Russia

[Sarisbury Saint]

5 minutes ago, moonraker said:

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.  

Internal revolt would be the key, but as we’ve already seen, they’re too scared to stand up to him, so he will rule by fear. Sound familiar ?

[egg]

3 minutes ago, moonraker said:

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.  

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? 

[Sarisbury Saint]

Just now, egg said:

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? 

It will have to react , otherwise NATO will collapse.

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, Sarisbury Saint said:

It will have to react , otherwise NATO will collapse.

And if it does?  Lets be honest, most of the nations offer very little and depend on the US funding their defence.

As Trump ranted - Germany being the biggest culprit

[moonraker]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

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? 

You suggest that some in NATO are more “equal” than others. If the major military powers in NATO reacted as you suggest that would play directly into Putins hands, not only sacrificing a NATO member but also underwriting his rhetoric on the corrupt west.

[egg]

1 minute ago, Sarisbury Saint said:

It will have to react , otherwise NATO will collapse.

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. 

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, moonraker said:

You suggest that some in NATO are more “equal” than others. If the major military powers in NATO reacted as you suggest that would play directly into Putins hands, not only sacrificing a NATO member but also underwriting his rhetoric on the corrupt west.

some NATO members are absolutely more equal than others.

[moonraker]

2 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And if it does?  Lets be honest, most of the nations offer very little and depend on the US funding their defence.

As Trump ranted - Germany being the biggest culprit

Basing your knowledge of NATO member states military capability on Trumps rankings does not merit serious consideration.  NATO does need the USA but do not so easily dismiss the capability of other countries militaries like Trump very arrogant.

[egg]

Just now, moonraker said:

You suggest that some in NATO are more “equal” than others. If the major military powers in NATO reacted as you suggest that would play directly into Putins hands, not only sacrificing a NATO member but also underwriting his rhetoric on the corrupt west.

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. 

[moonraker]

Just now, egg said:

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. 

Yes, if you believe in honouring agreements , oops we have Bojo in charge and he has no honour at all.

 

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, moonraker said:

Basing your knowledge of NATO member states military capability on Trumps rankings does not merit serious consideration.  NATO does need the USA but do not so easily dismiss the capability of other countries militaries like Trump very arrogant.

Other nations on their own? Are you having a laugh?

Germany have woefully equipped their services for decades, given their monetary might

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, moonraker said:

Yes, if you believe in honouring agreements , oops we have Bojo in charge and he has no honour at all.

 

he seems to be doing more than most at the moment (albeit way too late)

[egg]

Just now, moonraker said:

Yes, if you believe in honouring agreements , oops we have Bojo in charge and he has no honour at all.

 

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. 

[Jimmy_D]

1 minute ago, egg said:

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. 

If any NATO country faced invasion, I firmly believe that there would be a full scale NATO response.

The biggest risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that.

As it is, I think Putin may have underestimated how big the response will be to invading Ukraine.

[Guided Missile]

Breaking News - France have surrendered.

[egg]

Just now, Jimmy_D said:

If any NATO country faced invasion, I firmly believe that there would be a full scale NATO response.

The biggest risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that.

As it is, I think Putin may have underestimated how big the response will be to invading Ukraine.

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. 

[moonraker]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

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. 

He said he won’t send them to Ukraine, anon NATO member, you cannot extrapolate from this 5hat he won’t if a NATO member is attacked.

[moonraker]

11 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

he seems to be doing more than most at the moment (albeit way too late)

Your having a laugh, the 12 years of Tory rule has enabled corrupt Russian money laundering through London in exchange for donations to the Tory Party.  When the Tories return every penny they have received from Russians then I might believe he is serious.

[aintforever]

2 hours ago, Millbrook Saint said:

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

This. NATO need to show some balls and pile forces into Eastern Europe and supply Ukraine with any arms they need.

 

 

[aintforever]

19 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

he seems to be doing more than most at the moment (albeit way too late)

You are joking, his 'sanctions' were pathetic.

[AlexLaw76]

Just now, aintforever said:

You are joking, his 'sanctions' were pathetic.

Is that all you equate action towards, 'sanctions'?

