Posts: 9,098
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2019
Reputation:
22
(01-27-2022, 04:40 PM)wydileie Wrote: (01-27-2022, 04:30 PM)Syncro Wrote: While this is true, building a military is a long, slow process. Russia invests it's money in military readiness, unlike much of the EU nations, even France and Germany. France and Germany know that the US will show up if they call, so it's allowed them to be lax in their spending and preparedness. lol. Care to try again?
No, I said what I said and it was correct. I never said they didn't pay their fair share, I said they don't invest in military readiness at the rate that others do. The numbers you posted above pretty well prove that.
Also, those are all rookie numbers.
I'm not suggesting that the full weight of the US military isn't worth using ever, I just don't think Ukraine is the place and now is not the time
Posts: 5,353
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2020
Reputation:
26
(01-27-2022, 12:44 PM)Syncro Wrote: Then why wasn't France in the forefront against Libya? They are a paper tiger not operationally ready to fight anyone. They couldn't use air power against Libya, they were relegated to reconnaissance. The Russian military is capable. France's is not. France had the biggest army with the best equipment in the world in 1939. They were more capable then than now. They can probably mount an impressive parade. The Russians would make quick work of them.
They were in the forefront against Libya. They had the plurality of air sorties performed, and along with the UK, were largely responsible for wiping out Libya's air defenses. The US was mostly there just for tactical, intelligence, and some show of power. We basically made sure Qadaffi got toppled by pushing things along.
Posts: 5,353
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2020
Reputation:
26
01-27-2022, 05:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2022, 05:28 PM by wydileie.)
(01-27-2022, 05:14 PM)Syncro Wrote: No, I said what I said and it was correct. I never said they didn't pay their fair share, I said they don't invest in military readiness at the rate that others do. The numbers you posted above pretty well prove that.
Also, those are all rookie numbers.
I'm not suggesting that the full weight of the US military isn't worth using ever, I just don't think Ukraine is the place and now is not the time
If you are suggesting the US would need to employ the full weight of their military to take down Russia, then you are living in 1970 still (heck you even said so saying their expenditure is "rookie numbers"). Simply stating the intention of NATO to defend Ukraine, setting up supply lines, and moving some forces would be more than enough to make Russia back down. You really think Russia would be willing to test the waters against a NATO coalition? Best case scenario, they deploy more forces and overwhelm the initial coalition forces winning one battle, only to then be wholly routed by the full force of the combined militaries. There is no winning solution for Russia in that narrative, and Putin isn't dumb.
Posts: 18,300
Threads: 54
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
32
01-27-2022, 05:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2022, 05:52 PM by 3rdgensooner.)
(01-27-2022, 05:23 PM)wydileie Wrote: (01-27-2022, 12:44 PM)Syncro Wrote: Then why wasn't France in the forefront against Libya? They are a paper tiger not operationally ready to fight anyone. They couldn't use air power against Libya, they were relegated to reconnaissance. The Russian military is capable. France's is not. France had the biggest army with the best equipment in the world in 1939. They were more capable then than now. They can probably mount an impressive parade. The Russians would make quick work of them.
They were in the forefront against Libya. They had the plurality of air sorties performed, and along with the UK, were largely responsible for wiping out Libya's air defenses. The US was mostly there just for tactical, intelligence, and some show of power. We basically made sure Qadaffi got toppled by pushing things along. Nonsense France couldn't bring air power to bear and that's why we were there. Compared to France the US flew twice as many sorties and almost all the sorties that were offensive in nature rather than logistical, committed 10 times as many troops and fired almost all the cruise missiles used. The US didn't need France to accomplish anything there. Without the US France would've had no impact on the war. They were unable to actually have an impact on the ground.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo...s-country/
The UK is a real ally but I don't think they want to continue to carry the welfare slackers and expend blood and treasure in the Ukraine.
Aside from the US and UK regardless of expenditures and equipment the European NATO members just are not combat ready.
Posts: 9,098
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2019
Reputation:
22
(01-27-2022, 05:23 PM)wydileie Wrote: (01-27-2022, 12:44 PM)Syncro Wrote: Then why wasn't France in the forefront against Libya? They are a paper tiger not operationally ready to fight anyone. They couldn't use air power against Libya, they were relegated to reconnaissance. The Russian military is capable. France's is not. France had the biggest army with the best equipment in the world in 1939. They were more capable then than now. They can probably mount an impressive parade. The Russians would make quick work of them.
They were in the forefront against Libya. They had the plurality of air sorties performed, and along with the UK, were largely responsible for wiping out Libya's air defenses. The US was mostly there just for tactical, intelligence, and some show of power. We basically made sure Qadaffi got toppled by pushing things along.
This wasn't my post, something happened when quoting...
