Russo Ukrainian peace on a knife's edge

70,096 Views | 1025 Replies | Last: 2 days ago by nortex97
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to benchmark • 7:35a, 6/4/25
AG
Yes, the state department presently picks up the tab for Codels. The total cost is what…is outrageous, especially as he was over there undermining the President/executive branch foreign policy. I have to itemize my (business) travel costs, but I bet Lindsey and his entourage do not.

Ukraine admits the 35+ year old export-only radars (AN/APG-66V2's, a mechanically scanned system we never operated, though link 16 was finally added, this year) on the F-16's they've gotten are outclassed;
Quote:
"We are getting Western equipment, we are getting aircraft. Today, we have F16s, we already have Mirages," he said in an interview with the outlet Ukrainian Pravda published on Tuesday. "They have already been in use. We understand that they are not the newest."

Ignat stressed the importance of the detection range of the jets' radar, and the strike range of its weapons.
"Unfortunately, Russia has planes today that see further, and missiles that shoot further. Even compared now with the F-16," he said.
It's telling, however, that their airfields have been mostly left intact/not successfully targeted much by the Russians. Assorted sitreps.
Reply Quote
1
J. Walter Weatherman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 7:42a, 6/4/25
It's apparently a fake screenshot.



Edit: further context. As usual, twitter clickbait trolls taking standard expenses and trying to link them to something inflammatory to generate engagement:



Reply Quote
1
1 edit
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J. Walter Weatherman • 7:47a, 6/4/25
AG
It's not "Toy" it's TOV. Grok got it wrong, and apparently doesn't speak Ukrainian/Russian.
Reply Quote
1
J. Walter Weatherman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 7:48a, 6/4/25
No evidence that it has anything to do with Graham's trip. Just more outrage farming.

Reply Quote
2
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J. Walter Weatherman • 7:56a, 6/4/25
AG
'Readers added context' =Ukrainians. It's a defense of the spending we lavish on the Kiev regime's hotel there for these trips, not a denial of it.

It's one of their bigger industries (taking US tax dollars for visiting celebrities/politicians), and one of the reasons Trump refuses to go, despite the goblin's imploring it is very important he do so. Bannon is right that Graham should, in a sane world, be arrested over his actions/words there.
Quote:
"Lindsey Graham's over there saying, 'Hey, forget Trump. I got the House and Senate. We're going to pass it. You're going to see something in a couple of days,'" Bannon said, referring to Graham's legislation pushing for sanctions on Russia.

"Remember that?" the former White House chief strategist, who has consistently advocated against U.S. intervention in overseas conflicts, said. "He's stirring it up over there."

Bannon went on to say that Ukraine is "dragging us into a kinetic third world war. As we said ... we're getting dragged in now, or the deep state is driving us in there. Either of these are not good."

Despite its public efforts to downplay the devastation Ukraine's strikes wrought on Russian military capabilities, Moscow appears to be girding to mount a potentially heavy response.
Reply Quote
1
J. Walter Weatherman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 8:01a, 6/4/25
None of that changes that the tweet is false. Not that that's stopped you before.
Reply Quote
12
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J. Walter Weatherman • 8:11a, 6/4/25
AG
We're just going to keep getting more information on this spending now. The only good to come from his trips.
Reply Quote
1
J. Walter Weatherman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 8:32a, 6/4/25
As usual, even that is misleading at best and just more dishonest outrage engagement farming. Breaking news - it's expensive to house entire teams in a war zone. At least you stopped trying to pretend that the first tweet wasn't fake news though.
Reply Quote
8
Im Gipper
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:46a, 6/4/25
Quote:
Lindsey Graham's over there saying, 'Hey, forget Trump. I got the House and Senate. We're going to pass it. You're going to see something in a couple of days,'" Bannon said, referring to Graham's legislation pushing for sanctions on Russia.


Bannon isn't in the circle anymore. He's not a credible source.

Let's see if Trump condemns Grahams actions.


My guess? Trump approves of everything Grahams doing here. Setting up "good cop bad cop" situation on sanctions!

