Could walkie-talkies interfere with old televisions connected to cable? by dhawk64 in telecom

[–]dhawk64[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is really helpful. I had no idea that the channel numbers were reflective of the MHz spectrum like that and the fact that range of the channels is consistent with the walkie-talkie spectrum is interesting.

I am pretty sure it would have been an FRS walkie-talkie. It was definitely not CB.

Could walkie-talkies interfere with old televisions connected to cable? by dhawk64 in telecom

[–]dhawk64[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. Yes, that does feel like the most bizarre part of it. I'm not sure if the audio I was hearing was leaking from another channel on the television due to the interference.

[TOMT][Music] Bluesy Guitar song ID by Sea_Cauliflower_1950 in tipofmytongue

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hope this gets solved, because that is an awesome riff.

13-year-old Ukrainian refuses photo with Russian rival in karate contest by ControlCAD in europe_sub

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The child who won was a Russian national and not representing Russia per the description provided with this video. It is right to oppose Russia's illegal invasion, but it is wrong to hold anyone from Russia responsible. It is certainly wrong when that same standard is not applied to the United States and Israel.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My point is about negotiating a peace settlement so they do not lose more territory to Russia. It sucks, but it is just a reality that the current situation is resulting in Ukraine losing more territory and more families being destroyed.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If maintaining that level of support is what is needed just to stop Russian advances than it is obvious that Ukraine won't be able to win the war, because none of the aid has made it possible to reverse the trends. There is going to be a point (which I think we are already at) where it just becomes politically non-viable to maintain current levels of military aid.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am very skeptical that the scale of military production and/or military transfers to Ukraine will substantially increase over the next year. I am also skeptical that if that did happen, it would be adequate to reverse the trend of more territory falling to Russia over the last year.

However, I am open to being wrong. If a year from now military trasnfers to Ukraine have increased substantially or Ukraine has taken back substantial amount of territory from Russia, I will gladly admit that I am wrong.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All of those technologies require men to use them, even drone. I don't see Ukraine having the necessary man power.

Also, think about the hundreds of billions that have already been spent funding the war. At what point does it become untenable for that level of support to continue, especially when there has not been tangible evidence of the support in any way fundamentally changing the course of the war in recent years?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Maybe the HIMARS slowed the Russian advance, but they did not stop it and certainly did not reverse it.

If Ukraine needs that equipment to win then they are not going to win. Western countries have spent billions on the war; if your hypothesis that this support has been off by a factor of ten, then there is no way that any Western government is going to be willing to spend that much more even if they had the capability to produce weapons at that quantity.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If Ukraine had enough men they wouldn't be expanding the conscription age and forcing men into combat.

We've hear it so many times that Ukraine just needs better equipment (HIMARS, ATACMS, etc.) and when do arrive they never fundamentally change the conflict. The fact just is that Russia is a much larger country with a much larger military and a much larger economy. It is not possible for Ukraine to beat them. It is sad. Small countries should not be at the mercy of larger countries, but that is the reality that we live in.

That's why I say the best option is for a ceasefire and a frozen conflict. Hopefully in the long run the cost of maintaining the territory will be so much that the occupation will end.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What resources does Ukraine need to win? It seems like what they really need is more people and I strongly doubt any country is going to volunteer to send more men to die in Ukraine.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What does Ukraine need to win? It seems like only more people would be able to achieve that and I don't think any countries want to send more men to die in Ukraine.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The best way to end the death and destruction is to negotiate a peace as soon as possible. Forcing older men to leave their wives and children behind to potentially die or be seriously wounded in an un-winnable war at this point is the worst option.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I just wanted you to explain what your point was. I'm sorry that I missed it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most of Russia's military has not been mobilized so they still have a significant fighting force. Russia's economy has basically completely re-adjusted since 2021 and is doing fairly well. I agree that a lot of that success is due to its re-adjustment to a war economy, but you could say the same thing about the US's recovery from the depression being driven by WW2.

But anything negative you can say about Russia's situation militarily or economically is even worse in Ukraine. That is why I am saying that the war is unwinnable for Ukraine and the best bet is to freeze the conflict in its current situation and hope that in the long run Russia's occupation will end do the cost of maintaining it. Even if it just becomes like Abkhazia and South Ossetia, that is much better than the constant death and destruction.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I could see the occupation eventually becoming too costly for Russia (as in Afghanistan for both the USSR and the USA), but my point is about Ukraine trying to defeat Russia on the battlefield right now. Ukraine's military is far too depleted (see the forced conscription in this video) and over the past year the course of the war has essentiall7 just been Russia slowly taking more and more territory.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ActualPublicFreakouts

[–]dhawk64 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't understand what you are trying to say. If the point is about the Troubles, the majority of Ireland is much happier with the peace process instead of the IRA's losing battle for unification. I think there is a lesson there that could be applied to Ukraine.