Chromdome35
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | Fast lane, behind a slow driver |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | Life in the fast lane, behind a slow driver |
| Number of Posts: | 7942 |
| Registered on: | 11/27/2010 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/27/25 at 11:41 am to doubleb
Campaign rallies and Polling sites will make very ripe targets for Russia. They have shown no hesitation to hit civilian targets during this war, why would this be any different?
The first time Zelensky or his opponent holds an announced rally, I expect Russia to target it.
The first time Zelensky or his opponent holds an announced rally, I expect Russia to target it.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/26/25 at 4:31 pm to GOP_Tiger
Sounds promising, but I won't believe it until the ink is signed.
If Russia agrees to something along these lines, it has to be viewed as a major win for Ukraine. They have lost land, but they fought Russia to a stalemate for the last 3.5 years and didn't lose their country to the mighty Russian military.
At the start of the war in Feb 22, Russia already controlled 42,000 km^2. If the proposed plan is adopted, Russia would have a total of 108,000 km^2 of Ukrainian territory...The net gain for the last 4 years of fighting is 66,000 km^2.
At the start of the war, Ukraine controlled 558,628 km^2. Russia has captured 66 km^2 of that....or 11.81% of Ukraine. Russia lost its army to capture 11.8% of Ukraine, 66,000 square kilometers.
Not to mention, Sweden and Finland joining NATO, Europe waking up and rearming, losing the Black Sea to a country without a navy, using up almost all of its armor reserves, having its Air Force exposed as ineffective, losing Syria, having to turn to China, Iran, and North Korea for equipment, ammo, and troops.
Under what definition is this not a disaster for Russia?
ETA: Add to that list, doing significant damage to its economy, losing Europe as a customer for natural gas and losing the market for its oil.
If Russia agrees to something along these lines, it has to be viewed as a major win for Ukraine. They have lost land, but they fought Russia to a stalemate for the last 3.5 years and didn't lose their country to the mighty Russian military.
At the start of the war in Feb 22, Russia already controlled 42,000 km^2. If the proposed plan is adopted, Russia would have a total of 108,000 km^2 of Ukrainian territory...The net gain for the last 4 years of fighting is 66,000 km^2.
At the start of the war, Ukraine controlled 558,628 km^2. Russia has captured 66 km^2 of that....or 11.81% of Ukraine. Russia lost its army to capture 11.8% of Ukraine, 66,000 square kilometers.
Not to mention, Sweden and Finland joining NATO, Europe waking up and rearming, losing the Black Sea to a country without a navy, using up almost all of its armor reserves, having its Air Force exposed as ineffective, losing Syria, having to turn to China, Iran, and North Korea for equipment, ammo, and troops.
Under what definition is this not a disaster for Russia?
ETA: Add to that list, doing significant damage to its economy, losing Europe as a customer for natural gas and losing the market for its oil.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/26/25 at 9:58 am to VolSquatch
re: Boomer loathing?
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/23/25 at 1:08 pm to Wildcat1996
I was born in 64, the last year of the boomers. I can't speak to anyone else's situation, but no one gave me anything; I worked hard to build a career, home, and family.
The real issue is that the government sold out the middle class to cheap overseas labor decades ago. Get off the interstate and go drive through any large town/small city, and you will see hundreds of shuttered manufacturing facilities. Those factories fueled the middle class and their local economies.
The real issue is that the government sold out the middle class to cheap overseas labor decades ago. Get off the interstate and go drive through any large town/small city, and you will see hundreds of shuttered manufacturing facilities. Those factories fueled the middle class and their local economies.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/21/25 at 1:35 pm to Coeur du Tigre
I guess we know what the biolabs were working on
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/20/25 at 2:54 pm to LSUPilot07
I tend to agree with your perspective. This war has brutalized Russia's military; it is going to take a very long time and a tremendous amount of money and manufacturing to reconstitute Russia's army into a force that could project power into NATO countries.
