Putin announces 'military operation' in Ukraine.

[Rewulf]

2 minutes ago, oldypigeonpopper said:

from a previous post I still believe if we had all stood up to Putin i don't think he would have gone into Ukraine

We tried it , he wasnt buying it.

32 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

And in answer to how far do you go, I say all the way, whatever it takes.

Nuclear war , over Ukraine?

Id rather not.

Call me selfish and uncaring, but all Ukraine had to do was promise not to join NATO , and come to some agreement over Donbass and Crimea.
But they stuck 2 fingers up , the west made noises like it would do something besides sell them weapons, and now their countries wrecked and 1000s of people are dead.
I reckon if they could turn that clock back....

[Mungler]

8 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

We tried it , he wasnt buying it.

Nuclear war , over Ukraine?

Id rather not.

Call me selfish and uncaring, but all Ukraine had to do was promise not to join NATO , and come to some agreement over Donbass and Crimea.
But they stuck 2 fingers up , the west made noises like it would do something besides sell them weapons, and now their countries wrecked and 1000s of people are dead.
I reckon if they could turn that clock back....

No. Putin wants to rebuild Imperial Russia. All those tanks and all those men were sent for a reason (and which is why there was a wholesale invasion from all points of the compass and not just into the Donbass). 

The early supply chain columns contained riot gear. Putin really thought he’d roll in and be welcomed by the majority and the dissenting minority would get the riot gear.

Turns out the Kremlin were funnelling a shed ton of money to FSB agents who were supposed to subvert the local higher ups and politicos. The FSB agents took the money and reported back that everyone in Ukraine loved mother Russia and would welcome an occupation. Problem is, that was BS - the people they subverted didn’t exist and they trousered the bung money never for one moment thinking that Ukraine would actually get a formal visit and those involved were disappeared in the second week when it all started to unravel.

To suggest that Ukraine is at fault for not giving in straight away to the demands of an aggressing bully is just odd. Indeed, I’ve never seen it yet where giving in to a bully works out well.

Edited March 26, 2022 by Mungler

[12gauge82]

29 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

We tried it , he wasnt buying it.

Nuclear war , over Ukraine?

Id rather not.

Call me selfish and uncaring, but all Ukraine had to do was promise not to join NATO , and come to some agreement over Donbass and Crimea.
But they stuck 2 fingers up , the west made noises like it would do something besides sell them weapons, and now their countries wrecked and 1000s of people are dead.
I reckon if they could turn that clock back....

I'd rather not to, but when your on the side of right and someone else is the aggressor unfortunately you don't get to make the decision how far they're going to go with violence, you get to decide if your going to be a door mat or step up to the mark, I know what I'd do, but I'm not in the position to make that decision. 

 

As for ALL Ukraine had to do! How would you feel if a foreign power annexed part of the UK by force and dictated what we could do as a free country? I say good on them for giving Russia the finger. 

[Mungler]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

I'd rather not to, but when your on the side of right and someone else is the aggressor unfortunately you don't get to make the decision how far they're going to go with violence, you get to decide if your going to be a door mat or step up to the mark, I know what I'd do, but I'm not in the position to make that decision. 

 

As for ALL Ukraine had to do! How would you feel if a foreign power annexed part of the UK by force and dictated what we could do as a free country? I say good on them for giving Russia the finger. 

Agreed.

Moreover, given the massive military build up, had Ukraine just said ‘help yourself to Donbass and yes we’ll forgo NATO’ does anyone actually think Putin would have stopped there and taken just that region alone? Not a chance; to think otherwise is just bizarre.

And where is it written that giving up a region bigger than the whole of the UK just because an aggressor demands it is a either the right thing to do or the smart thing to do?

Some people watch far too much Russia Today.

[clangerman]

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

 How would you feel if a foreign power annexed part of the UK by force and dictated what we could do as a free country? 

exactly the SAME thing WE have done! speaking your mind in this police state is a crime free country? in your dreams! 

