User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:47:51 PM EDT
[#1]
Tag for tomorrow
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:53:15 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Trivia Time! What noble peace prize winner holds the record for most wars started and people killed by drones? 
1. What wars do you think he has started? 2. Bush started the drone thing. The drones and our intel have gotten progressively better. Bush would have lit up more bad guys had he had the tools to do so. Obama inherited the development of those tools. I really don't have a problem not putting our troops at risk in order to kill a terrorist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:39:32 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Crimea was not their own soil. They are now in eastern Ukraine, ie NOT their own soil. Go back to DU Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Go back to DU 60 years ago, it was. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:46:47 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Ukraine isn't Russia, and there is some "history" there. Holodomor |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:51:08 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The bold part really isn't true. Is it one of the better shitty options the USAF has? Yes. Is it good? Not really. Are there better for cheaper? Absolutely. F-35 for CAS. 
How in the blue fuck does an F35 even find a tank? Keep in mind I've been on the ground making a figure eight in the sky with an IZLID in the middle of 6 vehicles shooting at 2 other vehicles, one of which was on fire... F16 couldn't find ANY of us for 20 minutes. In another instance they identified a 25 ton bradley fighting vehicle as a possible enemy IED. Is there any benefit to F35 other than pilot safety? Because you know the safest thing is to stay in moms basement. In wars where people actually fight, things get blown up and people die. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The A-10 is just barely survivable against an air defense on the level of Iraq's in 2003. Against modern Russian air defenses, the A-10 would be flying one way missions. It is a good aircraft for CAS in permissive environments. Otherwise, it doesn't bring much to the table. So it actually makes sense to retire that aircraft, which is only useful in certain situations, and use the money saved to put toward more modern aircraft that can survive in even the most high threat areas. The F-35 will have plenty of ability to bust Russian tanks from considerable distances and survive to kill again, while keeping their pilots safe. The bold part really isn't true. Is it one of the better shitty options the USAF has? Yes. Is it good? Not really. Are there better for cheaper? Absolutely. F-35 for CAS.
How in the blue fuck does an F35 even find a tank? Keep in mind I've been on the ground making a figure eight in the sky with an IZLID in the middle of 6 vehicles shooting at 2 other vehicles, one of which was on fire... F16 couldn't find ANY of us for 20 minutes. In another instance they identified a 25 ton bradley fighting vehicle as a possible enemy IED. Is there any benefit to F35 other than pilot safety? Because you know the safest thing is to stay in moms basement. In wars where people actually fight, things get blown up and people die. To be fair, a Brad loaded up would make a great IED and have excellent cross country mobility, until the transmission broke. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:52:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
60 years ago, it was. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Go back to DU 60 years ago, it was. No, it was part of the USSR. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:56:08 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Defending Poland from the east has worked out so well in the past.  LoL. You suck at history Bro. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:02:02 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Ukraine isn't Russia, and there is some "history" there. Holodomor Russia isn't led by a Georgian now, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:15:59 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:46:33 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:56:41 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. Sorry, but you'll just have to work a little harder. There are exceptions to every rule. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:59:41 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, it was part of the USSR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Go back to DU 60 years ago, it was. No, it was part of the USSR. It actually depends on how far back y'all want to go. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:02:31 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Russia isn't led by a Georgian now, though. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Ukraine isn't Russia, and there is some "history" there. Holodomor Russia isn't led by a Georgian now, though. True, but Putin is a career KGB man. An improvement over Stalin to be sure, but probably ruthless and very intelligent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:04:46 PM EDT
[#14]
The Russians want the Black Sea, but their Navy is a shadow of its Cold War era self. So, why don't we just increase our Naval Presence in the Black Sea? We own the seas. Message sent to Putin.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:17:03 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
True, but Putin is a career KGB man. An improvement over Stalin to be sure, but probably ruthless and very intelligent. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Ukraine isn't Russia, and there is some "history" there. Holodomor Russia isn't led by a Georgian now, though. True, but Putin is a career KGB man. An improvement over Stalin to be sure, but probably ruthless and very intelligent. Different style. I do not think Putin would slaughter entire villages but probably has some skeletons in his closet. However, he knows that communications are almost impossible to sever as in Stalin's days hence we are seeing a good portion of what is going on in Ukraine and even the street protests in Moscow. So, he will be more careful and less ruthless than Stalin but I would not turn my back on him. However, we have a much worse enemy here at home stabbing us in the back and plotting how to drag the US down everyday. That one, given the chance, would be a lot worse than Stalin. Since he declared his "flexibility after being reelected" to Putin I just wonder what he has concocted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:21:36 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 60 years ago, it was. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Go back to DU 60 years ago, it was. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 10:36:35 PM EDT
[#17]
good lord, some of the people in this thread are mental..
