egg

He's signed up and on his way to Kyiv as we speak.

Rhetoric and troop gathering was inevitable. Hopefully Putin won't have a crack at Lithuania/Estonia/Latvia so we won't need to find out if article 5 gets invoked. That said, I still don't think the West would allow that to lead to WW3, but hopefully the rhetoric etc keeps Putin in check. I'll leave the discussion here mate. We undoubtedly want the same outcome, and a back and forth on what may happen if Putin gets even crazier, won't get either of us anywhere 👍

Good lad, that's the way to do it 😂

I've said that I think we should unleash on Russia if they turn on a Nato member. Any one of them. That's different to whether I think we would do that.

That'd involve Russia attacking a Nato member. Hopefully we'll have no need to resurrect it.

Kosher

We're obliged to under article 5. That's different to actual involvement.

It's not just Badger mate, it's others. I think they believe we're pacifists who want to roll out the red carpet for Putin, rather than people playing a possible tape forward and trying to be objective. Personally I vote for a full on involvement if he steps this up to a Nato member, but the expectation that there'll be no reprisals for us is folly.

I really don't think you're comprehending what I'm saying mate, and you're making a hell of an assumption how any reprisal would be delivered. Thinking that we can get into the ring with impunity is naive in the extreme.

Nonsense. We're only in the line of fire if we get into military conflict with Russia. It won't happen if we don't. We may or may not get involved, but if we do, it's nuts to assume that our losses will be contained to foreign soil.

I've said that I think an attack on the UK is a real possibility if we go toe to toe with his troops on foreign land. Incredibly naive to think otherwise.

It's a valid question given your bold assertion that we'll be fine if we fuck with Putin.

How do you think Putin will react if we go toe to toe with his soldiers? He ain't gonna fuck about with sanctions or a chat in Geneva. No idea where we draw the line, but I stand by my assertion that the West won't spark WW3 if he has a crack at Lithuania. Sure, there'll let him think we will with rhetoric and troop gathering, but the doing it is another matter.

I think you're misjudging what's being said. Putin is a disgrace. He should not get away with it. In time I'll think he'll go further if not stopped. Where I disagree with you and others is that I don't think the West will intervene militarily if Putin turns his attentions to the likes of Lithuania. That's not strolling across Europe. I also think you're misjudging the consequences for us if we intervene militarily against Russia wherever it may be. Nobody wants this shit on our shores. Nobody.

That's a short sighted question for me. This issue how Putin reacts to us if we put boots on the ground / send in warplanes where his lot are active. I see an armed response, potentially bringing this shit to our shores. Would that scenario cheer or disgust the British public?

Is that an actual question?

There's about 5 pages mate on this. I approach it on what I see as a credible reality - WW3 will not happen if Putin decides he wants Lithuania.

Sad but true. I'm with you on this. I think he'll probably stop, for now, at Ukraine. I think that's primarily as dealing with resistance in such a large country will take time. If/when he decides to move further west, I can't see any appetite for Nato to step in as the consequences would be severe. Regardless, its a fucked up situation, and completely unnecessary.

It should have been on the table and delivered without delay.

Because the ramifications are a European war, or if the USA get involved, a world war. I'm really not sure why you think it'd be such a small thing to do that to protect a small Baltic state.

Do you think the USA and other Nato members will put troops on the ground and shoot Russian troops if they invade Latvia or Lithuania? They should under article 5, but that's a world war.

Quite. I'm surprised people think Nato would jump to the rescue of Estonia in the same way they would Germany.

That's a terrible analogy. That one bloke ain't gonna smash up 4 others. Russian nukes can smash up more than 4 countries.

Whether anyone resorts to nuclear or otherwise, in this conflict the west will damage one country only, whereas Russia can cause damage to all Nato members and others. Thus, the west have much more at stake simply as there are more countries in harms way.

Putin can cause damage on umpteen countries with his nukes. The west have more to lose than him in a game of brinkmanship. I don't think the west, not the least USA, would risk armageddon for the likes of Lithuania.