Born Hunter
-
Content Count
18,003 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Born Hunter
-
Just downloaded duo lingo app. It’s EXACTLY what I wanted. Problem…. I can’t roll my f***ing Rs!
-
Cheers. Thing is I know if it requires me to concentrate for half an hour every night or whatever I just won’t do it. It needs to be quick and easy. App based that rather than flicking through insta or whatever I can just flick on and rattle through a few structured exercises until I’m bored. I want to spend a bit of time in Italy but I hate being in foreign speaking countries. I find it really off putting.
-
Absolute gold!
-
Never had the temperament for it but I’m now considering it. What useful tools are available these days? Anyone used apps that you can just flick on for five minutes a few times a day? Any more effort than that realistically I just won’t stick. I’m interested in learning the basics of Italian. Literally enough to get by.
-
Also, here’s something not many are talking about. Russia can’t take Ukraine, that much is clear. Ukraine has a nuclear power industry and so nuclear expertise… What would you do to deter further aggression after the dust settles?
-
Not really no.
-
Imo no. He’s so far failed to bring either the whole of Ukraine or the border region under Russian control. The north eastern border with Russia remains Ukrainian. So far he’s got the separatist regions and a land bridge to Crimea. He may have deterred Ukraine from becoming part of nato, may not, it’s not clear yet. What is clear is that Ukraine is now an enemy of Russia, capable of winning, and supported by the West. Even if they’re not NATO they’ll be a NATO trained and armed ally, motivated, experienced and confident in facing Russia. His actions have also led to the Nordic buffer stat
-
Difficult to know what to say really. It’s a huge victory for Ukraine. But it’s a huge loss for Russia too and I bet there are navy men all over the world that had a shiver down their spine hearing of it. It’s a messy business sinking enemy warships. Only a handful of navy’s in the world have experience of it from one aspect or the other. And I can only think of two that have experience in successfully defending against anti ship missile attacks in combat.
-
That’s a good summary. I obviously think Russia has f****d up in many ways but Id argue that they now occupy the separatist regions and secured Crimea via a land bridge. Which was a bare minimum strategic aim. I think it’s quite likely that Ukraine will not join NATO now either? Looking for security guarantors from other European states in any peace deal. I’d argue that’s hardly a Russian victory though, Ukraine will see more every day type support from NATO members now than it would’ve if Russia just let it join. Putin didn’t want NATO cruise missiles in Ukraine, well now NATO will just
-
Must be the water, he lives up the road.
-
Learnt the hard way. Still am.
-
There’s lots of little grudges and shit on this site, I try to stay out of them mate. If something smells a bit pointless then I try to f**k off. I’ve got my interests, you’ve got yours etc etc. I hope you both have a good bank holiday.
-
Now known as Francieski doctrine.
-
Francie de-escalate, DE-ESCALATE! You’re going nuclear mate!
-
No idea tbh. I’m more interested in military capabilities.
-
It looks like they’ve given up on Kyiv and therefore given up on taking the whole of Ukraine. They now seem to be focussing on the south and east. Giving themselves a land bridge from Russia to Crimea. They should be able to achieve that. Almost have. Beyond achieving that, things seem too unpredictable to say. The next stages will likely involve counterinsurgency within this new Russian controlled territory. The Russians tend to be successful at that. And perhaps also a counter offensive to retake these regions by Ukrainian forces.
-
All I’m doing is commenting on what they are actually doing in a real test of their actual capability. Using contemporary Western examples as comparison. The importance of the conclusions of that are far from ‘bollocks’. Russias real power has consequences. Nuclear weapons don’t just remove those. Nuclear weapons don’t simply end state competition or even guarantee an end to conventional war between nuclear powers. The fact that Russia have lost a major surface combatant has consequences to everyone. The fact that Russia have failed to occupy a weaker state that is literally next door an
-
I also wonder who you might be…
-
I still haven’t the faintest f***ing clue what your point is. But you crack on. We’ll just continue to chat ‘bollocks’ amongst ourselves.
-
That’s only marginally less vague. Russia retain a believed to be credible nuclear arsenal and so unless everyone understood the escalatory terms of a conventional war, there simply will not be one between Russia and nato that doesn’t end in MAD. It’s that simple. If there was then I don’t know what part of their performance in Ukraine makes you think they would be a match for nato. Not that anyone is discussing it… How the soviets performed nearly eighty years ago has little meaning today. It’s not even a good analogy, WW2 proved their real capability just as Ukraine is proving Russias.
-
Let’s not go down rabbit holes until we’ve settled your first statement. You said we were talking bollocks and it was all theories. Their performance isn’t theory. So what we’re the bollocks theories?
-
There have been many essays and commentary already on what are the implications of Ukraine for policy towards China already. It’s a huge and trending topic.
-
And the UK has supported Ukraine. Both actions are adversarial to the other but not direct attacks on the other. Russia hasn’t attacked us anymore than we have them. There’s a reason for that, and it’s not that Russia doesn’t fear us or NATO like you implied. There have been no serious claims we should invade Russia ffs. And claims they are shit aren’t theories, they’re direct observations and comparisons to similar Western examples. The narrative until Ukraine was that Russia was a superpower in land warfare. The professional and layman’s consensus was that they were far more cap
-
So not NATO. Just like NATO et al hasn’t and won’t attack Russia… Have you heard of ‘below the threshold’? Both sides are engaging in this, neither have actually shown they don’t fear the other by crossing the threshold. ‘Theoretical’ is your word. Something you still can’t give an actual example of… We’re discussing all sorts and the implications of such. It’s all very real.
-
They haven’t faced it anymore than we have. They haven’t touched NATO! And NATO hasn’t touched Russia! For the last time, what theories specifically are all bollocks? You’ve come on here and outburst that we’re talking bollocks because we won’t actually do anything. Right’o fine whatever, I mean I can’t really do anything with that level of vagueness.