I'm Gipper
Reply Quote
3
samurai_science
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J. Walter Weatherman • 8:55a, 6/4/25
J. Walter Weatherman said:
As usual, even that is misleading at best and just more dishonest outrage engagement farming. Breaking news - it's expensive to house entire teams in a war zone. At least you stopped trying to pretend that the first tweet wasn't fake news though.
Its a grift, they dont need to be in a warzone.
Reply Quote
1
Gordo14
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:23p, 6/4/25


Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians



Have we considered only carrots, no sticks? Art of the deal
Reply Quote
2
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:14p, 6/4/25
AG
Putin said that he is going to have to 'respond' to what Ukraine did?

I wonder exactly what the Russians are going to do that the Ukrainians didn't already anticipate and accept as a cost before going through with their attack? Cross the border and invade their country with hundreds of thousands of troops? A massive launch of cruise missiles and drones against Kiev including their energy infrastructure? Russia has already 'been there doing that' for 3 years now. Will have to see if the Russian response whatever it is actually moves the needle in this conflict in any meaningful way or is just another day like the past 3 years where a bunch more people died in a war of attrition.

Russia going nuclear in any way would immediately cause China and India to go 'F***!' and abandon him, give Trump no choice but to turn on him, and generally make Russia a political and economic pariah in the world. Even a notable portion of Putin's own population would probably turn on him and revolt for opening that Panora's box. So putting that option aside assuming Putin isn't suicidal, how might he respond? Blast some really important/symbolic building in Kiev to dust with a missile attack?
Reply Quote
4
3 edits
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gordo14 • 1:22p, 6/4/25
AG
Gordo14 said:


Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians



Have we considered only carrots, no sticks? Art of the deal
Trump is slowly but surely getting boxed in so 'for now' will probably only give him political cover with his own party and Congress for so long. A peace deal is no where close and Russia will probably now escalate even further attacks, driving yet more pressure on Trump to have to eventually 'sh*t or get off the pot' in this entire thing, because as this continues to go on then Trump just looks more and more indecisive and impotent on this topic every day and eventually the U.S. Congress will take it out of his hands.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Gordo14 • 1:39p, 6/4/25
AG
Quote:
Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians
None of the planes were loaded with missiles. Ukraine never even claimed that. Most (all but one, apparently) were thousands of miles from the actual war/entirely uninvolved. This was more the equivalent of the Japanese launching balloon-based bombs from submarines on the US than Pearl Harbor.

Hitting rusting/useless spare parts hulks:
Reply Quote
1
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 2:00p, 6/4/25
AG
nortex97 said:
Quote:
Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians
None of the planes were loaded with missiles. Ukraine never even claimed that. Most (all but one, apparently) were thousands of miles from the actual war/entirely uninvolved. This was more the equivalent of the Japanese launching balloon-based bombs from submarines on the US than Pearl Harbor.

Hitting rusting/useless spare parts hulks:


Some of the planes were loaded with missiles.

https://www.twz.com/air/firm-evidence-of-russian-aircraft-losses-after-ukrainian-drone-strikes
Reply Quote
4
Phatbob
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 2:04p, 6/4/25
AG
nortex97 said:
Quote:
Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians
None of the planes were loaded with missiles. Ukraine never even claimed that. Most (all but one, apparently) were thousands of miles from the actual war/entirely uninvolved. This was more the equivalent of the Japanese launching balloon-based bombs from submarines on the US than Pearl Harbor.

Hitting rusting/useless spare parts hulks:
Dude, you're getting comical at this point. I'm actually starting to wonder if you're playing a long con.
Reply Quote
12
1 edit
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:11p, 6/4/25
AG
Has Russia in the past 3 years ever once used a strategic bomber as a platform to launch a missile at Ukraine?

If so, then Russia is bending themselves in knots trying to claim that isn't a legit military target. They are at war with another country and can expect to be attacked by that country. They don't just get to conveniently fight that war only in Ukraine and only on their terms. They opened that door to a 'hot war' invading in Feb 22nd 2022 and are paying the cost.

