Exactly.

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

TheStorm said:

---

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/dccc-gas-costs-tweet-worse

Cue up Civ reminding us that these are just normal, cyclical events that Biden has zero control over...

---

Zero control? No.

Limited control? Yes.

From a proportionality standpoint I think any American president has the capacity to control maybe 10%-20% of the various inputs that drive gas prices in this country.

Wherever you put the number it ain't 50% and it sure ain't 100%.

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

I think if we did that, we would probably see a retaliation from Russia, and I don't want to think about what that would possibly entail

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

I think if we did that, we would probably see a retaliation from Russia, and I don't want to think about what that would possibly entail

---

See... that's exactly the way that they've always had to think about us until Biden. Now, not only is it too late - but now we have to send even more wasted money over there that isn't going to stop any of this.

It's just more money being given away with no positive outcome in return.

All of this could have been prevented.

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

I think if we did that, we would probably see a retaliation from Russia, and I don't want to think about what that would possibly entail

---

I'm not terribly worried about the nuclear threats. I think it takes very special special circumstances for that to come about. I would be more worried about cyber cyberattacks, that's where Russia seems to thrive. Biden all but gave them a list of places to go after, haha ha.

I have a good friend that works for the bureau of land management and is in the area that protects dams in the region from cyber attacks. He says they're constantly fighting off Russia and China as well as others. And interestingly enough, he said those attacks started ramping up about the time Biden was inaugurated.

TheStorm said:

---

All of this could have been prevented.

---

How?

Civilized said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

All of this could have been prevented.

---

How?

---

You wouldn't see it if we told you, you would just argue.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

"Expert" talking heads said the first Gulf War would be over in a few days due to our military superiority and the lack of combat readiness of the Iraq Army too.

How'd that work out?

And that was Iraq, not Russia.

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

"Expert" talking heads said the first Gulf War would be over in a few days due to our military superiority and the lack of combat readiness of the Iraq Army too.

How'd that work out?

And that was Iraq, not Russia.

---

Oh you mean when we declared war? Totally the same thing. Should we bring up inept leadership like Jimmy Carter to whatabout your whatabout?

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

"Expert" talking heads said the first Gulf War would be over in a few days due to our military superiority and the lack of combat readiness of the Iraq Army too.

How'd that work out?

And that was Iraq, not Russia.

---

That's great! Now tell us about the price of tea in China.

This has everything to do with oil and Russia's dependence upon selling it on selling it to make their country run.Russia was defeated the 1st time during the cold war by minimizing their ability to profit off of oil.

Reports have us binds thus bind 600000 barrels of oil from Russia every day. Combine that with opening up nordstream 2 and our reduced production, you have a country and leader that is empowered to do what he's doing.

Who has the power to really do anything about it when everyone is so dependent upon them?

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

I'm going to split the diff between your two comments with an opinion that falls somewhere in the middle. I do think that Civ highlighted an issue worth taking note of…Russia has a less than top notch conventional military and nuclear forces of unknown quality, but in both categories they make up for deficiencies with sheer quantity.

Oldsouljer said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

I'm going to split the diff between your two comments with an opinion that falls somewhere in the middle. I do think that Civ highlighted an issue worth taking note of…Russia has a less than top notch conventional military and nuclear forces of unknown quality, but in both categories they make up for deficiencies with sheer quantity.

---

Sheer quantity is definitely in their favor. The fact their however many mile long convoy continues to run out of gas on their way gives doubt to their capabilities though.

Im going to add a video, from MSNBC's Chris Hayes soon. He had a professor, from Columbia University, on and the guy is saying: we have declared war on Russia. It's an economic war!

Once I get it up, i hope everyone will watch it. Its powerful!!!

caryking said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

The "have a drink" comment was really to reinforce that whether I agree or disagree politically with Obama, Biden and Clinton, from what I can observe, they seem like ok guys. Get them out of politics, probably cool to discuss the game with. I just couldn't see that with Trump. If you do...OK. Doesn't mean I'm going to vote for them, or agree with their political beliefs. This isn't difficult.

---

Chem, the interesting thing I find with your comments are that by all accounts, Trump is the most gracious, engaging, thoughtful, thankful, person anyone will spend time with. Also, we know he likes sports!

Perhaps, you should consider you have have a clouded story built up in your mind! Not only do you have disdain for him in his political antics, you don't see him as a person you can watch a game with…

BTW, at one point Trump was a darling with the media, talk shows, etc…. He hasn't changed, they have!