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, Mungler said:

suggest that Ukraine is at fault for not giving in straight away to the demands of an aggressing bully is just odd. Indeed, I’ve never seen it yet where giving in to a bully works out well.

I didnt say they were at fault , I stated what they DID , I also stated that they may of acted in that fashion because they believed NATO  would do more than send some missiles and some sanctions ?

They were wrong , but it's not their fault , they made a miscalculation that has cost them , and Russia dearly.

But Zelenskys repeated attempts to bring the west in to fight for Ukraine,  are impractical,  and strategically absurd. For everyone.

Again no one is going to put the world at risk of nuclear war for Ukraine,  sorry , but it's not happening.

1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said:

As for ALL Ukraine had to do! How would you feel if a foreign power annexed part of the UK by force and dictated what we could do as a free country? I say good on them for giving Russia the finger.

Good on them too , at least they have their pride they didnt back down.

But millions of them have left , many never to return , infrastructure destroyed, thousands dead and injured, yes they gave ivan a bloody nose, killed loads of young soldiers, but that could easily lead to more anger and atrocities. 

If it was the UK,  yes I would fight, but if that fight caused the deaths of thousands of civilians , with a possible no win situation anyway,  would it be worth it ?

I'm no quitter , appeaser or apologist,  but sometimes there are practical considerations,  especially when dealing with an unpredictable enemy.

If the Russians take Kiev by force , there will be carnage on both sides

22 minutes ago, Mungler said:

Agreed.

Moreover, given the massive military build up, had Ukraine just said ‘help yourself to Donbass and yes we’ll forgo NATO’ does anyone actually think Putin would have stopped there and taken just that region alone? Not a chance; to think otherwise is just bizarre.

And where is it written that giving up a region bigger than the whole of the UK just because an aggressor demands it is a either the right thing to do or the smart thing to do?

Some people watch far too much Russia Today.

Maybe he would have just invaded anyway , maybe not , a bit late now to find out.

And as far as giving regions up , theres plenty of historical examples of just that .

[12gauge82]

Certainly an emotive subject with lots of different views, at least we haven't ended up at war with each other. 

Hope everyone is enjoying their weekend 👍

[oldypigeonpopper]

5 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Certainly an emotive subject with lots of different views, at least we haven't ended up at war with each other. 

Hope everyone is enjoying their weekend 👍

Hello, good post 👍, not a bad Saturday, 😁 be better with a lotto win 🤔👍😁

[ditchman]

anyone want to predict how this will all end up ?

 

go on i dare you

i think one thing tho....we will end up having closer relationship with china....think china is watching this very carefully...i think for a while they have been on a knife edge..between expasionism and trade........

i would also like to think there is going to be a very serious change within Russia...for the good

but there will be a lot of pain first

Edited March 26, 2022 by ditchman

[Dave-G]

2 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Certainly an emotive subject with lots of different views, at least we haven't ended up at war with each other. 

Hope everyone is enjoying their weekend 👍

Yep, emotive indeed, have a good weekend - are you enroute to Ukraine to fight Ruskies?

[ordnance]

Quote

 

Rewulf If it was the UK,  yes I would fight, but if that fight caused the deaths of thousands of civilians , with a possible no win situation anyway,  would it be worth it ?

I'm no quitter , appeaser or apologist,  but sometimes there are practical considerations,  especially when dealing with an unpredictable enemy.

 

There was no guarantee of winning WW2, and fighting would and did cause destruction and the deaths of thousands of civilians fighting a unpredictable enemy. There were plenty of quitters appeaser and apologist back then as well, that give similar reasons as you that the UK should have capitulated to Hitler. The Ukrainians have a long history of oppression occupation and genocide at the hands of the soviets / Russians and you think they should have thrown the hands up and surrendered 

Quote

The Holodomor also known as the Terror-Famine or the Great Famine, was a famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932 to 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians.

Holodomor | Holocaust and Genocide Studies - College of ...