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 10:58:01 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
good lord, some of the people in this thread are mental.. Just hang around. It will get worse. Any thread that gets started about this situation gets hijacked by everyone from Paulbots to Putin's propaganda corps. The 151 page running thread about Ukraine has largely been ruined by those folks. Without them, it would have been an excellent place to keep track of the latest news. Instead, you have to wade through pages of shit that has been posted to divert attention away from the real topic at hand. This one appears to be headed in the same direction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:03:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. Yep. It is like clockwork. When you see a post with "2013" you have about an 85% chance of it being total derp. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 11:05:28 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just hang around. It will get worse. Any thread that gets started about this situation gets hijacked by everyone from Paulbots to Putin's propaganda corps. The 151 page running thread about Ukraine has largely been ruined by those folks. Without them, it would have been an excellent place to keep track of the latest news. Instead, you have to wade through pages of shit that has been posted to divert attention away from the real topic at hand. This one appears to be headed in the same direction. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
good lord, some of the people in this thread are mental.. Just hang around. It will get worse. Any thread that gets started about this situation gets hijacked by everyone from Paulbots to Putin's propaganda corps. The 151 page running thread about Ukraine has largely been ruined by those folks. Without them, it would have been an excellent place to keep track of the latest news. Instead, you have to wade through pages of shit that has been posted to divert attention away from the real topic at hand. This one appears to be headed in the same direction. I'm surprised more of these are not popping up. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:04:07 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not quite I think. At the height of the cold war we had about 350,000 U.S. troops in Europe. source By today's standards that would be 3 Army groups.source What I would propose would be in the neighborhood of 1 Army. Let the Europeans provide the rest of the needed troops. If I am reading you right what you are saying is that we have no dog in the fight and should NOT support our allies against a potential threat. We should send 0 troops or other military assets. I say that is short sighted and would come back and bite us right in the ass. I am not proposing sending troops into Ukraine. That is a lost cause at this point. What I am saying is that we should make sure our allies have the support there so the same thing does not happen to them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. The Cold War was not about defending Europe or anything else. It was about containment. We had to contain the Soviet Union. Noe Russia is going back to their cold war tactics. The only counter to this is to contain them and isolate them militarily and economically thus we must revert to cold war tactics. Moving troops to bases in Poland and the Baltics is the only solution. We don't need the numbers we had all over Europe at the height of the cold war but neither can we ignore the situation. So we are pretty much saying the same thing. A Brigade or two maybe. Even that is arguably unnecessary though. Just pick up the red phone. Tell Putin that Westward expansion into NATO member countries will result in Nuclear war. If we have a ton of guys sitting around with nothing better to do, and someone must go liberate Polish vaginas from tyranny I will go. Send me. Whatever makes people feel better. Feelings>Economic reality. Maybe we should title the NSS "A strategy of our pivoting emotions" Not quite I think. At the height of the cold war we had about 350,000 U.S. troops in Europe. source By today's standards that would be 3 Army groups.source What I would propose would be in the neighborhood of 1 Army. Let the Europeans provide the rest of the needed troops. If I am reading you right what you are saying is that we have no dog in the fight and should NOT support our allies against a potential threat. We should send 0 troops or other military assets. I say that is short sighted and would come back and bite us right in the ass. I am not proposing sending troops into Ukraine. That is a lost cause at this point. What I am saying is that we should make sure our allies have the support there so the same thing does not happen to them. I didn't say none. I said 1-2 BCTs. None would be better for us, but as you've pointed out, that may cost us an important alliance. A Division or more, and you are talking about shutting down a US base, or expanding the Army. Putting more than a Division in Europe would only serve to continue to encourage the rest of NATO to sit on their ass in my opinion. Shutting down a US base would have some significant political opposition. An Army? As in multiple Corps? That seems unrealistic. You realize that would be about 50% of our current entire Army? Who is going to pay for that? We could afford it if we ended the welfare state. But I don't think that is realistic either. I agree that the Europeans should be providing the majority of forces. And Ukraine is a totally different discussion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:06:25 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. See, this is why 13ers have the reputation. It's like you guys go out of your way to reaffirm the intellectually stunted mental midget stereotype. I really didn't like it when people started slamming a whole class of members, but it's amazing how consistent and predictable it is. What is predictable is the lack of reading comprehension. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:21:50 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That Military Industrial Complex® ain't gonna pay itself!  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Here we go..... Couldn't go pulling out of Afghanistan without a plan for the future. That Military Industrial Complex® ain't gonna pay itself! LOL, No shit, The .MIL needs to replace all those MRAPS they gave away, left behind or scrapped. Not to mention there's the excuse to develop a new camouflage for fighting a war in Eastern Europe...Lots of trees and woods...I bet they call it "Woodland" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:33:40 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Go back to DU 60 years ago, it was. No, it was part of the USSR. It actually depends on how far back y'all want to go.  http://youtu.be/l53bmKYXliA
