Ukraine

[summit]

They have failed twice. Fidel tried to launch his during the bay of pigs and then the Soviets did during the 1983 thing.

Both times they didn't work.

No. No that wasn't even a thing. No they haven't.

[twat]

Russia lost a commercial cargo ship in the Mediterranean Sea! I don’t follow shipping, but I rearly hear ships going down! Specially it was bound for Syria.

[twat]

So my guess 5:30am special force op. Approach from behind. Retractable ladder. Rush to engine room. Open seachest. Block water tight doors. Adios
Update: German news. Explosion in the engine room¿ what can explode there¿ fire yes - explosion no
Bomb planted : )

[MultiVerse]

Another great victory for the Ukrainian submarine service

[exsparky]

No. No that wasn't even a thing. No they haven't.

Oh, so the Soviets wouldn't give the Cuban's something that wouldn't work or something they couldn't turn off?

https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-c...efenses-484777

Oh wait they do that.

Also if you read the Pan Am thing they tell you the radar system for all of Kamchatka hadn't been working and everybody was lying about it to their superiors in the Soviet Union which the defecting fighter pilot knew about.


So yes, they have stuff that doesn't work and yes they have stuff they turn off.

[summit]

Oh, so the Soviets wouldn't give the Cuban's something that wouldn't work or something they couldn't turn off?

Correct that the Soviets would never give the Cubans, or anyone else, nukes. Only Soviets had Soviet nukes. The US has never given anyone nukes either. Those UK SLBMs? Those have UK warheads.

The Soviets would never give Fidel a Soviet nuke, not even a fake nuke. Fidel had no way to deliver one anyway as his heaviest aircaft was a twin prop WW2 plane. Fidel wasn't going to use a nuke on a pathetic "invasion" that failed as it began. And if Fidel got fake nukes he wasn't going to trust the Soviets later the following year:

After the Bay of Pigs, and because of US Jupiters in Europe, the Sovs had the leverage and desire to base SS-4s in Cuba and Fidel was in the mood to oblige. If you thought that Cubans were the missile crews or had launch authority, I want some of what you are smoking.

Yes plenty of Soviet shit was shit. I have no idea what your other supposed failed nuclear attack was.

That aside, yes the Sovs export downgraded equipment and I'm not surprised if they put kill switches in their hi-tech stuff. Even if they don't (and they might not, F-35I is perfectly capable of killing Syria's Russian IADS), I love that the Iranians think they do, because the Iranian IADS is all Russian stuff. BTW one of the reason we are most scared of Iranian nukes is we absolutely believe they would give them to their proxies.

[MultiVerse]

Just as an aside, during the Cuban Missile Crisis a Soviet sub captain gave the order to launch a nuclear torpedo at U.S. Navy ships but was overruled by a more senior fleet officer who happened to be onboard. Had the XO not objected, the sub's captain and political officer would have overseen a nuclear launch

[summit]

Russian SAM crew shot a civilian airliner, Azerbaijan Emb190, on approach to Grozny. The pilots managed to fly the damaged plane across the Caspian in dire control condition making a Miraculous crash landing with some survivors. Nobody should have lived.

This is the 4th civilian airliner shot down by Russia and Iran in the last decade.

[MultiVerse]

Russia also launched a Christmas Day attack on Ukraine’s energy system

[Harry]

^^ heh


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Toadman]

Russian SAM crew shot a civilian airliner, Azerbaijan Emb190, on approach to Grozny. The pilots managed to fly the damaged plane across the Caspian in dire control condition making a Miraculous crash landing with some survivors. Nobody should have lived.

This is the 4th civilian airliner shot down by Russia and Iran in the last decade.

Amazing that people survived that crash.

https://www.bing.com/videos/rivervie...5E5&ajaxhist=0

[exsparky]

Correct that the Soviets would never give the Cubans, or anyone else, nukes. Only Soviets had Soviet nukes. The US has never given anyone nukes either. Those UK SLBMs? Those have UK warheads.

Yes, the United States has provided nuclear weapons to other countries for nuclear sharing:
NATO countries
The United States has provided nuclear weapons to NATO countries, including France, the United Kingdom, and Germany. The United States deploys about 100 B61 nuclear bombs at air bases in five European countries.
Cold War
During the Cold War, the United States stationed nuclear weapons in 27 foreign countries and territories, including Japan, Germany, and France.

Oh and here is a Soviet nuclear Missile launcher from 1962 in Cuba taken in 2002 next to a CIA guy.



From the NSA archive. Fidel told Kissinger in face to face meeting long after the bay of pigs in a back channel meeting he had "launch command and used it but the rockets wouldn't launch." Kissinger had the interpreter repeat what was said assuming it was an error. Kissinger then turned white and left the room. Fidel could have been full of it or not.

And then there is Israel... MAYBE we gave them nukes. OKAY probably.

