Putin announces 'military operation' in Ukraine.

[Gordon R]

Quote

This guy will not be wanting to send soldiers back to Putin in body bags, he will hold his troops back and bomb the hell out of the Ukrainians first.

Sadly, I have to agree. It has already started.

[Dave-G]

32 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

I doubt I'm the only person 😂

I can certainly see the possibility of a land grab, but to put the deeply unpopular USSR times back into a modern progressive Russia makes no sense. 

What also makes no sense, is why wait 8 years to make your move, 8 years for Ukraine to be become stronger and more closely tied to the EU and NATO, where is the logic in that? 

Give me some kind of explanation besides 'he's mad' or really bad at strategy, because when stuff doesn't add up, there is misdirection or lies at work. 

This is just a wild guess but - how long did it take to plan for and prepare their first part: install the last of those gas pipes to make Europe even more dependent on them?

I'm thinking Nordstream 2 was to be finally be running late last year was it?

Now they's disabled the largest electricity supply in Europe too.

[Mungler]

40 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

In those 8 years - Europe has become MUCH more dependant on Russian energy - and so a whole new bargaining chip/economic weapon became available.  That is part at least of the reason.

 

And Russia has spent 8 years in the background trying to break up European cohesion and so it thought, bunging Ukrainian higher ups who were supposed to welcome the Russian troops in.

But, the question is not why wait 8 years, but why at all?

On the subject of why we have been given half a dozen varying reasons by the Kremlin, none making any sense and none a national threat - Cocaine, gangsters, Nazis, nato : all demonstrably nonsense.

By a process of elimination (coupled with the ‘bunging’ and greasing that the Kremlin had thought had taken place) it has to be land grab because that is all that’s left that makes a modicum of sense. 

 

[old'un]

40 minutes ago, Gordon R said:

Sadly, I have to agree. It has already started.

Yep, this guy will do what he did in Syria and bomb civilian areas to try and brake the will of the Ukrainians, in fact I am surprised they have not done it before as most of the Russian public will hear very little of such acts, all they will hear is, the great victory of their army under the leadership of Gen Sergei Surovikin.

With this guy in charge I think we will see a lot more long range strikes deep into Ukraine.

Edit, Just seen this on sky news...https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-latest-news-putin-wont-launch-nuclear-attack-12541713

 

Edited October 10, 2022 by old'un

[Rewulf]

58 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

In those 8 years - Europe has become MUCH more dependant on Russian energy - and so a whole new bargaining chip/economic weapon became available.  That is part at least of the reason.

 

21 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

This is just a wild guess but - how long did it take to plan for and prepare their first part: install the last of those gas pipes to make Europe even more dependent on them?

I'm thinking Nordstream 2 was to be finally be running late last year was it?

Lets get this right. Europe wasn't exactly FORCED into Russian energy was it 😂

No one held a nuke at their head and said 'Buy our gas or we kill you all' 

They bought it because it was cheap, and huge profits could be made. 

Nordstream were built by Europe AND Russia to facilitate this, much to the anger of the US, who even threatened to sanction Germany over it! 

The fact that its WAS an economic weapon is coincidence, the fact it has now been removed is NOT. 

14 minutes ago, Mungler said:

By a process of elimination (coupled with the ‘bunging’ and greasing that the Kremlin had thought had taken place) it has to be land grab because that is all that’s left that makes a modicum of sense. 

Remove the dubious concept of the bunging and greasing, and your process of elimination falls at the first hurdle. 

That fact that a country committed itself to an invasion on the strength of someone's say so, without a stress test is ludicrous, all they had to do was watch Ukrainian TV to see the mood 😂

[henry d]

26 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Cocaine, gangsters, Nazis...

Sounds like one of those parties you would like to be invited to but may regret long term 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Lets get this right. Europe wasn't exactly FORCED into Russian energy was it

No one suggested Europe was forced into it.  Europe did it for a variety of reasons of mainly best value and perceived 'greenness'.  Arguably a 'trap was set, and Europe walked into it'.

Russia profited economically AND gained a very powerful economic weapon.

For Europe it will be shown to have been a hugely expensive and damaging 'green wise' in the long run, but there are the benefits of hindsight.

[old'un]

This does not look good, just been on the news.

Russia and Belarus to form joint military group

Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko says Belarus and Russia will deploy a joint military group in response to what he called an aggravation of tension on the country's western borders.

The move is likely to raise fears Russia is finally drawing its ally Belarus into the war.

The new task force was reported by Belarus's state-run Belta news agency this morning.

Mr Lukashenko said the two countries would deploy a regional military group, and had started pulling forces together two days ago, apparently after the explosion on Russia's bridge to Crimea.

 

[Mungler]

13 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Lets get this right. Europe wasn't exactly FORCED into Russian energy was it 😂

No one held a nuke at their head and said 'Buy our gas or we kill you all' 

They bought it because it was cheap, and huge profits could be made. 

Nordstream were built by Europe AND Russia to facilitate this, much to the anger of the US, who even threatened to sanction Germany over it! 

