Jump to content

Russia

whelk

By whelk,
in The Lounge

 Share

Referendum on Moscow to officially become territory of Wales  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. Referendum on Moscow to officially become territory of Wales

    • Da!
      32
    • Net!
      3

Recommended Posts

AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted (edited)

Government move from "condemning" Putin to "strongly condemning" Putin in a serious escalation of their response. They are reserving their right to "condemn in the strongest possible terms" should the strong condemnation not prove effective.

 

in reality, the real danger.......

Lot of people in Ukraine crowding together inside.

Only 35% of Ukrainians have been vaccinated. Less than 2% have been boosted.

 

Edited by AlexLaw76
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
  • Author
Posted
40 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Government move from "condemning" Putin to "strongly condemning" Putin in a serious escalation of their response. They are reserving their right to "condemn in the strongest possible terms" should the strong condemnation not prove effective.

 

in reality, the real danger.......

Lot of people in Ukraine crowding together inside.

Only 35% of Ukrainians have been vaccinated. Less than 2% have been boosted.

 

Are you on medication? Suggest you may need to speak to someone as you seem a little unhinged.
 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

Maybe the threats from Liz Truss didn't scare Putin as much as we thought.

Perhaps we should freeze the assets of another bank and see if that stops the invasion....

I'm glad we're leading the world on this, it's going very well.

Coming home to roost electing ego driven politicians with not a shred of integrity. When we hit a real crisis that needs leadership we have Boris and his cronies who suspect wouldn’t do a thing if impacted their finances or ratings. Putin seen the vacuum of strong leadership in West and taken full advantage. 
 

Edited by whelk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, whelk said:

Coming home to roost electing ego driven politicians with not a shred of integrity. When we hit a real crisis that needs leadership we have Boris and his cronies who suspect wouldn’t do a thing if impacted their finances or ratings. Putin seen the vacuum of strong leadership in West and taken full advantage. 
 

Corbyn would have been out there supporting the Russians 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Baird of the land said:

Initially I thought the talk of invasion was just posturing but Putin seems to gambled that US/nato won’t have the bottle to defend Ukraine, given he wasn’t getting what he wanted via negotiation.

Negotiation was never his route to his preferred outcome, it was just a means to test how strongly the West would respond to particular actions. This has been building for 8 years. Vlad is a Cold War warrior who hasn't seen a Russian victory, only the gradual disintegration of the empire he was born into. With the intention of being written into history as the strongman who rebuilt Russia, he has now taken Europe back to 1941, when many in Ukraine saw the start of Operation Barbarossa as an act of liberation from the Soviet yoke, and many actively supported the Germans. Russia is now 'de-Nazifying' Ukraine, justifying this with talk of torchlight parades, concentration camps, and genocide - who needs evidence when you have complete control of the media ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Millbrook Saint

Millbrook Saint

Posted
Posted

This is the beginning of the end of the West holding the power, China will now be watching to see how we respond, when they see that a few rich Russians have their banks frozen they'll see that as a green light for Taiwan.

Does anyone trust Putin to stop at Ukraine, anyone who does are probably the same people who thought it would stop with Crimea.  In a few months Ukraine will be another Belarus and people will move on, then in a few years his troops will be on a 'peacekeeping mission' to another country, meanwhile our politicians will talk of sanctions and negotiations, at some point we will have to face up to the bully and the sooner the better, problem is, he's a lunatic, if he's losing will he press that big red button?

At the very best we will be heading into a cold war, this time though Russia will be propped up by China and the middle east buying their commodities.  China are then propped up by the West and our lust for cheap goods and outsourcing everything to them.  The US no longer has the economic muscle to bankrupt Russia like they did in the last cold war.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Millbrook Saint said:

Does anyone trust Putin to stop at Ukraine, anyone who does are probably the same people who thought it would stop with Crimea.  In a few months Ukraine will be another Belarus and people will move on, then in a few years his troops will be on a 'peacekeeping mission' to another country

Which country would he attack next? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Millbrook Saint said:

You tell me, Latvia, Estonia, Poland, getting away with this will just embolden him

An attack on any of those counties is massively different to invading Ukraine.

