Coffeesforclosers Posted September 23 Posted September 23 Pretty much speaks for itself. If we're willing to live with a re-militarized EU, it sounds like a great idea.
Roundybout Posted September 23 Posted September 23 1 hour ago, Coffeesforclosers said: Pretty much speaks for itself. If we're willing to live with a re-militarized EU, it sounds like a great idea. Wow! Impossibly rare Trump W! Hey, if he somehow gets Ukrainian boots marching through Moscow, I’ll buy a damn MAGA hat 1
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted September 23 Author Posted September 23 It's like he is in a lovers spat with Putin and venting in public. Trump is really unstable
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted September 24 Author Posted September 24 https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/09/24/russia-trump-ukraine-support-war/ The outspoken former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev mocked Trump’s new position, saying he had been given a dose of “alternative reality.” “I have no doubt — he will come back. He always comes back,” Medvedev wrote about Trump on X. “The main thing is to radically change your point of view on various issues more often. And everything will be fine. That’s the essence of successful government through social media.” Margarita Simonyan, who heads the Russian English-language state news channel RT, dismissed the U.S. president’s support for Zelensky as that of a carnival huckster. “Trump debuts as the tarot card reader telling the thrice-divorced lady that she is going to meet that billionaire prince after all, as long as she buys the magic crystals,” she wrote on X.
Coffeesforclosers Posted September 25 Posted September 25 Russia saying they can violate countries sovereign airspace at their pleasure, and if you shoot down the aircraft violating your sovereign airspace, it's war. Any thoughts on this escalation?
B-Man Posted September 25 Posted September 25 Just now, Coffeesforclosers said: Russia saying they can violate countries sovereign airspace at their pleasure, and if you shoot down the aircraft violating your sovereign airspace, it's war. Any thoughts on this escalation? blus·ter /ˈbləstər/ verb talk in a loud, aggressive, or indignant way with little effect. "you threaten and bluster, but won't carry it through" noun loud, aggressive, or indignant talk with little effect. "their threats contained a measure of bluster"
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 25 Posted September 25 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: blus·ter /ˈbləstər/ verb talk in a loud, aggressive, or indignant way with little effect. "you threaten and bluster, but won't carry it through" noun loud, aggressive, or indignant talk with little effect. "their threats contained a measure of bluster" very dangerous bluster. The tightening alliance of Russia and China makes this threat worrisome. They are both provoking potential conflict seemingly in support of their imperialistic goals. Perhaps they believe that together they could win. Or maybe they're just seeing how far they can go without the US responding.
sherpa Posted September 25 Posted September 25 17 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said: Russia saying they can violate countries sovereign airspace at their pleasure, and if you shoot down the aircraft violating your sovereign airspace, it's war. Any thoughts on this escalation? It's nonsense. If Russia violates airspace, there are rules of engagement. The first it that it gets intercepted. The point being, you don't destroy it as your first response. If it doesn't respond to the intercept, which would be to escort it out, or get it to land, or displays any hostile intent, it can be engaged. The absolute last thing Russia could handle is a military action against NATO. They are hopelessly outmatched. I really doubt China has any interest in being a tag team, military partner with them. I think that thought is silly. 1 2
Coffeesforclosers Posted September 25 Posted September 25 (edited) 14 minutes ago, sherpa said: It's nonsense. If Russia violates airspace, there are rules of engagement. The first it that it gets intercepted. The point being, you don't destroy it as your first response. I'm thinking they're huffing and puffing after Radislav Sikorsky's "Don't get mad at Poland if the wreckage of a Russian plane lands on Poland" speech. 14 minutes ago, sherpa said: If it doesn't respond to the intercept, which would be to escort it out, or get it to land, or displays any hostile intent, it can be engaged. The absolute last thing Russia could handle is a military action against NATO. They are hopelessly outmatched. Couldn't agree more, and I'm wondering how much longer Russia's tired "escalate to deescalate" tactics will continue. There's no nuance in anything they seem to do anymore. Makes me think there's some kind of feedback loop in the Kremlin. Edited September 25 by Coffeesforclosers
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 25 Posted September 25 (edited) 37 minutes ago, sherpa said: It's nonsense. If Russia violates airspace, there are rules of engagement. The first it that it gets intercepted. The point being, you don't destroy it as your first response. If it doesn't respond to the intercept, which would be to escort it out, or get it to land, or displays any hostile intent, it can be engaged. The absolute last thing Russia could handle is a military action against NATO. They are hopelessly outmatched. I really doubt China has any interest in being a tag team, military partner with them. I think that thought is silly. China wants Taiwan. Russia has already violated airspace. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/09/25/russian-pilots-dared-nato-start-war/ The rules of engagement only matter if you are willing to follow them. Edited September 25 by Joe Ferguson forever
sherpa Posted September 25 Posted September 25 43 minutes ago, Coffeesforclosers said: I'm thinking they're huffing and puffing after Radislav Sikorsky's "Don't get mad at Poland if the wreckage of a Russian plane lands on Poland" speech. Couldn't agree more, and I'm wondering how much longer Russia's tired "escalate to deescalate" tactics will continue. There's no nuance in anything they seem to do anymore. Makes me think there's some kind of feedback loop in the Kremlin. I agree. It's almost as if they believe they are rated on belligerent rhetoric, which they are incapable of backing up, so not taken seriously. Of course we've got a guy who does something similar on a lot of occasions. Either way, their military is so degraded and so incompetent at this point that a NATO engagement would be regime suicide. 41 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: China wants Taiwan. Russia has already violated airspace. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/09/25/russian-pilots-dared-nato-start-war/ The rules of engagement only matter if you are willing to follow them. You are missing the point, as usual. The rules of engagement direct that you intercept and escort out of airspace unless there is hostile action. If you don't, and military pilots know this, you will be destroyed. It has nothing to do with the Russians following the ROE.
