UK and Blackrock

It’s ironic isn’t it… electric cars to save the planet… rockets galore to pollute the upper atmosphere, unbridled right wing lol polish dialled up full on his personal social media outlet, untrammelled access to US government without any restrictions or responsibility. What could possibly go wrong?

Though it could be entertaining if the penny drops with those lied to by the populists who will benefit far more than any regular individual.

 

are you serious

 

I want us to help the Ukrainians but I see us (& mainly the US) drip feeding them weapons & from all the evidence we have I don’t believe we want this war to end. It feels to me like our leaders & America are happy for this war to continue for as long as it’s weakening Russia.

We invaded Afghanistan & Iraq in the last 25 years. If Russia would have given either of them countries loads of weapons that led to tens of thousands of our troops coming home in body bags. Is that fair game because they were helping to stop an invading country?

 

To be fair there was a proxy war in Afghanistan when Russia attacked it in the late 70s into the 80s. One where UK and US (among others supported Afghanistan).

Russia appear to be arming proxies just as we do, so I guess the east v west parties do see it as fair game.

I suspect in terms of armaments, countries providing munitions to Ukraine will want to preserve their own stocks given global insecurity and it takes time unless you move to a full war footing to create them. Russia are in that footing but the west aren’t, and given western debt piles and minimal public sentiment for conflict, it’s maybe fair that US and EU and UK aren’t going all in. Maybe they also want to try and keep their efforts to a status quo position to not provoke Putin to a completely irrational state.

 

I just need a “Mainstream Media” in this thread for a full ****** bingo.

Come on.

 

Russia didn't because they had no capacity then to do so. They have since armed Syria despite it using chemical weapons against its own people. In Vietnam they had Russian aircrew piloting MIG fighters and armed the North Vietnamese to the teeth. The whole thing was folly on the part of the US but 57,000 no doubt decent ordinary lads came home in body bags. Interesting fact: The Americans lost more aircraft in Vietnam than they did in WW2, most accounted for by Russian SAMs.

 

Interesting. I had no idea they were involved in Vietnam.

Not really a war I’ve ever heard that much about apart from the general ‘should have never gone in’.

 

Blackrock.

 

But it’s a conspiracy theory because the “mainstream media” doesn’t talk about it

 

The "result" of the loss in Vietnam saw the Americans (under Reagan) and our government supporting the Khmer Rouge - both financially and with SAS teams training their soldiers - until the early 1990s. For around 15 years after the Vietnamese invaded Cambodia and the Killing Fields were public knowledge. (The Khmer Rouge attacked Vietnam and within 2 weeks had been defeated and ousted from power. Possibly the worst military mistake in living memory).

 

"Interesting fact: The Americans lost more aircraft in Vietnam than they did in WW2"

I don't think that's correct....in Vietnam they lost around 2500 including helicopters, in WW2 they lost over 90,000 ( including accidents) combat losses were over 50,000.
The 8th US Air Force operating in Europe lost more men that America's total Vietnam casualties.

 

My Bad mate ...it was bombs dropped. Total air losses as I re- read them though were 10,000 aircraft. The ratio of men can be misleading, as a B17 flying fortress had about 8 aircrew in WW2 and a Super Sabre in Vietnam had one so downing one aircraft had a disproportionate result. The point remains the same though. Russia were involved unofficially providing material, ground crew and by the accounts I've read, pilots.