Edited March 26, 2022 by ordnance

[Mice!]

15 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

I'd rather not to, but when your on the side of right and someone else is the aggressor unfortunately you don't get to make the decision how far they're going to go with violence, you get to decide if your going to be a door mat or step up to the mark, I know what I'd do, but I'm not in the position to make that decision. 

 

As for ALL Ukraine had to do! How would you feel if a foreign power annexed part of the UK by force and dictated what we could do as a free country? I say good on them for giving Russia the finger. 

I didn't get around to replying yesterday. 

So here's the question,  when are we going to sort out the trouble in Yemen? I'll openly admit I haven't a clue what's going on over there, but bits pop up on the news occasionally. 

Now the other day Yemen rebels hit an oil refinery 12 miles from where the F1 race is taking place today, if it wasn't for the race it wouldn't have been mentioned. 

F1 drivers led by Hamilton had a meeting to try and cancel the race, but shockingly being paid £50 million a year means the race will go ahead.

I've no doubt Saudi can do as they please with no repercussions,  they won't be sanctioned or condemned.

Is this similar to what was going on in Crimea or the East of Ukraine before Russia went in?

There are always lots of things going on, most of which is never reported,  at least not without bias, and I haven't seen anything yet that makes me want our troops to go in, if it was clearly one side at fault, committing genocide,  using chemical weapons,  if we felt that Ukraine was only the beginning then maybe it could be justified,  but British troops being killed in the defence of Ukraine should IMO be a last resort.

[12gauge82]

20 minutes ago, Mice! said:

I didn't get around to replying yesterday. 

So here's the question,  when are we going to sort out the trouble in Yemen? I'll openly admit I haven't a clue what's going on over there, but bits pop up on the news occasionally. 

Now the other day Yemen rebels hit an oil refinery 12 miles from where the F1 race is taking place today, if it wasn't for the race it wouldn't have been mentioned. 

F1 drivers led by Hamilton had a meeting to try and cancel the race, but shockingly being paid £50 million a year means the race will go ahead.

I've no doubt Saudi can do as they please with no repercussions,  they won't be sanctioned or condemned.

Is this similar to what was going on in Crimea or the East of Ukraine before Russia went in?

There are always lots of things going on, most of which is never reported,  at least not without bias, and I haven't seen anything yet that makes me want our troops to go in, if it was clearly one side at fault, committing genocide,  using chemical weapons,  if we felt that Ukraine was only the beginning then maybe it could be justified,  but British troops being killed in the defence of Ukraine should IMO be a last resort.

I get what your saying, but for me there are several differences that separates Ukraine and Yemen. 

First and foremost, it is in civil war, not an invasion by a foreign power, they haven't requested our assistance and if we did go in and attempt to help, I believe it would end up as another Afghanistan. 

I agree however, there are alot of double standards in the west and certainly media bias. 

[Rewulf]

17 hours ago, ordnance said:

There was no guarantee of winning WW2, and fighting would and did cause destruction and the deaths of thousands of civilians fighting a unpredictable enemy. There were plenty of quitters appeaser and apologist back then as well, that give similar reasons as you that the UK should have capitulated to Hitler. The Ukrainians have a long history of oppression occupation and genocide at the hands of the soviets / Russians and you think they should have thrown the hands up and surrendered

I don't think you're taking in what I'm saying. 

If there is a chance of victory, without the total destruction of the land you're defending, then yes, go for it, in WW2, if the German army had got across the Channel, gained a bridgehead, this country would have fallen in short order, similar to France, it doesn't matter how hard we would have fought, the end result would be the same, the length of time would purely depend on how many civilian deaths we were prepared to take. 

Bear in mind we lost in total 450, 000 in WW2, 100,000 of those were civilians, France gave up at 567000, around 240,000 of those were civilians, many were Jews. 

Russia lost 27 million, 19 million of those were civilian, millions died in Labour camps. They never gave up. They lost as many as France and UK combined in one city. 

How many do you think we would stand these days before we gave up? 