They are all in Nato and an attack on any of them triggers article 5 and would start a world war. That is not the case for non Nato Ukraine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Millbrook Saint said:

At the very best we will be heading into a cold war, this time though Russia will be propped up by China and the middle east buying their commodities.  China are then propped up by the West and our lust for cheap goods and outsourcing everything to them.  The US no longer has the economic muscle to bankrupt Russia like they did in the last cold war.

What? During the cold war the USSR was the second largest economy in the world. Now it's 11th and, with the exception of China, everyone above them is a democracy. They'll almost certainly slip to 13th behind Brazil and Australia with the sanctions they're likely to receive.

China will take them to the cleaners on any deal for oil or gas, knowing the West doesn't want to buy from them and good luck selling oil TO the Middle East. The cold war ultimately bankrupt the Soviet Union and Putin seems very keen on replicating that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Millbrook Saint

Millbrook Saint

Posted
Posted
Just now, Lighthouse said:

What? During the cold war the USSR was the second largest economy in the world. Now it's 11th and, with the exception of China, everyone above them is a democracy. They'll almost certainly slip to 13th behind Brazil and Australia with the sanctions they're likely to receive.

China will take them to the cleaners on any deal for oil or gas, knowing the West doesn't want to buy from them and good luck selling oil TO the Middle East. The cold war ultimately bankrupt the Soviet Union and Putin seems very keen on replicating that.

Hope you're right, but you telling me the Chinese won't like what's happening, I'm sure they'll be more than happy to buy more gas from them, to help prop them up whilst they give the west a bloody nose, as you say China will take them to the cleaners but not before using them to the full extent they can.

You think it was a coincidence they waited till the winter olympics finished before invading, one whole day they waited, I heard on the news this morning Chinese citizens have been told to place Chinese flags on their cars, I wonder why.

Russia and Chine are fully in cohoots over this, the Chinese may not be directly involved but they will be fully onside with the Russians behind the scenes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Same as above, attacking them automatically triggers a world war and article 5. Attacking Lithuania is vastly different to attacking the Ukraine. 

People in the baltics dont share your complacency, they think they are next, not immediately but in the future once Ukraine has been taken over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Of course it's different. Why are you jumping up and down shouting that it's different question who would be next?

@Millbrook Saintsuggested Putin would be emboldened after the Ukraine and attack another country in a few years. I wondered which country, because really it would need to be a non Nato member, because the Russians would know they are likely to get away with it as it wouldn't trigger article 5.

Perhaps it isn't the Nato member Baltic states and Poland who should be worried and more non Nato member Finland 

The Winter War between Soviet Union and Finland (1939 - 1940) - YouTube

Edited by Matthew Le God
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
Just now, Matthew Le God said:

Millbrook Saint suggested Putin would be emboldened after the Ukraine and attack another country in a few years. I wondered which country, because really it would need to be a non Nato member, because the Russians would know they are likely to get away with it as it wouldn't trigger article 5.

Perhaps it isn't the Nato member Baltic states and Poland who should be worried and more non Nato member Finland 

The Winter War between Soviet Union and Finland (1939 - 1940) - YouTube

Seems like the forum elite dont like this topic being discussed MLG. Been abused for it already this morning 😞 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted (edited)
52 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Same as above, attacking them automatically triggers a world war and article 5. Attacking Lithuania is vastly different to attacking the Ukraine. 

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. 

Edited by egg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, egg said:

It only triggers a world war of 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. 

If article 5 isn't triggered when a Nato member is attacked then there is no need to have Nato and it would disband. The whole purpose of Nato is for collective defence. That is what they signed up for and if they wouldn't follow through with article 5 they may as well not have signed up in the first place!

Edited by Matthew Le God
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
Just now, Matthew Le God said:

If article 5 isn't triggered when a Nato member is attacked then there is no need to have Nato and it would disband. The whole purpose of Nato is for collective defence. That is what they signed up for.

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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

If article 5 isn't triggered when a Nato member is attacked then there is no need to have Nato and it would disband. The whole purpose of Nato is for collective defence. That is what they signed up for.

exactly.  Fancy a war with Russia?  They are not some tin-pot desert rat nation.  They bite back and have significant means to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

exactly.  Fancy a war with Russia?  They are not some tin-pot desert rat nation.  They bite back and have significant means to do so.

Would Russia have the appetite to try it just to see what response they get ?

Edited by badgerx16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

exactly.  Fancy a war with Russia?  They are not some tin-pot desert rat nation.  They bite back and have significant means to do so.

