Nato Opens door to Sweden/Finland-How will this play in US Politics?

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Russia has lost about 20,000 men in Ukraine a country many times the size of Finland. The biggest reason they've had such losses is they waited too late to invade and did so after the ground had already begun to thaw.

We can do a lot of things, what we can't do is move vast amounts of men and supplies by ship into the North Atlantic easily or without considerable risk during a winter war.

A brief study of the battle for the North Atlantic during WWII gives us a good idea of what difficulties exist and what kinds of losses we could expect.

Putin is not the permanent head of Russia and they will learn from their mistakes in Ukraine so the next invasion of the west by Russia isn't likely to be as poorly conceived and executed.

The US can do amazing things, taming the North Atlantic in winter is not among them.

You need to look at a fucking history book from WWII. In that case, we were supplying the Russians. You didn't read that study. I have a degree in history with an emphasis on military history. Our biggest issue was German U-boats. Guess what else the Russians suck at?

The Arctic convoys of World War II were oceangoing convoys which sailed from the United Kingdom, Iceland, and North America to northern ports in the Soviet Union – primarily Arkhangelsk (Archangel) and Murmansk in Russia. There were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945,[1] sailing via several seas of the Atlantic and Arctic oceans, with two gaps with no sailings between July and September 1942, and March and November 1943.

About 1,400 merchant ships delivered essential supplies to the Soviet Union under the Anglo-Soviet agreement and US Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost. Nazi Germany's Kriegsmarine lost a number of vessels including one battleship, three destroyers, 30 U-boats, and many aircraft.

Arctic convoys of World War II - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Since you apparently are functionally illiterate, there were 85 merchant vessels lost out 1400. many of which I would assume made multiple trips to Russia. The weather apparently was not an issue.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Asking such a question further proves what a fool you are. Ever heard of Libya or Serbia?
Major NATO Military Interventions

How many combat troops were on the ground in either of those? Answer: None.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Yeah such a big difference. Untold numbers of dead and wounded, nations destroyed and thousands displaced. Dumb Americans think this is somehow admirable.

Let's face it it! You are simply a coward who will not face facts that we do not target civilians like the Russians do.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Asking such a question further proves what a fool you are. Ever heard of Libya or Serbia?
Major NATO Military Interventions

Both of which were destroyed from within, not by anything NATO did.

The NATO interventions were specifically designed to stop the slaughter of civilians that was ongoing for months before they intervened.

You're going to have to work a lot harder.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

You need to look at a fucking history book from WWII. In that case, we were supplying the Russians. You didn't read that study. I have a degree in history with an emphasis on military history. Our biggest issue was German U-boats. Guess what else the Russians suck at?

The Arctic convoys of World War II were oceangoing convoys which sailed from the United Kingdom, Iceland, and North America to northern ports in the Soviet Union – primarily Arkhangelsk (Archangel) and Murmansk in Russia. There were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945,[1] sailing via several seas of the Atlantic and Arctic oceans, with two gaps with no sailings between July and September 1942, and March and November 1943.

About 1,400 merchant ships delivered essential supplies to the Soviet Union under the Anglo-Soviet agreement and US Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost. Nazi Germany's Kriegsmarine lost a number of vessels including one battleship, three destroyers, 30 U-boats, and many aircraft.

Arctic convoys of World War II - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Since you apparently are functionally illiterate, there were 85 merchant vessels lost out 1400. many of which I would assume made multiple trips to Russia. The weather apparently was not an issue.

Difficult is not impossible but it definitely comes with losses.

We lost 347 ships making those supply runs to Britain and Russia in 1940 alone.

The Murmansk Run: Running the Gauntlet of WWII's Arctic Convoys

Compared to the icy, infamous Murmansk Run, no WWII battlefront was perhaps more dangerous. This is the true story of the arctic convoys.

warfarehistorynetwork.com

You need to return your degree and ask for a refund.

About 1400 merchant ships delivered vital supplies to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost. The Nazi German Kriegsmarine lost a number of vessels including one battleship, three destroyers and at least 30 U-boats as well as a large number of aircraft.

Arctic convoys of World War II

The Arctic convoys of World War II were oceangoing convoys which sailed from the United Kingdom, Iceland, and North America to northern ports in the Soviet Union - primarily Arkhangelsk (Archangel) and Murmansk, both in modern day Russia. There were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945...

military-history.fandom.com

Americans today would be demanding we surrender if we lost a single large ship with several hundred lives lost.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Difficult is not impossible but it definitely comes with losses.

