Author Topic: Possible WW3 thread  (Read 49850 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46433
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #25 on: January 26, 2022, 11:00:56 AM »
This isn't 1563, there should be resistance and consequence from one nation invading another sovereign nation. No, I do not think we should just sit back and just sanction Russia. There are several reasons why sanctions mean absolutely nothing. First, the sanctions only hurt the citizens of Russia, and the western businesses that rely on the Russian people. The sanctions do absolutely nothing to harm or deter the Russian government or military. Russia isn't a democracy, what does Putin give a crap if the children of Novograd are starving and cold because we aren't providing them corn and coats? Secondly, China won't sanction them. Russia with continued support from China will be economically just fine.

If you support sanctions only you're better off just letting them invade without giving a crap.

We need to, with a coalition of forces across, Europe, provide armed resistance. If we can't build a coalition, and by that I don't mean 90% American troops with England, France, and particularly Germany, Czechia, and Poland throwing a couple of soldiers in. We would need to provide SUPPORT. If the countries that border Ukraine can't be bothered, then why should we. Whatever we do I am very much anti-sanctions.

I also firmly believe that if there was a war over Ukrainian sovereignty, that this absolutely would not be WW3. Who is fighting with Russia in this scenario? I certainly don't think China will fight a war with Russia on a different continent. What do they have to gain by that?

On a personal note, I have a couple of people close to me who are Ukrainian, currently living in the Ukraine or Poland and because of this I certainly care more than I would if this was Tajikistan. My view that no country should take another sovereign nation by force still applies, but I would care a lot less.
I get your point but I’m confused as to why you think armed conflict would somehow avoid the downsides of sanctions that you mention.

Exactly.  That kid in Novograd is screwed either way.  Why not use the one that kills less american soldiers?

Online MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38934
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #26 on: January 26, 2022, 12:40:26 PM »
lol
The expected tapout

I can't wait until you get mature enough to stop making every conversation on this board about you.

Online MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 38934
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #27 on: January 26, 2022, 12:53:01 PM »
This isn't 1563, there should be resistance and consequence from one nation invading another sovereign nation. No, I do not think we should just sit back and just sanction Russia. There are several reasons why sanctions mean absolutely nothing. First, the sanctions only hurt the citizens of Russia, and the western businesses that rely on the Russian people. The sanctions do absolutely nothing to harm or deter the Russian government or military. Russia isn't a democracy, what does Putin give a crap if the children of Novograd are starving and cold because we aren't providing them corn and coats? Secondly, China won't sanction them. Russia with continued support from China will be economically just fine.

If you support sanctions only you're better off just letting them invade without giving a crap.

We need to, with a coalition of forces across, Europe, provide armed resistance. If we can't build a coalition, and by that I don't mean 90% American troops with England, France, and particularly Germany, Czechia, and Poland throwing a couple of soldiers in. We would need to provide SUPPORT. If the countries that border Ukraine can't be bothered, then why should we. Whatever we do I am very much anti-sanctions.

I also firmly believe that if there was a war over Ukrainian sovereignty, that this absolutely would not be WW3. Who is fighting with Russia in this scenario? I certainly don't think China will fight a war with Russia on a different continent. What do they have to gain by that?

On a personal note, I have a couple of people close to me who are Ukrainian, currently living in the Ukraine or Poland and because of this I certainly care more than I would if this was Tajikistan. My view that no country should take another sovereign nation by force still applies, but I would care a lot less.
I get your point but I’m confused as to why you think armed conflict would somehow avoid the downsides of sanctions that you mention.

Maybe I'm war dumb but why would pushing Russian troops out of Ukraine have adverse effect on the 144 million people living in the largest country in the world? I wouldn't think this would be a war fought on a dozen different fronts in Russia. Economic sanctions would touch every single Russian, the poorer they are the greater the affect.

Are you suggesting that armed conflict would also be accompanied by the same sanctions? If so that's unfortunate, I truly don't know. The larger point remains that I believe that Russia shouldn't be allowed to simply take Ukraine, it's not like he'd stop there.

Online Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46433
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #28 on: January 26, 2022, 01:34:25 PM »
We aren't getting into a shooting war with russia and not hitting every sanction we have.  Probably more than if we were just trying to pressure them without shotimng.  Once the bullets fly we will starve that kid to bones if it means they quit the fight. 

I'd hate to be explaining about the kid in novograd to a widow in springfield

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12575
    • View Profile
Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #29 on: January 26, 2022, 01:44:15 PM »
I’ll also admit to being war dumb but it seems crazy to me that we would be trading with a country while killing its citizens. And what makes you think the poor starving kid won’t be near the front line of that conflict?

Online Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 46433
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #30 on: January 26, 2022, 01:53:17 PM »
I’ll also admit to being war dumb but it seems crazy to me that we would be trading with a country while killing its citizens. And what makes you think the poor starving kid won’t be near the front line of that conflict?

I can't fathom a world where the US doesn't sanction a country who is killing US soldiers.


Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34594
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #31 on: January 26, 2022, 02:02:54 PM »
We should give drone support. Run their asses back into Russia with our robot army.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 19261
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2022, 02:31:17 PM »
if Germany isn't going to be helping Ukraine and France is ambivalent, then why is the United States of America going over to Europe to send billions of dollars of robots to fight?
@bentren

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34594
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2022, 02:32:46 PM »
if Germany isn't going to be helping Ukraine and France is ambivalent, then why is the United States of America going over to Europe to send billions of dollars of robots to fight?

