Footage released by the 1st Warsaw Armored Brigade of Polish Armed Forces on Aug 13, 2023 shows Polish troops movement in the streets of Warsaw on Saturday night.
Poland said this week it would move 10,000 troops to its border with Belarus, the latest sign of unease among America’s friends at the presence of Russian mercenary forces now based in this close Kremlin ally.
Poland’s ambassador to the United States, Marek Magierowski, told NBC News it was “imperative” for his country to not only defend itself, but also protect NATO’s eastern flank. The region should be braced for “further provocations” from Moscow and Minsk in the months to come, he added.
Let’s have a war!
Re: Let’s have a war!
“The Electoral College is DEI for rural white folks.”
Derek Cressman
Derek Cressman
Re: Let’s have a war!
Careful with that “P” word.
Re: Let’s have a war!
unstoppable.
and by that, I mean Q's continuance to bong the Buben in this thread despite a preponderance of evidence to the contrary.
and by that, I mean Q's continuance to bong the Buben in this thread despite a preponderance of evidence to the contrary.
Just Ledoux it
Re: Let’s have a war!
Sigh.
I’ve tried this before, and know I’m prob only gonna get no answer, but…
What preponderance of the evidence to the contrary?
And please, give specific examples.
While you’re at it, bonus points if you take a stab at the yet-to-be-answered question why the WMDs in Iraq dipshits are suddenly playing us straight about Ukraine.
I’ve tried this before, and know I’m prob only gonna get no answer, but…
What preponderance of the evidence to the contrary?
And please, give specific examples.
While you’re at it, bonus points if you take a stab at the yet-to-be-answered question why the WMDs in Iraq dipshits are suddenly playing us straight about Ukraine.
Re: Let’s have a war!
holy fuck. there's 160 pages of evidence. Probably only 100 pages if you take out your meme regurgitation.ousdahl wrote: ↑Mon Aug 14, 2023 11:38 am Sigh.
I’ve tried this before, and know I’m prob only gonna get no answer, but…
What preponderance of the evidence to the contrary?
And please, give specific examples.
While you’re at it, bonus points if you take a stab at the yet-to-be-answered question why the WMDs in Iraq dipshits are suddenly playing us straight about Ukraine.
Please be specific. Shit...please use your next paycheck to buy a mirror.
check please.
now go bong the buben.
Just Ledoux it
Re: Let’s have a war!
how oh how did I know that you wouldn't actually answer, but would just be an asshole instead?
Re: Let’s have a war!
when is the last time you answered a question yourself instead of just pontificating about enumerable, unanswerable queries without actually considering reality?
pot meet fucking kettle.
Just Ledoux it
Re: Let’s have a war!
bro I answered trad’s hypothetical not one page ago
Re: Let’s have a war!
“The Electoral College is DEI for rural white folks.”
Derek Cressman
Derek Cressman
Re: Let’s have a war!
how exactly did they save Europe? Sre we sure they saved Europe and didn't actually condemn Europe to a century of capitalist driven freedom?
Were the Soviets actually just trying to prevent the rise of Nazism (which reared its head not even 20 years later) but wrre foiled by the propaganda machine against the color red and baklava? If the soviets are so bad why did they rescue Europe 25 years later? Is Poland the bad guy? History is written by the winner but the winner isn't right. Did Aliens visit and sway the battle? Did nazis capture aliens and steal their tech to aide their rise? Why is the earth tilted at 23 degrees? Am I a swordfish? Speaking of fish, I cant stop eating Swedish fish. Sweden is part of Nato now? Sweden is bad, killing machine.
Provide a 18 page essay by noon. Please. Be. Specific. Cite sources, proper bibliography will be required for any credit. This will be a pass/fail grade and there will be no further discussion on the subject. Theres no fucking way I'm actually going to read any of these, I'm too busy working on my next set of questions.
Class dismissed.
Were the Soviets actually just trying to prevent the rise of Nazism (which reared its head not even 20 years later) but wrre foiled by the propaganda machine against the color red and baklava? If the soviets are so bad why did they rescue Europe 25 years later? Is Poland the bad guy? History is written by the winner but the winner isn't right. Did Aliens visit and sway the battle? Did nazis capture aliens and steal their tech to aide their rise? Why is the earth tilted at 23 degrees? Am I a swordfish? Speaking of fish, I cant stop eating Swedish fish. Sweden is part of Nato now? Sweden is bad, killing machine.
