Podcaster Joe Rogan and his guest condemned pro-war rhetoric, arguing former President Donald Trump is the voice of reason to stop the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
His answer was that he’d somehow end it in the first day in office. Since he can’t cause Ukraine to make gains in one day, that means he’ll force them to make major concessions to Russia by threatening to withhold support to Ukraine. So he’d essentially end the war by letting Russia win, at least partially.
I think what he would negotiate for is Luhansk & Donetsk being incorporated into Russia, while the rest of the lands are ceded back to the Ukraine.
This is better than the likely outcome.
The longer that the war drags on, and the more that the Ukrainians are attrited, the more likely it becomes that even a place like Odessa could eventually be won over by the Russians.
There are costs to continuing conflict, but because of sustained increasing Ukrainian technology and training, it will shift more rather than less to their favor. But Putin likely thinks more like you do, which is why they continue to fight even though omniscient lines on maps would suggest they have alternatives mutually preferable to war.
I think that’s settled - that would not even be an option.
There are costs to continuing conflict, but because of sustained increasing Ukrainian technology and training, it will shift more rather than less to their favor. But Putin likely thinks more like you do, which is why they continue to fight even though omniscient lines on maps would suggest they have alternatives mutually preferable to war.
The Leopards did not have the desired effect. The main lines were not penetrated, and there does not seem to be any chance that the counteroffensive makes a significant gain.
The longer the war continues, the more attrition Ukraine will experience, making even their extensive arming by NATO irrelevant, IMO. A peace will eventually have to be negotiated for.
I think that’s settled - that would not even be an option.
Which is why I was confused with you said “while the rest of the lands are ceded back to the Ukraine” since Crimeia is still contested.
The Leopards did not have the desired effect. The main lines were not penetrated, and there does not seem to be any chance that the counteroffensive makes a significant gain.
Which is what Putin and you think. I won’t be able to convince you that a few burnt-out Leapards doesn’t mean NATO equipment is useless. There’s a typical cycle that Russian media views any new acquisition as incredibly provocative and escalates the war before it is sent, then nothing at all and offers no new capabilities once it is delivered. For example, do you think F16s would be a huge capability for Ukraine? I do, but once they are delivered in a few months or years, I’m sure Russia will say they’re nothing new.
Ukraine is trying to do the hardest thing an army can do, break through heavily entrenched enemy lines without air superiority. We’ll see if the offensive will end up achieving a lot or a little, but it has already been infinitely more effective than Russia’s ‘winter offensive.’ I’d recommend William Spatnel’s game theory analysis videos for the bargaining and strategic analysis and Perun’s videos for more in-depth on what capabilities which systems offer Ukraine and Russia.
undefined> Which is what Putin and you think. I won’t be able to convince you that a few burnt-out Leapards doesn’t mean NATO equipment is useless. There’s a typical cycle that Russian media views any new acquisition as incredibly provocative and escalates the war before it is sent, then nothing at all and offers no new capabilities once it is delivered. For example, do you think F16s would be a huge capability for Ukraine? I do, but once they are delivered in a few months or years, I’m sure Russia will say they’re nothing new.
I respect your beliefs and I do think that the war can be very exhausting and costly for the Russians as well. One of the issues is, though, that the Russians have actually a really resilient industrial base that has a lot of ties across the world, and the Russians are no stranger to living under drastic sanctions. The Iranians have done so for a long time now, and they have discovered and are sharing many workarounds with the Russians.
Now, when I had heard about F-16s potentially going over there, I thought Russia was going to be in deep dookie, but I was actually wrong:
*There have been repeated requests for the delivery of American-made F-16s, leading to debates about how effective the fourth-generation planes would be in the skies. One former F-16 pilot told Insider he wouldn’t want to fly missions over Ukraine right now, saying that the aircraft can’t outmatch Russia’s air-defense systems.
Fourth-generation fighters “have no business in a modern-day battlefield,” John Venable, a 25-year veteran of the US Air Force, told Insider in a recent interview.
