F-16 to Ukraine means NATO involvement in conflict, says Russia

[Unusual Tournament]

On 5/24/2023 at 3:30 PM, Alchopwn said:

Thanks to the upgraded Patriot System that is no longer the case.

Patriot system is a great deterrent but each PAC-3 missile costs 5 million dollars. To put that into perspective - there are 16 missiles per launcher - if all three are fired against missiles and drones in one go that’s 80 million dollars to defend against 1-5 million dollars in Russian missiles. Patriot is too expensive to operate for it to be effective 

[Alchopwn]

On 5/25/2023 at 8:26 PM, Unusual Tournament said:

If the Republicans come to office they will de-fund the war and leave Ukraine at the mercy of Russia

And that would be the largest foreign policy failure in US history.  We have the ability to break Russia's back just by helping Ukraine.  It is like what happened to the USSR in Afghanistan except on some serious steroids.  The USA needs to lead the world in getting rid of the remaining totalitarians imo.  No need to rush into wars, but no trusting dictatorships or helping them economically ever again.

[Unusual Tournament]

8 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

And that would be the largest foreign policy failure in US history.  We have the ability to break Russia's back just by helping Ukraine.  It is like what happened to the USSR in Afghanistan except on some serious steroids.  The USA needs to lead the world in getting rid of the remaining totalitarians imo.  No need to rush into wars, but no trusting dictatorships or helping them economically ever again.

You say no need to rush into new wars, yet war is exactly America’s business and business is really good. Ukraine and Taiwan are the new likely ones and the cash registers are pumping 
 

You mention Afghanistan. Today, Taliban troops attacked a border crossing with Iran and killed 3 Iranian soldiers. Then threatened to March on Tehran. Can anyone be sure that totalitarian regimes are the problem or are they a problem if they don’t listen and don’t do our bidding. It seems Afghanistan’s rulers foreign policy is aligning with ours perfectly after 20 years of American occupation. 

[Setton]

15 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

You say no need to rush into new wars, yet war is exactly America’s business and business is really good. Ukraine and Taiwan are the new likely ones and the cash registers are pumping 
 

You mention Afghanistan. Today, Taliban troops attacked a border crossing with Iran and killed 3 Iranian soldiers. Then threatened to March on Tehran. Can anyone be sure that totalitarian regimes are the problem or are they a problem if they don’t listen and don’t do our bidding. It seems Afghanistan’s rulers foreign policy is aligning with ours perfectly after 20 years of American occupation. 

One minor border scuffle with Iran is hardly an alignment with western foreign policy.

[Unusual Tournament]

3 minutes ago, Setton said:

One minor border scuffle with Iran is hardly an alignment with western foreign policy.

…and yet we apparently now share an enemy.  

[Setton]

Just now, Unusual Tournament said:

…and yet we apparently now share an enemy.  

Russia is also fighting ISIS. ISIS is also fighting al Shabaab. Doesn't make us friends.

Edited May 27 by Setton

[Unusual Tournament]

Just now, Setton said:

Russia is also fighting ISIS. Doesn't make us friends.

In Syria, Russia and American interests align concerning Islamic State

[+and-then]

10 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

And that would be the largest foreign policy failure in US history.  We have the ability to break Russia's back just by helping Ukraine.  It is like what happened to the USSR in Afghanistan except on some serious steroids.  The USA needs to lead the world in getting rid of the remaining totalitarians imo.  No need to rush into wars, but no trusting dictatorships or helping them economically ever again.

Just curious, do you think we should seriously consider entering the conflict to defend the western area of Ukraine with our own troops if this offensive fails and Russia begins to push their forces across Ukraine towards the west?

[acidhead]

48 minutes ago, and-then said:

Just curious, do you think we should seriously consider entering the conflict to defend the western area of Ukraine with our own troops if this offensive fails and Russia begins to push their forces across Ukraine towards the west?

Why would Russia push their forces west?  It makes no logistic sense. 

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, and-then said:

Just curious, do you think we should seriously consider entering the conflict to defend the western area of Ukraine with our own troops if this offensive fails and Russia begins to push their forces across Ukraine towards the west?

