[Zipperfish]

bootlegga bootlegga:

The only real problem would be whether or not Russia came to their defence. Even that would be a fairly one-sided battle (although casualties would go up) - they simply don't have numbers, training or anything else on their side except for distance to the battlefield.

I can't see Russia getting involved. Then again I can't see NATO getting involved. This looks like it'll play out as the old skool proxy war.

I think Putin needs to be contained. That's why I'd favour a pretty muscular response on this incident, but it doesn't look like that's going to heppen.

[Canadian_Mind]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

A Dutch mechanized infantry brigade would slice the separatists to ribbons - the only problem would come afterwards, assuming the Russians didn't intervene to protect the scumbags.


... flown there inside leased Russian Antonovs ...

Not anymore, NATO stopped using AN-124s a couple years ago. Now they would be flown there on NATO operated C-17s;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Strat ... Capability

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

Good point. (:cough: BUK :cough:)
But Antonovs are Ukrainian. Built in and operated from Kyiv.

Yeah, I doubt they would go in unescorted. Flights of Dutch F-16s would 'clear a path' for them so to speak if NATO decided to intervene.

Again, NATO forces against poorly-trained separatists would be a one sided battle just like Gulf Storm was. The amount of training and technology behind NATO would crush them utterly.

The only real problem would be whether or not Russia came to their defence. Even that would be a fairly one-sided battle (although casualties would go up) - they simply don't have numbers, training or anything else on their side except for distance to the battlefield.

I look at this the same way I look at conflicts in Asia, South America (excluding the Falklands and related disputes), Africa, and the middle east. Let the Ukrainians deal with their own problem. That said, the shooting down of the aircraft is an international incident, and I do believe that should NATO become involved, it should only be to secure the crash site area, retrieval of stolen goods/aircraft pieces, and provide a safe path for investigators to get to and from the crash site.

Now, if a few hundred/thousand rebels die in the process and Ukraine happens to take more of her territory back as a consequence of NATO's site security, I certainly wont cry about it.

[Winnipegger]

bootlegga bootlegga:

The only real problem would be whether or not Russia came to their defence. Even that would be a fairly one-sided battle (although casualties would go up) - they simply don't have numbers, training or anything else on their side except for distance to the battlefield.

NATO would roll over separatists/rebels/insurgents/terrorists. One sided like Desert Storm? Yea, pretty much. However, if Russian military gets involved, that would be entirely different. Do not underestimate the Russians.

[Freakinoldguy]

andyt andyt:

Ron Paul Defends Russia After Malaysian Plane Crash

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/ron-p ... 31466.html

Hmmm, apparently dementia can affect even the very very very rich. Point. If Ron baby was standing on the corner of Hastings and Main spouting this shit he'd just be another crazy person who needed social assistance rather than one of the richest men in the world.

I guess money makes a persons insanity acceptable.

[bootlegga]

Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:

bootlegga bootlegga:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

A Dutch mechanized infantry brigade would slice the separatists to ribbons - the only problem would come afterwards, assuming the Russians didn't intervene to protect the scumbags.


... flown there inside leased Russian Antonovs ...

Not anymore, NATO stopped using AN-124s a couple years ago. Now they would be flown there on NATO operated C-17s;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Strat ... Capability

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

Good point. (:cough: BUK :cough:)
But Antonovs are Ukrainian. Built in and operated from Kyiv.

Yeah, I doubt they would go in unescorted. Flights of Dutch F-16s would 'clear a path' for them so to speak if NATO decided to intervene.

Again, NATO forces against poorly-trained separatists would be a one sided battle just like Gulf Storm was. The amount of training and technology behind NATO would crush them utterly.

The only real problem would be whether or not Russia came to their defence. Even that would be a fairly one-sided battle (although casualties would go up) - they simply don't have numbers, training or anything else on their side except for distance to the battlefield.

I look at this the same way I look at conflicts in Asia, South America (excluding the Falklands and related disputes), Africa, and the middle east. Let the Ukrainians deal with their own problem. That said, the shooting down of the aircraft is an international incident, and I do believe that should NATO become involved, it should only be to secure the crash site area, retrieval of stolen goods/aircraft pieces, and provide a safe path for investigators to get to and from the crash site.

Now, if a few hundred/thousand rebels die in the process and Ukraine happens to take more of her territory back as a consequence of NATO's site security, I certainly wont cry about it.

I was just responding to the mistaken belief that NATO troops would go home en masse in bodybags if they got involved.

I'm not saying that NATO should get involved - ideally, the UN would step in, however Putin can use his veto on the Security Council to stop that from happening, so it's not likely that the UN will do anything. And as we've seen, neither will the US without support from major European countries.

Like Zip, I'd like to see a strong reaction from the West, but that's not likely to happen, as the Germans and French seem too worried about their trade with Russia. The Netherlands can't really do it by themselves and I doubt the Americans would back them even if they wanted too - Obama wants broad-based European involvement on this.