Limited view entirely. 

[aintforever]

2 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Is that all you equate action towards, 'sanctions'?

Limited view entirely. 

They were softer that what the EU did. Maybe he didn't want to upset the Conservative donors?

Edited 24 February, 2022 by aintforever

[Sheaf Saint]

1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

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

Congratulations. I think you have just set a new personal record for the highest number of strawman arguments in a single sentence. 

You'll never learn will you. 

Edited 24 February, 2022 by Sheaf Saint

[whelk]

4 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Congratulations. I think you have just set a new personal record for the highest number of strawman arguments in a single sentence. 

You'll never learn will you. 

The sad little chap can’t get away from his little culture wars.  Such a free thinker. 

[RedArmy]

24 minutes ago, Jimmy_D said:

If any NATO country faced invasion, I firmly believe that there would be a full scale NATO response.

The biggest risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that.

As it is, I think Putin may have underestimated how big the response will be to invading Ukraine.

You really think America would risk nukes being launched in their direction to save the likes of Lithuania? 

No matter how arrogant they are or how good they think their defences are at dealing with a nuclear strike, even the yanks aren’t that stupid. 

They tried to poke the bear and now he’s got them by the bollocks. Oops. 

 

[aintforever]

7 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Congratulations. I think you have just set a new personal record for the highest number of strawman arguments in a single sentence. 

You'll never learn will you. 

It's like he's just read the Daily Mail, had some sort of a breakdown and shat a load of words out.

It's mental how anyone can connect Russia starting WW3 to footballers kneeling before kick-off. 

[badgerx16]

24 minutes ago, moonraker said:

He said he won’t send them to Ukraine, anon NATO member, you cannot extrapolate from this 5hat he won’t if a NATO member is attacked.

The 82nd Airborne have just been deployed to Poland.

[Lighthouse]

3 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

You really think America would risk nukes being launched in their direction to save the likes of Lithuania? 

No matter how arrogant they are or how good they think their defences are at dealing with a nuclear strike, even the yanks aren’t that stupid. 

They tried to poke the bear and now he’s got them by the bollocks. Oops. 

That works both ways. Putin is clearly desperate to lead his own Russian empire and that wont include getting annihilated by Britain and USAs nuclear deterrent. You can flip your argument around both ways; would Putin risk his own Empire, betting against nuclear war with USA, just for a small, economically insignificant piece of land like Lithuania?

[egg]

3 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

That works both ways. Putin is clearly desperate to lead his own Russian empire and that wont include getting annihilated by Britain and USAs nuclear deterrent. You can flip your argument around both ways; would Putin risk his own Empire, betting against nuclear war with USA, just for a small, economically insignificant piece of land like Lithuania?

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. 

[aintforever]

16 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

You really think America would risk nukes being launched in their direction to save the likes of Lithuania? 

No matter how arrogant they are or how good they think their defences are at dealing with a nuclear strike, even the yanks aren’t that stupid. 

They tried to poke the bear and now he’s got them by the bollocks. Oops. 

 

But surely if NATO doesn't bother to protect one of it's members it makes the whole organisation pointless and it will collapse.

[Lighthouse]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

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. 

No they don't, we both lose exactly the same - everything! People are talking as if the west would respond to all out nuclear Armageddon with some hashtags and T-shirts. That's not the case, there's a reason the cold war stayed cold and all the wars were fought by proxy; mutually assured destruction.

[egg]

Just now, Lighthouse said:

No they don't, we both lose exactly the same - everything! People are talking as if the west would respond to all out nuclear Armageddon with some hashtags and T-shirts. That's not the case, there's a reason the cold war stayed cold and all the wars were fought by proxy; mutually assured destruction.

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. 

[Lighthouse]

Just now, egg said:

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. 

That makes zero sense. That’s like getting into a fight with four blokes outside a pub and thinking they’ve got more to lose because you can punch four of them.

[trousers]

3 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

the Ukraine. 

Need to drop the "the"... https://time.com/12597/the-ukraine-or-ukraine/

[RedArmy]

12 minutes ago, aintforever said:

But surely if NATO doesn't bother to protect one of it's members it makes the whole organisation pointless and it will collapse.