---

Many may not be old enough to remember the polite, thoughtful and courteous Trump who appeared on many mainstream talk shows. He miraculously changed when he became a candidate. That's what happens when an outside pulls out the flashlight and rearrange the 'den of a bunch of thieves'.. When all is said and done, I hope we find out Trump was urged to run by some in our military.

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

Are we sure though? I mean, surely Trump was perceived much stronger to Russia and others than Biden, but he also wanted to pull out of Afghanistan, and I supposed would have (hopefully in a better way). Showing an intolerance to be involved in someone else's problems.
So I wonder if that perspective from America -- regardless of President -- gave Putin the comfort zone to take the risk?

He knew he had Europe under his control. He surely had a pretty safe assumption that we (regardless of POTUS) didn't have any stomach to take on Russia over Ukraine?

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

Those Russian supply lines we keep seeing images of look like sitting ducks. How are they are being protected? I keep seeing them and thinking...couldn't some allied war planes take those out in quick order (or course that would trigger a whole slew of other issues).

https://rumble.com/vw8q9n-ukraine-and-russia-what-the-media-wants-you-to-think.html

Something to contemplate.

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

I think if we did that, we would probably see a retaliation from Russia, and I don't want to think about what that would possibly entail

---

It also would have helped to galvanize public opinion in Russia in support of this mess whereas there seems to be a lot of domestic opposition to what Putin is doing now.

https://rumble.com/vvimwi-how-to-get-along-with-narrative-believers-narrative-scripts.html

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

"Expert" talking heads said the first Gulf War would be over in a few days due to our military superiority and the lack of combat readiness of the Iraq Army too.

How'd that work out?

And that was Iraq, not Russia.

---

Oh you mean when we declared war? Totally the same thing. Should we bring up inept leadership like Jimmy Carter to whatabout your whatabout?

---

What's your read? You think a "couple of fighter jets" could have ended Russia's invasion real quick?

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

Those Russian supply lines we keep seeing images of look like sitting ducks. How are they are being protected? I keep seeing them and thinking...couldn't some allied war planes take those out in quick order (or course that would trigger a whole slew of other issues).

---

I think that was their point. They talked about the ineptitude of Russia's military and that it wouldn't take much. Reports are saying that they don't wanna fight at night, they don't wanna fight because the weather is crappy and they have no overall moral. I believe that's why this whole thing is taken longer than they thought it would.

I think Russia's biggest strength is in cyber attacks and of course the wild card that is Putin.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

Those Russian supply lines we keep seeing images of look like sitting ducks. How are they are being protected? I keep seeing them and thinking...couldn't some allied war planes take those out in quick order (or course that would trigger a whole slew of other issues).

---

I think that was their point. They talked about the ineptitude of Russia's military and that it wouldn't take much. Reports are saying that they don't wanna fight at night, they don't wanna fight because the weather is crappy and they have no overall moral. I believe that's why this whole thing is taken longer than they thought it would.

I think Russia's biggest strength is in cyber attacks and of course the wild card that is Putin.

---

Not wanting to do night fighting is understandable, it's scary and confusing as hell even with night vision gear. The one thing about the weather that has me confused is that they say the Russians aren't going off-road because of the mud but the temps are still well below freezing so their heavy gear shouldn't be getting bogged down or so I would think. But yeah, the high in Kyiv today is only 24 and going down to be teens tonight. I hated being out in that stuff when I was both, in the 10th Mountain and in the 2nd Infantry in the ROK. And American cold weather gear is pretty good, dunno about Russian stuff. But I'll take cold, dry arctic temps anytime over 40 degree spring rains, which is what's coming next.

National Review had a piece last week discussing structural changes made in Russia's military and laying some of the blame for their ineptitude on those changes. They failed to prepare logistically for fighting on multiple fronts and they are making substantive tactical errors.

The article also provides some interesting discussion on tank warfare with successful counterintuitive methods used in the West that the Russians aren't using. It was educational just for that section.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-the-russians-are-struggling/

Quote:

---

First, the Russian army's recent structural reforms do not appear to have been sufficient to the task at hand. Second, at the tactical and operational level, the Russians are failing to get the most out of their manpower and materiel advantage.

Russia currently fields an active-duty military of just under 1 million men. Of this force, approximately 260,000 are conscripts and 410,000 are contract soldiers (kontraktniki). The shortened 12-month conscript term provides at most five months of utilization time for these servicemen. Conscripts remain about a quarter of the force even in elite commando (spetsnaz) units.

