- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:59 am to WDE24
Posted on 3/6/22 at 9:59 am to WDE24
quote:
March 6 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law allowing funds to be seized from the bank accounts of officials if the sum of the deposits exceeded their declared incomes over three years and was shown to be illegal, state television said on Sunday.
Putin needs him some money. May just be a matter of time until he starts a gofundme
1
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:00 am to UndercoverBryologist
Belarus?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:02 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:So did Ukraine
Russia already had conscription.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:02 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
My place of business is something like 1500 feet from an interstate on-ramp. The biggest problem is that the interstate travels parallel to the downtown area, so for about 1.5 miles, I am making zero progress towards putting distance between me and ground zero.
Do we really think that population centers are going to be the targets in a first strike situation?
I realize that’s the doomsday scenario, and also that’s how we imagine nuclear weapons being used partially because it’s how we used them. But that was an effort to end a drawn out, bitter war. And WW2 Japan is a bit different given the military culture of that country at the time.
Wouldn’t we expect any such strike to really be focused on strategic targets? Military bases, fleets, manufacturing centers, etc.? I would think the priorities of a nuclear strike would be:
1. Eliminate the enemy’s ability to retaliate with nuclear weapons (not really possible due to boomers, among other things).
2. Eliminate the enemy command structure to prevent a retaliatory strike.
3. Eliminate the enemy’s ability to engage in a conventional war.
So presumably the DC metro area and the Virginia seaboard would be fricked. Places with large military bases or key military manufacturing centers would probably be fricked. Granted, this does start to include some major population centers. But it’s just hard for me to imagine a country indiscriminately targeting major downtown areas with ICBM’s unless it’s an “all is lost” type of retaliatory strike.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:05 am to WDE24
quote:
Belarus?
He didn't ask for their help, he took it. One of Putin's puppets have been in place there for years. Notice they didn't make a peep while Putin staged 120,000+ troops in their country?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:05 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Russia already had conscription.
So did Ukraine
Yeah, and when you’re fighting an invasion force from a country that has 3x the population, you are going to expect forced military service. It’s hardly a metric of war success.
Britain had the manpower disadvantage in WWII but still won the Battle of Britain.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:06 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
UndercoverBryologist
Serious question. Do you think Ukraine is winning this war?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:08 am to DabosDynasty
quote:Basis points for political risk aside, I wonder if they had any swaps in the desk drawer.
Most Russian debt is privately held, but BlackRock holds around $1.5B
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:08 am to TheOcean
quote:
Ukraine's sovereignty is most definitely not inconsequential to America. A stable Europe greatly benefits us and everyone else in the world. We should be supplying Ukraine with equipment and money.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:09 am to OneSaintsFan
The problem is that most icbms carry multiple warheads that pepper a wider area.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:13 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Serious question. Do you think Ukraine is winning this war?
I’d merely argue that the balance of the war is not yet determined. The southern campaign is much more sided to the Russians, but the overall picture is not clear.
In the Battle of Britain, Germans bombarded London relentlessly. But they exposed a ton of hardware to British strikes, which over a long enough time line, eventually seriously depleted the Luftwaffe or bomber aircraft forcing Germany to withdraw from the campaign.
In this war, the Ukrainians are under siege, but they are downing Russian planes, helicopters, and tanks with enough success that they could eventually wear down the Russian command and force a “true” ceasefire.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:15 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:Actually, there is a far higher percentage of sweet crude in North America than South. You have to inject steam for many of the wells in Venezuela. Great feed stock for asphalt though.
The best question is why we can’t source 100% of our oil in North America already. Because it's not economically efficient as of now. There are different grades and "types" of oil out there and we run those other grades for max efficiency. If we dropped those in favor of US and Canada only you are asking refiners to cut their margins substantially.
ExxonMobil BR is already tuned for Pemex and Valdez crudes. The LOOP brings in others, but there would be little cracker adjustment in any case.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:19 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:That’s possible. I’ve posted as much in this very thread. I’ve even posted, on line day 3 or 4 of this war, that if they could hold out for a few weeks then intervention from the west would garner enough popular support that we may actually intervene with a no fly zone. And look what’s happening, the media and most of the internet is calling for NATO to do just that.
In this war, the Ukrainians are under siege, but they are downing Russian planes, helicopters, and tanks with enough success that they could eventually wear down the Russian command and force a “true” ceasefire.
But everyone should know that Ukraine is also taking massive losses and that the casualty and equipment loss reports coming from both sides are complete bullshite. If you believe them then you are retarded.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:20 am to UndercoverBryologist
Max C Roser
This data scientist (take his word or leave it) makes an interesting case that we are being misled by poor map designs* on actual Russian progress into Ukraine.
* Note, I’m not going all Polidumbass on this and saying it’s a coordinated conspiracy. I’m saying that this guy makes an argument or two on his account that these maps showing “Russian held area” are faulty as frick.
This data scientist (take his word or leave it) makes an interesting case that we are being misled by poor map designs* on actual Russian progress into Ukraine.
* Note, I’m not going all Polidumbass on this and saying it’s a coordinated conspiracy. I’m saying that this guy makes an argument or two on his account that these maps showing “Russian held area” are faulty as frick.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:27 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
This data scientist (take his word or leave it) makes an interesting case that we are being misled by poor map designs* on actual Russian progress into Ukraine. * Note, I’m not going all Polidumbass on this and saying it’s a coordinated conspiracy. I’m saying that this guy makes an argument or two on his account that these maps showing “Russian held area” are faulty as frick.
It’s technically accurate while also being disingenuous and retarded at the same time. You could make that exact same map about every military operation in the history of military operations. It turns out that armies focus their combat power on certain objectives and targets and don’t attempt to occupy every acre of land that they don’t need to.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:31 am to UndercoverBryologist
Is the map on the right implying that the Russians don't actually hold the areas around their advancements?
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:32 am to BottomlandBrew
quote:
The problem is that most icbms carry multiple warheads that pepper a wider area.
I don’t think the warheads in a single MIRV all pepper the same area. They warhead separate high in the ballistic arc and so when they fall down, they ultimately end up hitting targets that are relatively spaced out (not clustered together).
The ultimate goal is still one warhead per city and/or military installation.
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:35 am to upgrayedd
quote:
Is the map on the right implying that the Russians don't actually hold the areas around their advancements?
Basically, yes. Although, this data is already 3 days old, so much could have changed since then. But if the general trend holds up, it could mean that the maps they are being circulated around various news outlets could overestimate “Russian held” areas by as much as a 1/3 of what they actually have.
(Again take it or leave it. This is one guy’s take which could be faulty in and of itself.)
Posted on 3/6/22 at 10:38 am to UndercoverBryologist
quote:
Basically, yes. Although, this data is already 3 days old, so much could have changed since then. But if the general trend holds up, it could mean that the maps they are being circulated around various news outlets could overestimate “Russian held” areas by as much as a 1/3 of what they actually have.
According to that map, it looks closer to an overestimation by about 100x
Page 432 of 5046
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News