We lost 347 ships making those supply runs to Britain and Russia in 1940 alone.

The Murmansk Run: Running the Gauntlet of WWII's Arctic Convoys

Compared to the icy, infamous Murmansk Run, no WWII battlefront was perhaps more dangerous. This is the true story of the arctic convoys.

warfarehistorynetwork.com

You need to return your degree and ask for a refund.

About 1400 merchant ships delivered vital supplies to the Soviet Union under the Lend-Lease program, escorted by ships of the Royal Navy, Royal Canadian Navy, and the U.S. Navy. Eighty-five merchant vessels and 16 Royal Navy warships (two cruisers, six destroyers, eight other escort ships) were lost. The Nazi German Kriegsmarine lost a number of vessels including one battleship, three destroyers and at least 30 U-boats as well as a large number of aircraft.

Arctic convoys of World War II

The Arctic convoys of World War II were oceangoing convoys which sailed from the United Kingdom, Iceland, and North America to northern ports in the Soviet Union - primarily Arkhangelsk (Archangel) and Murmansk, both in modern day Russia. There were 78 convoys between August 1941 and May 1945...

military-history.fandom.com

Americans today would be demanding we surrender if we lost a single large ship with several hundred lives lost.

I was right. You are functionally illiterate.

From your link:
In 1940 alone, U-boats accounted for the sinking of 375 ships in the North Atlantic.

I guess you do not understand the difference of ships in a convoy and those who just happened to be in the North Atlantic. Many ships were sunk off the coast of the US because cities were not blacked out and provided the U-boats with silhouettes of their targets.

Let's face it! You are a fucking amateur! Arguing with someone who not only has a degree, but a naval officer who served on 6 different ships in my career, including a submarine.

I wrote a major research paper in college for my history degree which discussed submarine warfare in the Pacific and how the submarine actually won the war against Japan.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

I was right. You are functionally illiterate.

From your link:
In 1940 alone, U-boats accounted for the sinking of 375 ships in the North Atlantic.

I guess you do not understand the difference of ships in a convoy and those who just happened to be in the North Atlantic. Many ships were sunk off the coast of the US because cities were not blacked out and provided the U-boats with silhouettes of their targets.

Let's face it! You are a fucking amateur! Arguing with someone who not only has a degree, but a naval officer who served on 6 different ships in my career, including a submarine.

I wrote a major research paper in college for my history degree which discussed submarine warfare in the Pacific and how the submarine actually won the war against Japan.

That's exactly what I said moron.

347 ships lost in a single year making those runs to Britain and Russia.

Our entire merchant fleet today consists of just 182 ships.

Russia has aircraft, surface craft, and submarines that can inflict even more damage today and we have only a fraction of the ships we had in the WWII Merchant Fleet.

There is no way to move mass numbers of troops, supplies, and equipment across the North Atlantic and Arctic by sea especially during the winter without substantial losses being expected.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That's exactly what I said moron.

347 ships lost in a single year making those runs to Britain and Russia.

Our entire merchant fleet today consists of just 182 ships.

Russia has aircraft, surface craft, and submarines that can inflict even more damage today and we have only a fraction of the ships we had in the WWII Merchant Fleet.

There is no way to move mass numbers of troops, supplies, and equipment across the North Atlantic and Arctic by sea especially during the winter without substantial losses being expected.

Like I said, you are functionally illiterate!

You said: 347 ships lost in a single year making those runs to Britain and Russia.

Both I and your link said: In 1940 alone, U-boats accounted for the sinking of 375 ships in the North Atlantic.

Do you not see the difference, you pin-headed Googler!

How would you classify an oil tanker sunk off the Outer Banks of NC in 1942? They were not in a convoy and not bound for the UK or USSR. They were in the North Atlantic. Which category would you place that in?

Fucking amateur!

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Like I said, you are functionally illiterate!

You said: 347 ships lost in a single year making those runs to Britain and Russia.

Both I and your link said: In 1940 alone, U-boats accounted for the sinking of 375 ships in the North Atlantic.

Do you not see the difference, you pin-headed Googler!

How would you classify an oil tanker sunk off the Outer Banks of NC in 1942? They were not in a convoy and not bound for the UK or USSR. They were in the North Atlantic. Which category would you place that in?

Fucking amateur!