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

"Expert" talking heads said the first Gulf War would be over in a few days due to our military superiority and the lack of combat readiness of the Iraq Army too.

How'd that work out?

And that was Iraq, not Russia.

---

Oh you mean when we declared war? Totally the same thing. Should we bring up inept leadership like Jimmy Carter to whatabout your whatabout?

---

What's your read? You think a "couple of fighter jets" could have ended Russia's invasion real quick?

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

packgrad said:

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

---

Yeah these stories about Russian machinery breaking down, bogging down, and running out of gas have been shocking, frankly. Their military is obviously huge and nuclear-enabled but their Ukraine ops have seemed like amateur hour, so far.

Big time. Also seeing their soldiers that look so young and have no desire to be there is heart breaking. I'm sure some of that is Ukraine propaganda but I also think it has a bit of tooth. They were sold a bag of goods that they were liberators and that the Ukrainians wanted them there. Clearly that is not the case.

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

---

Yeah these stories about Russian machinery breaking down, bogging down, and running out of gas have been shocking, frankly. Their military is obviously huge and nuclear-enabled but their Ukraine ops have seemed like amateur hour, so far.

---

I think an element of that is, we've watched so many war movies/video games we expect all this super high-tech stuff to just work great. But in real life, real issues happen, and not skills you get to actually use that often. And machinery that probably gets short-cut because the $$ have to go elsewhere. And certainly soldiers who are probalby underpaid, not motivated, etc (its not like they are taking on someone who attacked their homeland here)

Bottom line though, you are right -- our expectation would have been Russia would roll over Ukraine, and they don't look close to doing so.

Packchem91 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

---

Yeah these stories about Russian machinery breaking down, bogging down, and running out of gas have been shocking, frankly. Their military is obviously huge and nuclear-enabled but their Ukraine ops have seemed like amateur hour, so far.

---

I think an element of that is, we've watched so many war movies/video games we expect all this super high-tech stuff to just work great. But in real life, real issues happen, and not skills you get to actually use that often. And machinery that probably gets short-cut because the $$ have to go elsewhere. And certainly soldiers who are probalby underpaid, not motivated, etc (its not like they are taking on someone who attacked their homeland here)

Bottom line though, you are right -- our expectation would have been Russia would roll over Ukraine, and they don't look close to doing so.

---

I don't know why.

Look at how things have gone for us in Iraq and Afghanistan. I would say that we have the best military in the world and we had the people on our side partially and look how long it took us. Why would anyone thing that the Russians would just roll in and take care of the Ukranians?

Oldsouljer said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

Those Russian supply lines we keep seeing images of look like sitting ducks. How are they are being protected? I keep seeing them and thinking...couldn't some allied war planes take those out in quick order (or course that would trigger a whole slew of other issues).

---

I think that was their point. They talked about the ineptitude of Russia's military and that it wouldn't take much. Reports are saying that they don't wanna fight at night, they don't wanna fight because the weather is crappy and they have no overall moral. I believe that's why this whole thing is taken longer than they thought it would.

I think Russia's biggest strength is in cyber attacks and of course the wild card that is Putin.

---

Not wanting to do night fighting is understandable, it's scary and confusing as hell even with night vision gear. The one thing about the weather that has me confused is that they say the Russians aren't going off-road because of the mud but the temps are still well below freezing so their heavy gear shouldn't be getting bogged down or so I would think. But yeah, the high in Kyiv today is only 24 and going down to be teens tonight. I hated being out in that stuff when I was both, in the 10th Mountain and in the 2nd Infantry in the ROK. And American cold weather gear is pretty good, dunno about Russian stuff. But I'll take cold, dry arctic temps anytime over 40 degree spring rains, which is what's coming next.

---

Again, I'm just relaying the info that they discussed. I don't have s military background. Their point of not fighting at night, they evidently don't have the technologyto do so. According to them, the US would rather fight at night because they are trained and have an advantage, even saying most fighting was done at night.

The cold sounded like a morale thing. But overall, they were starting that Russia is supposed to be a super power but, but it's fighting like something not even close. He mentioned the tanks getting stuck in the mud asking the route, which made him say that a couple of fighter keys could destroy the roads and bring the entire thing to a halt.

cowboypack02 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

---

Yeah these stories about Russian machinery breaking down, bogging down, and running out of gas have been shocking, frankly. Their military is obviously huge and nuclear-enabled but their Ukraine ops have seemed like amateur hour, so far.

