thoughts on THAAD deployments? https://www.youtube.com/wat

I think it's BAAD.

>>31811365
>everyone puts up SAM systems claiming (rightfully) that it's for defense and it's a defensive system
>the US does it and suddenly it's a huge issue and SAMs are offensive weapons

makes me kek erry time

>>31811392

Here's a metaphor, dude:

We're neighbors. You own a handgun. You tell me about this handgun.

The next day, I set up a .50 belt-fed machinegun pointed directly at your bedroom. Every now and then, I take this machinegun down to the range and I put about 500 holes through a target that's just a photograph of your bedroom.

When you started to get a little worried about this, I tell you it's just for keeping the dindus out. For some reason, you're not convinced.

Are you starting to get this now?

File: 215907be4kw3gaagyl3gcq.jpg (122KB, 400x599px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 400x599px

>>31811435
This.

And China is now reacting with deploying their own THAAD-copy, while ending their minimum deterrence doctrine to produce missiles like sausages.

Literally noone wins.

>>31811435
You're retarded my dude.

If you want to use the neighbors analogy, use it properly.

We're neighbors. You own a handgun. You tell me about this handgun.

The next day, I show up with a bullet proof vest. Every now and then, I take this vest to the range and test it with the same model of handgun you have.

When you started to get a little worried about this, I tell you it's just for making sure no one shoots me. For some reason, you think this is an offensive weapon.

>>31811491
haha this.

>>31811491
Defenitly the better analogy.

>>31811435
>Every now and then, I take this machinegun down to the range and I put about 500 holes through a target that's just a photograph of your bedroom.
I'm confused. Is USA the person with the handgun and China/Russia the crazy man threatening to snipe him because he didn't like USA playing self defense? I wholeheartedly agree then.

>>31811491
>>31811526
agreed

>>31811435
>defense sam system
>in any way related to an offensive weapon

I kek every time.

>>31811435
except THAAD can't be used offensively at all...

>>31811491
uhh but what if you aggressively use that vest to stop a bullet!??!? fucking americans how can you be so thoughtless!

>>31811435
That's an idiotic analogy, especially since THAAD is called TERMINAL high altitude for a reason. It can't intercept missiles in their boost phase. As >>31811491 said it's more like you both have guns and then you suddenly getting butthurt that your neighbor bought a vest.

>>31811435
>Let me break this down in metaphor speak for you my dude!
>posts terrible metaphor

Putin is just pissed because after 70 years of Russia and the United States being on somewhat equal footing regarding their nuclear triads, the US has finally gotten far enough ahead that his last viable option for offensive (Or reactive) nuclear attack is almost neutralized. Russia has always enjoyed ambiguity because it doesn't have a declared NFU policy, so if you get them in a bad enough position they could use nuclear weapons offensively. Take away that ability and NATO can steamroll over them with superior military power and Russia can't guarantee MAD with its current nuclear stockpile.

Essentially this gets finished Russia is looking at being in a glass bubble that if they ever used a nuclear strike for any reason, they would lose the ensuing exchange handedly. A Non-Nuclear Russia is a Non-Superpower Russia.

>>31811365
>Putin's Warning Speech

I swear Russia is becoming the new Isreal for all of these cuckservatives because they sucked up all the RIDF propaganda.

File: 20161027003701.jpg (106KB, 1127x162px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1127x162px

Putin wasn't talking about THAAD.

>>31811491
It's a dumb analogy.

Because you happen to have a GAU-8 mounted ontop your house pointed at his bedroom, while he only has a .22 handgun. Now, you clad yourself in an EOD-vest with SAPI plates, rendering the little deterrence he has even more useless.

And instead of de-escalating by removing your GAU-8, you modernize it by replacing it with a 127mm deck gun.

But dont forget that you cry bitchtears when your neighbor drops out from your disarmament treaties in reaction to your glorious efforts to secure 'peace and stability' in the neighborhood.

>>31811700
Basically this.

And the US efforts to achieve nuclear domination over every of their enemies also disturbs long-standing NFU powers like China, who is considering dropping this policy and embark of nuclear expansion as well.

>>31812551
>he thinks american ABM systems are a credible threat to Russian deterrence

Lmao.

North Korean? Sure, 100%.

Chinese? Quite possibly.

Russian? No chance in hell. They have far too many launchers and far too many warheads for these tiny deployments of systems to threaten their second strike capability.