Since the early days of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has sought fighter jets from its Western allies to supplement its diminishing fleet of Soviet-era MiG-29 and Su-27 fighters, which arguably cannot compete against Russia’s superior air force.*
…
*Fourth- and fourth-plus-generation fighter jets — like the F-16 — that lack stealth features are “completely outmatched in high-threat environments” because of advanced air-defense systems like Russia’s S-400, argued Venable, a veteran and senior research fellow for defense policy at The Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based think tank.
In a commentary published on the think tank’s website last month, Venable wrote that the F-16 was not suited for Ukraine’s air force for several reasons, including that the S-400 could outsmart the F-16’s targeting systems and that it could target the fighter jets before they’re in range to fire weapons like Small Diameter Bombs.*
…
*Venable said that when he was flying F-16s over Europe earlier in his career as a pilot, his aircraft had solid jamming pods that worked against threats posed by the SA-6 and SA-11 Soviet-era SAM systems. He said that he would have felt comfortable going up against the integrated Soviet air defenses in the 1980s and 1990s knowing he was backed by HARM targeting systems designed to take those on.
“The threat would’ve been high. There would’ve been a good possibility that I would’ve been shot down, but also at least an equal possibility that I could have made it to the target, hit my target, and then I drop successfully and then egress safely from the battlefield,” Venable said.
But there’s since been a “whole leap in capabilities” from those to the current Russian SAM systems that have evolved over time. “I had a fighting chance back then,” he said. “Today, there is no fighting chance.”*
Ukraine is trying to do the hardest thing an army can do, break through heavily entrenched enemy lines without air superiority. We’ll see if the offensive will end up achieving a lot or a little, but it has already been infinitely more effective than Russia’s ‘winter offensive.’ I’d recommend William Spatnel’s game theory analysis videos for the bargaining and strategic analysis and Perun’s videos for more in-depth on what capabilities which systems offer Ukraine and Russia.
Yeah, it’s not going to work for them.
I also thank you for the recommendations. But I am very very skeptical of this.
Let’s take a trip on DMT. Welcome to the Dank Microwave Taco or DMT for short. Anything and everything goes in here. Be sure to share your experience on DMT with your friends, family and social media. @WiggleHard bans nothing and exiles nobody (Dont doxx wolfballs users, no posting of porn/nudes or foot fetish material unless it involves political scandals, no ads for sex sites or dating sites; do that on your own time, no solicitation for pyramid scams, no posting job advertisements unless from official job sites, no posts supporting pedophilia, not all love is love) also: (we cannot allow violations of the patriot act concerning how we speak, no calls for violence, suggesting you are personally harming someone ect. These things are not free speech protected by law but actually against the law and could get the website shut down.) (no spam posting, especially spam posting of what could be considered symbols of hate) examples: guy posting nazi flag 5 times in one day, guy posting “whitey is the devil over and over, im going to use my best judgement on this one rule)
His answer was that he’d somehow end it in the first day in office. Since he can’t cause Ukraine to make gains in one day, that means he’ll force them to make major concessions to Russia by threatening to withhold support to Ukraine. So he’d essentially end the war by letting Russia win, at least partially.
Yes, I think that is partially correct.
I think what he would negotiate for is Luhansk & Donetsk being incorporated into Russia, while the rest of the lands are ceded back to the Ukraine.
This is better than the likely outcome.
The longer that the war drags on, and the more that the Ukrainians are attrited, the more likely it becomes that even a place like Odessa could eventually be won over by the Russians.
So Ukrane would get Crimea?
There are costs to continuing conflict, but because of sustained increasing Ukrainian technology and training, it will shift more rather than less to their favor. But Putin likely thinks more like you do, which is why they continue to fight even though omniscient lines on maps would suggest they have alternatives mutually preferable to war.
I think that’s settled - that would not even be an option.
The Leopards did not have the desired effect. The main lines were not penetrated, and there does not seem to be any chance that the counteroffensive makes a significant gain.