The fact that its WAS an economic weapon is coincidence, the fact it has now been removed is NOT. 

Remove the dubious concept of the bunging and greasing, and your process of elimination falls at the first hurdle. 

That fact that a country committed itself to an invasion on the strength of someone's say so, without a stress test is ludicrous, all they had to do was watch Ukrainian TV to see the mood 😂

No it doesn’t.

Remove the greasing of Ukraine politicos and it’s still the only plausible explanation for such an incredible course of action. Indeed to do it for any less of a reason makes it doubly nuts.

 

[Rewulf]

15 minutes ago, Mungler said:

No it doesn’t.

Remove the greasing of Ukraine politicos and it’s still the only plausible explanation for such an incredible course of action. Indeed to do it for any less of a reason makes it doubly nuts.

Your opinion.
Which seems to involve a lot of nuts.

 

25 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Arguably a 'trap was set, and Europe walked into it'.

Arguably , Europe wanted cheap gas , and despite REPEATED warnings that it could be used as an economic weapon, still went ahead , because, and you hear me say this often ,  (they) follow the money.
Saying Russia set a trap is a feeble attempt at swinging blame away from greedy EU oligarchs.

 

29 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

For Europe it will be shown to have been a hugely expensive and damaging 'green wise' in the long run, but there are the benefits of hindsight.

The green agenda will be far more damaging in the long run anyway, its obvious.
But while reliance on Russian energy is damaging in the short term , the real pain is yet to come.
But thats another story,

[old'un]

33 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

No one suggested Europe was forced into it.  Europe did it for a variety of reasons of mainly best value and perceived 'greenness'.  Arguably a 'trap was set, and Europe walked into it'.

Russia profited economically AND gained a very powerful economic weapon.

For Europe it will be shown to have been a hugely expensive and damaging 'green wise' in the long run, but there are the benefits of hindsight.

If Belarus gets dragged into this war I don't think any of that will matter, Poland will have two country's on its boarders at war, there's now a possibility NATO will move more troops closer to the boarder with Poland and Belarus and we all know what that means if it kicks off, WW3.

[ditchman]

2 minutes ago, old'un said:

If Belarus gets dragged into this war I don't think any of that will matter, Poland will have two country's on its boarders at war, there's now a possibility NATO will move more troops closer to the boarder with Poland and Belarus and we all know what that means if it kicks off, WW3.

think Belarus is on a sticky wicket anyway....there will be alot of unrest if things get phyisical...and maybe Lukashenko will go under the cosh by his own people.........

before anyone from Australia shouts rubbish..this is my own view..which i have a right to air

[mchughcb]

2 hours ago, old'un said:

This guy is ruthless, he’s been given a free hand by Putin to get the job done, I think we will see the same tactics he used in Syria where he bombed civilian areas and reduced them to rubble, leaving little for the resistance to hide and fight from.

This guy will not be wanting to send soldiers back to Putin in body bags, he will hold his troops back and bomb the hell out of the Ukrainians first.

Russia also ended the 4 year siege of Aleppo from ISIS or Al Nusra. The same Al Nusra that was supported by the USA, Turkey, UK and France.

When the Russians came, they cutoff their NGO supplies and gave them one week to lay down their arms and get out on the buses. Those that were left were terminated. 4 years and it was over in months.

Battle of Aleppo (2012–2016) - Wikipedia

 

 

[old'un]

20 minutes ago, ditchman said:

think Belarus is on a sticky wicket anyway....there will be alot of unrest if things get phyisical...and maybe Lukashenko will go under the cosh by his own people.........

before anyone from Australia shouts rubbish..this is my own view..which i have a right to air

Hope you are right, but the reports coming in this morning makes me think this going to escalate.

[mchughcb]

1 hour ago, Mungler said:

And Russia has spent 8 years in the background trying to break up European cohesion and so it thought, bunging Ukrainian higher ups who were supposed to welcome the Russian troops in.

But, the question is not why wait 8 years, but why at all?

On the subject of why we have been given half a dozen varying reasons by the Kremlin, none making any sense and none a national threat - Cocaine, gangsters, Nazis, nato : all demonstrably nonsense.

By a process of elimination (coupled with the ‘bunging’ and greasing that the Kremlin had thought had taken place) it has to be land grab because that is all that’s left that makes a modicum of sense. 

 

 

Next time theirs a civil war on the borders of NI, be sure to send a letter to Truss saying we don't need the army to protect the borders let them sort it out themselves. I certainly didn't like the army checking my car every time I passed through Derry.

28 minutes ago, old'un said:

If Belarus gets dragged into this war I don't think any of that will matter, Poland will have two country's on its boarders at war, there's now a possibility NATO will move more troops closer to the boarder with Poland and Belarus and we all know what that means if it kicks off, WW3.

Which is exactly what the USA wants. They will defend Ukraine down to the last Ukrainian. Old Uncle Joe sleep walking into WW3. Thankgod it wasn't Trump, the first US President to step foot in North Korea, unlike old nobel peace prize smooth talking Obama.