Of course none of them want a war with Russia. But members joined Nato  largely for self defence vs the USSR (and now Russia). May as well disband Nato if they don't follow through the key reason it was created for.

Equally Russia is unlikely to want to attack any of them because it knows a war with one Nato member is a war with all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, whelk said:

All looks pretty civil to me

It is now, it's been cleansed.

Just now, badgerx16 said:

Would Russia have the appetite to try it ?

Or even the cash. It's not like Putin's going into places with massive amounts of financial reserve or natural resources he can commandeer. A prolonged occupation of Ukraine, combined with the sanctions which will follow, isn't going to come cheap. This kind of invasion and occupation has gone tits up for countries with much stronger economies, invading much smaller places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
Just now, Lorne Malvo said:

Its pretty clear why they would be. West hasn't the balls for a war and Putin wants the old borders/countries back into Russian power.

You've cut me off mid sentence in the quote you just used, which takes what I said out of the context it was written. 

The West was never going to want to go to war over a non Nato member invaded by Russia. It is written into the Nato membership that countries have to defend other Nato countries, that is the deterrent for Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Of course none of them want a war with Russia. But members joined Nato  largely for self defence vs the USSR (and now Russia). May as well disband Nato if they don't follow through the key reason it was created for.

Equally Russia is unlikely to want to attack any of them because it knows a war with one Nato member is a war with all of them.

Self defence is only going to happen if there is a will to do so.  What will is there?

US - general population probably could not careless about eastern Europe (or Europe in general).  The nation is led by someone who barely knows what day it is.

UK - We all know the issues here.  Both left and right scrambling for the green agenda, pronouns, kneeling, statues, no will to secure our own borders, demanding the PM (who ever it is) is removed within months of taking over and armed forces gleefully decimated over the last 25 years

France - Incredible history of not fronting up to NATO responsibilities

Germany - Pacifist at best and sold their soul to Russia in many ways.

Canada - Look at the state of that country (and who leads it)

That is about it.  The rest are two-bob powers

 

I would predict that the appetite for war, let alone a protracted one, after Afghanistan etc is absolutely minimal. Like we could afford it after COVID.  Talking of Afghanistan, notice no one cares anymore?  Kids are probably still getting their heads cut off, but cake is a bigger story.

 

Edited by AlexLaw76
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
Just now, AlexLaw76 said:

Self defence is only going to happen if there is a will to do so.  What will is there?

US - general population probably could not careless about eastern Europe (or Europe in general).  The nation is led by someone who barely knows what day it is.

UK - We all know the issues here.  Both left and right scrambling for the green agenda, pronouns, kneeling, statues, no will to secure our own borders, demanding the PM (who ever it is) is removed within months of taking over and armed forces gleefully decimated over the last 25 years

France - Incredible history of not fronting up to NATO responsibilities

Germany - Pacifist at best and sold their soul to Russia in many ways.

That is about it.  The rest our two-bobs powers

Do you agree that article 5 is fundamental to the existence of Nato and a key reason why countries signed up to it? Without it being triggered after an attack on one of its members it may as well fold as mutual self defence is the key purpose of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexLaw76

AlexLaw76

Posted
Posted
Just now, Matthew Le God said:

Do you agree that article 5 is fundamental to the existence of Nato and a key reason why countries signed up to it? Without it being triggered after an attack on one of its members it may as well fold as mutual self defence is the key purpose of it.

it is a deterrent if anything.  If Khalid crashes a plane in down-town warsaw, then 'retribution' will take place.

If Russia (backed by China?) squares up to Lithuania, the will for ~30-odd nations to pile-in.....remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
badgerx16

badgerx16

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Do you agree that article 5 is fundamental to the existence of Nato and a key reason why countries signed up to it? Without it being triggered after an attack on one of its members it may as well fold as mutual self defence is the key purpose of it.

But, but but,............cake !

Link to comment
Share on other sites
moonraker

moonraker

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, egg said:

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. 

In 1939 Hitler banked on the UK and France not honouring their commitment to Poland.  Putin is nothing if not a survivor, he will weigh very carefully any attack on a NATO member against the will of NATO members to honour article 5.  I do not pretend to understand the warped mind of the likes of Putin, but he will also have to weigh the risk of internal revolt, and this I think may be a greater concern for him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...