glenn239 Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 6 hours ago, Roman Alymov said: There is no need for Russia to escalate in this way (even leaving aside the simple fact of currebt Russian elite begging for peace, not for escalation): the spread of technology is irreversable, and it is plenty of groups inside the West (and any other place on the globe) who could use this technlologies to communicate their case. Now every student of technology (or even random person with modest ability of handcraft and internet search skills) could create long-range drone with accuracy of PGM of 1990th (or even better, is no EW around). Yes explosives is still the problem, but, say, just having 50 l of fuel crashed into regular building and ignited will do a lot of damage.... The broader point is that even 5 years ago, Russian military doctrine does not seem to have been particularly focused on being able to defeat NATO's airpower in a war in Eastern Europe. Now, thanks to the Biden Administration, it now very much is. Western airpower is vulnerable to drone and missile attack, provided that the enemy spends the money and time to create the means and doctrine to execute the threat - the missiles and drones themselves, the reconnaissance and strike doctrines. Only in the last year or two does this seem to be happening in Russia at the kinds of industrial scale required.
seahawk Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 34 minutes ago, glenn239 said: I doubt NATO's motives were so nefarious. NATO expansion is good way to dominate arms markets, and with the EU in tow, big civilian contracts like power plants. But generational projects like NATO expansion often start off with one intention and arrive at another, so it is entirely possible that benign motives to start could morph into more aggressive ones in a decade or two. You are thinking too small. The forces behind the curtain want access to the Russian raw materials and want to control the exploitation and the access. The only way to achieve this is to break up Russia into small, powerless and weak individual Republics, just what was done to the Soviet Union and which also gave those access to the former Soviet Republics, whenever Russian control was weak and the local leaders were weak and corrupt.
urbanoid Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 12 minutes ago, glenn239 said: The broader point is that even 5 years ago, Russian military doctrine does not seem to have been particularly focused on being able to defeat NATO's airpower in a war in Eastern Europe. Now, thanks to the Biden Administration, it now very much is. Western airpower is vulnerable to drone and missile attack, provided that the enemy spends the money and time to create the means and doctrine to execute the threat - the missiles and drones themselves, the reconnaissance and strike doctrines. Only in the last year or two does this seem to be happening in Russia at the kinds of industrial scale required. NATO has far more money than Russia to spend both on countermeasures AND the same means of attack (missiles and drones) that it needs to protect itself against. They were playing this game as USSR and their economy couldn't keep up, now we have a much smaller (compared to USSR) Russia and much larger (and richer) NATO.
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 Just now, glenn239 said: The broader point is that even 5 years ago, Russian military doctrine does not seem to have been particularly focused on being able to defeat NATO's airpower in a war in Eastern Europe. Now, thanks to the Biden Administration, it now very much is. Western airpower is vulnerable to drone and missile attack, provided that the enemy spends the money and time to create the means and doctrine to execute the threat - the missiles and drones themselves, the reconnaissance and strike doctrines. Only in the last year or two does this seem to be happening in Russia at the kinds of industrial scale required. I think it is illusion that it is possible to defeat NATO's airpower by strikes on bases etc. If it comes to war (o war-like situation) it is far more reasonable to use the same strike capability not in useless attempts to hit Western airbases, but reserve them for strikes on high-value infrastructire targets like electric grids etc. that would if not halt white people's economy then at least significantly disrupt it.
urbanoid Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 Just now, Roman Alymov said: I think it is illusion that it is possible to defeat NATO's airpower by strikes on bases etc. If it comes to war (o war-like situation) it is far more reasonable to use the same strike capability not in useless attempts to hit Western airbases, but reserve them for strikes on high-value infrastructire targets like electric grids etc. that would if not halt white people's economy then at least significantly disrupt it. Russia is vulnerable to the same measures and NATO is likely to have similar means of attack only... more of them. And what's this about 'white people'? Are you some kind of 'niggas' in solidarity with the 'brothas' right now?
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 8 minutes ago, urbanoid said: NATO has far more money than Russia to spend both on countermeasures AND the same means of attack (missiles and drones) that it needs to protect itself against. They were playing this game as USSR and their economy couldn't keep up, now we have a much smaller (compared to USSR) Russia and much larger (and richer) NATO. NATO only "have money to spend" as long as unlimited quantitative easing (aka money printing) is possible. It is strange to compare situation of USSR years when both sides were actually producing things, and now when production is mostly done by Asia, while NATO powers are mostly busy consuming. In case of big conflict , situation could quiclky change in unknown direction.