[summit]

Dude you think you know, because you have a bit of surface knowledge then make a fuckton of assumptions. The problem is you don't understand that details so your assumptions lead you to wildly incorrect conclusions. Let me help you out:

We do not give nukes to other countries to use. We base our nukes in other countries under our control, which they welcome because it gives them a great deterrent effect. We promise to nuke enemies, or specifically permit allies to nuke enemies, if enemies attack allied countries under our nuclear umbrella of protection, these being NATO allies and certain major non-NATO allies (eg Japan, South Korea, Australia etc). This US doctrines are called Extended Deterence and Nuclear Sharing. We do it because we achieve deterrence with out have nuclear proliferation amongst Allied nations. It has always been the interest of the nuclear powers, and most non-nuclear powers, to stop nuclear proliferation, which is destabilizing and dangerous.

Under Nuclear Sharing, the US trains certain allied squadrons, nuclear certifies their planes and their people, on US manufactured aircraft (except the Tornado), with US nuclear security and storage systems, and the B-61s are maintained by US crews, guarded by US MPs at their bases, and they have PALs that need codes from the US that don't get released until the NCA says so. That was also true when we had "shared" nukes on defense missiles in allied countries, which we don't anymore. The US maintains control of the weapons and the release authority. The President could, in a conflict, devolve release authority from the NCA to SACEUR. In the past we would have devolved it to NORAD in an attack, which would have allowed Canadian weapons release. But those are still US nukes and US forces are capable of emergency evacuation (3PEV) and our MP and maintainers are capable of emergency disablement (3PED) if necessary.

The US did not give nukes to the Israelis. We were not even the best of allies with the Israelis until the 1970s. Before then it was really the French and British who were Israel's primary friends in the world. We would have never give them nukes because, if overrun, they might vaporize a Soviet base in a neighboring country and it would have a US signature. Israel already had nukes by the time US and Israel became close. The Israelis built their own nukes, in secret, and possibly partnered with South Africa in exchange for Uranium, and potentially for a joint test (see Vela incident). The Israelis had the scientists and infrastructure, the South Africans had the raw materials.

And as far as your NSA archive, Fidel was full of it. The Sovs did not have nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1961 (Bay of Pigs), much less under Fidel's supposed control. The SSC-2 and Frog-7 units pictured were Soviet short range units manned by Soviets under Soviet command that came over in 1962, after the Bay of Pigs.

Just stop and think how insane it would be for a nuclear superpower to give unfettered control and nuclear release authority to a minor ally under existential threat from the opposing nuclear superpower. Critically analyze that. That's playing Russian Roullette with nukes.

[riser4]

Dude, we totally gave the Israelis material and help. I mean, it's all in Tom Clancy's novel. He wouldn't write total fiction, would he? Oh. Right. Nevermind.

[exsparky]

We had nukes in Turkey guarded by two Americans with Garands and few hundred Turkish soldiers in 1959 for almost 2 years until a nuclear scientist walking the runway in Turkey said... Hey maybe its not a good idea to have hot nukes ready to go on exposed planes within 100 miles of soviet forces maybe we should I don't know maybe put a code on them?

The Generals were overruled and codes were put on deployed nukes for the first time in 1961.

Maybe the Soviets didn't get around to it until 1963. Maybe Fidel wasn't full of it. Maybe the Soviets stuff was crap. Their cars were.

[MultiVerse]

Azerbaijani government sources confirmed that a missile fired from a Russian Pantsir-S air defense system caused the Azerbaijan Airlines Embraer E190 crash in Aktau, Kazakhstan.

The pilots, Captain Igor Kshnyakin and First Officer Aleksandr Kalyaninov, managed to keep the stricken plane aloft for 1.5 hours over the Caspian Sea after Russians refused permission for an emergency landing at any of three nearby airports.

For those who have seen the video, the pilots very nearly pulled off a successful landing without use of the plane's tail flight control surfaces. The brave crew fought to save as many passengers as possible. 29 passengers survived. 39 lives lost, including the crew.

1) Russia fires missile at the plane
2) Pilots request immediate emergency landing
3) Russia denies permission to land
4) Pilots forced to fly to Kazakhstan
5) Russia jams the plane's GPS over the sea
6) Russia further attempted to crash plane into the sea to hide the evidence!

[summit]

Finland boards and sieze Russian tanker that cut Finnish-Estonian undersea cable

[The Nuclear Option]

Russia is going to escalate things now so that they can turn down the temp when their boy Trump comes into office and make him look the hero.

[summit]

Russia is going to escalate things now so that they can turn down the temp when their boy Trump comes into office and make him look the hero.

War Criminal Lavrov said it is up to Trump to make the first move to "improve relations"

[The Nuclear Option]

There is no promise or negotiated deal that Russia can be trusted to hold to.

Lavrov lied about their promise to never invade Ukraine.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/m...st-memorandum/

War Criminal Lavrov said it is up to Trump to make the first move to "improve relations"

[The Nuclear Option]

We should have built as many nukes as fast as we could have post Japan surrender and nuked the Russians into submission before they could build their own bombs.

