egg

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.

I think it's naive to think that Biden will send his troops in. Indeed, he's said he won't. That leaves it to the Europeans, with Russian planes and nukes close by. Let's see how it unfolds, but hopefully we can contain this and things don't escalate, but if they do then not beyond Ukraine.

You have more faith than me. Biden has already said that if US soldiers shoot at Russian soldiers then we have WW3. It won't happen imo and I think Putin could test the resolve of the West as a consequence.

In reality, there are differences. If Germany or France are attacked, there'll be a proper reaction. Latvia, Lithuania, do you think that Nato would spark WW3 to come to their rescue? I know they should under article 5, but ask yourself if that's a realistic outcome.

Don't count on it. I don't think the USA would get involved, and I doubt the others will go near it without them. Any future move is largely about whether Putin believes Biden will react, and the rest will follow.

Indeed. The issue for the west now is the nuclear risk. If we react to Putin, the war either stays where we react, extends to our shores (or others) with conventional warfare, or someone hits the big red N button. Whilst it shouldn't, I think an article 5 decision depends on which Nato country is impacted - would the west really risk ww3 or a nuclear attack to look after Lithuania, for example?

Yep, I know the theory. The reality is for the west to respond as it should and trigger an almighty mess, or breach its obligations.

It only triggers a world war if the west respond. There's no guarantee that they would. Sure they should, but given the choice of breaching it's obligations or triggering a nuclear / world war, the west may bottle it. Lithuania is a vital path to give Russia a direct connection from its mainland to Kaliningrad and the Baltic.

Lithuania.

Agree with that. Gervais is diverse. I don't rate him as a comedian, but some of his TV stuff has been excellent and varied. The strength of his stuff is in the characters, and situations. In Extras the characters were great but not relatable, but in the Office they were all relatable in some way. Both were funny, but in different ways. Afterlife is superb and shows a completely different side of him, and again there's lots of relatable characters, and situations. The last episode of the the recent series was brilliant. Derek was also very good, but not from a comedy perspective, and loads of that was relatable also and with a warmth and empathy which people wouldn't expect from Gervais.

Luton