Provide a 18 page essay by noon. Please. Be. Specific. Cite sources, proper bibliography will be required for any credit. This will be a pass/fail grade and there will be no further discussion on the subject. Theres no fucking way I'm actually going to read any of these, I'm too busy working on my next set of questions.
Class dismissed.
Just Ledoux it
-
KUTradition
- Contributor
- Posts: 13881
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2022 8:53 am
Re: Let’s have a war!
i think i want to change my class schedule
Have we fallen into a mesmerized state that makes us accept as inevitable that which is inferior or detrimental, as though having lost the will or the vision to demand that which is good?
Re: Let’s have a war!
If you read the comments below that tweet, apparently, it's complicated.TDub wrote: ↑Tue Aug 15, 2023 8:37 am how exactly did they save Europe? Sre we sure they saved Europe and didn't actually condemn Europe to a century of capitalist driven freedom?
Were the Soviets actually just trying to prevent the rise of Nazism (which reared its head not even 20 years later) but wrre foiled by the propaganda machine against the color red and baklava? If the soviets are so bad why did they rescue Europe 25 years later? Is Poland the bad guy? History is written by the winner but the winner isn't right. Did Aliens visit and sway the battle? Did nazis capture aliens and steal their tech to aide their rise? Why is the earth tilted at 23 degrees? Am I a swordfish? Speaking of fish, I cant stop eating Swedish fish. Sweden is part of Nato now? Sweden is bad, killing machine.
Provide a 18 page essay by noon. Please. Be. Specific. Cite sources, proper bibliography will be required for any credit. This will be a pass/fail grade and there will be no further discussion on the subject. Theres no fucking way I'm actually going to read any of these, I'm too busy working on my next set of questions.
Class dismissed.
I was in the hospital with the Spanish flu during much of that time, so my memory is fuzzy.
“The Electoral College is DEI for rural white folks.”
Derek Cressman
Derek Cressman
Re: Let’s have a war!
Soooo. you didnt even attempt to answer the question? Just trying to have an honest dialogue, is that scary to you? If it is good, I'm only here to challenge the status quo and open up discussions that maybe uncomfortable. We need to expand our definitions of reality to fully comprehend the impacts of our tidal system and how it may control more than just werewolves.
I'm sorry, too late to change class schedule. No takesy backsees. I'll expect the paper or no credit will be given and no redos. Specifics are the key.
Thank you.
Just Ledoux it
Re: Let’s have a war!
Welp, guess that settles it.
Tdub is a swordfish.
Tdub is a swordfish.
Re: Let’s have a war!
This is the best part of the thread.
Shirley -- wherever she may be -- would get a kick out of Feral showing up here every day to share videos made by Reed Galen and talking points written by Bill Kristol.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/16/lincoln ... group.html
https://www.zgr.net/en/wiki/who-is-reed ... n-project/
Imjustheretohelpyoubuycrypto
Re: Let’s have a war!
Spoiler alert: He makes a reference to the Oppenheimer movie, which I haven't seen, but plan to.
Courageous fighters win wars. So do intellectuals.
By Paul Krugman
New York Times Opinion Columnist
If you’ve seen the movie “Oppenheimer,” which you should — trust me, it’s gripping even though it’s three hours long and you know how the story ends — you probably noticed several appearances by the physicist Isidor Isaac Rabi, who is portrayed in some ways as Oppenheimer’s voice of conscience. I was a bit puzzled when I watched, because I happened to know that Rabi wasn’t a resident at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project. But the film was historically accurate: Rabi did visit Los Alamos on occasion, and was present for the Trinity bomb test.
Why wasn’t Rabi at Los Alamos? The film highlights his ethical qualms. But the truth is that he was involved in another secret project applying cutting-edge science to the war effort, M.I.T.’s Radiation Laboratory, which basically worked on advanced radar. The Rad Lab arguably had an even bigger impact on the course of the war than the Manhattan Project, because it turned microwave technology, originally developed in Britain, into a radar system that German submarines couldn’t detect. This was a major factor in the Allies’ 1943 victory in the Battle of the Atlantic, which secured the sea lanes to Britain; this in turn set the stage first for the decisive defeat of the Luftwaffe in early 1944, and then for D-Day.