>>31811558

>except THAAD can't be used offensively at all.

Sure it can. All you have to do is swap out the warhead with a nuke.

>>31811365

Man, I wish the rodent-like politicians in the West could speak so plainly about important stuff, but they don't. Everything is done in secrecy and the professional whore lawyers who act as politicians merely spout lies to support their objectives.

>>31812600
That's dumb.

But it could really be offensively used by placing the missiles at the border of your enemy territory and shooting down his 2nd strike during boost phase.

THAAD's interception profile allows it.

>>31811435
>>31811464

Your analogy sucks balls. Setting up a counter ICBM isn't like "Pointing a .50 heavy machinegun" at your neighbors. It's a defenseive weapon. Chicoms and gopnik faggots are butt hurt their nuclear missiles pointed at civilian cities could be shot down and save millions of lives.

>>31812600
No you can't you fucking retard. You can theoretically fit a small nuclear weapon inside an M270 MLRS or on board fighter aircraft but you don't see the butt hurt countries crying about them being stationed in South Korea or Japan.

>>31812634
>shooting down his 2nd strike during boost phase.
>boost phase
>boost

>Terminal High Altitude Area Defense
>Terminal


HMMMMMMMMMM

File: 1477368982001.jpg (90KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 640x640px

>>31811392

Right, but why are you placing that system on the borders of Russia?

>>31812676

Neutralizing the weapons that ensure strategic balance, is an offensive posture.

>>31812600
THAAD is an air to air system incapable of striking ground targets.

>>31812814
Because the countries that Russia is threatening are on Russia's border.

If the USA was threatening Mexico I wouldn't hold it against Russia at all to deploy some ABM systems there.

THAAD is a point defense system. If the USA was truly trying to hurt Russia's ability to strike at the US, wouldn't it make more sense to deploy stuff like this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-Based_Midcourse_Defense

>>31812600
You're retarded.

The reason defensive missiles are perceived as being aggressive is because they totally destroy the concept of deterrence by removing the ability of any nation to retaliate against the nation which has the defensive missiles using nuclear weapons. This means the nation with the defensive missiles can be as aggressive as it wants and use nuclear weapons however it wants without fear of retaliation.

Any country that us using nuclear weapons as a deterrent against aggression can rationally interpret one of its rivals developing ballistic missile defenses as a prelude to some kind of conflict.

File: 1477372957001.jpg (123KB, 831x639px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 831x639px

>>31811491

No, that's a shitty analogy.

With the deployments of US ABM systems in Poland and Romania, it's more like:

>We're neighbors

>I own a handgun, so do you

>I then erect a 10 ft tall ballistic barrier around your property, claiming that it's to prevent noise, violating a bunch of city bylaws in the process

>I do this with the intention of hoping to drive you out of your house

I believe there is already a planned coup d'etat in the works against Putin and his closest circle, using a few Oligarchs and the Fifth Column in Russian society.

>>31812850

Yes, because it is impossible to make a missile launcher use more than 1 type of projectile.

>>31812881
How do point defense missiles deployed across the world from the USA stop Russia from hitting targets in the USA?

>>31812857

>Because the countries that Russia is threatening are on Russia's border.

But those countries are not the United States of America.

Or are you implying that NATO membership is basically equivalent to vassal-tier subservience?

>>31812891

The goal is to eventually have both Russia and China completely surrounded by anti-missile launchers. Clinton said it herself in the emails.

>>31812834
Does Russia plan to nuke South Korea in the event of war with the United States? Then it's valid to put a defensive weapon there. Sorry gopniks you won't be able to commit genocide in South Korea. Try fucking up East Europe again.

File: 1476990874200.jpg (37KB, 562x600px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 562x600px

>>31812850

Seems the Russians are already aware that it has a dual purpose.

I would be liable to trust them over brochures from Lockheed Martin..

Remember, for every public military project, there is nearly always a black-project derivative kept away from public scrutiny.

>>31812578
It just now occurred to me that being in charge and getting new weapons for your military must be like when I go to the gun store or order something online but on a large scale. Also it's not my money.

>>31812917

Thank God there is still the polar route which can't be populated with ABM shields.

>>31812908
Protecting those countries is in the strategic interests of the USA.

>>31812917
Who cares? Being surrounded by countries that can be defended from missile strike doesn't effect the balance of power, because all the THAADs in the world being positioned in Poland doesn't stop Russia from striking at US targets. Call me if the US starts deploying weapons meant to intercept boosting Russian missiles.