---

I think an element of that is, we've watched so many war movies/video games we expect all this super high-tech stuff to just work great. But in real life, real issues happen, and not skills you get to actually use that often. And machinery that probably gets short-cut because the $$ have to go elsewhere. And certainly soldiers who are probalby underpaid, not motivated, etc (its not like they are taking on someone who attacked their homeland here)

Bottom line though, you are right -- our expectation would have been Russia would roll over Ukraine, and they don't look close to doing so.

---

I don't know why.

Look at how things have gone for us in Iraq and Afghanistan. I would say that we have the best military in the world and we had the people on our side partially and look how long it took us. Why would anyone thing that the Russians would just roll in and take care of the Ukranians?

---

Yours is a good point.....I think we underestimate how a nation / people fighting for survival will make it very tough for the nation on their soil.
But were we looking to roll over and just beat Afghan, or more to eradicate certain groups who could just move around and never be found?

Frankly, I also don't expect the Russians to try to avoid civilian casualties like the US Armed Forces are typically inclined to do.....and that makes a huge difference

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Yeah, she's not much different than AOC in my eyes either. Attention *****. Both worked in the restaurant industry and are cute. I remember the type.

If Biden can keep us from WWIII, I'll consider that a success. I am happy that his administration has been outspoken about not going to war with Russia. I am disappointed that his weakness as a leader allowed the attack to occur in the first place though. Ukraine has been attacked by Russia twice now when Biden has been in the top 2 seats.

---

Nobody wants to go to war, but you have to be strong enough that the other guy *thinks* that you'd be willing to go to war. That ship sailed shortly into this administration unfortunately.

It 100% would not be happening if Trump was still in office.

---

I heard a couple former military folks on the show yesterday talking about the fact that a couple fighter jets could've brought this to a halt real quick. They talked about how bad Russian forces were prepared and how inept they were. It wouldn't have taken much to stop this whole thing.

---

A couple of fighter jets could have subdued one of the biggest nuclear-enabled militaries in the world, that's being headed by a determined and ruthless autocrat, "real quick?"

You'll have to excuse me if I think that's understating the challenge and complexities a hair.

---

It wasn't my quote, it was former high level military personnel. While I do respect your expert opinion, I would probably defer to theirs first.

---

"Expert" talking heads said the first Gulf War would be over in a few days due to our military superiority and the lack of combat readiness of the Iraq Army too.

How'd that work out?

And that was Iraq, not Russia.

---

Oh you mean when we declared war? Totally the same thing. Should we bring up inept leadership like Jimmy Carter to whatabout your whatabout?

---

What's your read? You think a "couple of fighter jets" could have ended Russia's invasion real quick?

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

---

Way too late IMO. We've already **** our pants and now we have France doing our talking for us...

Packchem91 said:

---

cowboypack02 said:

---

Packchem91 said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

I think a couple fighter jets could have created pause and perhaps reevaluation in a Russian invasion real quick. Still could.... 40 mile convoy is still out there right? I really don't know the answer to that question. They were yesterday with their continuous breakdowns and gas shortages. Sounds like a well oiled machine that Russian army.

Edit to add.... not that I want the US creating pause.

---

Yeah these stories about Russian machinery breaking down, bogging down, and running out of gas have been shocking, frankly. Their military is obviously huge and nuclear-enabled but their Ukraine ops have seemed like amateur hour, so far.

---

I think an element of that is, we've watched so many war movies/video games we expect all this super high-tech stuff to just work great. But in real life, real issues happen, and not skills you get to actually use that often. And machinery that probably gets short-cut because the $$ have to go elsewhere. And certainly soldiers who are probalby underpaid, not motivated, etc (its not like they are taking on someone who attacked their homeland here)

Bottom line though, you are right -- our expectation would have been Russia would roll over Ukraine, and they don't look close to doing so.

---

I don't know why.

Look at how things have gone for us in Iraq and Afghanistan. I would say that we have the best military in the world and we had the people on our side partially and look how long it took us. Why would anyone thing that the Russians would just roll in and take care of the Ukranians?

---

Yours is a good point.....I think we underestimate how a nation / people fighting for survival will make it very tough for the nation on their soil.
But were we looking to roll over and just beat Afghan, or more to eradicate certain groups who could just move around and never be found?

Frankly, I also don't expect the Russians to try to avoid civilian casualties like the US Armed Forces are typically inclined to do.....and that makes a huge difference

---

You say that but as of Wednesday only around 2000 Ukrainians(both military and civilians) have been killed according to the Ukranian government. If the Russians were killing at will I would if expected those numbers to be significantly higher