Josh Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 (edited) 54 minutes ago, glenn239 said: The broader point is that even 5 years ago, Russian military doctrine does not seem to have been particularly focused on being able to defeat NATO's airpower in a war in Eastern Europe. Now, thanks to the Biden Administration, it now very much is. Western airpower is vulnerable to drone and missile attack, provided that the enemy spends the money and time to create the means and doctrine to execute the threat - the missiles and drones themselves, the reconnaissance and strike doctrines. Only in the last year or two does this seem to be happening in Russia at the kinds of industrial scale required. I find it rather unlikely Russia was not preparing to engage NATO airbases in a notional war. It seems far more likely they drastically over estimated their recon-strike complex capability to do so. The fact that Ukraine still sorties aircraft seems to directly contradict your assessment. Your theory that Russia could ultimately develop a more threatening anti airfield capability seems to hinge on NATO air defense development holding still while Russia rearms post war. NATO is learning all about UAV capabilities as well, without actually having to suffer the costs associated with that learning curve. Edited July 9, 2024 by Josh
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 6 minutes ago, urbanoid said: Russia is vulnerable to the same measures and NATO is likely to have similar means of attack only... more of them. Of course Russia is also vulnerable to infrastructure attacks, but here is few points to mention: 1) Russian infrastructure is ALLREADY under attacks (see this numerous attempts by pro-Ukrainians - from planting IEDs on fuel trains in Baikal tunnels to attacks by drones and Storm Shadows on oil refineries and power stations), so the process of adaptation is allready started. Yes it is long process and our officials are traditionally incompetent and dragging their feet, but it is allready going. Are you sure your officials are more competent and quick to react? The same on personal level - see my post from last year 2) In what way a person who is freezing without electric power in his house in London/Paris/Warsaw is supposed to feel better because somebody in Ekaterinburg/Moscow/Kabul/Cairo/Islamabad is also without power? 3) Current position of West in global trade and economy is to significant extent heritage of its imperial empires past. Remove it for some time - anf returning to this positions might be very difficult. 4) There is plenty of people on our planet who have uneasy feelings about "West" (due to above mentioned colonial past) so this sort of attacks is in fact only question of time (since it is now DIY level of tasks). May be they will not have significant scale - but who knows, imagine sort of BLM riots with drones... (just as illustration, i do not mean it will happen). Even simply dropping petrol bomb bottles into electric/communication cables whells could create lasting problems for big city if conducted by few dozens oif individuals across the city.
Josh Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 (edited) NATO would also have a much more pronounced ability to attack actual war material production sites. It would almost certainly refrain from doing so, but an attack against its electrical grid by masses produced UAVs would probably eventually escalate to attacks on UAV production sites and supporting power production as a means of ending the threat. The new geran2 factory is well known. Production could be distributed to much smaller facilities over a wide area, and that would probably require attacking the power grid of industrial areas to impede. Edited July 9, 2024 by Josh
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 26 minutes ago, urbanoid said: And what's this about 'white people'? Are you some kind of 'niggas' in solidarity with the 'brothas' right now? The West problems are not limited to Russia, so "white people". By the way, with all my respect. let me remind you Poles were the same sort of Untermench as Russians on the memory of living generation*, so wellcome to the club, my nigga brother. Do not allow your white skin to make you illusioned you are real white * Unfortumatelly not mamny people are still alive who remember that, but they are still alive....
Josh Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 21 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: The West problems are not limited to Russia, so "white people". By the way, with all my respect. let me remind you Poles were the same sort of Untermench as Russians on the memory of living generation*, so wellcome to the club, my nigga brother. Do not allow your white skin to make you illusioned you are real white * Unfortumatelly not mamny people are still alive who remember that, but they are still alive.... “White” in current US usage has expanded to include basically anyone of European decent who’s not too swarthy, from Russia to Portugal. It is very much a sliding scale/changing definition; a century ago the term in U.S. usage would largely be limited to Northern European descent with the notable exclusion of the Irish.
urbanoid Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 24 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: The West problems are not limited to Russia, so "white people". By the way, with all my respect. let me remind you Poles were the same sort of Untermench as Russians on the memory of living generation*, so wellcome to the club, my nigga brother. Do not allow your white skin to make you illusioned you are real white * Unfortumatelly not mamny people are still alive who remember that, but they are still alive.... Come on, get on your facts straight, Reich was about being Germanic or otherwise 'racially tolerable'*, not 'white' and Poles and Russians happened to dwell on the lands that they wanted for themselves, which resulted in making up ideological, pseudoscientific basis for that. Had Poland decided to become Reich's ally, the ideological spin would have been different, just like it went from initial 'Ukrainians needing a whip over them' to Ukrainian SS divisions, while Russians could escape their 'subhuman' status by being 'brave ROA/RONA soldiers'. You should also get on with the times. Anti-whiteness is all the rage now in the progressive West, to the point where a journalist from a liberal newspaper in a 99,9% white country had no problem writing the article titled 'White, heterosexual, catholic Pole is bad for the planet', just imagine what is being done elsewhere (actually you don't have to imagine, just visit certain FFZ threads from time to time). Even Asianness or having Asian admixture, not something uncommon in Russia, is now functionally evil 'whiteness' across the pond, as Asians tend to be hardworking and have somewhat strong family values, they also usually don't need gibs from the state. So however you want to spin it, you cannot escape your whiteness in our progressive times. You're not oppressed (or more likely 'oppressed') enough to be a nigga. *not that they were consistent even in that, as they had no problems in taking newborns and toddlers from the 'Untermenschen' to give to German families to raise, it must have altered their genetics or something. That's just one among plenty other inconsistencies, sometimes hilarious as hell, as in the right circumstances even the Jewishness could be... uh... 'negotiated away' ('in my staff, I decide who is a Jew').
