War

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
He's also doubled down on his trust of Putin over CIA + FBI at his infamous Helsinki meeting,do the right thing live long enough to FK up the 2024 pres. election to keep your sicko party from any chance of gaining the oval office,then DIE.
I'm hoping Jack will get to work on them soon, starting with the kingpin over the docs and obstruction, then working his way into the house and senate, wherever the evidence leads and for as many as the rats squeal on.
 

CCGNZ

Well-Known Member
And that's exactly why sending them piece mill extra shit is less than helpful...you have to train people to maintain 30 different systems, when they hardly have time to learn one. The Abrams we send them may never actually see combat, at least more than once.
Exactly,what a puzzling menagerie of equipment and parts chain to manage,it's dizzying for even the highest technical aptitude to deal with,I really don't understand the Abrams situation,To satiate the Germans we relented,but it's complete bs that they have to be built for them,I know there are many pre-positioned in Germany NOW,some of those can't be made available?,I think we want to avoid the possibility of the technology falling into Russian hands.I am pro Ukraine as is this thread largely, candidly I'm not sure how this conflict will end.The fears of a broader conflict still remain though time has passed and the west has upped the ante in terms of involvement. As long as Putin is leading Russia an outcome satisfactory to Ukraine or a this conflict being contained seem remote and as time marches on eastern Ukraine is resembling Verdun more and more daily.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
Exactly,what a puzzling menagerie of equipment and parts chain to manage,it's dizzying for even the highest technical aptitude to deal with,I really don't understand the Abrams situation,To satiate the Germans we relented,but it's complete bs that they have to be built for them,I know there are many pre-positioned in Germany NOW,some of those can't be made available?,I think we want to avoid the possibility of the technology falling into Russian hands.I am pro Ukraine as is this thread largely, candidly I'm not sure how this conflict will end.The fears of a broader conflict still remain though time has passed and the west has upped the ante in terms of involvement. As long as Putin is leading Russia an outcome satisfactory to Ukraine or a this conflict being contained seem remote and as time marches on eastern Ukraine is resembling Verdun more and more daily.
Supplying the Abrams is just cover to let the other countries supply the Challenger and Leopards. With the US involved the Russians can not just pick off the other supplying countries.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
More Americans believe US provides too much support to Ukraine
A growing portion of Americans think that the U.S. is giving too much support to Ukraine, as the Biden administration and other western allies have taken steps in recent weeks to escalate their backing of the country in its war against Russia.

About a quarter of Americans, 26 percent, think the U.S. support of Ukraine is too strong, according to a new Pew Research Center poll. It is a percentage of people that has steadily grown since the Russian invasion of Ukraine last year and has jumped six percent since September.

The U.S. has sent billions of dollars to Ukraine to support its military in the war against Russia. In a $1.7 trillion spending package passed by Congress late last year, lawmakers included around $45 billion in funding for Ukraine and NATO allies.

But the spending levels have come under attack by some Republican lawmakers, who argue the country is opening its pockets at unsustainable levels for Ukraine. Soon-to-be Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in October that House Republicans would not provide a “blank-check” for support of Ukraine if his party took control of the House — which it did. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) said on Twitter that President Biden needed to understand the U.S. wasn’t an ATM.

And as some prominent Republicans have started to sour on the support levels, the poll of 5,152 people, with a margin of error of 1.7 percent, found that Republican voters are following along. A total of 40 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents think the U.S. is providing too much support, according to the poll. That is up from 32 percent in September and from nine percent directly after the invasion.

While Republican attitudes have dimmed on Ukrainian support, they have also come to view the Russian war as less of a major threat to the U.S. Just 29 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents think the war is a major threat.

In March 2022, Republicans were more likely to see the invasion as a direct threat to the U.S., but now Democrats are more likely to hold that opinion, with 43 percent holding that belief.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
You internet generals need to study more, I'm afraid none of you would pass a predeployment readiness review. And that really leaves huge holes in our forums defense. Do better please. We all depend on you and your blanket of freedom.
Since the average age for us is approximately 60 don't be holding your breath. In terms of being accurate in our posts, you have a long way to go to have credibility here.
 

printer

Well-Known Member
US accuses Russia of violating major nuke treaty
The United States on Tuesday accused Russia of violating a major nuclear arms control agreement by not allowing on-site inspections and refusing to meet to discuss such concerns.

“Russia is not complying with its obligation under the New START Treaty to facilitate inspection activities on its territory,” a State Department spokesperson confirmed to The Hill. “Russia’s refusal to facilitate inspection activities prevents the United States from exercising important rights under the treaty and threatens the viability of U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control.”

The spokesperson added that Russia has also failed to comply with the treaty’s “obligation to convene a session of the Bilateral Consultative Commission in accordance with the treaty-mandated timeline.”
The announcement of the violations, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, is likely to ramp up tensions between Washington and Moscow after they were already strained due to the Kremlin’s war on Ukraine.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has on numerous occasions threatened nuclear action since starting the conflict nearly a year ago, alarming the United States and its allies.

The New START treaty, established under the Obama administration in 2011, dictates the number of nuclear warheads both the United States and Russia can deploy at any time.

Russian lawmakers in January 2021 passed a five-year extension of the treaty with the U.S. just ahead of the nuclear arms control pact’s expiration, though there are concerns the Kremlin will refuse to negotiate a follow-on agreement to take effect after New START expires in 2026.
The last major nuclear arms pact in the post-Cold War era, the treaty also permits the two countries to conduct inspections of each other’s weapons sites. Such inspections have been postponed since 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, though the United States has accused Russia of delaying a Bilateral Consultative Commission on the treaty. That meeting was set for November in Egypt but was called off at the last moment.

The State Department’s finding, revealed in a report sent to Congress earlier Tuesday, is the first time Washington has accused Moscow of violating the agreement.

“Russia has a clear path for returning to full compliance. All Russia needs to do is allow inspection activities on its territory, just as it did for years under the New START Treaty, and meet in a session of the Bilateral Consultative Commission. There is nothing preventing Russian inspectors from traveling to the United States and conducting inspections,” according to the State Department spokesperson.

Following the report to Congress, Republican lawmakers condemned the Russian violations and warned that the infringement had serious implications for global security. They also urged the administration to ready the U.S. military should it need to respond.

“Russia must be held accountable for its actions if the New START Treaty, or any future agreement, is to have any meaning at all. If these agreements cannot be enforced, then they do nothing to enhance U.S. security, and serve only to undermine it,” according to a joint statement from Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss,) and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), and Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.).
“We urge President Biden to direct the Department of Defense to prepare for a future where Russia may deploy large numbers of warheads, well in excess of New START Treaty limits,” they added.
 

Roger A. Shrubber

Well-Known Member
Supplying the Abrams is just cover to let the other countries supply the Challenger and Leopards. With the US involved the Russians can not just pick off the other supplying countries.
the russians can't pick off a country one tenth their population, in fact they're losing to them badly...that just doesn't seem like much of a threat to me.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Israel seems to be making noises about Russia, perhaps concerns about nukes and Iran? Some recent things out of there appear to be attacking Trump over Russia and concerns about US national security. They would also know if Trump was compromised by Russia. If Bebe smells a deal over nukes between desperate Russia and Iran, there will be fireworks and there already have been some with attacks on Iran.

 
Top