2 ms·

Look man, if really believe in this stuff the military is really struggling to find recruits right now. A lot of people are disillusioned with the forever wars

Look man, if really believe in this stuff the military is really struggling to find recruits right now. A lot of people are disillusioned with the forever wars as their nations infrastructure crumbles around them, costs rise to unsustainable levels and their streets are full of homeless. They watch the VA fail to serve veterans and remember the lies they were told by the elderly politicians who still haven't been replaced. You on the other hand appear to have strong convictions about this conflict, rather than costing my daughter her future via debt spending are you willing to be the boots on the ground to make sure justice is served?

ceejayoz 3y ago
My boots on the ground mean nuclear holocaust due to open war between Russia and NATO, which probably impacts your daughter a bit. If you'd told a Cold Warrior in the 80s it'd cost 10% of a single year's military budget to kneecap Russia's military without firing a shot, they'd have laughed at you; it's probably the most effective military spending we've done since WWII. Americans are simultaneously down on "forever wars" and supportive of Ukraine assistance. Your attempt to connect the two concepts doesn't seem to be a widely shared position in the American public.
- willcipriano 3y ago
  > My boots on the ground mean nuclear holocaust due to open war between Russia and NATO, which probably impacts your daughter a bit. Oh but if you were to say, build a fighter jet and then go to Ukraine and teach the Ukrainians on how to use the jet to kill Russians, there is no way that will result in nuclear war? I'll take that as a no on the "go die for the war machine" plan.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    There's direct evidence of that, yes. HIMARs, Bradleys, etc. all active in Ukraine, but importantly, manned by Ukrainians. We're also clearly providing plenty of training and intelligence support. NATO troops actively shooting folks in the Donbas would be a very different scenario, one we're rightly avoiding. For the sake of folks like your daughter.
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      But if I am to believe the claims, this guy is off his rocker. Our activity doesn't reduce his nuclear capabilities at all, in fact it buys him time! He recently developed supersonic missles, his capabilities are increasing by leaps and bounds. Provocative action that isn't remotely decisive is the exact opposite of what you'd do here if that was the actual concern. You'd either cut off the head or do nothing.
      - _kbh_ 3y ago
        > He recently developed supersonic missles Supersonic missiles are heaps old. What Russia recently developed is _hypersonic_ missiles, and what Ukraine recently did is shoot all of down them with a patriot. Turns out when your missiles move in predictable patterns they can still be shot down at hypersonic speeds.
        meepmorp 3y ago
        Yeah, merely hypersonic missiles aren't that interesting; maneuverable hypersonic missiles/weapons, however, are.
        _kbh_ 3y ago
        Exactly hypersonic glide vehicles are what’s interesting, the Kinzhal is not a hypersonic glide vehicle. The Kinzhal is effectively just an air launched slightly modified Iskander.

ceejayoz 3y ago

My boots on the ground mean nuclear holocaust due to open war between Russia and NATO, which probably impacts your daughter a bit. If you'd told a Cold Warrior in the 80s it'd cost 10% of a single year's military budget to kneecap Russia's military without firing a shot, they'd have laughed at you; it's probably the most effective military spending we've done since WWII. Americans are simultaneously down on "forever wars" and supportive of Ukraine assistance. Your attempt to connect the two concepts doesn't seem to be a widely shared position in the American public.

willcipriano 3y ago
> My boots on the ground mean nuclear holocaust due to open war between Russia and NATO, which probably impacts your daughter a bit. Oh but if you were to say, build a fighter jet and then go to Ukraine and teach the Ukrainians on how to use the jet to kill Russians, there is no way that will result in nuclear war? I'll take that as a no on the "go die for the war machine" plan.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  There's direct evidence of that, yes. HIMARs, Bradleys, etc. all active in Ukraine, but importantly, manned by Ukrainians. We're also clearly providing plenty of training and intelligence support. NATO troops actively shooting folks in the Donbas would be a very different scenario, one we're rightly avoiding. For the sake of folks like your daughter.
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    But if I am to believe the claims, this guy is off his rocker. Our activity doesn't reduce his nuclear capabilities at all, in fact it buys him time! He recently developed supersonic missles, his capabilities are increasing by leaps and bounds. Provocative action that isn't remotely decisive is the exact opposite of what you'd do here if that was the actual concern. You'd either cut off the head or do nothing.
    - _kbh_ 3y ago
      > He recently developed supersonic missles Supersonic missiles are heaps old. What Russia recently developed is _hypersonic_ missiles, and what Ukraine recently did is shoot all of down them with a patriot. Turns out when your missiles move in predictable patterns they can still be shot down at hypersonic speeds.
      - meepmorp 3y ago
        Yeah, merely hypersonic missiles aren't that interesting; maneuverable hypersonic missiles/weapons, however, are.
        _kbh_ 3y ago
        Exactly hypersonic glide vehicles are what’s interesting, the Kinzhal is not a hypersonic glide vehicle. The Kinzhal is effectively just an air launched slightly modified Iskander.