Ukraine says strategic bombers have been used to launch cruise missiles at them.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Rossticus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 2:15p, 6/4/25
Strategic bombers have been used to launch cruise missiles since the beginning of the war. That's not remotely debatable.
Reply Quote
7
samurai_science
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 2:17p, 6/4/25
Pumpkinhead said:
Gordo14 said:


Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians



Have we considered only carrots, no sticks? Art of the deal
Trump is slowly but surely getting boxed in so 'for now' will probably only give him political cover with his own party and Congress for so long. A peace deal is no where close and Russia will probably now escalate even further attacks, driving yet more pressure on Trump to have to eventually 'sh*t or get off the pot' in this entire thing, because as this continues to go on then Trump just looks more and more indecisive and impotent on this topic every day and eventually the U.S. Congress will take it out of his hands.
The voters dont care about the war, thats clear.
Reply Quote
1
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 2:21p, 6/4/25
AG
Is there someone somewhere claiming the remote Tu-95's and rusting A-50's were not a 'legitimate military target?' I missed that, if so.


Onward, the empire must persist.
Reply Quote
2
Who?mikejones!
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 2:23p, 6/4/25
The ussr has never been the most powerful nation in existence. So, theres that
Reply Quote
3
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Who?mikejones! • 2:31p, 6/4/25
AG
I don't disagree with that, though I have never really tracked how many megatons etc. of nukes they had. If measured (idiotically) as such, they'd have to have been one of the top two.

Those leftovers are ironically what made them so attractive as business partners to the Clintons/Bidens, among others. Russia today is a 2nd world economy with a 1st world military thanks to this proxy war, and still a 'leading' nuclear weapons power.
Reply Quote
1
Ducks4brkfast
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 2:36p, 6/4/25
AG
nortex97 said:
Is there someone somewhere claiming the remote Tu-95's and rusting A-50's were not a 'legitimate military target?' I missed that, if so.
Yes. You.
Reply Quote
3
Teslag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 2:36p, 6/4/25
AG

Quote:
with a 1st world military

Literally no one believes this anymore. They can't even beat Ukraine with hand me down weapons and half assed support. Right now even Poland would straight up beat them in a conventional war.
Reply Quote
3
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Ducks4brkfast • 2:44p, 6/4/25
AG
Ducks4brkfast said:
nortex97 said:
Is there someone somewhere claiming the remote Tu-95's and rusting A-50's were not a 'legitimate military target?' I missed that, if so.
Yes. You.
Where did I post that? I apologize if so, but don't recall ever making that claim. They were/are explicitly valid legitimate military targets.

ETA: https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3539552/replies/70340396
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rossticus • 2:48p, 6/4/25
AG
Rossticus said:
Strategic bombers have been used to launch cruise missiles since the beginning of the war. That's not remotely debatable.
So is Russia's spin on this something like 'we can understand if Ukraine shoots down a strategic bomber while it was on one of its bombing runs launching missiles, but hitting those bombers while 'docked' at an airfield is Not Fair! That's TERRORISM!'?
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Teslag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 2:50p, 6/4/25
AG
Not to mention that Nortex posted recently that Russia was planning on moving these bombers closer to the front in rotations for the specific goal to increase glide bomb and cruise attacks on Ukraine. It doesn't matter where they are. We used B1's en masse in Afghanistan out of Diego Garcia. And they'd rotate in from Dyess in Texas. They would have been a valid target at any time.
Reply Quote
4
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Pumpkinhead • 3:01p, 6/4/25
AG
Pumpkinhead said:
Rossticus said:
Strategic bombers have been used to launch cruise missiles since the beginning of the war. That's not remotely debatable.
So is Russia's spin on this something like 'we can understand if Ukraine shoots down a strategic bomber while it was on one of its bombing runs launching missiles, but hitting those bombers while 'docked' at an airfield is Not Fair! That's TERRORISM!'?
What? Speculating about Russia's 'spin' is silly without a source, as is the misrepresentation of my position as to the validity of the targeting. Really, again, it's clearly the case these were legitimate targets.