As you said, I wouldn't have a problem with these scumbags taking one on the chin for this, but at this point, I don't see it happening. Like the Crimea, most of the West is willing to sit back and not do a damned thing about it.

[bootlegga]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

bootlegga bootlegga:

The only real problem would be whether or not Russia came to their defence. Even that would be a fairly one-sided battle (although casualties would go up) - they simply don't have numbers, training or anything else on their side except for distance to the battlefield.

NATO would roll over separatists/rebels/insurgents/terrorists. One sided like Desert Storm? Yea, pretty much. However, if Russian military gets involved, that would be entirely different. Do not underestimate the Russians.

I'm not underestimating them at all - just looking at facts.

Technology matters - and the Russians do have some good technology.

But training AND technology trumps technology all by itself.

While NATO countries may have stopped/slowed defence spending in the 90s to enjoy a peace dividend, they never stopped training nor upgrading their equipment. Our pilots/troops/sailors still train much more often than all of our potential adversaries - China, Russia, Iran, etc. That's where our edge is.

That's why Israel crushed the Arabs so many times with WW2 tanks and why NATO crushed Serbia in Kosovo and why Iraq got wiped out in Desert Storm.

The Russians stopped training and let most of their equipment rust out. It's only been recently that they have slowly gotten back up to speed. The Russians are still a shadow of themselves and while we would no doubt take a lot of casualties, it would still be a conventional victory for us in the end.

[Winnipegger]

andyt andyt:

Ron Paul Defends Russia After Malaysian Plane Crash

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/ron-p ... 31466.html

Actually, he has a point. He didn't say anything factually wrong. It's all about spin.

However, spin: Ukraine does want to be a separate country. Ukraine wanted to retain nuclear weapons when they separated from the Soviet Union. The US didn't want yet another nuclear country, so convinced Ukraine to surrender their nuclear weapons. They promised to defend Ukraine if Russia invaded. Well, you could argue Russia is invading. So why doesn't NATO help? There's all the stuff we're fully aware of.

$1:

"Western politicians and media joined together to gain the maximum propaganda value from the disaster. It had to be Russia; it had to be Putin, they said," the former presidential candidate wrote. "While western media outlets rush to repeat government propaganda on the event, there are a few things they will not report."

He's actually correct on this point. Now Russia is doing the same. Someone had to point this out; may as well be him.

So now what? Western politicians are required to pound their chest like an ape trying to scare away an opponent. Families of the dead demand strong action. If politicians don't make strong statements, they'll get crucified next election. But will they take action? Their statements appear to be leading to NATO action. Or are they just "pounding their chests" trying to scare Russia? Western politicians are ramping up rhetoric. At the same time they try to convince Russia to de-escalate rhetoric. They can't have it both ways. What's going to happen?

[Zipperfish]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

He's actually correct on this point. Now Russia is doing the same. Someone had to point this out; may as well be him.

Perhaps, but Paul rather studiously ignores the evidence available that this place was shot down by pro-Russian separatists. It's all well and fine to to trace threads back into history and conclude that things are more compicated than the media would have us believe. That's true of absolutely any incident. But in this case we have pretty specific and credible evidence indicating that this plane was downed by separatists.

[BartSimpson]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

Do not underestimate the Russians.

Don't overestimate them, either. Keep in mind that in two successive invasions of Iraq we rolled over the best of their military hardware in a virtual cakewalk. And while they have a few prototype platforms that show promise the fact remains that they're still fielding 3rd rate stuff to the field because they lack the funding and the expertise to maintain tech at the same level as NATO does.

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

pro-Russian separatists.

This is media-speak for Russian soldiers in Russian uniforms with their unit patches and national flag removed.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

pro-Russian separatists.

This is media-speak for Russian soldiers in Russian uniforms with their unit patches and national flag removed.

...and let's hope that this becomes very apparent as this investigation unfolds.

[BRAH]

The investigation has already been compromised as the scene has been contaminated and any evidence linking the Russian rebels has already been removed or tampered with.

[BartSimpson]

BRAH BRAH:

The investigation has already been compromised as the scene has been contaminated and any evidence linking the Russian rebels has already been removed or tampered with.

There's already enough evidence of direct Russian involvement to start drawing conclusions.

The repercussions will come in the form of indirect and direct aid to Ukraine in repelling the Russian forces on their soil.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

There's already enough evidence of direct Russian involvement to start drawing conclusions.

The repercussions will come in the form of indirect and direct aid to Ukraine in repelling the Russian forces on their soil.

Yes, the US intelligence reports should be indepedently verified. If they are, then it's pretty evident where the blame for this tragedy lays.

[llama66]

CNN is reporting the 'Pro-Russian' separatists have handed the Black Box Flight Recorders over to a Malaysian Delegation, now lets get them to hand over the remains, so the families can have some measure of closure.