Hi Annd Then

Not likely that it will fail as a lot of preperation has gone into this next counter offensive. The Ukraine has been able to keep fighting concentrated at Bakhmut consuming valuable Russian resources. I think the next 3 months will be more than you can imagine

[Unusual Tournament]

2 hours ago, and-then said:

Just curious, do you think we should seriously consider entering the conflict to defend the western area of Ukraine with our own troops if this offensive fails and Russia begins to push their forces across Ukraine towards the west?

By doing so Nato would be partitioning Ukraine outta fear Russia would take all of it, leading us to a nuclear confrontation, not a good idea.

[Occult1]

1 hour ago, acidhead said:

Why would Russia push their forces west?  It makes no logistic sense. 

 

Col. MacGregor makes an argument as to why Russia might push west all the way to the Polish border.

Edited May 28 by Occult1

[jmccr8]

32 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

 

Col. MacGregor makes an argument as to why Russia might push west all the way to the Polish border.

Hi Occult

And they will do this exactly how without draining resources from dfferent points on the front,lol.

It took them 2 days to get people to Belarus last week.to parade around with little to show.

Edited May 28 by jmccr8

[Alchopwn]

10 hours ago, and-then said:

Just curious, do you think we should seriously consider entering the conflict to defend the western area of Ukraine with our own troops if this offensive fails and Russia begins to push their forces across Ukraine towards the west?

I have insider info that there is simply no need for US forces to enter the Ukraine war.  Ukraine needs war materiel not boots on the ground.  I have friends in Ukraine with several years of military experience who haven't even been called up yet, but are waiting to go.  Compare that to the Russians, whose able bodied males are all leaving the country.  I am presently helping the son of one of my long time and extremely decent Russian academic buddies get out of Sri Lanka.  Would I be doing this if he were a vatnik? Lol nope.  There is no need for US intervention, but hanging the threat of NATO intervention over the RF and their sordid war of aggression is a good idea to make them behave on those borders.

[Grey Area]

On 5/23/2023 at 12:54 AM, and-then said:

NATO/AMERICA is supplying advanced armaments, surveillance intel, top level assistance with war plans... the only thing missing has been NATO troops and if we see F-16s in the air in less than 6-12 months, even THAT little Rubicon will have been crossed.  "Contractors" flying those platforms is the logical next step.  All the Russians would need then is a shootdown and a captive or a body to parade before the cameras.

But hey, I'm sure Vladdy will meekly take his ball and go home after NATO spanks him in front of the world, right?  

During the Falklands war HMS Sheffield was sunk by the Argentine airforce, using its most advanced and potent weapon, the Exocet missile.  The Exocet missile, quite controversially was a French missile system, as were the aircraft that deployed them.  Many of the weapon systems they deployed were European and in some cases US systems.  Should the British have declared war on France for this?  Perhaps threatened a couple of nuclear strikes on mainland Europe and the US?

This whole argument is a desperate tactic, an attempt to stop game changing armaments being supplied to Ukraine because Russia knows they can tip the balance.

The truth of the matter is, Worldwide there are only really a handful of reliable arms manufacturers that can deliver in the numbers required to support a national military.  Most of them are NATO standard, with China and Russia being the other big players, as well as Korea having a sizeable production capability.  Now, if you were being invaded by Russia, where would you source your materiel?  Russia?  China?

The takeaway from this is that:  One, Ukraine, as a sovereign nation has the right to defend itself and its people.  Two, Ukraine has the right to choose what hardware it employs in this task. 

[Occult1]

Pilots Say F-16s Can Help Ukraine But Missiles Could Down Them

(Bloomberg) -- The F-16 jets that the Ukrainian military is touting as a potential gamechanger in its conflict with Russia will either be restricted to defense or deployed in very high-risk operations, according to people who’ve flown the planes in combat.

The General Dynamics Corp fighter-bombers will be a significant upgrade on the Soviet-era planes that Ukrainian pilots have been flying so far. But the F-16s that are likely to be sent to Ukraine will still have inferior radar and shorter range missiles that the most modern Russian jets and air defenses.

“It’ll be like they pushed the easy button or switched from driving a Lada to a Honda Accord,” says Brynn Tannehill, a former aviator who designed simulatros for F-16s, referring to the notoriously clunky Soviet-era Lada car. All the same, she added, “you can’t overcome the laws of physics.”''

