100% this was the case.

I bet they have something on him.

Ah yes, the famous pentagon blue maga shadow task force focused on lemmy.

That’s the official stance of everybody really.

Unofficially : US doesn’t really want that because that would significantly reduce their diplomatic influence and weapons sales. European nations don’t want it, because of responsibility, it would be expensive and we would end up with a lot of armed nations that don’t really like each other that much.

So, it’s really beneficial for everyone that it stays like it is.

I can say I’m quite experienced in the mushroom department, taking them for the last 20 years, from social doses to hero doses, but I’d never fucking shut off the engines on a plane I was on.

I mostly played 2. It was simpler and had a lot of action. Later games became more tedious, I didn’t think the advancements in diplomacy and other stuff were good enough to displace that.

On the other hand I never really wanted the games to end. Whenever I would get close to the end I would start playing in a way to delay the end.

Exaggeration.

I’m so excited! Will it not suck completely? Maybe!

We have had many predictions like that before. I believed in some and I take myself to be quite conservative in these estimations. What I saw is that none of them actually happen as an event, but very gradually. The best example is artillery shells. Media has predicted that Russia will run out of shells many times, but it doesn’t happen of course, because thats not how the world works. They just reduce consumption. This reduction was not big enough for any media to even report.

What im trying to say is that there is very likely not going to be an event when Russia cracks. As sanctions are applied, workarounds are found. They have enough people by sheer numbers to at least defend the front for many years to come.

Not significantly. For now Russia made sufficient changes to endure and project an appearance of stability.

Yes, well phrased. All though I think there was hope. There is always hope, but none of the deciders care or have cared.

That’s not the point. The point is when will this effect the war? Significantly. Enough to matter to Ukraine.

Russian economy is going towards ruin…

… but it’s not nearly fast enough to have a substantial impact on the war in Ukraine. Russia is good to fight for another 2 or 3 years, maybe an additional year if they really push it. Can Ukraine do that? Not unless NATO seriously ramps up high tech weapon deliveries.

Absolutely, but if you ask climate scientists, in private, what they think the numbers are saying, they will tell you a very different story.

I don’t want to go into specific predictions because there are too many. But generally, scientists are very conservative with their predictions, because they don’t want to lose grants. It’s safe to hide behind numbers and give low estimates.

Well, that’s not entirely true is it. This territory is not known to have been a place missiles. Plus, Ukraine will not be able to take enough land to even make it a buffer zone for artillery, let alone missiles.

This land is a liability. You need many troops to defend it that could be somewhere else. That’s a fact. The is only a question Wether the pros outweigh the cons.

Of course we don’t know more than Ukrainian commands. We are speculating and talking. But they make mistakes as well. In war there is a game of probabilities and risks.

Maybe it’s because climate scientists have been underestimating effects for decades so they didn’t lose grants for looking alarmist.

In this case it’s just words. Russians know they are invading foreign lands.

Even without US. UK has nukes, France has nukes. You don’t need a lot to destroy Russia. Basically just two.

Nato would completely overwhelm Russia, but not before nukes would fly from various places and hit major cities in the western world. In the retaliation, all of Russia would be destroyed, world in turmoil…