 

I'm sure there's enough lefties here who think Trump was an idiot, but here is a raft of presidents before him who hid behind bullet proof glass. Only one of them knew how to get dialogue happening and yet the best London could do was make a baby blimp of him.

 

 

[mchughcb]

28 minutes ago, ditchman said:

think Belarus is on a sticky wicket anyway....there will be alot of unrest if things get phyisical...and maybe Lukashenko will go under the cosh by his own people.........

before anyone from Australia shouts rubbish..this is my own view..which i have a right to air

That's alright. Remember the Warsaw pact dissolved but NATO carried on. Well as NATO refuses to dissolve and appears to be getting bigger, then maybe it shouldn't choke if the Warsaw Pact gets the gang back together.

[mchughcb]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

No one suggested Europe was forced into it.  Europe did it for a variety of reasons of mainly best value and perceived 'greenness'.  Arguably a 'trap was set, and Europe walked into it'.

Russia profited economically AND gained a very powerful economic weapon.

For Europe it will be shown to have been a hugely expensive and damaging 'green wise' in the long run, but there are the benefits of hindsight.

Europe and the Greta loving village idiots who have no idea of where their food or energy comes from setting the agenda for equally stupid career politicians who only worry about how many of these idiots will vote for them at the next election.

The EU has decided to sanction Russia. If the EU had not sanctioned Russia, there would be probably zero problems with energy or food coming from Russia. They will sell to anybody. The only people to force the 8th round of sanctions is that non elected EU leader Ursula.

 

 

 

[Mungler]

What on Earth are you babbling on about?

Northern Ireland?

What’s that got to do with the price of fish?

More obfuscation and irrelevant whataboutery. 

12 minutes ago, mchughcb said:

That's alright. Remember the Warsaw pact dissolved but NATO carried on. Well as NATO refuses to dissolve and appears to be getting bigger, then maybe it shouldn't choke if the Warsaw Pact gets the gang back together.

Bonkers 😆😆😆

4 minutes ago, mchughcb said:

The EU has decided to sanction Russia. If the EU had not sanctioned Russia, there would be probably zero problems with energy or food coming from Russia. They will sell to anybody. The only people to force the 8th round of sanctions is that non elected EU leader Ursula.

Funding Russia’s invasion and slaughter of the Ukrainian general population was the bridge too far. 

[JohnfromUK]

21 minutes ago, mchughcb said:

only worry about how many of these idiots will vote for them at the next election.

Unlike Putin, European politicians are subject to genuine elections.

[mchughcb]

5 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Unlike Putin, European politicians are subject to genuine elections.

Lets not confuse a weak opposition to electoral process. Gary Kasparov who was in opposition is a complete nutcase.

Here is addressing a crowd while a flying dildo interrupts him.

This never happens at a Putin press conference.

 

 

[Rewulf]

13 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Unlike Putin, European politicians are subject to genuine elections.

Thats debateable 

 

[JohnfromUK]

Just now, Rewulf said:

Thats debateable 

 

All right, most European politicians are subject to genuine elections.  Putin does not have to face genuine elections (and keeps any realistic opposition locked up/out of the election process).

[welsh1]

1 hour ago, mchughcb said:

 

Next time theirs a civil war on the borders of NI, be sure to send a letter to Truss saying we don't need the army to protect the borders let them sort it out themselves. I certainly didn't like the army checking my car every time I passed through Derry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The British Army stood between waring political and religious factions stopping each from commiting more atrocities than they managed.
When you pased through Londonderry there were checkpoints because it was a hot bed of terrorist activity, and checkpoints disrupted their movment of men ,arms and explosives.I have several good mates who were at a checkpoint when a car bomb went off, and more who were responsible for rebuilding the checkpoint.
Having spent time on the boat section in Londonderry i am aware of who was about back in the days of the troubles and our intel was very very good. 

The Army kept you safer than you will ever be aware of by vehicle check points, and the minor inconvienience of being stopped aided your safety.

[Rewulf]

15 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

All right, most European politicians are subject to genuine elections.  Putin does not have to face genuine elections (and keeps any realistic opposition locked up/out of the election process).

Agreed, however , I dont believe anyone has ever seriously stated that Russia runs a democratic, free system of government.
The closest anyone has come , is to say that western governmental systems are hardly bastions of squeaky clean transparency.
That said , I know where Id rather live, and it aint Russia, or Ukraine.

[mchughcb]

35 minutes ago, welsh1 said:

The British Army stood between waring political and religious factions stopping each from commiting more atrocities than they managed.
When you pased through Londonderry there were checkpoints because it was a hot bed of terrorist activity, and checkpoints disrupted their movment of men ,arms and explosives.I have several good mates who were at a checkpoint when a car bomb went off, and more who were responsible for rebuilding the checkpoint.
Having spent time on the boat section in Londonderry i am aware of who was about back in the days of the troubles and our intel was very very good. 

The Army kept you safer than you will ever be aware of by vehicle check points, and the minor inconvienience of being stopped aided your safety.

I have no doubt. But in the end my safety on the years since have been based on political solutions following the military ones.