Good to see:

EU to debate accelerating departure of Ukrainian 'migrants.' Poland will…probably have an impact as with Slovakia/Hungary.
Reply Quote
1
Pumpkinhead
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to samurai_science • 3:07p, 6/4/25
AG
samurai_science said:
Pumpkinhead said:
Gordo14 said:


Oh those poor innocent "docked" planes loaded with cruise missiles ready to fire at civilians



Have we considered only carrots, no sticks? Art of the deal
Trump is slowly but surely getting boxed in so 'for now' will probably only give him political cover with his own party and Congress for so long. A peace deal is no where close and Russia will probably now escalate even further attacks, driving yet more pressure on Trump to have to eventually 'sh*t or get off the pot' in this entire thing, because as this continues to go on then Trump just looks more and more indecisive and impotent on this topic every day and eventually the U.S. Congress will take it out of his hands.
The voters dont care about the war, thats clear.
I agree a bulk of American voters don't care about something unless it is affecting them personally, for example affecting gas pump prices.

A quandary with the 'we should walk away from Europe! Let them buy more of their own guns and deal with it!' viewpoint is the United States vacating its position as a global Policeman will leave a void that somebody or something else will fill. You are basically adding fuel for example to a new arms race in Europe where everybody over there is building up their armed forces for defense.

How do you quantify the risk of leaving the teenagers alone to run the house whether or not that will eventually damage your house while you took a break because you were tired of dealing with all their sh*t?

The EU is the second largest trading partner with the United States. Our country does have a very significant interest in what is going on over there. So it is a very difficult proposition to try to say 'EU security is not our problem' and then trusting that EU stability wouldn't go to sh*t if we took a break from it.
Reply Quote
2
5 edits
GAC06
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 3:27p, 6/4/25
AG
nortex97 said:
Ducks4brkfast said:
nortex97 said:
Is there someone somewhere claiming the remote Tu-95's and rusting A-50's were not a 'legitimate military target?' I missed that, if so.
Yes. You.
Where did I post that? I apologize if so, but don't recall ever making that claim. They were/are explicitly valid legitimate military targets.

ETA: https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3539552/replies/70340396


Well you did make this laughably false claim on this very page.

" None of the planes were loaded with missiles. Ukraine never even claimed that. Most (all but one, apparently) were thousands of miles from the actual war/entirely uninvolved"
Reply Quote
6
EastSideAg2002
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 3:53p, 6/4/25
nortex97 said:
This has been underplayed but must have been a lot of casualties unfortunately.

Not 40 aircraft, lol "ghost of Kiev" absurdity.


Fwiw, the Russians built over 500 of these. Not real sure this really matters. Around 4 updated ones are delivered by beriev per year.
Cites sources that claim terrorist attack, but doesnt "claim" terrorist attack. Just more semantic hoops.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to EastSideAg2002 • 4:13p, 6/4/25
AG
Well it was a terrorist attack as they used (and killed) unwitting civilian truck drivers. The targets were still legitimate.
Reply Quote
1
benchmark
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 4:16p, 6/4/25
AG
nortex97 said:
None of the planes were loaded with missiles. Ukraine never even claimed that. Most (all but one, apparently) were thousands of miles from the actual war/entirely uninvolved. This was more the equivalent of the Japanese launching balloon-based bombs from submarines on the US than Pearl Harbor.
Tell me you're clueless about the dynamics of mobile asset allocation without telling me you're clueless.
Reply Quote
3
J. Walter Weatherman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to nortex97 • 4:18p, 6/4/25
1. Where is there reporting that any civilians were killed?
2. I must have missed you calling Russia's indiscriminate bombing of apartment complexes and civilians at bus stations terrorism.
Reply Quote
3
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to benchmark • 4:18p, 6/4/25
AG
benchmark said:
nortex97 said:
None of the planes were loaded with missiles. Ukraine never even claimed that. Most (all but one, apparently) were thousands of miles from the actual war/entirely uninvolved. This was more the equivalent of the Japanese launching balloon-based bombs from submarines on the US than Pearl Harbor.
Tell me you're clueless about the dynamics of mobile asset allocation without telling me you're clueless.

What impact on kh101 strikes on Ukraine do you forecast from this?
Reply Quote
1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.