Not the end of the world really, the big members would likely still stand shoulder to shoulder if one of those countries was attacked.

The only members that would be really concerned would be the ones that aren’t really bringing much to the table anyway. 

If the USA, UK, France, Germany etc were attacked and/or invaded. What the fuck are Latvia and Estonia going to do about it? 
 

 

[egg]

15 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

That makes zero sense. That’s like getting into a fight with four blokes outside a pub and thinking they’ve got more to lose because you can punch four of them.

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

[egg]

2 minutes ago, RedArmy said:

Not the end of the world really, the big members would likely still stand shoulder to shoulder if one of those countries was attacked.

The only members that would be really concerned would be the ones that aren’t really bringing much to the table anyway. 

If the USA, UK, France, Germany etc were attacked and/or invaded. What the fuck are Latvia and Estonia going to do about it? 
 

 

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

[badgerx16]

1 minute ago, egg said:

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

So what is the point of the NATO treaty ? Have the larger member states simply duped the smaller ones into joining something they have no intention of honouring ?

[Lighthouse]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

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

Okay, walking up to four blokes outside a pub holding a grenade, pulling the pin, then standing at the pearly gates claiming you won 4-1.

[RedArmy]

Just now, egg said:

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

You could give the average American 200 guesses to point out Estonia on a map of the world and they wouldn’t find it. The idea that Biden would have the backing of the American people to risk their lives to defend a country with a population 6 times smaller than New York City is laughable. 

 

2 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

So what is the point of the NATO treaty ? Have the larger member states simply duped the smaller ones into joining something they have no intention of honouring ?

They’re certainly not members for their military prowess 

[Jimmy_D]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

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

It wouldn’t be defending Lithuania or Estonia, it’d be defending NATO itself.

Like I said, the bigger risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that. The risk to NATO of Putin thinking any part of NATO would be left undefended would be far too big a risk to ignore.

[egg]

3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

So what is the point of the NATO treaty ? Have the larger member states simply duped the smaller ones into joining something they have no intention of honouring ?

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. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Jimmy_D said:

It wouldn’t be defending Lithuania or Estonia, it’d be defending NATO itself.

Like I said, the bigger risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that. The risk to NATO of Putin thinking any part of NATO would be left undefended would be far too big a risk to ignore.

I don't agree. When it comes down to it, the big countries aren't going to send in people to die in Lithuania. It won't command popular support. 

[hypochondriac]

Also Trump is a buffoon but you can't tell me that this situation would be worse if he were still in charge. 

[Lighthouse]

If nothing else, I think the USA would push to defend the Baltics to send a message to China/Taiwan. However, I think if it came to it, NATO would defend them and Russia wouldn't attack.

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, Lighthouse said:

If nothing else, I think the USA would push to defend the Baltics to send a message to China/Taiwan. However, I think if it came to it, NATO would defend them and Russia wouldn't attack.

If Russia attacked would NATO respond with boots on the ground? I don't think they would. Russia knows there is no appetite for it which is why they are doing it. The disaster in Afghanistan has contributed to this as well. 

Edited 24 February, 2022 by hypochondriac

[Mystic Force]

So I take it we have given up on Ukraine, its now Russian and we accept it. Looks like BoJos wrist slap did not stop them like MLG told me it would. 

[Jimmy_D]

Just now, hypochondriac said:

If Russia attacked would NATO respond with boots on the ground? I don't think they would. 

I think if there were any indication of an imminent invasion of a NATO member, boots would be on the ground before it happened.

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

If Russia attacked would NATO respond with boots on the ground? I don't think they would. Russia knows there is no appetite for it which is why they are doing it. The disaster in Afghanistan has contributed to this as well. 

It's not just the West who've had a disaster in Afghanistan. Boots on the ground, who knows but if I had to wager their air force against F22s, F35s, Typhoons, F15s and FA18s I know what my money's on.

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Jimmy_D said:

I think if there were any indication of an imminent invasion of a NATO member, boots would be on the ground before it happened.

I can't see the likes of America stationing troops in a country to die in a country they know nothing about. Expect we will find out shortly.