There were other crucial scientific efforts too, like the group at Johns Hopkins that developed the proximity fuse, which made antiaircraft guns far more effective because they could bring down a plane without scoring a direct hit.
All of this was made possible not just by America’s economic might but also by its cultural and social openness. At one point in the movie Oppenheimer says that the only reason we might beat the Germans to the bomb is Nazi antisemitism; indeed, America’s war effort was crucially aided by our willingness to take in and make use of the scientific talents of refugees.
If you’re a history buff like me, you find this stuff fascinating in its own right. But it’s also relevant, even now, to American politics — and to the war in Ukraine.
Many people on the U.S. right seem to equate national greatness with military prowess and believe that military prowess is associated with macho posturing. The epitome of this attitude was Ted Cruz’s infamous ad contrasting tough-looking Russian recruits with U.S. recruiting ads that celebrated diversity, and declaring that we were made weak by having a “woke, emasculated” military. And you still hear that sort of thing despite the catastrophic and very recent failures of Russia’s un-woke, un-emasculated army.
This is all, of course, deeply stupid. Wars still require almost unimaginable courage and endurance on the part of combatants. But they haven’t been won by sheer brawn for a long time. They are instead won largely by production capacity — and intellectual creativity.
I’ve read many books about World War II. The book that did the most to change how I thought about the conflict was “How the War Was Won,” by the military historian Phillips P. O’Brien, which begins with this memorable sentence: “There were no decisive battles in World War II.” O’Brien shows that even the bloodiest, most stupendous battles, like the battle of Kursk in 1943, destroyed at most a few weeks’ worth of the losing side’s war production. What decided the war was Allied success in dominating first the seas, then the air — success that depended crucially on intellectuals like Rabi, who didn’t look like anyone’s idea of a warrior, or Alan Turing, who led the code-breaking efforts at Bletchley Park but whose gayness would have made him an outcast in the right-wing vision of what America should be.
O’Brien was, as it happens, one of the few prominent military analysts who disagreed with the consensus that Russia would quickly and easily conquer Ukraine, and has been a frequent and insightful commentator on the course of the ongoing war. He believes that Ukraine’s counteroffensive will eventually succeed; I’m not qualified to judge whether he’s right, but I do understand his reasoning.
Here’s how I’d put it: The Ukrainians discovered early on that they couldn’t pull off a blitzkrieg, using armored vehicles to punch a hole in Russia’s defense lines and then racing for the coast. When they tried that, they ran into dense minefields and withering artillery fire. So they reverted to tactics that seem on the surface almost like those of World War I: small-scale (and incredibly brave) infantry attacks that gain at most a few hundred yards at a time.
Under the surface, however — pun not really intended — what’s going on is something like the Battle of the Atlantic. Those infantry assaults force the Russians to respond, exposing their artillery systems in particular to attacks from Ukrainians using superior Western technology, supplemented by local ingenuity.
If this strategy is working — again, a question I’m not competent to answer — Ukraine’s slow gains on the ground aren’t a good indication of what’s really happening. If the optimists are right, the real story is the gradual degradation of the stuff behind Russia’s lines — counter-battery radar, artillery pieces, command centers and so on.
One notable thing about the Battle of the Atlantic is that the denouement was quite sudden. We now know that the Allies were gradually gaining the upper hand for many months before a sudden surge in U-boat losses forced the Germans to abandon their attacks.
Will there be a similar tipping point in Ukraine? I don’t know. But what we do know is that this war, like most modern wars, will be determined more by brains and open-mindedness than by tough-guy posturing.
Courageous fighters win wars. So do intellectuals.
By Paul Krugman
New York Times Opinion Columnist
If you’ve seen the movie “Oppenheimer,” which you should — trust me, it’s gripping even though it’s three hours long and you know how the story ends — you probably noticed several appearances by the physicist Isidor Isaac Rabi, who is portrayed in some ways as Oppenheimer’s voice of conscience. I was a bit puzzled when I watched, because I happened to know that Rabi wasn’t a resident at Los Alamos during the Manhattan Project. But the film was historically accurate: Rabi did visit Los Alamos on occasion, and was present for the Trinity bomb test.