The longer the war continues, the more attrition Ukraine will experience, making even their extensive arming by NATO irrelevant, IMO. A peace will eventually have to be negotiated for.
Which is why I was confused with you said “while the rest of the lands are ceded back to the Ukraine” since Crimeia is still contested.
Which is what Putin and you think. I won’t be able to convince you that a few burnt-out Leapards doesn’t mean NATO equipment is useless. There’s a typical cycle that Russian media views any new acquisition as incredibly provocative and escalates the war before it is sent, then nothing at all and offers no new capabilities once it is delivered. For example, do you think F16s would be a huge capability for Ukraine? I do, but once they are delivered in a few months or years, I’m sure Russia will say they’re nothing new.
Ukraine is trying to do the hardest thing an army can do, break through heavily entrenched enemy lines without air superiority. We’ll see if the offensive will end up achieving a lot or a little, but it has already been infinitely more effective than Russia’s ‘winter offensive.’ I’d recommend William Spatnel’s game theory analysis videos for the bargaining and strategic analysis and Perun’s videos for more in-depth on what capabilities which systems offer Ukraine and Russia.
undefined> Which is what Putin and you think. I won’t be able to convince you that a few burnt-out Leapards doesn’t mean NATO equipment is useless. There’s a typical cycle that Russian media views any new acquisition as incredibly provocative and escalates the war before it is sent, then nothing at all and offers no new capabilities once it is delivered. For example, do you think F16s would be a huge capability for Ukraine? I do, but once they are delivered in a few months or years, I’m sure Russia will say they’re nothing new.
I respect your beliefs and I do think that the war can be very exhausting and costly for the Russians as well. One of the issues is, though, that the Russians have actually a really resilient industrial base that has a lot of ties across the world, and the Russians are no stranger to living under drastic sanctions. The Iranians have done so for a long time now, and they have discovered and are sharing many workarounds with the Russians.
Now, when I had heard about F-16s potentially going over there, I thought Russia was going to be in deep dookie, but I was actually wrong:
*There have been repeated requests for the delivery of American-made F-16s, leading to debates about how effective the fourth-generation planes would be in the skies. One former F-16 pilot told Insider he wouldn’t want to fly missions over Ukraine right now, saying that the aircraft can’t outmatch Russia’s air-defense systems.
Fourth-generation fighters “have no business in a modern-day battlefield,” John Venable, a 25-year veteran of the US Air Force, told Insider in a recent interview.
Since the early days of Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine has sought fighter jets from its Western allies to supplement its diminishing fleet of Soviet-era MiG-29 and Su-27 fighters, which arguably cannot compete against Russia’s superior air force.*
…
*Fourth- and fourth-plus-generation fighter jets — like the F-16 — that lack stealth features are “completely outmatched in high-threat environments” because of advanced air-defense systems like Russia’s S-400, argued Venable, a veteran and senior research fellow for defense policy at The Heritage Foundation, a Washington-based think tank.
In a commentary published on the think tank’s website last month, Venable wrote that the F-16 was not suited for Ukraine’s air force for several reasons, including that the S-400 could outsmart the F-16’s targeting systems and that it could target the fighter jets before they’re in range to fire weapons like Small Diameter Bombs.* … *Venable said that when he was flying F-16s over Europe earlier in his career as a pilot, his aircraft had solid jamming pods that worked against threats posed by the SA-6 and SA-11 Soviet-era SAM systems. He said that he would have felt comfortable going up against the integrated Soviet air defenses in the 1980s and 1990s knowing he was backed by HARM targeting systems designed to take those on.
“The threat would’ve been high. There would’ve been a good possibility that I would’ve been shot down, but also at least an equal possibility that I could have made it to the target, hit my target, and then I drop successfully and then egress safely from the battlefield,” Venable said.
But there’s since been a “whole leap in capabilities” from those to the current Russian SAM systems that have evolved over time. “I had a fighting chance back then,” he said. “Today, there is no fighting chance.”*
Business Insider
Yeah, it’s not going to work for them.
I also thank you for the recommendations. But I am very very skeptical of this.