U.S. Fighter Jets Scrambled to Intercept Russian Warplanes Near Alaska

[that guy]

I am pretty sure by law the USA couldn't annex Cuba, otherwise they would have did it after defeating Spain in the Spanish American war.

What laws?

Israel has been breaking every single international law for decades with no repercussions because of US backing. They even sanctioned the ICC

Nonetheless, it still doesn’t change the fact that the US tried to invade Cuba and failed embarrassly despite this “cutting-edge technology”

 

[Samori Toure]

What laws?

Israel has been breaking every single international law for decades with no repercussions because of US backing. They even sanctioned the ICC

Nonetheless, it still doesn’t change the fact that the US tried to invade Cuba and failed embarrassly despite this “cutting-edge technology”

The Teller Amendment didn't allow the USA to seize Cuba. It was part of the declaration of war against Spain.

Guantánamo Public Memory Project - University of Minnesota Guantánamo Public Memory Project - University of Minnesota

 

[Mister Terrific]

Nonetheless, it still doesn’t change the fact that the US tried to invade Cuba and failed embarrassly despite this “cutting-edge technology”

On the second day into the invasion, Kennedy ordered the Alabama Air National Guard to halt its bombings of Cuba. The Alabama Air National Guardoriginally intended to bomb Cuban airports to debilitate the Cuban Air Force. Without the bombings, the Cuban Air Force could effectively bomb the Brigade 2506 invasion force, ending the invasion

Kennedy's betrayal - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The US never invaded Cuba you low IQ big eating Orc buffoon.

 

[Marc Spector]

this happens all the time. Saber rattling bullshyt.

 

[CodeBlaMeVi]

Where are you getting this propaganda from? The US used carpet bombing in Vietnam and Afghanistan killing hundreds of thousands of women and children and still lost both wars

Operation Menu - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Taliban Carpet-Bombed as Osama Hunt Narrows

abcnews.go.com

As for preventing further PAVN/VC offensives, they failed.[citation needed] In May 1969, PAVN/VC launched an offensive similar in size to that of the May Offensive of the previous year.[citation needed] It certainly cost North Vietnam the effort and manpower to disperse and camouflage their Cambodian sanctuaries to prevent losses to further air attack.

It was stopped because of geopolitics as mentioned below:

When Congress, in the summer of 1973, legislated an end to U.S. military action in, over, or off the shores of Indochina, the only U.S. military activity then going on was air support of a friendly Cambodian government and army desperately defending their country against a North Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge onslaught ... What destabilized Cambodia was North Vietnam's occupation of chunks of Cambodian territory from 1965 onwards for use as military bases from which to launch attacks on U.S. and South Vietnamese.

It had nothing to do with losing armed combat with Vietcong.

 

[that guy]

It's asymmetric warfare

Vietnam and Afghanistan did it with guerrilla tactics
Russia is doing it now with drones instead of billion dollar jets

Even if the U.S "wins" it's still a L because it usually results in more instability but with a massive tax payer funded cost

I agree that’s my whole point. We don’t have the strongest military because countries have adapted by using asymmetric warfare. The strongest military is the military who can withstand a 20-year armed conflict.

The missile that trump used to blow up the Venezuelan boat costed $150,000 taxpayer dollars. One $150,000 missile to kill 14 fishermen. That makes no sense and is not sustainable.

3 cheaper ways the Navy could destroy a narco-terrorist drug boat

Because missiles are expensive.

www.yahoo.com

The entire operation off the coast of Venezuela has already costed $20 million for a made-up conflict. All Venezuela has to do is sit there while the US government drains the taxpayers. We’re already losing a war that doesn’t even exist

 

[Adeptus Astartes]

I said Russia is fighting against the entire NATO alliance. This is a factual statement by NATO itself

No. That's a huge overstatement. The alliance is providing Intel and materiel. No NATO nation is actively fighting in Ukraine.

A better statement would be the entire alliance is aiding Ukraine in its fight against Russia, but you don't care about accuracy.

 

[MoshpitMazi]

Modern wars are wars of attrition, not brute force. You should have learned that during your time there.

That's not true! It's all about drones and aerial supremacy now

 

[that guy]

No. That's a huge overstatement. The alliance is providing Intel and materiel. No NATO nation is actively fighting in Ukraine.

A better statement would be the entire alliance is aiding Ukraine in its fight against Russia, but you don't care about accuracy.

You’re saying the same exact thing but wording it differently

Russia doesn’t have to fight against NATO troops to be fighting against NATO when all of the intelligence, training, and weapons are coming from NATO. This should be common sense.

 

[Mister Terrific]

You see guys the Orcs are winning and the US is losing.


Imagine if US boats were getting destroyed off the coast of Maryland

 

[Biscayne]

What about Iraq? Vietnam? Korea?

When Sadam got toppled?

The person who responded to OP, tried to loosely use examples of the American military “losing” as proof that America doesn’t have the strongest military in the world. When your main export is war and defense, you’re gonna have more examples “remember when America didn’t complete mission X” than any other nation on earth just numerically. Especially if you have more overseas bases than any other country on earth. Why has the rest of the globe just allowed the US to just hoe them and build bases just about wherever? If America is the evil colonialist super power that ppl think it is…then well…what they waiting for?

 

[FlimFlam]

A “black” Russian apologist

The coli has truly jumped the shark

beyond coli patriotic echo tunnels, he isnt saying anything that hasnt been widely expressed in many arenas... domestic and beyond

such an interpretation makes one a "russian apologist "? aint no body gotta agree with shyt, but how the hell is a message board so anti discourse

 

[that guy]

That's not true! It's all about drones and aerial supremacy now

How is it not true? You’re supporting my argument. Countries (like Ukraine) and rebel forces like HAMAS are using cheap drones to destroy expensive military equipment.

Ukraine used cheap drones that cost a few thousand dollars to drop explosives and destroy Russian bombers worth millions of dollars.

The cheaper your military is, the longer you can sustain a war.

https://www.axios.com/2024/05/25/drones-war-ukraine-iran-pentagon

 

[Mister Terrific]

beyond coli patriotic echo tunnels, he isnt saying anything that hasnt been widely expressed in many arenas... domestic and beyond

You Orcs are out of gas

 

[StretfordRed]

So what Russia is doing is testing defenses.

Which is funny because if we’ve learned anything in the past few years, its that their military is greatly overestimated.

I wouldn’t say hard defences e.g military, more soft defence e.g what will NATO nations say or how will they react, testing their togetherness. Remember Lavrov is /was in the US this week

Russia know flying over will do nothing unless they are reconnaissance/EW planes. They been doing the same shyt for the past 15 years.