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/pilots-say-f-16s-can-help-ukraine-but-missiles-could-down-them-1.1925937

[jmccr8]

3 hours ago, Occult1 said:

Pilots Say F-16s Can Help Ukraine But Missiles Could Down Them

(Bloomberg) -- The F-16 jets that the Ukrainian military is touting as a potential gamechanger in its conflict with Russia will either be restricted to defense or deployed in very high-risk operations, according to people who’ve flown the planes in combat.

The General Dynamics Corp fighter-bombers will be a significant upgrade on the Soviet-era planes that Ukrainian pilots have been flying so far. But the F-16s that are likely to be sent to Ukraine will still have inferior radar and shorter range missiles that the most modern Russian jets and air defenses.

“It’ll be like they pushed the easy button or switched from driving a Lada to a Honda Accord,” says Brynn Tannehill, a former aviator who designed simulatros for F-16s, referring to the notoriously clunky Soviet-era Lada car. All the same, she added, “you can’t overcome the laws of physics.”''

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/pilots-say-f-16s-can-help-ukraine-but-missiles-could-down-them-1.1925937

Hi Occult

If nations supplying jets thought that they would be ineffective in the conflict they wouldn't have bothered training pilots or supplying jets. You post is really a non issue to anyone outside of Russia.

[Occult1]

2 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Occult

If nations supplying jets thought that they would be ineffective in the conflict they wouldn't have bothered training pilots or supplying jets. You post is really a non issue to anyone outside of Russia.

Not ineffective, just highly vulnerable. That's not a game changer. That's what actual experienced pilots are saying.

[jmccr8]

33 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

Not ineffective, just highly vulnerable. That's not a game changer. That's what actual experienced pilots are saying.

Hi Occult

Well I guess we will find out how effevtive they will be in Crimea then. Everything about war is risky which is what strategic planning is all about and it would seem that NATO has aided in planning the counter assault so they must jave some confidence in using them.

[Trelane]

As vulnerable a s Russian armored convoy moving through the Ukraine. especially near farms.

[+and-then]

On 5/27/2023 at 6:13 PM, acidhead said:

Why would Russia push their forces west?  It makes no logistic sense. 

West from the eastern part of Ukraine.  It's possible that they'd be satisfied with a land bridge to Crimea but if the media are lying (say it ain't so) then Russia may just have a little fight left in it.  If the coming counteroffensive is successful or sputters, it will tell a very big story about who is telling the truth and who isn't.

My only fear is that DC is so invested in this madness that IF the stories they are using media to push, become known to be major lies, they might just use the Russian success to forge ahead with NATO intervention to "save Ukraine".  I just pray that is a level of crazy they aren't capable of.  There sure are a lot of true believers around here that would fully support sending Polish, German, and US troops into western Ukraine to stop the total collapse and occupation by Russian forces.  

SPOILER ALERT:  That will end badly for us all.

[+and-then]

16 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

I have insider info that there is simply no need for US forces to enter the Ukraine war. 

Sounds commendable but I note you did not really answer the question.  Would you support NATO/US intervention to stop Russia from taking all of Ukraine?

[Dejarma]

4 minutes ago, and-then said:

Would you support NATO/US intervention to stop Russia from taking all of Ukraine?

i know you're not asking me but yes i'd support that

Edited May 29 by Dejarma

[Alchopwn]

5 hours ago, and-then said:

Sounds commendable but I note you did not really answer the question.  Would you support NATO/US intervention to stop Russia from taking all of Ukraine?

That is a laughable situation that will never occur.  Ask a more realistic question.

[jmccr8]

16 hours ago, and-then said:

There sure are a lot of true believers around here that would fully support sending Polish, German, and US troops into western Ukraine to stop the total collapse and occupation by Russian forces.  

SPOILER ALERT:  That will end badly for us all.

Hi And Then

Such drama, no oone here has called for NATO or other countries to put boots on the ground. Russia started is n th Ukraine is defending itself and many of us support them for their fight. Maybe after the counter offensive things will look different as it will happen given all the equipmennt and planning that has already been invested.

Likely the Ukraine will become a UN and EU member to ensure their safety before any ceasefire agreements are made.