File: 1477394060004.jpg (75KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1280x720px

>>31812578

Well, the Russians seem to be concerned, quite visibly, and they're pouring a lot of money into defense and new offense systems, to ensure that any attempts at "democracy-bringing" remain too costly for American calculations of warfare.

If the Americans can neutralize Russian balancing weapons, then they will undoubtedly pursue regime change in Russia.

A lone hypowerpower will always be liable to imperialistic aggression. The two have always gone hand-in-hand.

>>31812962
>Being surrounded by military bases belonging to the allies of your enemy, which are being protected by your enemy doesn't affect the balance of power.

File: 1475333474988.jpg (42KB, 706x960px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 706x960px

>>31812885
That's even more retarded, i think it would go like this

>I'm an eurasian abomination of the wastes called Russia

>I have a handgun
>Not being able to stop shitting on where i eat i then threaten my neighbors waving it around knowing i'm the only one packing in town
>Get mad when someone with the capability to stop my fuckery meddles in my aggresion, making me and my almost non-existant masculinity feel insecure.

>>31812962
>Protecting those countries is in the strategic interests of the USA.

So is neutralizing Russia.

And it's in the strategic interests of Russia to remain sovereign, not like Germany or Poland.

>>31812989
>The Russians seem to be concerned

Of course they are. Their neighbors being stronger means the Russians are less able to bully them.

>If the Americans can neutralize Russian balancing weapons, then they will undoubtedly pursue regime change in Russia.

Sure, but nothing the US is doing is threatening to neutralize those weapons. If the USA wanted to threaten Russia's deterrence ability, they would be deploying first strike weapons, they would be deploying midcourse interceptors, they would be deploying point defense systems against likely second strike targets (in the USA).

They aren't doing any of that. They are deploying point defense system against threatened states near Russia.

>>31813008
It does shift the geopolitical balance of power, but it does nothing to the nuclear balance of power.

>>31812962
>Protecting those countries is in the strategic interests of the USA.

How so?

>>31813011

That sounds like an SJW-tier argument.

Why don't you just say you have an irrational hatred of Russia, because you've been eating at the trough of Globalist/Neo-Con propaganda for nearly 20 years?

>>31811370
I think it's RAAD.

File: 1477407357618.jpg (46KB, 600x485px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x485px

>>31813039
>bully them

What kind of drooling retard uses this kind of language at this level?

You have to be at least 18 to post here.

File: 1476968803837.jpg (302KB, 1454x993px) Image search: [Google]

302KB, 1454x993px

>>31813052
Why yes, i want those wretches to burn for their fuckery thorough the ages.

>>31813052
>how does maintaining control of the states bordering one of your only geopolitical rivals help you

GEE I DUNNO IVAN

File: 1477394060002.jpg (78KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1280x720px

>>31813039
>Sure, but nothing the US is doing is threatening to neutralize those weapons. If the USA wanted to threaten Russia's deterrence ability, they would be deploying first strike weapons, they would be deploying midcourse interceptors, they would be deploying point defense systems against likely second strike targets (in the USA).

So a "Terminal High Altitude Area Defense" missile system magically becomes a "point defense system" in your mind.

What strategically valuable "points" is it going to be protecting in the strategically important Romania, lel.

Other anon has already pointed out to you that the interception profile of THAAD and the new SM naval missiles is capable of hitting ICBMs in second stage..

It's quite obvious to anyone, with a few brain cells, that the goal is neutralization of Russian balancing weapons, and regime change.

You're just carrying water for the Neo-Con agenda.

Better question is, why?

>>31812834
>Neutralizing the weapons that ensure strategic balance
I'm sure /pol/ swallows up your bullshit propaganda without a second thought, but people who have the slightest understanding of what THAAD can and cannot do aren't buying it.

>>31813139
>So a "Terminal High Altitude Area Defense" missile system magically becomes a "point defense system" in your mind.

Yes, because thats what it is. Do you not understand what the terminal phase of a missile is?

You are the one saying it has magically gone from what it is designed for to some kind of boost phase offensive interceptor.

File: 1477368982002.jpg (120KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 640x640px

>>31813086

Thank you for coming clean, Shillary dick suck.

>>31813139
>So a "Terminal High Altitude Area Defense" missile system magically becomes a "point defense system" in your mind.
Yes you fucking idiot. Do you literally not understand what the word "terminal" means?