I can't watch that video without screaming "Haha bitches!" when the Soviet Union Disappears... Made my day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:39:33 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I didn't say none. I said 1-2 BCTs. None would be better for us, but as you've pointed out, that may cost us an important alliance. A Division or more, and you are talking about shutting down a US base, or expanding the Army. Putting more than a Division in Europe would only serve to continue to encourage the rest of NATO to sit on their ass in my opinion. Shutting down a US base would have some significant political opposition. An Army? As in multiple Corps? That seems unrealistic. You realize that would be about 50% of our current entire Army? Who is going to pay for that? We could afford it if we ended the welfare state. But I don't think that is realistic either. I agree that the Europeans should be providing the majority of forces. And Ukraine is a totally different discussion. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm in my 30's, so the cold war was before my time. I'm not criticizing what we did then. I'm suggesting that returning to those glory days is a retarded concept. Europe's economy has had ample opportunity to rebuild. Ours is declining. We face an actual threat that we have not yet figured out how to definitively defeat. Maybe we should focus more on our own security threats than the threats that primarily oppose our allies who have existed under the defense umbrella paid for by the US for 70 years. Russia can't really threaten US vital interests as long as we have Nukes. If we really want to protect Poland, we can do it from Montana. Obama even has a red phone he can pick up and tell Putin that himself. What did Poland do to help in Iraq and Afghanistan? That's what you get in return. Don't like it? FOAD. The Cold War was not about defending Europe or anything else. It was about containment. We had to contain the Soviet Union. Noe Russia is going back to their cold war tactics. The only counter to this is to contain them and isolate them militarily and economically thus we must revert to cold war tactics. Moving troops to bases in Poland and the Baltics is the only solution. We don't need the numbers we had all over Europe at the height of the cold war but neither can we ignore the situation. So we are pretty much saying the same thing. A Brigade or two maybe. Even that is arguably unnecessary though. Just pick up the red phone. Tell Putin that Westward expansion into NATO member countries will result in Nuclear war. If we have a ton of guys sitting around with nothing better to do, and someone must go liberate Polish vaginas from tyranny I will go. Send me. Whatever makes people feel better. Feelings>Economic reality. Maybe we should title the NSS "A strategy of our pivoting emotions" Not quite I think. At the height of the cold war we had about 350,000 U.S. troops in Europe. source By today's standards that would be 3 Army groups.source What I would propose would be in the neighborhood of 1 Army. Let the Europeans provide the rest of the needed troops. If I am reading you right what you are saying is that we have no dog in the fight and should NOT support our allies against a potential threat. We should send 0 troops or other military assets. I say that is short sighted and would come back and bite us right in the ass. I am not proposing sending troops into Ukraine. That is a lost cause at this point. What I am saying is that we should make sure our allies have the support there so the same thing does not happen to them. I didn't say none. I said 1-2 BCTs. None would be better for us, but as you've pointed out, that may cost us an important alliance. A Division or more, and you are talking about shutting down a US base, or expanding the Army. Putting more than a Division in Europe would only serve to continue to encourage the rest of NATO to sit on their ass in my opinion. Shutting down a US base would have some significant political opposition. An Army? As in multiple Corps? That seems unrealistic. You realize that would be about 50% of our current entire Army? Who is going to pay for that? We could afford it if we ended the welfare state. But I don't think that is realistic either. I agree that the Europeans should be providing the majority of forces. And Ukraine is a totally different discussion. How much of our army was stationed in Europe in the 80's? I would say about half. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:45:27 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't watch that video without screaming "Haha bitches!" when the Soviet Union Disappears... Made my day. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't watch that video without screaming "Haha bitches!" when the Soviet Union Disappears... Made my day. Unfortunately there's a good possibility it will come back, now that there's more "flexibility" and all that. The real issue, at least for me, is that in the first cold war we had our economy and government geared towards defeating an external enemy. Now we have the commies infiltrated almost everywhere here at home and a "government" hellbent on taking us down. I would like to see more commitment from the EU about this whole thing. What have they committed so far? With them so dependent and in bed with Russian interests it appears this time the Cold War will take a very different twist. What we have on our side is that Russia is also in big trouble internally and unlikely to put out something in the same scale they did before. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:45:33 PM EDT
[#27]