We are still fighting the Cold War because we didnt.

[subtle plague]

We should have built as many nukes as fast as we could have post Japan surrender and nuked the Russians into submission before they could build their own bombs.

We are still fighting the Cold War because we didnt.

Well, not everyone prefers the nuclear option.
-signed
Europe

[summit]

Respectfully, I won't put much weight on a German's opinion of what we should have done in 1945.

The West was smartly letting the Nazis and Soviets kill each other, putting our hands heavily on the scales so the Nazis definitively lost, and the Soviets couldn't actually claim we were not amazing Allies giving them absolutely massive support in every way possible except pointless mass sacrifice of our soldiers to save Soviet soldiers.

There were unfortunately a lot of pro-Communists and Soviet sympathizers who had been taken in, sometimes willfully, by the abject lies and propaganda of the Soviet workers paradise that downplayed their horrific oppression and mass murder.

Between being war weary and having a government that contained these pro-Soviet elements, including spies at the highest levels of the executive branch, and within the Manhattan project, we just were not going to be able to motivate the Western peoples to fight the Soviets, our former "allies" even if we could have dropped 50 nukes on them by the time they got their first in 1948.

And what state would the West have been in economically then? And what would have remained of the USSR?

Well, maybe it would avoided the creation of the PRC, the Cold War, the current wars... interesting thought experiment, but also consider what we would have had to become in order to achieve that, and then that version of us would have been the dominant force.

Here's a better what-if: what if the fucking idiotic monsters German high command hadn't put Vladimir Ilyich Lenin and all his fucking commie buddies, who were rotting in prison up until the decision, on the Sealed Train to St. Petersburg so that they could murder the nascent Russian Republic in its crib in 1917? They made a deal. Take over Russia, we'll make peace with your commie asses, and then we can move all of our armies from the Western East to fight in the West. Russia becomes a Republic. No USSR ever. No Cold War. No PRC. No Korean War. No Viet Nam. No century of communist incited revolutions and Soviet undermining of Western Liberal Society. And No Ukraine War.

Fuck Ludendorf. Fuck Hindenburg. Fuck the Fucking Kaiser. And above all, Fuck Lenin and all the murderous progeny.

[The Nuclear Option]

You may very well see them anyways if the Bear decides that the “ existence of the Russian state, our sovereignty and independence…”are threatened.
In other words if they are losing.

Well, not everyone prefers the nuclear option.
-signed
Europe

[riser4]

Respectfully, I won't put much weight on a German's opinion of what we should have done in 1945.

The West was smartly letting the Nazis and Soviets kill each other, putting our hands heavily on the scales so the Nazis definitively lost, and the Soviets couldn't actually claim we were not amazing Allies giving them absolutely massive support in every way possible except pointless mass sacrifice of our soldiers to save Soviet soldiers.

There were unfortunately a lot of pro-Communists and Soviet sympathizers who had been taken in, sometimes willfully, by the abject lies and propaganda of the Soviet workers paradise that downplayed their horrific oppression and mass murder.

Between being war weary and having a government that contained these pro-Soviet elements, including spies at the highest levels of the executive branch, and within the Manhattan project, we just were not going to be able to motivate the Western peoples to fight the Soviets, our former "allies" even if we could have dropped 50 nukes on them by the time they got their first in 1948.

And what state would the West have been in economically then? And what would have remained of the USSR?

Well, maybe it would avoided the creation of the PRC, the Cold War, the current wars... interesting thought experiment, but also consider what we would have had to become in order to achieve that, and then that version of us would have been the dominant force.

Here's a better what-if: what if the fucking idiotic monsters German high command hadn't put Vladimir Ilyich Lenin and all his fucking commie buddies, who were rotting in prison up until the decision, on the Sealed Train to St. Petersburg so that they could murder the nascent Russian Republic in its crib in 1917? They made a deal. Take over Russia, we'll make peace with your commie asses, and then we can move all of our armies from the Western East to fight in the West. Russia becomes a Republic. No USSR ever. No Cold War. No PRC. No Korean War. No Viet Nam. No century of communist incited revolutions and Soviet undermining of Western Liberal Society. And No Ukraine War.

Fuck Ludendorf. Fuck Hindenburg. Fuck the Fucking Kaiser. And above all, Fuck Lenin and all the murderous progeny.

Interesting. Like a cement block dropped in a still pond, there would have been lots of waves crashing around. Would the labor movements in the US, and other places, have gained as much traction? One of many what ifs.

However, it's a far better scenario than the frequently used one about someone having prevented Hitler from taking over. Stalin would have advanced into western Europe in his place. Of course one could argue that in your scenario without the bolshevik takeover in Russia, ww1 might not have produced the conditions ripe for Hitler's ascendancy. So many what ifs.