- 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: Europe is betting that President Trump will not walk away
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:52 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:52 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
From who?
For themselves. If they want to use them in Ukraine I don’t give a frick.
quote:
First of all, no US companies cannot just export tanks or combat aircraft without government approval. Second, are you under the impression that we just have excess F-35's or upgraded Abrams tanks sitting in a parking lot somewhere?
We have factories that can build them if the Europeans want to buy them. All of those countries are already flying or have orders for the F35 anyways. We sell our shite all over the globe. ITAR isn’t going to get in the way of selling shite to European allies and if it did both the administration and congress would be happy to tweak the laws to allow it.
1
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:52 pm to Indefatigable
Bessent and Rubio have explained over and over that Z was supposed to sign this twice, but they were told “we’ll do it in DC.” Bessent said Z then started asking for security guarantees out of nowhere that no president has ever given. That’s why Trump and Vance went apeshite.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:53 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
It won't, because that type of thing has been at the forefront of geopolitics as long as nation states have existed.
If it's to change, Trump is the one to pull it off. I'm betting on him.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:53 pm to Indefatigable
I bet you keep a photo of Dick Cheney in a locket around your neck. We never get anything but neocon talking points from you.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:54 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
You understand that these deployments being floated by Starmer are following a peace deal, right?
You do realize that Putin has to agree to it right? He will never allow this and I really cannot blame him.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:54 pm to John Barron
We paid for the first 3 years…let them take it from here.
I’ll be ok with zero dollars ever going to Ukraine again.
I’ll be ok with zero dollars ever going to Ukraine again.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:55 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
What is the problem with Starmer's statement?
Because it ignores the situation that caused the war. The whole nato and Ukraine thing. The rule we followed about nato not expanding 1 inch eastward. That thing that had been followed for about 30 years.
quote:
all that is required for the UK, France, German, Poland, etc., to insert a peacekeeping force is a statement from Trump that "if you attack these people, we'll become interested," then what is the problem? Putin isn't risking a conflict with the US.
Sounds kinda like a nato membership which Russia never wanted. And that is why they invaded Ukraine in the first place.
Not contingency the whole Crimea thing that Obama fricked up on.
quote:
Where is the harm in that?
World war 3?
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:55 pm to HeadCall
quote:
We have factories that can build them if the Europeans want to buy them.
We already have an enormous backlog for the F35 and the Abrams. No, no nation anywhere could just decide right now to buy more and get them in any reasonable timeframe to impact this conflict.
We don't produce them (or anything military related) quickly enough for that anymore.
Hell, we can't even start building our own Constellation class frigates because Fincantieri is still busy building useless Freedom class LCS's for the Saudis.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 2:56 pm
Posted on 3/2/25 at 2:59 pm to thetempleowl
quote:
The whole nato and Ukraine thing.
Ukraine isn't joining NATO and no one seriously thinks that was ever an option. Believing that is the case because Biden or Putin said so on TV is laughable.
quote:
That thing that had been followed for about 30 years.
It was never followed. The statement to Gorbachev was made in the early 90's, and Poland/Czech Republic/Hungary/Romania joined NATO in 1999. The Baltic states followed in 2004. Croatia and the former Balkan nations followed thereafter, sans the Serbs and Bosnia.
quote:
Sounds kinda like a nato membership which Russia never wanted.
It would be ancillary to a peace deal Russian agreed upon. This is an offer of a peacekeeping force, not a threat.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:01 pm to Warboo
quote:
You do realize that Putin has to agree to it right? He will never allow this and I really cannot blame him.
Then it isn't part of the deal. Its that simple.
These deployments only happen as part of a peace deal. If that deal isn't made, there's nothing to preemptively screech about.
Starmer's statement was conditional on a peace deal that included European peacekeepers.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:02 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Hell, we can't even start building our own Constellation class frigates because Fincantieri is still busy building useless Freedom class LCS's for the Saudis.
Correct. China is kicking our arse in shipbuilding
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. 
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:02 pm to John Barron
Europe and Canada support of Z really means nothing.......they NEED the USA no matter what.
If Z avoids further US talks, Ukraine is in big trouble, period.
And NATO will come begging when shite hits the fan over there.....they always do.
If Z avoids further US talks, Ukraine is in big trouble, period.
And NATO will come begging when shite hits the fan over there.....they always do.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:05 pm to Indefatigable
Build more factories
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:06 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Ukraine has every right to fight to the last man if they want to do so.
There is a difference between whether Zelensky wants to do so and whether the people want to do so. It is a lot easier to fight to the last man when you are not one of those men who is going to die. Ask the people on the front lines; I guarantee they want a peace deal and an end to the war.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:07 pm to John Barron
TLDR;
“We agree with the US there must be peace but let’s keep fighting”
“We agree with the US there must be peace but let’s keep fighting”
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:09 pm to John Barron
Good god.
Do you know how many sea wolf class subs it takes to sink an entire task force? One I might add you see coming from thousands of miles away?
One.
Surface warfare has been dead for at least 30 years
Do you know how many sea wolf class subs it takes to sink an entire task force? One I might add you see coming from thousands of miles away?
One.
Surface warfare has been dead for at least 30 years
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:15 pm to HeadCall
quote:
Build more factories
If we started today, they wouldn't be putting out anything worth it until the late 2030's.
We're properly fricked when it comes to shipbuilding. We have four, maybe 5 shipyards up to standard in the US for the ships/boats we need to be building (Bath, Newport News, HII, FMM, and Groton (subs)) . Combined, they have less capacity than China's largest naval shipyard. We aren't going to catch up building a Virginia and a couple maxed-out Burkes per year.
And HII and Bath are wasting time upgrading the useless Zumwalts so they aren't churning and burning at max capacity on the Burkes either. Groton/Electric Boat is way behind on the VA's, much less getting started on the Columbia/Ohio replacements. I've already referenced FMM's issues in getting started on the next ASW platform. Newport News is busy adding a single bolt per day on the Fords/Nimitz replacements. That's without even getting into our slow progress on icebreakers, smaller vessels from yards like Bollinger, and support ships.
The LCS and Zumwalt/DDG1000 programs set the Navy and US shipbuilding back a generation. We are in trouble.
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:15 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
What is the problem with Starmer's statement?
They don’t want peace
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:17 pm to djsdawg
quote:
They don’t want peace
The force he mentioned would be provided as part of a peace deal, so what are you talking about?
Posted on 3/2/25 at 3:18 pm to llfshoals
quote:
Do you know how many sea wolf class subs it takes to sink an entire task force?
Zero, because we're the only nation on earth capable of putting a true task force to sea outside of littoral waters to begin with, at least on anything other than a port visit.
This post was edited on 3/2/25 at 3:19 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News