I hear it's a quagmire already. Oh wait, a Democrat is president. Never mind.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 3:55:38 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How much of our army was stationed in Europe in the 80's? I would say about half. Sounds about right. No matter how much nostalgia people may have, a simple return to the 80's is about as likely as re-electing Reagan. We can't go back in time. There might be some similarities to the 80's, but there are also some key differences. Such as we are in a war in Afghanistan, the GWOT really isn't over, and it seems a lot of people would rather cut the military now than expand it. I believe the Russian Army is significantly smaller and less capable these days than in the 80's. Stationing a huge force in Europe is extremely expensive. I seriously doubt that the majority of Americans would support it. That would be a significant reversal of opinion. Despite the threat of NK, we have recently pulled as many troops out of SK as possible. I think claiming that Russia taking part of Ukraine, and sabre rattling is going to be a tough sell to get 200,000 US troops to Europe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:02:53 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL, No shit, The .MIL needs to replace all those MRAPS they gave away, left behind or scrapped. Not to mention there's the excuse to develop a new camouflage for fighting a war in Eastern Europe...Lots of trees and woods...I bet they call it "Woodland"
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Here we go..... Couldn't go pulling out of Afghanistan without a plan for the future. That Military Industrial Complex® ain't gonna pay itself! LOL, No shit, The .MIL needs to replace all those MRAPS they gave away, left behind or scrapped. Not to mention there's the excuse to develop a new camouflage for fighting a war in Eastern Europe...Lots of trees and woods...I bet they call it "Woodland"
Fear is a top seller. How else can you explain spending a trillion dollars on the F35? All of the major defense contracting companies are traitors willing to lie to keep selling hardware. They are a bigger threat to long term security than Russia. The mil is ditching a lot of MRAPs, because they have limited utility. We over bought them against the advice of the Army and Marines. I'd prefer a return to Woodland over the stupid pattern we have now. At least the new material is way more comfy than the old starched BDUs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:09:04 PM EDT
[#30]
America
America America, Fuck Yeah! Comin' again to save the motherfuckin' day, Yeah America, Fuck Yeah! Freedom is the only way, Yeah Terrorists, your game is through 'cause now you have ta answer to America, Fuck yeah! So lick my butt and suck on my balls  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 4:39:16 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression who the hell are you and get the hell out. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 6:15:58 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sounds about right. No matter how much nostalgia people may have, a simple return to the 80's is about as likely as re-electing Reagan. We can't go back in time. There might be some similarities to the 80's, but there are also some key differences. Such as we are in a war in Afghanistan, the GWOT really isn't over, and it seems a lot of people would rather cut the military now than expand it. I believe the Russian Army is significantly smaller and less capable these days than in the 80's. Stationing a huge force in Europe is extremely expensive. I seriously doubt that the majority of Americans would support it. That would be a significant reversal of opinion. Despite the threat of NK, we have recently pulled as many troops out of SK as possible. I think claiming that Russia taking part of Ukraine, and sabre rattling is going to be a tough sell to get 200,000 US troops to Europe. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How much of our army was stationed in Europe in the 80's? I would say about half. Sounds about right. No matter how much nostalgia people may have, a simple return to the 80's is about as likely as re-electing Reagan. We can't go back in time. There might be some similarities to the 80's, but there are also some key differences. Such as we are in a war in Afghanistan, the GWOT really isn't over, and it seems a lot of people would rather cut the military now than expand it. I believe the Russian Army is significantly smaller and less capable these days than in the 80's. Stationing a huge force in Europe is extremely expensive. I seriously doubt that the majority of Americans would support it. That would be a significant reversal of opinion. Despite the threat of NK, we have recently pulled as many troops out of SK as possible. I think claiming that Russia taking part of Ukraine, and sabre rattling is going to be a tough sell to get 200,000 US troops to Europe. I'm afraid that without a bold commitment of significant of troops to Poland and the Baltics, Russia might just figure that they can grab those Baltic states. The reason I would base most of them in Poland is because Poland has a pretty good infrastructure and it actually WANTS closer ties to us. Maybe two armies would be a tad much and we could base a corps there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 6:57:51 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Different style. I do not think Putin would slaughter entire villages but probably has some skeletons in his closet. However, he knows that communications are almost impossible to sever as in Stalin's days hence we are seeing a good portion of what is going on in Ukraine and even the street protests in Moscow. So, he will be more careful and less ruthless than Stalin but I would not turn my back on him. However, we have a much worse enemy here at home stabbing us in the back and plotting how to drag the US down everyday. That one, given the chance, would be a lot worse than Stalin. Since he declared his "flexibility after being reelected" to Putin I just wonder what he has concocted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
