d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Russia / Ukraine
Prev1493949404941494249435001Next
Closed New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 39,626
Joined: Nov 16 2005
Gold: 13.37
Jul 17 2025 10:04am
I mean one should let the dead rest. They have suffered.
To be honest even the German soldiers who were under Hitler and I know it might sound rather contentious.
Some soldiers don't even know they are fighting for to be honest. All they know is to protect their country etc etc

No matter what, they are dead, let them rest and in this case, they were dead because they fought to free you from Nazi Germany.


Not Soviet, but their own which is even more disgusting. If we don’t take into account that part of Ukraine was on the side of the fascists, as part of the SS.
There is no justification for how the residents of some village dig up their own local people, their ancestors, who defended it 80 years ago.
It’s better to live without a toilet in the permafrost of Chukotka than to be a Ukrainian. They are a cursed nation.
#sucks2bukrainian

This post was edited by Norlander on Jul 17 2025 10:10am
Member
Posts: 9,693
Joined: Mar 2 2006
Gold: 1,590.00
Jul 17 2025 10:06am
Lol. Typical ruski propaganda.
Soyuz rockets are from the 60s. Lol. First flight
28 November 1966.

ISS crew transport

Between 1 February 2003 and 26 July 2005 with the grounding of the United States Space Shuttle fleet, Soyuz was the only means of transportation to and from the International Space Station. This included the transfer of supplies, via Progress spacecraft, and crew changeovers. After the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet in 2011, the United States space program was without any means to take astronauts into orbit, and NASA was dependent on the Soyuz to send crew into space until 2020.[5] NASA resumed crewed flights from the United States in 2020 through the Commercial Crew Development program.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_(rocket_family)

In other words, so what? This has nothing to do with putin being able to successfully launch an attack. Btw- more cosmonauts have died at the hand of ruski rockets, than Americans have died in space shuttles. What ever happened to russias Shuttle? Lol. Abadoned.

If tomahawks rain down on st Petersburg, will putin resort to attempting to launch nukes? That is the question.https://i.imgur.com/VuQF2op.jpeghttps://i.imgur.com/RysyNzr.jpeg


1,700 U.S. (NASA + DoD + NRO) vs. ~3,500 Soviet+Russian launches to date.

17 dead (including Columbia/challenger disasters) vs 4 dead cosmonauts for USSR (none for Russia so far)?

Space shuttle was a giant waste of money and was scrapped in favor of conventional rockets. Russian “analogue” was abandoned as Soviet Union broke down and it was no longer needed.

If tomahawks start raining on St Petersburg - MAD doctrine will trigger and you will stop shitposting on d2jsp once and for all. Demonstration of Oreshnik was proof enough for DoD they can’t intercept new generation hypersonic MIRVs and need to develop a countermeasure.

This post was edited by Malopox on Jul 17 2025 10:11am
Member
Posts: 15,920
Joined: Jun 27 2010
Gold: 102,354.50
Jul 17 2025 11:53am
Lol. Typical ruski propaganda.
Soyuz rockets are from the 60s. Lol. First flight
28 November 1966.

ISS crew transport

Between 1 February 2003 and 26 July 2005 with the grounding of the United States Space Shuttle fleet, Soyuz was the only means of transportation to and from the International Space Station. This included the transfer of supplies, via Progress spacecraft, and crew changeovers. After the retirement of the Space Shuttle fleet in 2011, the United States space program was without any means to take astronauts into orbit, and NASA was dependent on the Soyuz to send crew into space until 2020.[5] NASA resumed crewed flights from the United States in 2020 through the Commercial Crew Development program.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_(rocket_family)

In other words, so what? This has nothing to do with putin being able to successfully launch an attack. Btw- more cosmonauts have died at the hand of ruski rockets, than Americans have died in space shuttles. What ever happened to russias Shuttle? Lol. Abadoned.