Posts: 18,300
Threads: 54
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
32
(01-27-2022, 05:44 PM)Syncro Wrote: (01-27-2022, 05:23 PM)wydileie Wrote: (01-27-2022, 12:44 PM)Syncro Wrote: Then why wasn't France in the forefront against Libya? They are a paper tiger not operationally ready to fight anyone. They couldn't use air power against Libya, they were relegated to reconnaissance. The Russian military is capable. France's is not. France had the biggest army with the best equipment in the world in 1939. They were more capable then than now. They can probably mount an impressive parade. The Russians would make quick work of them.
They were in the forefront against Libya. They had the plurality of air sorties performed, and along with the UK, were largely responsible for wiping out Libya's air defenses. The US was mostly there just for tactical, intelligence, and some show of power. We basically made sure Qadaffi got toppled by pushing things along.
This wasn't my post, something happened when quoting... My post. I basically replied just above your post.
Posts: 5,353
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2020
Reputation:
26
01-27-2022, 05:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-27-2022, 05:55 PM by wydileie.)
(01-27-2022, 05:43 PM)3rdgensooner Wrote: Nonsense France couldn't bring air power to bear and that's why we were there. Compared to France the US flew twice as many sorties and almost all the sorties that were offensive in nature rather than logistical, committed 10 times as many troops and fired almost all the cruise missiles used. The US didn't need France to accomplish anything there. Without the US France would've had no impact on the war. They were unable to actually have an impact on the ground.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo...s-country/
The UK is a real ally but I don't think they want to continue to carry the welfare slackers and expend blood and treasure in the Ukraine. Your source is contradicted by other sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/world...wanted=all
Quote:France carried out about a third of all strike sorties, Britain 21 percent and the United States 19 percent, according to data from each nation.
It's possible the US did more sorties, in total, such as recon and whatnot, but France took the bulk of the actual work of destroying things. France has a pretty large airforce. I'm not sure where you are getting your information that they can't bring an air force to bear.
https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-..._id=france
Posts: 15,138
Threads: 267
Joined: May 2020
Reputation:
32
(01-27-2022, 05:14 PM)Syncro Wrote: (01-27-2022, 04:40 PM)wydileie Wrote: (01-27-2022, 04:30 PM)Syncro Wrote: While this is true, building a military is a long, slow process. Russia invests it's money in military readiness, unlike much of the EU nations, even France and Germany. France and Germany know that the US will show up if they call, so it's allowed them to be lax in their spending and preparedness. lol. Care to try again?
No, I said what I said and it was correct. I never said they didn't pay their fair share, I said they don't invest in military readiness at the rate that others do. The numbers you posted above pretty well prove that.
Also, those are all rookie numbers.
I'm not suggesting that the full weight of the US military isn't worth using ever, I just don't think Ukraine is the place and now is not the time We haven't used the full weight of our military since ww2.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Posts: 5,146
Threads: 134
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation:
28
No troops to Ukraine. And I also think this is a smokescreen to distract from China. Gives Biden a chance for a win by saying he backed down the The Bear
Posts: 9,098
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2019
Reputation:
22
(01-27-2022, 09:43 PM)Soupcity Kid Wrote: No troops to Ukraine. And I also think this is a smokescreen to distract from China. Gives Biden a chance for a win by saying he backed down the The Bear
Joe†s handlers aren†t backing anyone down though. I†m sure some of you saw the initial reports this evening about what a train wreck Joe†s call was with Zelensky.
Joe basically said “grab the lube and bend over, Vlad and the boys are coming in dryâ€
God this guy is such a p*ssy
1
Posts: 15,138
Threads: 267
Joined: May 2020
Reputation:
32
(01-27-2022, 10:10 PM)Syncro Wrote: (01-27-2022, 09:43 PM)Soupcity Kid Wrote: No troops to Ukraine. And I also think this is a smokescreen to distract from China. Gives Biden a chance for a win by saying he backed down the The Bear
Joeâ€s handlers arenâ€t backing anyone down though. Iâ€m sure some of you saw the initial reports this evening about what a train wreck Joeâ€s call was with Zelensky.
Joe basically said “grab the lube and bend over, Vlad and the boys are coming in dryâ€
God this guy is such a p*ssy They'll send out the tyranny who was the health dept head in PA.
That will have them shaking in their boots.
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
1
Posts: 1,063
Threads: 5
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation:
0
01-28-2022, 08:26 AM
(This post was last modified: 01-28-2022, 08:27 AM by amlex.)
Eh, why not… as it likely shows the federal government is recognizing that they lost the war on the American people in the Great Coronavirus War. Then again, the federal government is notorious in continuing to fight wars that have long been lost for the sake of expanding power and stealing more money.
Can the law — which necessarily requires the use of force — rationally be used for anything except protecting the rights of everyone? … A citizen cannot at the same time be free and not free.
- Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
|