Something we've seen no evidence of, at least that I'm aware of, is Russia's military adapting to the war and fixing its systemic issues. At the end of WW2, the Russian military command was vastly superior in terms of quality to the command when Germany launched Barbarossa. We've seen lots of brutality and disregard for the lives of their soldiers. Has anyone seen any evidence of improvement in the Russian Army's command and control during this war?
Right now, it would be suicidal for Russia to attempt to invade any European country.
Something we've seen no evidence of, at least that I'm aware of, is Russia's military adapting to the war and fixing its systemic issues. At the end of WW2, the Russian military command was vastly superior in terms of quality to the command when Germany launched Barbarossa. We've seen lots of brutality and disregard for the lives of their soldiers. Has anyone seen any evidence of improvement in the Russian Army's command and control during this war?
Right now, it would be suicidal for Russia to attempt to invade any European country.
re: List it - Each SEC team's Christmas list (Missing 5 teams)
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/19/25 at 2:10 pm to Landmass
Arkansas - An SEC win
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/18/25 at 9:03 pm to Leopold
If this turns out to be true, what does it say about the state of the Russian offensive?
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/17/25 at 8:05 am to VolSquatch
quote:
t's possible they don't have the combat ability even if drones didn't exist.
This, plus the lack of logistics to support it, the competency to execute it, and the lack of air superiority.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/16/25 at 9:20 pm to Leopold
If the Russian military was competent and had the available combat power, they would execute a pincher movement and cut off the salient that is forming around Zalizychne and Hulyarpole. The top half of the pincher would move due west towards Vozdvyzhivka then turn south while the bottom half would punch straight North thru Hulyaipilske.
This is the kind of situation the US Army would steamroll.
If the Russians try, it will take at least a year.
This is the kind of situation the US Army would steamroll.
If the Russians try, it will take at least a year.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/16/25 at 11:39 am to texag7
I don't know if they did or not, don't really care either way, but a simple chatgpt question about this says:
Q: Did Shell have a gas plant in Eustace Texas?
A:
It's still there, just owned by a different company. ETA Using Google Earth's history function, you can see that they tore down part of the plant between 2017 and 2022.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Sx2EjSm5QVuLz5CVA
Q: Did Shell have a gas plant in Eustace Texas?
A:
quote:
Short answer: Yes — Shell did have a gas processing plant in the Eustace, Texas area.
Here’s what the record shows with documented context:
In a 1998 filing related to industrial contracting work, someone described contracting with Smackover Shell Limited Partnership at the Eustace Field and Plant beginning in January 1985. That strongly implies that Shell operated or was directly involved with a gas plant near Eustace during that era.
Independent local sources mention a former Shell gas plant in Eustace connected with a historic railroad spur (Southern Pacific line) serving the facility — today abandoned but noted in rail-history posts.
Local obituary content references an individual working as a technician for Shell Oil in the gas treatment plant around Eustace, with retirement in 1999.
Regulatory records from OSHA refer to an “Eustace Gas Processing Plant” in the same town, though at the time of that report it was owned/operated by a different company (Tristream East Texas LLC). This suggests the facility changed hands over time after Shell’s involvement.
Put together, the evidence points to Shell having owned and/or operated a gas processing plant in the Eustace/Smackover Field area historically, likely through a partnership structure, with subsequent changes in ownership over the years. If you need specifics on dates of operation, ownership transitions, or exact facility names in regulatory filings, I can pull those for you next.
It's still there, just owned by a different company. ETA Using Google Earth's history function, you can see that they tore down part of the plant between 2017 and 2022.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Sx2EjSm5QVuLz5CVA
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/16/25 at 12:08 am to Coeur du Tigre
The sub that was hit was one of 3 active Kilo II (Project 636.3) subs in the Black Sea Fleet. The Kilo II can fire Kalibr cruise missiles via its torpedo tubes, which is what Russia was using it for against Ukraine. Kalibr's can be equipped with nuclear warheads.