If tomahawks rain down on st Petersburg, will putin resort to attempting to launch nukes? That is the question.https://i.imgur.com/VuQF2op.jpeghttps://i.imgur.com/RysyNzr.jpeg


So clueless, so childish

Soyuz rockets are still being used it shows this is a very reliable missile, Russia's ICBMs are reliable too this is exactly the point I made.

I don't know in what sense this is propaganda, it's a simple observation, a cold hard fact.

Only complete idiots would talk about bombing Moscow with American long range missiles in the hands of Ukrainians because of Russia's updated nuclear doctrine.

They updated their nuclear doctrine in November 2024 and it's clear you don't know anything about it what are you even doing in this topic, lol

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-12/news/russia-revises-nuclear-use-doctrine

Quote
The revised nuclear doctrine includes language asserting that Russia “reserves the right” to use nuclear weapons not only in response to a nuclear attack, but also to respond to a conventional weapons attack that creates a “critical threat” to its “sovereignty and territorial integrity” or to that of Russia’s ally, Belarus. The previous version of Russia’s nuclear weapons doctrine, issued in 2020, reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if an attack on Russia threatens “the very existence of the state.”



Putin won't and most likely can't use nukes. As for what we've seen in this ongoing war in Ukraine, Russia relies on 80s era weapons. Do you believe Putin and his mob has actually spent the resources necessary for upkeep on ballistic nuclear missles? Post cold war- Putin mobs sold everything off. Putin likes to look strong. He clearly isnt.

Russia now is relying on China made junk. Look at how Iran went down.
China made defenses-0 usa stealth bombers with tomahawks -1


Missed this one, can't believe anyone could be this clueless :wacko:

This post was edited by Djunior on Jul 17 2025 12:14pm
Member
Posts: 31,873
Joined: Oct 25 2005
Gold: 3,873.50
Warn: 10%
Jul 17 2025 12:33pm
So clueless, so childish

Soyuz rockets are still being used it shows this is a very reliable missile, Russia's ICBMs are reliable too this is exactly the point I made.

I don't know in what sense this is propaganda, it's a simple observation, a cold hard fact.

Only complete idiots would talk about bombing Moscow with American long range missiles in the hands of Ukrainians because of Russia's updated nuclear doctrine.

They updated their nuclear doctrine in November 2024 and it's clear you don't know anything about it what are you even doing in this topic, lol

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2024-12/news/russia-revises-nuclear-use-doctrine






Missed this one, can't believe anyone could be this clueless :wacko:


Typical name calling is your only rebuttal. You should change your name to " vlad trump" an "updated" doctrine doesn't mean they have done the necessary maintenance.

Nobody said usa would nuke Moscow. Pay attention

This post was edited by said_aouita on Jul 17 2025 12:35pm
Member
Posts: 56,264
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 575,205.03
Jul 17 2025 12:45pm
he's not wong Djunior, you know by now how it works.
Member
Posts: 39,626
Joined: Nov 16 2005
Gold: 13.37
Jul 17 2025 01:35pm
Typical name calling is your only rebuttal. You should change your name to " vlad trump" an "updated" doctrine doesn't mean they have done the necessary maintenance.

Nobody said usa would nuke Moscow. Pay attention


You should change your name to Roadrunner then. Beep-beep.
Member
Posts: 9,106
Joined: May 11 2009
Gold: 5.01
Jul 17 2025 02:58pm
Do you actually think Russia is winning? They have lost a million troops and have gained like 15% of the eastern side of Ukraine. Remember when putin said they would control Kiev in 3 days?


Lol


Lol


Hahaha


Yes, absolutely.
Member
Posts: 5,377
Joined: Feb 5 2022
Gold: 2,200.11
Jul 17 2025 05:37pm
Yea sure. How about you provide a link?


https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12672

According to 2025 testimony of NORTHCOM Commander General Gregory Guillot, "if fielded," these novel Russian capabilities "will severely challenge [the U.S.] ability to detect and characterize an inbound attack and determine an appropriate response during a conflict."