US can move troops into poland, but Russia moving troops around on their own soil is an intolerable act of aggression Ukraine isn't Russia, and there is some "history" there. Holodomor Russia isn't led by a Georgian now, though. True, but Putin is a career KGB man. An improvement over Stalin to be sure, but probably ruthless and very intelligent. Different style. I do not think Putin would slaughter entire villages but probably has some skeletons in his closet. However, he knows that communications are almost impossible to sever as in Stalin's days hence we are seeing a good portion of what is going on in Ukraine and even the street protests in Moscow. So, he will be more careful and less ruthless than Stalin but I would not turn my back on him. However, we have a much worse enemy here at home stabbing us in the back and plotting how to drag the US down everyday. That one, given the chance, would be a lot worse than Stalin. Since he declared his "flexibility after being reelected" to Putin I just wonder what he has concocted. LOL you're in this thread too with your usual tactic to divert any debate about Russia to US domestic politics. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 7:00:06 PM EDT
[#34]
Finally, the troops get to go somewhere with hot women.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 7:15:24 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm afraid that without a bold commitment of significant of troops to Poland and the Baltics, Russia might just figure that they can grab those Baltic states. The reason I would base most of them in Poland is because Poland has a pretty good infrastructure and it actually WANTS closer ties to us. Maybe two armies would be a tad much and we could base a corps there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How much of our army was stationed in Europe in the 80's? I would say about half. Sounds about right. No matter how much nostalgia people may have, a simple return to the 80's is about as likely as re-electing Reagan. We can't go back in time. There might be some similarities to the 80's, but there are also some key differences. Such as we are in a war in Afghanistan, the GWOT really isn't over, and it seems a lot of people would rather cut the military now than expand it. I believe the Russian Army is significantly smaller and less capable these days than in the 80's. Stationing a huge force in Europe is extremely expensive. I seriously doubt that the majority of Americans would support it. That would be a significant reversal of opinion. Despite the threat of NK, we have recently pulled as many troops out of SK as possible. I think claiming that Russia taking part of Ukraine, and sabre rattling is going to be a tough sell to get 200,000 US troops to Europe. I'm afraid that without a bold commitment of significant of troops to Poland and the Baltics, Russia might just figure that they can grab those Baltic states. The reason I would base most of them in Poland is because Poland has a pretty good infrastructure and it actually WANTS closer ties to us. Maybe two armies would be a tad much and we could base a corps there. Even a brigade size task force would likely be sufficient to prevent the Russians from moving far beyond their current boundaries. All that is needed is an American force that would be in the way of any further Russian endeavors. They won't make any moves on Poland or the Baltic states if we have troops in them, even if only a small number, as any direct contact with US troops would mean war. The Russians don't want to go to war with us anymore than we want to go to war with them. So even a minimal tripwire force would be sufficient to keep them contained. And as of yet we have no definitive proof they have any intentions of going beyond Ukraine. We can't even say for sure that they are going to try to take eastern Ukraine. Putting a US brigade into Poland and sending detachments of fighters to fly air defense missions over the Baltic will at the very least ensure this situation remains confined to Ukraine. And it might even prevent any further westward forays into Ukraine. We can accomplish most of our goals without the need for a massive US build-up in the region. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 7:24:52 PM EDT
[#36]
Maybe we are going to help them change light bulbs |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 7:29:04 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Finally, the troops get to go somewhere with hot women.  There are probably still finger nail drag marks in the airport at Seoul from the end of my tour ...  as well as a hand print on the sink next to the urinal at Casey  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 10:18:19 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Order of Battle initially would be most of the following. U. S. Marine Battalion Landing Team building quickly to a Brigade sized unit. U S Army S F, Ranger Bat. Armor Heavy Brigade, lots of air support. French Foreign Legion Bat +, Brit mixed Brigade probably Green Jackets, Scotts Borderers, Commando Bat. At least 30 of the latest tanks. German reinforced Panzer Brigade. Lots of aircraft. There are already bets among A F Squadrons on a kill count. NATO units will have a great many folks with real combat experience, Russia doesn't. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Are we to be joined by a British Army of the Vistula and other Western company, or is America the only nation in NATO? pretty much this... Order of Battle initially would be most of the following. U. S. Marine Battalion Landing Team building quickly to a Brigade sized unit. U S Army S F, Ranger Bat. Armor Heavy Brigade, lots of air support. French Foreign Legion Bat +, Brit mixed Brigade probably Green Jackets, Scotts Borderers, Commando Bat. At least 30 of the latest tanks. German reinforced Panzer Brigade. Lots of aircraft. There are already bets among A F Squadrons on a kill count. NATO units will have a great many folks with real combat experience, Russia doesn't. Not sure any heavy armor units are still in Europe, Second Cav is Strykers now, and is the main US deployment force (other than the 173rd Airborne) in Europe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2014 10:56:27 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe we are going to help them change light bulbs I see what you did there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2014 4:52:06 PM EDT
[#40]
Airborne leads the way!!