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 29 minutes ago, Josh said: “White” in current US usage has expanded to include basically anyone of European decent who’s not too swarthy, from Russia to Portugal. It is very much a sliding scale/changing definition; a century ago the term in U.S. usage would largely be limited to Northern European descent with the notable exclusion of the Irish. As far as i remember, for some time Norvegian migrants in USA were also facing troubled attitude (despite of now considered "standard of white"). Yes prejudice are inconsitent (no surprise, people generally are).
Stefan Kotsch Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 Roman is really impressed by the idea that the West enslaved the Russians. So much so that he welcomes the fact that Putin is now rebuilding the KGB surveillance state of Stalin and Breshnev. Once a slave - always a slave.
urbanoid Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 2 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: As far as i remember, for some time Norvegian migrants in USA were also facing troubled attitude (despite of now considered "standard of white"). Yes prejudice are inconsitent (no surprise, people generally are). But I don't think it was ever reflected in law, all of those 'from Russia to Portugal' were allowed naturalization as 'free white persons', they could own land, vote (provided they met other requirements) etc. from the very beginning.
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 10 minutes ago, urbanoid said: Come on, get on your facts straight, Reich was about being Germanic or otherwise 'racially tolerable'*, not 'white' and Poles and Russians happened to dwell on the lands that they wanted for themselves, which resulted in making up ideological, pseudoscientific basis for that. Had Poland decided to become Reich's ally, the ideological spin would have been different, just like it went from initial 'Ukrainians needing a whip over them' to Ukrainian SS divisions, while Russians could escape their 'subhuman' status by being 'brave ROA/RONA soldiers'. ******************************* *not that they were consistent even in that, as they had no problems in taking newborns and toddlers from the 'Untermenschen' to give to German families to raise, it must have altered their genetics or something. That's just one among plenty other inconsistencies, sometimes hilarious as hell, as in the right circumstances even the Jewishness could be... uh... 'negotiated away' ('in my staff, I decide who is a Jew'). Yes i know how flexible this regulations were when needed. But isn't it worrying how quick it was for people to switch their attitudes when it is profitable/usseful for them? By the way majority of black people live in Africa and got nothing to do with US. Emilia Tangra from Voronezh, silver on Russian championship
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 6 minutes ago, urbanoid said: But I don't think it was ever reflected in law, all of those 'from Russia to Portugal' were allowed naturalization as 'free white persons', they could own land, vote (provided they met other requirements) etc. from the very beginning. As far as i understand, racial segregation in US was relatively late to appear/codified (allready after US Civil War) but i admit it is not my field of knowlege.
Roman Alymov Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 10 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said: Roman is really impressed by the idea that the West enslaved the Russians. So much so that he welcomes the fact that Putin is now rebuilding the KGB surveillance state of Stalin and Breshnev. Once a slave - always a slave. I'm affreaid you are spending too much time trying to read my mind and create ideas i am supposed to be impressed by.
txtree99 Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 What does racial tensions have to do with Ukraine technical or military aspects? Should this not be in the ffz threads
Markus Becker Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 1 hour ago, urbanoid said: *not that they were consistent even in that, as they had no problems in taking newborns and toddlers from the 'Untermenschen' to give to German families to raise, it must have altered their genetics or something. That's just one among plenty other inconsistencies, sometimes hilarious as hell, as in the right circumstances even the Jewishness could be... uh... 'negotiated away' ('in my staff, I decide who is a Jew'). Fits because it never makes sense. I remember a US poster from ~1900 that showed who's white and who not. Generally western Europeans were considering white unless they were from the very west of Europe. Like Ireland, Spain and Portugal. They were firmly in the not white category.
sunday Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 3 minutes ago, Markus Becker said: Generally western Europeans were considering white unless they were from the very west of Europe. Like Ireland, Spain and Portugal. They were firmly in the not white category. Looks like non-Catholic. Were Italians also excluded?
Markus Becker Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 2 minutes ago, sunday said: Looks like non-Catholic. Were Italians also excluded? Probably, the anti Catholic mood was strong in certain circle at the time.
Josh Posted July 9, 2024 Posted July 9, 2024 1 hour ago, sunday said: Looks like non-Catholic. Were Italians also excluded? Yes.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now