Recent reports indicate that Russia's development and testing of new intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), specifically the RS-28 Sarmat[/URL]


We've been over the sarmat failure in this thread. This is why they do these tests. The sarmat is a small piece in a very large pie, my friend. Again, theres tons of ways to trash on Russias ability to manufacture new weapons to western standards, but literally no one questions russias ability to engage in MAD. Russia has never let their icbms,ssbns and slbms be a weak point for them.

Russia is already well underway in its modernization of its nuclear arsenal, while uncle sam wont start replacing its minutemen 3s with the sentinel gbsds till like 2030. The us has done a good job of modernizing its warheads but its ground-launched icbms are relics at this point. Youre seriously barking up the wrong tree
Member
Posts: 56,264
Joined: Jan 19 2007
Gold: 575,205.03
Jul 18 2025 01:39am
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12672

According to 2025 testimony of NORTHCOM Commander General Gregory Guillot, "if fielded," these novel Russian capabilities "will severely challenge [the U.S.] ability to detect and characterize an inbound attack and determine an appropriate response during a conflict."



We've been over the sarmat failure in this thread. This is why they do these tests. The sarmat is a small piece in a very large pie, my friend. Again, theres tons of ways to trash on Russias ability to manufacture new weapons to western standards, but literally no one questions russias ability to engage in MAD. Russia has never let their icbms,ssbns and slbms be a weak point for them.

Russia is already well underway in its modernization of its nuclear arsenal, while uncle sam wont start replacing its minutemen 3s with the sentinel gbsds till like 2030. The us has done a good job of modernizing its warheads but its ground-launched icbms are relics at this point. Youre seriously barking up the wrong tree


If I were a contrarian, I’d flip Russia’s claim that 95% of its nuclear deterrent is modernized and pretend it’s only 5% ready. That’s still 80+ nukes—about as many as North Korea has. And we treat that as a serious global threat. 80 Russian warheads is enough to flatten all of Europe and still save a few "gifts" for the taskmaster in Washington. Now, if Russia has even slightly more than 5% ready, I have no doubt the bulk of its arsenal is earmarked for the US, for obvious reasons. But let’s say the worst happens. Russia is cornered, humiliated, and faces destruction. It doesn’t even need to strike NATO. It could just detonate its arsenal on its own soil—all 1,500+ warheads. The smoke alone would block the sun for years. Crops would fail. Billions would starve. The planet would die. No missiles need to reach Berlin, Paris, or New York. This would be a final two fingered salute to the US which seems hell bent on pushing the envelope.

This post was edited by ferdia on Jul 18 2025 01:51am
Member
Posts: 15,920
Joined: Jun 27 2010
Gold: 102,354.50
Jul 18 2025 06:39am
Typical name calling is your only rebuttal. You should change your name to " vlad trump" an "updated" doctrine doesn't mean they have done the necessary maintenance.

Nobody said usa would nuke Moscow. Pay attention


No

I'm posting clear facts, you're not

Your response to my logical and sensible posts is to call it "ruski propaganda" -->

Lol. Typical ruski propaganda.


Secondly I posted the updated nuclear doctrine of the Russians and I even quoted the relevant part about long range conventional weapons which is what we were talking about (Tomahawk cruise missiles) NOTE THE BOLDED PART

Quote
The revised nuclear doctrine includes language asserting that Russia “reserves the right” to use nuclear weapons not only in response to a nuclear attack, but also to respond to a conventional weapons attack that creates a “critical threat” to its “sovereignty and territorial integrity” or to that of Russia’s ally, Belarus. The previous version of Russia’s nuclear weapons doctrine, issued in 2020, reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if an attack on Russia threatens “the very existence of the state



he's not wong Djunior, you know by now how it works.


He's wrong on all counts lol

That these people are still around after 3 years of NATO "game changers" and Ukraine "winning the war" is mindboggling

Oh well he was hanging out in GC for a while maybe that explains it

Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1493949404941494249435001Next
Closed New Topic New Poll