18 of them. A grand total of 18. And they were not engaging with Russian soldiers.
Carlson desperately wants a hot war between the US and Russia, so he's trying to manufacture it in the minds of his audience.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
18 of them. A grand total of 18. And they were not engaging with Russian soldiers.
Carlson desperately wants a hot war between the US and Russia, so he's trying to manufacture it in the minds of his audience.
Don't believe so, so far not seen anything which suggests they've moved to forward areas yet.
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
Yep! We "immigrated (?)" a whole bunch of their biggest brains as they were desperate to leave.
They didn't for the war on Iraq either. Which Tucker Carlson supported and defended. He didn't care about whether or not people had voted for it.
Anyway it's a moot point because the US is not at war with Russia, or even in a conflict with Russia.
US has sanctions some Chinese companies for ignoring the Russian sanctions
www.cnbc.com
China protests U.S. sanctioning of firms dealing with Russia
Beijing on Saturday protested U.S. sanctions against additional Chinese companies over their alleged attempts to evade U.S. export controls on Russia.
Last edited:
US has sanctions some Chinese companies for ignoring the Russian sanctions
China protests U.S. sanctioning of firms dealing with Russia
Beijing on Saturday protested U.S. sanctions against additional Chinese companies over their alleged attempts to evade U.S. export controls on Russia.
More of this, please.
Kind of embarrassing when the US is not even at war with Russia but have cost Russia a force equivalent to their pre-war ground forces.
I would wager the UK have put limitations on what they can/can't do with them, as it would look super bad for the UK if they jumped into their hot new tanks, drove to the front to wreck havoc and got immediately fragged like the Syrian army did with their first T-90.
It has to be remembered that while the Challenger 2 has a scary reputation it is entirely derived from the reputations of the tanks that preceded it plus the hype around it's armour. We've all heard the "never lost to enemy fire" line but hype aside the C2 itself is effectively untested in battle as it has spent it's whole combat life thus far popping Soviet tanks from the 50s with zero modernisation and bouncing RPGs from the 60s.
Although in fairness that does cover quite a bit of what it will be going up against in in Ukraine
It's not often talked about but this is something that's been ongoing for decades albeit not as openly/large scale as the last 12 months.
A good friend of mine is a Russian who left in the early 2000s due to Putin becoming president, he worked in the Russian defence industry but now works in the UK defence industry. The crazy thing is he knows dozens of other people who worked in the Soviet/Russia defence sector who are now living/working in the UK, USA, etc and that's just from that industry, their brain drain over the past twenty years has been immense which somewhat explains the performance of some of their newer hardware (or lack thereof).
I don't remember the exact figures so apologies if it's more than a few numbers off, but I recall a democrat being questioned by a republican in congress last year about the amount being "wasted" on Ukraine.
And the response was something like "We have spent 5% of our 22-23 defence budget on arming Ukraine, and as a result have reduced Russia's conventional military capacity by 50%".
*EDIT*
I found it: “US spending of 5.6% of its defense budget to destroy nearly half of Russia’s conventional military capability seems like an absolutely incredible investment,”
Last edited:
Hopefully a good sign but I'm sceptical that the Russians aren't in possession of the idea to tactically retreat for advantage at this point.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 15,991
- Location
- Fareham
Am very much in camp believe it when I see it.
?
British parliamentary approval for the invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia
Because you said so? lmao.
I think any reasonable person would consider a country to be involved in a conflict if they were providing one side with lethal arms, monetary aid, providing active intelligence, and had special forces soldiers in that country supporting them. If that isn't being involved in a conflict then most of the British Army also wasn't involved in invading Iraq, it was just the guys who pulled the trigger apparently
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,026
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Believe it when I see it but it would tie into the expectations Ukriane would attack to the south to try and split Russian forces.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,026
- Location
- Billericay, UK
See @Grim5 last post, could be the mighty Challenger 2 sending commies to God's waiting room.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 4,255
- Location
- North Sea
Inside this post there’s a ‘Your mum’ joke just screaming to get out.
Last edited:
Roar in actually having a point shocker?
British parliamentary approval for the invasion of Iraq - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Because you said so? lmao.
I think any reasonable person would consider a country to be involved in a conflict if they were providing one side with lethal arms, monetary aid, providing active intelligence, and had special forces soldiers in that country supporting them. If that isn't being involved in a conflict then most of the British Army also wasn't involved in invading Iraq, it was just the guys who pulled the trigger apparently
Careful now!
- Status