egg

He's not just a young player doing well or in purple patch. Anyone who saw this lad play before he joined us could see a player big, fast, powerful, skilful, two good feet, great finish, good movement, great on the turn, etc. That's the signs of a decent player. He's then come into the Premier league and smashed it. If I were a city fan, I'd be as excited by signing this kid as Kane. In a couple of years Kane will be beyond his best or playing deeper, whereas Broja will still be improving. I appreciate that you'll disagree and advocate that A Armstrong would be a better option, but each to their own.

I saw your point that he was over rated and that was enough mate. You stated that the kid was less talented than Adam Armstrong and have continued to talk nonsense about him since then. We all misjudge players - I thought Jake Thompson was gonna be a superstar and he managed to look shit in the national league. We all get it wrong sometimes treacle.

Autumn

Do you believe all the shit you post? Broja overrated. Behave.

Rain (....yeah I know)

Jefferson

Kitten

How is Ireland's GDP double ours? Crazy.

Yep. Ukraine haven't got time for sanctions to bite and for Putin to possibly be ousted. On the last part, I think the answer is obvious. Our sanctions have been piss poor in comparison to almost everyone else who's sanctioned, so hardly likely that we'd announce military support if we've supplied it.

That's a lot of waffle mate. I'm none the wiser whether you feel that Putin should be able to dictate who joins other people's clubs.

To be clear, you're saying that Moldova or Finland should abandon Nato or EU membership if Putin demands it?

Putin’s demand is not to drop it, but amend its constitution to agree to never to seek membership. If they're out, they'll always be a sitting duck and the minute they ask to join, Putin will have another crack. Just tell the little prick that Nato decides who's in their club, not him.

He's essentially said that Nato don't want Ukraine as they don't want to protect it from Russia. That's not a willingness, and doesn't give any protection to Ukraine from Russia, protection which they bought when they surrendered their nuclear weapons. Nato should to stand up and admit Ukraine when this nonsense is over - they're no less deserving of a seat at the table than the Baltic states or Poland.

How about Nato or EU membership? If Ukraine concede that. Should Moldova or Finland be expected to do so if Putin insists?

1, 2 and 3. 2 assumes that we'll react if it escalates to a Nato country. We should, and that would be a short lived conventional war that he knows he won't win. That increases the risk to a nuclear war and i'm not convinced we'll risk that, or that you're right that he'll be talked down. Thus, I think he either tests the West or just sticks it out in Ukraine. I'm not sure what this fool will do. 4. The idiot has backed himself into a corner. There's no compromise here, and I can't see that he'll retreat for the reason you state.

There's no distinction between items leaving one Nato country in a plane and arriving in Ukraine, or a plane leaving a Nato country and arriving in Ukraine. Any argument to the contrary is bollox. One of our senior forces guys (or ex, I can't recall) said something about Ukraine pilots crossing the border and collecting them. Seems like a solution. At the end of the day though, Putin has said don't supply planes, we've shit ourselves and said "don't blame us, it was the Poles idea". Pathetic.

Poland needed US support on this. Rather than give that, the US didn't just say no, they've publicly said what Poland wanted and hung them out to dry. Sure, the US didn't have to agree, but the public message is a tacit apology to Russia.

Who's suggested supplying F16/F18? Poland offered Migs. The US appeared to be on board, then backtracked, then threw Poland under the bus. Presumably having shit themselves over Russian red lines re planes.

You've missed the point I was replying to namely that determining that supplying Ukraine with plans is a red line set arbitrarily by Russia. Its no different than supplying any other machine or weapon to take out Russian machines or men.

Indeed, their terms.

The last point goes to my initial point today, namely that the West are running scared of Putin. We haven't been to war with a nuclear power before, and we don't want to. Putin knows that and my concern is that our unwillingness to engage militarily in Ukraine because of the nuclear threat may be interpreted by Putin that we won't engage if an article 5 issue arises in a Nato country. I know we should, but the more he is allowed to get away with, the more emboldened he becomes imo. The line point is a tough one, and wholly subjective. Understandably people have a different view on this and quite right too, it's serious stuff. The problem here, is that the line seems to be a long way away than it should be owing to the nuclear threat. There has to come a point though. On the plane thing, Ukraine can fly the migs that were on offer from Poland. Seems odd that we supply weapons to hurt soldiers but not weaponised planes to hurt soldiers and/or destroy the weapons that will be used against Ukraine and its people. There's no distinction there and again it reeks of running scared.

Yemen - the Saudi's are leading that with UK and US weapons, to include aircraft. Why not supply Ukraine with Aircraft alongside the other weapons we've supplied to give them better defense?

We could do more without going toe to toe. We're supplying anti aircraft weapons and other arms, but not planes. What's the distinction? Does he have license in your eyes to do what he likes with Ukraine and its people without military opposition? If not, at what point do we intervene, whether by no fly zone or otherwise? Vacuum bombs haven't been enough. Ditto carpet bombs. Ditto attacks on hospitals. A nuke perhaps? The West have intervened for a hell of a lot less on conflict not on its doorstep, and where article 5 has not arisen.

Russia will come unstuck at some point, but that doesn't help Ukraine or its people.

"Influenced", how? Has it escaped you that Ukraine is being smashed to bits? Preferring to see stronger action than sanctions that haven't stopped Putin in his tracks does not make me a "pant pisser" - that's a stupid comment. Sure, the sanctions will be impacting on Russia and its people, I'm more concerned about seeing the stopping of the destruction or Ukraine than a bit of damage caused to Russian forces and its economy. What's the common opinion as you see it? Hope that the closing of McDonald's and Starbucks causes such pressure that Putin gives up?