An Army company of about 150 soldiers from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team based in Vicenza, Italy, will start the exercises Wednesday in Poland. Additional Army companies will head to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and are expected to arrive by Monday for similar land-based exercises in those countries. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/22/us-troops-arrive-in-poland-for-exercises-across-eastern-europe-amid-ukraine/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2014 10:52:16 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Airborne leads the way!! An Army company of about 150 soldiers from the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team based in Vicenza, Italy, will start the exercises Wednesday in Poland. Additional Army companies will head to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and are expected to arrive by Monday for similar land-based exercises in those countries. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/22/us-troops-arrive-in-poland-for-exercises-across-eastern-europe-amid-ukraine/ 
Godspeed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 5:35:03 PM EDT
[#42]
WOW. A whole company.
That'll make Putin shake in his boots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 5:39:17 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
WOW. A whole company. That'll make Putin shake in his boots. A company of bored, horny Marines would. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/23/2014 6:26:40 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A company of bored, horny Marines would. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
WOW. A whole company. That'll make Putin shake in his boots. A company of bored, horny Marines would. Russian troops could take all of Europe while those guys are chasing the Polish girls around. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 3:58:13 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Russian troops could take all of Europe while those guys are chasing the Polish girls around. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
WOW. A whole company. That'll make Putin shake in his boots. A company of bored, horny Marines would. Russian troops could take all of Europe while those guys are chasing the Polish girls around. This is why you tell them the Polish women are all toward Moscow. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 4:10:51 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Heading to Poland next month:) I hear them Polished wimmins haz the big breastesses over there. Post pics please
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 2:13:50 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: WOW. A whole company. That'll make Putin shake in his boots. About like the initial brigade of the 82nd sent to Saudi Arabia following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, they weren't a sufficient force to prevent his armored troops from invading Saudi Arabia, but they WERE a trip-wire force which would invoke a full-scale war if they were attacked. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 2:31:00 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
About like the initial brigade of the 82nd sent to Saudi Arabia following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, they weren't a sufficient force to prevent his armored troops from invading Saudi Arabia, but they WERE a trip-wire force which would invoke a full-scale war if they were attacked. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
WOW. A whole company. That'll make Putin shake in his boots. About like the initial brigade of the 82nd sent to Saudi Arabia following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, they weren't a sufficient force to prevent his armored troops from invading Saudi Arabia, but they WERE a trip-wire force which would invoke a full-scale war if they were attacked. Putin now has to kill americans to seize poland. that changes the equation significantly, regardless the numbers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 3:38:51 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Putin now has to kill americans to seize poland. that changes the equation significantly, regardless the numbers. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
WOW. A whole company. That'll make Putin shake in his boots. About like the initial brigade of the 82nd sent to Saudi Arabia following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, they weren't a sufficient force to prevent his armored troops from invading Saudi Arabia, but they WERE a trip-wire force which would invoke a full-scale war if they were attacked. Putin now has to kill americans to seize poland. that changes the equation significantly, regardless the numbers. In Benghazi this did not seem to work (killing Americans).. What would be the excuse now? "Soldiers provoked innocent "Russian bystanders" and got into a fight"... Our boys over there better watch their six. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2014 3:46:45 PM EDT
[#50]
Dead Americans in Benghazi, Ukraine, Poland. To the guys we got in charge now "what difference does it make?"
As long as they can spin it to win an ellection that's about all they care about. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
