Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)JA
Posts
2
Comments
763
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • what's all this NATO equipment done?

    Stopped Russia from taking over Ukraine.

    These new weapons have done nothing to shift the front lines

    That is correct, they're intended to prevent Russian advances, not to support Ukrainian advances.

    There is a non-zero risk that if Ukraine was given full offensive support, they'd try to take over Russia... or at least a chunk of it... which would self-justify Russia into using nuclear weapons, something that most people don't want to see.

    Ukraine needs artillery, ammunition, drones, and supplies

    Supplies, they're getting. There is a problem with ammunition though; since Ukraine is using Soviet era weapons, they are non-NATO caliber. Most of the stock of Soviet stuff that Western countries had, they have already shipped to Ukraine. In order to ship more, Ukraine will need to switch to NATO gear, which means basically re-arming the whole country from scratch.

    It is no coincidence that Russia would become buddies with China, India, or North Korea, they're one of the few countries left producing some Soviet-compatible ammunition and gear.

    All of this also means a NATO-ification of Ukraine's armament, which is something very desirable for NATO, and in particular for the main NATO weapons producer: the US.

  • Some nuclear warheads have a "best by" date, and need to be recycled. ICBMs also have a "best by" date on fuel, and both the missiles and launch installations need to be regularly maintained (at least with some WD-40, or whatever Russian equivalent).

    If Russia launched a full scale attack right now, you'd likely see some of the launch sites explode, a bunch of duds, another bunch of them getting intercepted, and a few hundred million people dead from the ones that worked as intended... possibly including that London oligarch and his home. Followed by major Russian cities, military, and industrial complexes getting destroyed in retaliation.

    Overall: not good.

  • Wait until you hear about how many times we've come how close to a nuclear world war... or why GPS became available to the public in the first place and now Russian pilots can tape some receivers to the dashboards of their planes.

  • And is it really necessary for him to be a shill for China to make business there?

    That one is easy: yes.

    If he wants to do some real business in there, he also needs to break some laws so they can blackmail hold him in check and take away his business in case he ever refuses to follow orders.

  • we’re not even allowing broad, legitimate discourse about this topic without mockery and eye brow raising.

    Blame the decades (over a century?) of grifters taking advantage of people's gullibility.

    It doesn't help that there is not a single solid proof, or that top secret information is not just available to anyone with a clearance, but only on a "need to know" basis. If there was actual proof, and there was an actual aircraft, or even actual contact... what would you do with that knowledge? Do you "need" to know, or just "want" to know?

    As far as I see, there are three possible scenarios:

    1. There is nothing, it's just a bunch of sensor glitches, visual illusions, and imagination from people who want to believe.
    2. There are no ETs, just advanced technology, that no country wants to reveal before using it by surprise in the next war.
    3. There are ETs, the technology is millennia more advanced than ours, for all intents and purposes it looks like magic, we can't reverse-engineer it, or stop it, or even properly detect it, and we may not even be the ones deciding who gets to know.

    Which one would you want to believe?

    I've personally known people whose accounts point to scenario 3... even I have personally seen things that have been hard to explain... but without proof, they could all be just a mix of 1 and 2.

    Or a glitch in the Matrix 🤷

  • the West has sat behind the idea that every single new weapon they send to Ukraine will be a GAME CHANGER

    That's propaganda used to get the expenditures approved. Nothing is going to be a "game changer" by itself, it's all a step by step way to replace Ukraine's soviet-era weapons, with an updated NATO weapons kit.

    Once the kit gets completed, we'll see what happens. For now, each part is proving superior to its Russian counterpart. The Patriot is a defensive system intended to prevent Russia from achieving air superiority, and it's doing just that.

  • According to some articles, there was a call to the White House along with the Ukrainians... but apparently after the fact.

    It would seem the Ukrainians tried to make it a sneaky operation and only called Musk at the last moment, when the drones were already underway, instead of coordinating beforehand.

    The spirit of the law, in this case, is clearly spelled out, multiple times: do what they tell you, don't do what they tell you not to. It's not up to interpretation. Whether intentionally or not, Musk did what he was required to.

  • The agreement was [...]

    None. There was no agreement until 2023.

    United States interests

    US sanctions from early 2022 forbid supplying any sort of telecommunications, including by satellite, over territory controlled by sanctioned nations, like Russia.

    Crimea was, and still is, territory controlled by Russia. Until Russia gets kicked out of Crimea, nobody from the US is allowed to provide telecom services over Crimea, unless they get a special exception.