>>31813100

There's literally nothing in Russia. So why fuck with them?

Creating an existential crisis for a nuclear armed power is pretty dumb and reckless.

File: 1476675850861.jpg (380KB, 1403x992px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 1403x992px

>>31813171
I'm more of a Kasich guy but yes, it is unfortunate that not many can't come off easy and clean as me without hiding anything, unlike certain demographic group of /pol/.

>>31813139

>So a "Terminal High Altitude Area Defense" missile system magically becomes a "point defense system" in your mind.

>What strategically valuable "points" is it going to be protecting in the strategically important Romania, lel.
What the fuck are you even talking about? There are no THAAD batteries in Romania.

>>31811435
That example is fucking dog shit and you should feel bad about yourself.

>>31811491
>You're neighbors.
>You both own handguns.
>Every time he sees you he points his gun at your face.
>When you try to confront him about it he says: "It's just for defence in case you do something stupid with your gun. It's not even loaded with lethal rounds haha just belive me."

There are some extremely retarded posters in this thread.


Are they Russian? /pol/ posters? Shills payed to act retarded?

File: 1477493797331.png (38KB, 499x338px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 499x338px

>>31813167
>You are the one saying it has magically gone from what it is designed for to some kind of boost phase offensive interceptor.

No, actually, this guy did:>>31812634

If it's capable of doing such, isn't it OBVIOUS, that it wouldn't be used in this capacity?

Again, let's go back to your "point" defense system.

What "points" in Romania or Bulgaria require the capabilities of THAAD, where systems like the PAC-3 fall short?

let's take your stipulation to its logical conclusion.

File: 1455648647977.gif (1MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x300px

>our super new better-than-anything-USA-got missile can in 100% of all possible situations evade any US defense system, they even said so on RT
>let's throw a nigger fit and chimp out because the US deployed these worthless defense system in a sovereign nation close to us
Vatniks and their god emperor of vatniks, Putin are a bunch of retards.

File: arguing with russiaball.png (234KB, 516x1599px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 516x1599px

Mandatory.

>>31812814

Why is Russia placing their borders next to nato?

>>31813319
Can you site a single source saying that THAAD is able to intercept boost phase missiles?

It obviously isn't designed to do it, because you're much better off using a warhead against a boost phase ICBM instead of a hit to kill system.

>>31813319
Major cities, industrial centers, transportation hubs, airfields and military bases.

>>31813319
>If it's capable of doing such,
It fucking isn't.

>What "points" in Romania or Bulgaria require the capabilities of THAAD, where systems like the PAC-3 fall short?
There are no THAAD or PAC-3 batteries in either country.

>>31813179

That's just semantics you moron.

There's nothing stopping the missile from intercepting early stage launches. Certainly not your butthurt can stop it.

>>31812814
Because the nations bordering russia begged for them to be placed there?
When will vatniks learn that there are more actors on the world stage than the US and russia?
I'ts not like Romania or Poland could ever invade russia, the only way these missiles shields would ever negatively impact russia would be in the case of russian aggression.
Russia needs to learn that they do not have the right to invade or oppress their neighbors.

>>31813417
>There's nothing stopping the missile from intercepting early stage launches.
So you're completely full of shit, and yet decided to post anyway.

File: 1476614642602.jpg (209KB, 1598x684px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1598x684px

>>31813222

My bad, I was thinking of the ground-based SM-3.

>>31813247

Why, it's bad because it upsets your own chauvinistic biases?

That's called cognitive dissonance.

>>31813319
>What "points" in Romania or Bulgaria require the capabilities of THAAD, where systems like the PAC-3 fall short?

Here, have a list!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K720_Iskander#Intended_targets

>>31812936
>Trusting the Russians
>Ever

But still, THAAD has no dual purpose. Why would it, even, when the US has other systems capable of striking ground targets while doing a better job?

>>31813422
>Because the nations bordering russia begged for them to be placed there?

More like, the appropriate political class was bought off and in return, they were obligated to push for integration with NATO.

t. Pollak who observed this happen between 1999-2003.

>>31813441

So if the SM-3 is only aimed at targeting Iskander missiles, why is Putin making such a stink of it?

What does the SM-3 do that the PAC-3 does not?

>>31813067
>Implying that bullying isn't an accurate descriptor of how the Russians have treated Eastern European nations

>>31813437
>My bad, I was thinking of the ground-based SM-3.
Great.