To keep the Ukrainian people free.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44110
    • View Profile
Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #34 on: January 26, 2022, 02:58:54 PM »
lol
The expected tapout

I can't wait until you get mature enough to stop making every conversation on this board about you.
I can’t wait until you quit insufferably chiming in on everything. 

You asked a question, you got an answer, you didn’t like the answer (no surprise there) and you tapped out. 

I then followed up with multiple sources discussing exactly what I was referencing.
It's a great day to be a Wildcat and it's a great day to say no to the Pit.

Offline Justwin

  • Combo-Fan
  • **
  • Posts: 540
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2022, 03:07:48 PM »
if Germany isn't going to be helping Ukraine and France is ambivalent, then why is the United States of America going over to Europe to send billions of dollars of robots to fight?

To keep the Ukrainian people free.

If it's not worth it to France and Germany, is it worth it to the United States?

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20671
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2022, 03:08:17 PM »
if Germany isn't going to be helping Ukraine and France is ambivalent, then why is the United States of America going over to Europe to send billions of dollars of robots to fight?

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34594
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #37 on: January 26, 2022, 03:14:57 PM »
if Germany isn't going to be helping Ukraine and France is ambivalent, then why is the United States of America going over to Europe to send billions of dollars of robots to fight?

To keep the Ukrainian people free.

If it's not worth it to France and Germany, is it worth it to the United States?

Yes

Online wetwillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 25623
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #38 on: January 26, 2022, 03:16:27 PM »
I’d like to hear the argument for why it’s worth it to the US if Europe can’t be bothered
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20671
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2022, 03:19:52 PM »
I’d like to hear the argument for why it’s worth it to the US if Europe can’t be bothered

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.

Online wetwillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 25623
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #40 on: January 26, 2022, 03:21:40 PM »
I’d like to hear the argument for why it’s worth it to the US if Europe can’t be bothered

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.

Why did we regret it? I’m not a WW2 historian.
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34594
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #41 on: January 26, 2022, 03:22:06 PM »
Either we want Russia to eat all of the small states around it or we don't. The rest of Europe has no bearing on which outcome is better for the USA.

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20671
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #42 on: January 26, 2022, 03:43:13 PM »
I’d like to hear the argument for why it’s worth it to the US if Europe can’t be bothered

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.

Why did we regret it? I’m not a WW2 historian.

In a nutshell, we opted to "stay out of it" after WWI while Germany, Italy, and Japan were busy doing lots and lots of invading. By the time we got involved, things had escalated to the point where WWII was inevitable. So, the lesson we supposedly learned was that getting involved before things spin out of control is way, way better than staying out of it.

Online wetwillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 25623
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #43 on: January 26, 2022, 03:52:40 PM »
Well we put NATO in place to prevent the next one right?
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 20671
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #44 on: January 26, 2022, 04:01:39 PM »
Well we put NATO in place to prevent the next one right?

It's a great thing! Also doesn't need to be the only thing.

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 12575
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #45 on: January 26, 2022, 04:04:17 PM »
I’d like to hear the argument for why it’s worth it to the US if Europe can’t be bothered

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.

Why did we regret it? I’m not a WW2 historian.

In a nutshell, we opted to "stay out of it" after WWI while Germany, Italy, and Japan were busy doing lots and lots of invading. By the time we got involved, things had escalated to the point where WWII was inevitable. So, the lesson we supposedly learned was that getting involved before things spin out of control is way, way better than staying out of it.
You are saying that the US sending troops from across the ocean while Italy, Germany, and Japan were antagonizing other countries would have PREVENTED a world war? I am not a historian at all but I’d never heard that theory.

It also seems kind of quaint because that sounds similar to our justification for entering Vietnam which is now viewed as a monumental mistake.

Online wetwillie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 25623
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #46 on: January 26, 2022, 04:10:10 PM »
Well we put NATO in place to prevent the next one right?

It's a great thing! Also doesn't need to be the only thing.

So what has been the response from NATO to date?  I assume all members are aligned to prevent Russian expansion correct?
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 19261
    • View Profile
Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #47 on: January 26, 2022, 04:12:58 PM »
if Germany isn't going to be helping Ukraine and France is ambivalent, then why is the United States of America going over to Europe to send billions of dollars of robots to fight?

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.
Who has invaded more sovereign countries just this century:

Russia or the US?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
@bentren

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 19261
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #48 on: January 26, 2022, 04:15:33 PM »
Well we put NATO in place to prevent the next one right?

It's a great thing! Also doesn't need to be the only thing.
NATO was put in place to fight against the USSR!  Mission accomplished!  What the eff are we talking about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
@bentren

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 34594
    • View Profile
Re: Possible WW3 thread
« Reply #49 on: January 26, 2022, 04:19:28 PM »
I’d like to hear the argument for why it’s worth it to the US if Europe can’t be bothered

Because the last time we did this we regretted it IMMENSELY. We vowed that we would never, ever do it again.

Why did we regret it? I’m not a WW2 historian.

In a nutshell, we opted to "stay out of it" after WWI while Germany, Italy, and Japan were busy doing lots and lots of invading. By the time we got involved, things had escalated to the point where WWII was inevitable. So, the lesson we supposedly learned was that getting involved before things spin out of control is way, way better than staying out of it.
You are saying that the US sending troops from across the ocean while Italy, Germany, and Japan were antagonizing other countries would have PREVENTED a world war? I am not a historian at all but I’d never heard that theory.

It also seems kind of quaint because that sounds similar to our justification for entering Vietnam which is now viewed as a monumental mistake.

This situation is more similar to Kuwait than Vietnam.