It's a significant loss for Russia, and current estimates are $400M - $500M per boat.
From Wikipedia
2 of the 6 boats mentioned were already out of service, one due to a fuel system problem and the other due to an aerial drone strike by Ukraine. One is on duty in the Mediterranean. The one we're talking about was one of the remaining 3 in service in the Black Sea Fleet.
It's a significant loss for Russia, and current estimates are $400M - $500M per boat.
From Wikipedia
quote:
The Russian Navy also moved forward in the late 2010s, with the construction of Project 636.3, also known as Improved Kilo II. The first-in-class was named Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky (PPK) and was launched by the head of Admiralty Shipyard Alexander Buzakov on 28 March 2019, or some thirty months after commission.[1] By November 2019, six units had been built for the Black Sea Fleet and further boats were proposed, but not funded, for the Pacific and Baltic Fleets.[4]
In June 2022, an unconfirmed report from within Russia's defense industry suggested that a further tranche of six additional Project 636.3 vessels might be ordered to start construction in around 2024.[17] The class "is slightly longer in length — the sub's submerged displacement is around 4,000 tons — and features improved engines, an improved combat system, as well as new noise reduction technology; it can fire both torpedoes and cruise missiles, launched from one of six 533-millimeter torpedo tubes."[1] The class has a seven-bladed propeller, instead of the six-bladed propeller of the Project 877 class.[15]
2 of the 6 boats mentioned were already out of service, one due to a fuel system problem and the other due to an aerial drone strike by Ukraine. One is on duty in the Mediterranean. The one we're talking about was one of the remaining 3 in service in the Black Sea Fleet.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/15/25 at 11:42 pm to VolSquatch
100% agreed. On Land, Air, and Sea.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/15/25 at 11:27 am to cypher
I hope the US Military is paying close attention to the drone innovation coming out of this war.
Ukraine is going to chase Russia's navy totally out of the black sea.
Ukraine is going to chase Russia's navy totally out of the black sea.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/10/25 at 9:27 pm to Lee B
quote:
It's best just to walk past the crazy guy yelling outside the CVS...
Thank you, I actually laughed at this.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/10/25 at 2:42 pm to VolSquatch
quote:
Interesting how no one had any rebuttals for this post.
There is nothing to rebut; the poster is using a logical fallacy to try to gatekeep the conversation.
The OP is arguing that only direct victims are allowed to hold views on a war. That’s a fallacy; expertise and evidence don’t require personal trauma. By that logic, nobody could have an opinion on cancer, poverty, law enforcement, or national policy unless they personally lived each one.
It boils down to the fact that he can't attack the argument, so he's attacking the poster. What is there to rebut other than calling out his weak arse position? Frankly, there have been so many posts like this over the last 4 years that I suspect most people just ignore them...like I should have.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/5/25 at 10:37 pm to VolSquatch
You two sound like an old married couple. :rotflmao:
re: Thought I'd give Downton Abby a try.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 12/3/25 at 12:15 pm to prplhze2000
In my opinion, if you like period dramas, its one of the very best out there.
Well written and acted.
Well written and acted.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 11/26/25 at 4:38 pm to Chromdome35
Good article discussing the Russian armor situation.
Note: This article was published in early 2025; the numbers will have declined further since then.
https://theins.ru/en/politics/278468?utm_source=chatgpt.com
The closing paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about in my previous post.
Note: This article was published in early 2025; the numbers will have declined further since then.
https://theins.ru/en/politics/278468?utm_source=chatgpt.com
quote:
Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has led to the bloodiest conflict in Europe since World War II. It has also resulted in the largest depletion of military equipment in 80 years. Vast stockpiles of primarily Soviet-era weaponry, originally designed at the height of the Cold War for use in a global confrontation with the Western world, have been exhausted at an unprecedented rate. According to the latest available estimates, Russia’s armed forces have already lost more than half of their available military hardware. If no unexpected developments occur, the most likely scenario involves a gradual decline in combat intensity by late 2025 or early 2026, driven by a basic shortage of tanks, armored vehicles, and artillery. Alternatively, the nature of the war may shift, with both sides relying more on missile and drone strikes against rear positions, while the front lines remain largely static.