If you believe in the most optimistic performance figures of SM-3 IIA, and give it an impossible response time, then it just maybe can intercept ICBMs coming out of southeast Russia*, with no capability at all against other eastern launch sites, and is certainly helpless against the central sites (which are the most likely to survive a first strike, but whatever...). And of course the Romanian site is highly vulnerable to being knocked out itself.

BUT, if you do believe in the SM-3 as a great anti-ICBM weapon, why fucking bother with European deployment? Put a few ships in the North Sea and you're far more suited to intercept eastern sited Russian ICBMs, and ships outta US ports on the coasts can hit stragglers (flyover states must suffer from a lack of coverage even with the highly optimistic SM-3 figures, but that's why if you want to stop Russian ICBMs you should build a Aegis Ashore in the fucking State).

*Assuming that despite their constant whining the Russians are also too stupid not to cross target so those missiles are heading too west for any chance of interception, but who cares about being reasonable?

File: b23[1].png (473KB, 600x706px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 600x706px

>>31811365
>THAAD
It's fucking nothing.

File: 1476536974643.jpg (266KB, 1024x781px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 1024x781px

>>31813521

Dude, Putin is more transparent than the US government. He openly talks about policy and their objectives.

You won't hear a single word of truth out of politicians on American foreign policy. Everything is done in secrecy.

That implies some sinister motives.

Do you think even a fraction of Americans know about the support for Jihadists in Syria and Libya?

>>31812850
THAAD is a surface to air system dingus

>>31813558

So, what is the purpose of SM-3 in Poland and Europe?

>>31813574
>Dude, Putin is more transparent than the US government.
Then why exactly is it that we have to rely on State Department releases to know what the latest Russian counts are under New START, and while the State Department provides a breakdown of US forces, and the DoD has published the planned composition for US forces come 2018 when the limits are in place, for Russian forces the only available information is open source estimates?

>>31813574
Don't get me wrong, I'm not calling American politicians choir boys. But to take anything out of the mouths of the likes of Putin and Russian state media at face values is foolish. They aren't trustworthy, either.

>>31813588
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/16/washington-made-it-easy-for-iran-to-fire-its-ballistic-missiles/

>>31812600
>Not knowing that THAAD is just a really fancy SAM
>Not knowing the enormous difference between terminal and flight phase interception
>Unironically thinking THAAD is a ballistic missile

r e t a r d

>>31811365
The easiest way for the Korean peninsula issue to be solved is to go back o Great powers doctrine and have China, SK and the US invade simultaneously, with the UN footing the bill.

Post war the US agrees not to station forces past the current DMZ and China agrees to support korean repatriation of all the NK refugees and shit.

Unfortunately the Chinese are huge pussies and the US needs NK as an excuse to ring China with military bases so it will never happen.

>>31813623

You've got to be kidding...

That is almost as laughable as the original claim, remember? Back in the Bush days, the missile shield was supposed to be against North Korean threats... in Poland...

Do you for one second believe that?

>>31813676
No, Iran was always the primary threat.
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/108079.pdf

But you've now stopped even attempting to try and clarify what the US is sinisterly up to.

>>31811370
lol

>>31813729

That's just a bunch of Bush-era hyperbole which was proven garbage. It's just a PR power point.

Iran has no nuclear program, now cemented with the deal Obama finalized.

Why not deploy these systems in Turkey, Italy or Germany, where most US forces are garrisoned? Because they claim to be protecting US troops...

None of it adds up mate.

These are all measures to contain Russia and neutralize her strategic weapons.

>>31813830
>That's just a bunch of Bush-era hyperbole
So when you claimed Bush had only talked about NK, that was a lie.

>Iran has no nuclear program, now cemented with the deal Obama finalized.
A joke of a deal. Iran is continuing its intermediate missile program for a reason.

>Because they claim to be protecting US troops...
Even when I post a document outlining US claims, you feel completely free to make up whatever you want, that the US is purely interested in force protection. I would explain to you why you put bases in Poland and Romania to cover Iranian launches, but then you just posted this:

>These are all measures to contain Russia and neutralize her strategic weapons.
After I already explained it can do no such thing, which you didn't even bother acknowledging at all. You're just another /pol/ drone mindlessly posting.

