be considered an act of war by every other nation on Earth. It's literally a crime against Humanity.
For sure.That ought to be considered an act of war by every other nation on Earth. It's literally a crime against Humanity.
Is this really a surprise to anyone? It was like this before East and West Germany were reunited. Russia had portable nuke launchers, on 16 inch centers, all along their western borders. So what now? Nothing changes for NATO.It's the post so who knows if it really happened but seems plausible.
![]()
Russia reportedly moves nuclear-capable missiles to Finland border
Russia has reportedly moved missiles capable of firing nuclear warheads close to its border with Finland amid heightened threats over the latter’s bid to join NATO.nypost.com
Maybe they just got tired of the U.S. reporting to the world what their military was doing and wanted to beat us to the punch.Is this really a surprise to anyone? It was like this before East and West Germany were reunited. Russia had portable nuke launchers, on 16 inch centers, all along their western borders. So what now? Nothing changes for NATO.
Maybe they just got tired of the U.S. reporting to the world what their military was doing and wanted to beat us to the punch.
Here is a thread about basically what my Hungarian friends were saying and concerned about.
We have run out of letters to denote examples at this point.And Russians continue to wonder why they are disliked across the globe.
Exhibit A.
at some point UA will have to go on the offensive in that region which is a totally different tact from "Defensive"
I had read a thread about from Gen. Hertling not to long ago about the logistics of doing that.
I am thinking an attempt will come in the south to sever that "land bridge" and we end up just where we were in 2014 with exception of Mariupol.
I totally agree although I also have no problem with purely MILITARY advice from NATO along those lines if that's what the experts think relative to the mid-to-long-term military strategic security of Ukraine. I'm worried about a different kind of pocket.Some think that NATO should pressure Ukraine to "pocket" its gains and not push for expelling Russian forces from all of Ukraine because it would be costly (lives) and risky. I think the whole point of much of this is to let Ukraine make its own decisions about what happens in Ukraine.
![]()
Ukraine’s Way Out
Strategic prudence argues in favor of pocketing successes rather than pressing the fight and running the tantamount risks.www.theatlantic.com
Couldn't agree more. And I'm pretty old.The thing I'm most jealous of is the young leadership they have. Our country is ran by ancient career politicians with one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel.
The only concern I have is that you'd have Russia always being a short hop, step away from invading again after they resupply and reinforce their forces. It's a real strategic risk for Ukraine to stand pat where they are. They would be doing exactly what Russia hopes they'll do. But idk. Would depend on what Ukraine wants to do.Some think that NATO should pressure Ukraine to "pocket" its gains and not push for expelling Russian forces from all of Ukraine because it would be costly (lives) and risky. I think the whole point of much of this is to let Ukraine make its own decisions about what happens in Ukraine.
![]()
Ukraine’s Way Out
Strategic prudence argues in favor of pocketing successes rather than pressing the fight and running the tantamount risks.www.theatlantic.com
I just hope NATO doesn't try to pressure them into a compromise by cutting off aid.The only concern I have is that you'd have Russia always being a short hop, step away from invading again after they resupply and reinforce their forces. It's a real strategic risk for Ukraine to stand pat where they are. They would be doing exactly what Russia hopes they'll do. But idk. Would depend on what Ukraine wants to do.