---
For the Russian military, the primary source of heavy equipment remains Soviet-era stockpiles. New production is nowhere near sufficient to compensate for battlefield losses. T-90M tanks are the only model still produced from scratch, with an estimated 250 units built per year. Military analyst Andriy Tarasenko told The Insider that Russia likely produces no more than 300 new tanks annually — less than half of what is lost in offensives like the one on Avdiivka and Pokrovsk.
---
In the artillery category, Russia’s key limitation lies in its inability to manufacture gun barrels. As a result, there have been notable instances of Russia abandoning efforts to reactivate certain artillery systems from storage. For rocket artillery, the primary challenge is the production of a sufficient number of rockets to sustain operations.
A group of independent researchers using satellite imagery to analyze Russia’s Soviet-era equipment stockpiles at open storage bases released a comprehensive report at the end of 2024. Their findings indicate that over the course of the full-scale war, across key categories of military equipment (tanks, IFVs, APCs, and artillery systems), only 41% to 52% of pre-war reserves remain in storage.
![]()
![]()
![]()
The closing paragraph is exactly what I'm talking about in my previous post.
quote:
Having burned through an enormous amount of military resources in a localized war with Ukraine, the Kremlin will face an almost insurmountable challenge if it is seriously preparing for a new Cold War with the West. To maintain combat readiness, Russia would need to replenish not only frontline units, but also storage reserves, and given the depletion of its Soviet-era stocks, it would need to do this with newly manufactured vehicles, which are far more complex and expensive to produce. By even the most conservative estimates, rebuilding the Russian military’s combat potential would require massive investments in its core assets and take decades to complete.
re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.
Posted by Chromdome35 on 11/26/25 at 4:23 pm to Coeur du Tigre
quote:
8/ "And they HAVE NOT BEEN ROUTED. And they cannot be routed in a situation where the Russian Armed Forces only have the forces for tactical operations. Still, the forces for strategic operations are either completely absent or insufficient for their successful implementation.
Early this year, I made a series of posts in the old thread about Russia not having the combat power to exploit any breakthroughs at the front. This is precisely what I was referring to. At the time, I was talking about the apparent lack of Russian mechanized forces sitting in reserve to exploit breakthroughs.
The depots are empty, and Russia has almost exhausted its armor stocks. Yes, it has ramped up production, but nowhere near the level needed to support a real offensive operation. Those stockpiles had been building for decades and were a tremendous strategic asset to the Russian military. That's gone now.
Russia has been neutered for decades. It will take long-term, sustained manufacturing to rebuild its stockpiles. They can't go to war on any scale without large reserves of equipment and ammo. Yes, they still have the nukes, but they can't launch any type of conventional war.
The recent Ukrainian attacks on geothermal plants and power substations if continued, will start to cause a real problem for Russia. Winter is here.
Russia had better be glad Ukraine doesn't have the combat power to go on the offensive.
re: President Donald Trump has ended the war in Ukraine
Posted by Chromdome35 on 11/25/25 at 12:02 pm to Strannix
Has Russia accepted the terms yet? I can't find anything in the news that says they have. Do you have a link?
Normally, when ending a war, both sides have to agree to end it. I've seen that Ukraine has accepted the US plan, but has Russia?
ETA:
Ukraine peace plan expected to be rejected by Russia — likely extending war until after Christmas at minimum: sources
Normally, when ending a war, both sides have to agree to end it. I've seen that Ukraine has accepted the US plan, but has Russia?
ETA:
Ukraine peace plan expected to be rejected by Russia — likely extending war until after Christmas at minimum: sources
quote:
Russia is set to reject the new 19-point cease-fire deal drafted by the US and Ukraine but may use disinformation tactics to keep President Trump engaged in continued talks — suggesting the war will last at least through Christmas, sources told The Post on Tuesday.