Here's a fucking hint: the Russian nuclear arsenal right now is heavily concentrated (below New START delivery vehicle numbers by almost 200 while being well in excess of the warhead limit). If the Russian government was actually worried about a sneak attack* they would be focused on more launchers with less warheads and make Yars their primary ICBM. Instead just this week we got a nice wave of Russian propaganda about their new super ICBM which sounds wonderful on paper, until you think about why a country terrified on a first strike is going to put even more warheads on each silo based ICBM? But why am I wasting my fucking time. Enjoy your paranoid fantasies this my last response.

*A country actually worrried about sneak attack doesn't let their satellite warning system fucking burn out and leisurely replace it right now with merely a single test satellite, but whatever again

>>31813965
>>31813830
Not to mention if Iran keeps up with their nuclear program, they because inherently unsafe as their ability to conduct nuclear strikes are limited and the ability of the US and allies to truly fuck their shit up becomes nation ending.

>>31813965
This, on so many levels.

>>31811700
But do you honestly think this shit actually works? I mean if Vlad launches 1600 warheads our way, how many will this ABM shit actually knock out, like 3 or 4? And what would be the point? Nonetheless, still personally scared shitless of a Hillary victory.

>>31815340
It won't work that way, that guy is either woefully misinformed about the actual capabilities of ABM or falseflagging. ABM can certainly affect the targeting of nuclear weapons (Oppenheimer could explain this a lot better if he was still around) but it would do next to nothing to dent a full exchange. The vatniks know this, in every other thread they'd be shitposting about how pathetic American ABM is compared to glorious Russian missiles.

>>31812600
You're literally retarded. If the U.S wanted, it'd launch nukes from SLBMs, anywhere in the world. or deliver them by strategic bomber/cruise missle

>>31811435

It's a THAAD you moron; you can't use them to hit anything but aircraft in-flight, meaning the only way that they'd be able to hit anything was if China deliberately had its assets operational.

More worrying is the fact that the B-21's list of requirements is to be able to fly from Texas to Bejing in order to drop a Little Boy and back, yet China seems to be ignoring that.

>>31813417

Holy shit. This level of delusion is astounding. Are you the same vatnik that was in the fighter thread earlier? I think you are. Are you going to start talking about production run migs?

>>31813371
The chinks are paranoid that the US have or will have the capability of extending the THADD's range and mount explosive warheads on the missiles.

>>31815731
If it is he's now in the ironic position of having to downplay Russian weapons in favor of American ones.

File: 1474816649947.jpg (202KB, 1056x705px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1056x705px

>Enthusiastic Hillary supporters (pic related) overwhelmingly vote for Clinton based on the presence (theoretically) of a vagina and *CURRENT YEAR* type of reasoning

>Hillary is owned and beholden to the interests of Neo-Cons and NWO-style globalists, who see the elimination of Russia and others as a sovereign state necessary to achieve a global plantation of cheap labour and liberal progressive values across the world

>AD 2017, war was beginning.

>Most military aged men (late stage millennials) are either NEETs, fat, chronic drug users or suffer from other psychological problems caused by single mother households.

>Women and SJWs are conscripted into service to fill the shortfall in recruitment. After all, it's CURRENT YEAR and no longer will straight White men carry the entire military burden

>Frontlines in the war have stabilized around Minsk and Eastern Ukraine

>War devolves into attrition mode after early American successes, heavy use of tube and rocket artillery by Russians as American conventional war capabilities have atrophied fighting pointless desert policing ops.

>Body parts of SJWs and feminists, along with numales and the Mexicans imported to fight in the war litter the battlefields of Ukraine and Eastern Poland, ground into the winter mud and churned up by mechanized forces and artillery, turning the ground into a purple-brown jelly of entrails and wet clay.

>One war photographer comes to blog about American success, but accidentally films someone's intestines getting caught in the running gear of a Bradley fighting vehicle rolling past

>The Romanian capital was hit by a stray missile, and their government capitulated and renounced NATO

>Poland fulfills her historic role as disposable cannon fodder is reduced to Neolithic conditions

>>31815721
>shitposting on this level

Meanwhile, in America, with missile defenses...

>>31815849
Lind, is that you?

File: 14492502326982.png (469KB, 640x408px) Image search: [Google]

469KB, 640x408px

>>31813322
>ukrainian thinks he is a big wolf, among first world nations...

here is your real spirit animal, you stupid subhuman

>>31815928
spotted the booty-blasted RT shill