It's taken directly from the title and opening paragraph, can you not fucking read?

The Murmansk Run: Running the Gauntlet of WWII’s Arctic Convoys​

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Duplicate

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

It's taken directly from the title and opening paragraph, can you not fucking read?

Fucking moron!

It appears in the article and says, "In 1940 alone, U-boats accounted for the sinking of 375 ships in the North Atlantic". It does not say in the convoys!

I swear, in 21 years I never had even a special education student that could not read and understand the difference between a ship in a convoy and one that just happened to be sunk in the North Atlantic. You really are an overachiever at being stupid.

To what do you attribute your success in this area? An appropriate category to place you in would be "Dumber than a fucking post!" Although, your posts are pretty fucking dumb all on their own!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Duplicate

Don't know how to delete a post? The stupidity is growing on you like a fungus!

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Fucking moron!

It appears in the article and says, "In 1940 alone, U-boats accounted for the sinking of 375 ships in the North Atlantic". It does not say in the convoys!

I swear, in 21 years I never had even a special education student that could not read and understand the difference between a ship in a convoy and one that just happened to be sunk in the North Atlantic. You really are an overachiever at being stupid.

To what do you attribute your success in this area? An appropriate category to place you in would be "Dumber than a fucking post!" Although, your posts are pretty fucking dumb all on their own!

The entire article is about the Murmansk run which was made by convoys not individual ships running around the North Atlantic and Arctic you idiot.

The Murmansk Run: Running the Gauntlet of WWII’s Arctic Convoys​

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That's exactly what I said moron.

347 ships lost in a single year making those runs to Britain and Russia.

Our entire merchant fleet today consists of just 182 ships.

Russia has aircraft, surface craft, and submarines that can inflict even more damage today and we have only a fraction of the ships we had in the WWII Merchant Fleet.

There is no way to move mass numbers of troops, supplies, and equipment across the North Atlantic and Arctic by sea especially during the winter without substantial losses being expected.

Try this on for size:

The total civilian merchant fleet of the Untied States is 393 vessels, according to the CIA World Factbook. I

Everything You Need to Know About the Merchant Marine

There is another maritime "service" you may not have heard much about, yet, the United States Merchant Marine is arguably incredibly important to the Armed Forces. They also help keep America's economy moving. But what exactly is the Merchant Marine?

www.military.com

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Try this on for size:

The total civilian merchant fleet of the Untied States is 393 vessels, according to the CIA World Factbook. I

Everything You Need to Know About the Merchant Marine

There is another maritime "service" you may not have heard much about, yet, the United States Merchant Marine is arguably incredibly important to the Armed Forces. They also help keep America's economy moving. But what exactly is the Merchant Marine?

www.military.com

Total US fleet under our flag, 182 ships.

Number and Size of the U.S. Flag Merchant Fleet and Its Share of the World Fleet | Bureau of Transportation Statistics

KEY: DWT = deadweight tons; N = data do not exist; RO/RO = roll-on/roll-off vessels; U = data are not available.

www.bts.gov

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Total US fleet under our flag, 182 ships.

Number and Size of the U.S. Flag Merchant Fleet and Its Share of the World Fleet | Bureau of Transportation Statistics

KEY: DWT = deadweight tons; N = data do not exist; RO/RO = roll-on/roll-off vessels; U = data are not available.

www.bts.gov

There are more ships in the US merchant fleet than just the Merchant Marine. Of course who would accept the expertise of someone who probably owns a jet ski for those flash floods!

 

[Sunsettommy]

Finland and Sweden have both been working and Training with NATO for a long time and more so in recent years.

LOL, he was talking about HIS link that is from the ONION.

 

[Sunsettommy]

There are over 3,600 Merchant Marine vessels in America 5th largest in the world

LINK

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The entire article is about the Murmansk run which was made by convoys not individual ships running around the North Atlantic and Arctic you idiot.

It says "North Atlantic" you fucking dumbass! Take a look at a map of the world and see where that is!

Shut your cock holster, admit you are as fucked up as a soup sandwich, and go slither back under your rock in the Texas desert.

 

[gipper]

Both of which were destroyed from within, not by anything NATO did.

The NATO interventions were specifically designed to stop the slaughter of civilians that was ongoing for months before they intervened.

You're going to have to work a lot harder.

Oh my. Yeah all those NATO bombs didn’t hurt a fly or damage anything, yet infrastructure was destroyed and thousands were killed.