The White House has said it is working to secure a deal after Special Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff developed a previous controversial 28-point version of the plan that heavily favored Moscow. That plan included input from Kyiv, the Trump administration has insisted.
The proposal, roundly criticized by both sides of the US political aisle and international community because it was so one-sided, was then narrowed down to a 19-point plan acceptable to Ukraine after talks between top Washington and Kyiv officials happened Sunday.
But sources told The Post that Russia won’t agree to the 19-point version, as they already weren’t completely satisfied with the broader previous plan.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov publicly went on the offensive Tuesday, reiterating that Moscow will not outright support any plan that deviates from Trump’s original 28-point proposal.
Lavrov sought to contrast the latest plan with discussions between Trump and Putin at the August summit in Anchorage — implying that the Kremlin came away from the meeting with the idea that Trump had agreed to side with Moscow.
“After Anchorage, when we thought these understandings had already been formalized, there was a long pause. And now the pause has been broken by the introduction of this document. . . A whole series of issues there, of course, require clarification,” Lavrov said.
The Kremlin had praised the original plan as a real pathway to peace, with Lavrov adding that any proposal that deviates from that will not have Moscow’s backing.
“If the spirit and letter of Anchorage are erased from the key understandings we have documented, then, of course, the situation will be fundamentally different,” Lavrov warned, according to the Financial Times.
Still, Moscow may want to appear as if it is not out-right rejecting all US efforts to bring peace to Ukraine for fear of further provoking Trump’s suspicion that the Kremlin is unwilling to play ball, sources said.
Russia may also being planning to use other disinformation tactics, such as issuing vague statements or even signing documents indicating support — without actually committing to end its war, they said.
“Rule of law in Russia is non-existent. Putin historically amends the constitution of Russia whenever it suits him,” said Institute for the Study of War Russia program leader George Barros to The Post. “So any sort of Russian agreement, be it verbal or even legal, must be treated with utmost skepticism.
“It means that whatever the US and Ukraine agree to here has to be absolutely bulletproof and not depend on Russian agreement, but the backing of our own resolve and concrete commitments.
Trump has been wide-eyed about Russia’s efforts to drag out the war, previously accusing Putin of “tapping him along.”
Myroslava Gogadze, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, added on a call with reporters Tuesday, “From Ukrainian perspective, they don’t see this 19-point plan as something that Russia would accept.
“However, the point of this exercise was not exactly to make an agreement but to throw out that 28 point plan and put some Ukrainian interest in that possible negotiation and show that Ukraine is really willing and want to discuss and negotiate at peace in terms of situation on the ground, you have to look at what is going on.”
“From my understanding and what I’m hearing from sources [is that] the American side is very concerned about possible leaks of that 19-point plan. So I mean, we don’t really have a clear understanding of these 19 points,” the expert said.
The 28-point plan prompted heavy bipartisan and international outcry.
It called on Ukraine to shrink its current army of about 2 million active and reserve personnel to just 600,000 — all while ceding the entire Donbas region, the defensive stronghold that Russia has failed to conquer for more than a decade.
It also demanded Ukraine abandon any hope of joining NATO in exchange for vague security guarantees that would do little to stave off another Russian invasion.
Putin has maintained that Ukraine should never be allowed to join NATO, which he described as one of the “root causes” that led him to launch the invasion in 2022.
The original plan, which leaked last week, caused an uproar and forced US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to scramble to amend the proposal.
The new 19-point deal vastly differs from the original, eliminating the cap on Ukraine’s active forces and leaving the door open for the country to join NATO.
The framework came together in recent days following Rubio’s meeting with Ukrainian negotiators in Geneva, with the secretary of state touting it as their most productive meeting yet.
Ukraine agreed to the terms of the peace deal on Tuesday following a meeting with American officials in Abu Dhabi.
Popular
0