Why wasn’t Rabi at Los Alamos? The film highlights his ethical qualms. But the truth is that he was involved in another secret project applying cutting-edge science to the war effort, M.I.T.’s Radiation Laboratory, which basically worked on advanced radar. The Rad Lab arguably had an even bigger impact on the course of the war than the Manhattan Project, because it turned microwave technology, originally developed in Britain, into a radar system that German submarines couldn’t detect. This was a major factor in the Allies’ 1943 victory in the Battle of the Atlantic, which secured the sea lanes to Britain; this in turn set the stage first for the decisive defeat of the Luftwaffe in early 1944, and then for D-Day.
There were other crucial scientific efforts too, like the group at Johns Hopkins that developed the proximity fuse, which made antiaircraft guns far more effective because they could bring down a plane without scoring a direct hit.
All of this was made possible not just by America’s economic might but also by its cultural and social openness. At one point in the movie Oppenheimer says that the only reason we might beat the Germans to the bomb is Nazi antisemitism; indeed, America’s war effort was crucially aided by our willingness to take in and make use of the scientific talents of refugees.
If you’re a history buff like me, you find this stuff fascinating in its own right. But it’s also relevant, even now, to American politics — and to the war in Ukraine.
Many people on the U.S. right seem to equate national greatness with military prowess and believe that military prowess is associated with macho posturing. The epitome of this attitude was Ted Cruz’s infamous ad contrasting tough-looking Russian recruits with U.S. recruiting ads that celebrated diversity, and declaring that we were made weak by having a “woke, emasculated” military. And you still hear that sort of thing despite the catastrophic and very recent failures of Russia’s un-woke, un-emasculated army.
This is all, of course, deeply stupid. Wars still require almost unimaginable courage and endurance on the part of combatants. But they haven’t been won by sheer brawn for a long time. They are instead won largely by production capacity — and intellectual creativity.
I’ve read many books about World War II. The book that did the most to change how I thought about the conflict was “How the War Was Won,” by the military historian Phillips P. O’Brien, which begins with this memorable sentence: “There were no decisive battles in World War II.” O’Brien shows that even the bloodiest, most stupendous battles, like the battle of Kursk in 1943, destroyed at most a few weeks’ worth of the losing side’s war production. What decided the war was Allied success in dominating first the seas, then the air — success that depended crucially on intellectuals like Rabi, who didn’t look like anyone’s idea of a warrior, or Alan Turing, who led the code-breaking efforts at Bletchley Park but whose gayness would have made him an outcast in the right-wing vision of what America should be.
O’Brien was, as it happens, one of the few prominent military analysts who disagreed with the consensus that Russia would quickly and easily conquer Ukraine, and has been a frequent and insightful commentator on the course of the ongoing war. He believes that Ukraine’s counteroffensive will eventually succeed; I’m not qualified to judge whether he’s right, but I do understand his reasoning.
Here’s how I’d put it: The Ukrainians discovered early on that they couldn’t pull off a blitzkrieg, using armored vehicles to punch a hole in Russia’s defense lines and then racing for the coast. When they tried that, they ran into dense minefields and withering artillery fire. So they reverted to tactics that seem on the surface almost like those of World War I: small-scale (and incredibly brave) infantry attacks that gain at most a few hundred yards at a time.
Under the surface, however — pun not really intended — what’s going on is something like the Battle of the Atlantic. Those infantry assaults force the Russians to respond, exposing their artillery systems in particular to attacks from Ukrainians using superior Western technology, supplemented by local ingenuity.
If this strategy is working — again, a question I’m not competent to answer — Ukraine’s slow gains on the ground aren’t a good indication of what’s really happening. If the optimists are right, the real story is the gradual degradation of the stuff behind Russia’s lines — counter-battery radar, artillery pieces, command centers and so on.
One notable thing about the Battle of the Atlantic is that the denouement was quite sudden. We now know that the Allies were gradually gaining the upper hand for many months before a sudden surge in U-boat losses forced the Germans to abandon their attacks.
Will there be a similar tipping point in Ukraine? I don’t know. But what we do know is that this war, like most modern wars, will be determined more by brains and open-mindedness than by tough-guy posturing.
“The Electoral College is DEI for rural white folks.”
Derek Cressman
Derek Cressman
-
KUTradition
- Contributor
- Posts: 13881
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2022 8:53 am
Re: Let’s have a war!
hey randy!
just a reminder that we’ve got this whole thread about Ukraine already
just a reminder that we’ve got this whole thread about Ukraine already
Have we fallen into a mesmerized state that makes us accept as inevitable that which is inferior or detrimental, as though having lost the will or the vision to demand that which is good?