The Frankish Reich Posted September 25 Posted September 25 I can't see this ending until Putin is gone. He is now dug in so deep that he can't negotiate away territorial gains, and NATO/the US similarly can't reward him with anything more than official recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. It is an utterly irrational war from Russia's national perspective, but it may be totally rational from Putin's perspective if he is correct that "losing" would mean the end of his rule.
sherpa Posted September 25 Posted September 25 38 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: It is an utterly irrational war from Russia's national perspective, but it may be totally rational from Putin's perspective if he is correct that "losing" would mean the end of his rule. He's already lost it, he just hasn't acknowledged it. His military is incompetent, corrupt and exposed. His economy is ruined. He's caused the loss of one million victims, and countless desertions to other countries from war fighting aged people. He has gained nothing of any import. Anyway, what I would do re the airspace incursion thing, I would provided evidence of it to the international media, do a song and dance at the useless UN, and issue a well publicized warning that if it happens again, the intruders will be shot down. Then, if they did it again and did not respond to the intercept, I would shoot them down. 1
Coffeesforclosers Posted September 25 Posted September 25 32 minutes ago, sherpa said: He's already lost it, he just hasn't acknowledged it. His military is incompetent, corrupt and exposed. His economy is ruined. He's caused the loss of one million victims, and countless desertions to other countries from war fighting aged people. He has gained nothing of any import. Anyway, what I would do re the airspace incursion thing, I would provided evidence of it to the international media, do a song and dance at the useless UN, and issue a well publicized warning that if it happens again, the intruders will be shot down. Then, if they did it again and did not respond to the intercept, I would shoot them down. I think the Poles and the Baltics are ready to start Interesting Times in this scenario. The rest of the EU apart from the Russophile governments *might be* getting there. Russia just tried to outflank Pokrovsk from the north and got smashed in one of their first clear defeats for a while. Which I think makes them more insane, not less.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 25 Posted September 25 47 minutes ago, sherpa said: Anyway, what I would do re the airspace incursion thing, I would provided evidence of it to the international media, do a song and dance at the useless UN, and issue a well publicized warning that if it happens again, the intruders will be shot down. Then, if they did it again and did not respond to the intercept, I would shoot them down. Do you see trump ordering that? I sure don’t. He hasn’t even followed through on increasing sanctions.
sherpa Posted September 25 Posted September 25 2 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Do you see trump ordering that? I sure don’t. He hasn’t even followed through on increasing sanctions. This has nothing to do with Trump or the US. Not sure how you came up with that. Flying a combatant or drone into another countries airspace is provocative and impermissible. It needs to be addressed and not allowed. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted September 25 Posted September 25 (edited) 18 minutes ago, sherpa said: This has nothing to do with Trump or the US. Not sure how you came up with that. Flying a combatant or drone into another countries airspace is provocative and impermissible. It needs to be addressed and not allowed. So you don’t think the commander in chief could order us pilots to not shoot? so far, no consequences for their impermissible provocation. Edited September 25 by Joe Ferguson forever
Coffeesforclosers Posted September 25 Posted September 25 9 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: So you don’t think the commander in chief could order us pilots to not shoot? In Trump's defense, it's not really his call until someone in NATO triggers Article 5 unless I'm mistaken. Sovereign states in Eastern Europe are of course free to blast whatever they want should a foreign military violate their borders. 1
Recommended Posts