Everyone likes to think they would fight to the last bullet, but in reality, 99% give up long before that. 

7 hours ago, Mice! said:

I've no doubt Saudi can do as they please with no repercussions,  they won't be sanctioned or condemned.

Is this similar to what was going on in Crimea or the East of Ukraine before Russia went in?

The Saudi backed government in Sudan, stand accused of many atrocities, genocide, war crimes. 

We committed many war crimes in Iraq and afghan. 

The US in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, endless crimes against civilians, where is the bleeding hearts and trials in the Hague for them? 

The longer this conflict lasts, the more desperate BOTH sides will get to win... Something. 

That's when it gets dirty. 

[oowee]

3 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

 

How many do you think we would stand these days before we gave up? 

Everyone likes to think they would fight to the last bullet, but in reality, 99% give up long before that. 

 

The longer this conflict lasts, the more desperate BOTH sides will get to win... Something. 

That's when it gets dirty. 

And that's what make the stand made by Ukraine so admirable. Standing upto the bully that is Putin. There is no way back for him now and the Ukrainians are likely to achieve what the Russian people, to date have been unable to do.

[Mungler]

The rumours appear to be true.

You couldn’t make this up. 
 

 

[Gordon R]

I suspect there will be repercussions for those who stole the money.

[Rewulf]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

And that's what make the stand made by Ukraine so admirable. Standing upto the bully that is Putin. There is no way back for him now and the Ukrainians are likely to achieve what the Russian people, to date have been unable to do.

You could be right, I hope you are, I just hope nothing stupid happens, when you back a rat into corner ect. 

 

32 minutes ago, Mungler said:

The rumours appear to be true

I'm not for a moment saying they aren't true, again I hope they are, it severely weakens Russian intelligence services, but I can't trust anything coming from bellingcat, they are primarily funded by NATO,  with a plausible deniability if they get found out over their misinformation. 

They have been caught out lying, doctoring pictures and information many times. 

1 minute ago, Gordon R said:

I suspect there will be repercussions for those who stole the money.

Which makes you wonder how they thought they would ever get away with it? 

[Mice!]

2 hours ago, Rewulf said:

The longer this conflict lasts, the more desperate BOTH sides will get to win... Something. 

That's when it gets dirty. 

 

2 hours ago, oowee said:

And that's what make the stand made by Ukraine so admirable. Standing upto the bully that is Putin. There is no way back for him now and the Ukrainians are likely to achieve what the Russian people, to date have been unable to do.

I'd say Putin will get what he wants, which was probably the ports and a large chunk of the East of Ukraine. 

Completely flattening areas certainly seems dirty enough. 

They have stood up to Putin,  but if you mean they are likely to get rid of him then I don't see it. And the cost is clearly huge.

The figures of Russian dead vary massively,  whether its 5000 or 15000 I don't think he'll be bothered, throwing numbers at a problem has always seemed to be the Russian way.

[ditchman]

9 minutes ago, Mice! said:

 

I'd say Putin will get what he wants, which was probably the ports and a large chunk of the East of Ukraine. 

Completely flattening areas certainly seems dirty enough. 

They have stood up to Putin,  but if you mean they are likely to get rid of him then I don't see it. And the cost is clearly huge.

The figures of Russian dead vary massively,  whether its 5000 or 15000 I don't think he'll be bothered, throwing numbers at a problem has always seemed to be the Russian way.

you are right what you say.........but there is a difference now...the russian people are more aware...i know Putin has done everything he can to control the influx of "conflicting" information....but he is slowly fighting a losing battle on that front....this is Putins real battle...and it is brutal......thats why i have said on several occasions..i think this will come to an end when he loses the information war.........he knows "the people" will eventually turn on him....a precentent has already been set several times..........

"you can fool some of the people all of the time...BUT you cant fool all the people all of the time"

Edited March 27, 2022 by ditchman

[Mice!]

30 minutes ago, ditchman said:

you are right what you say.........but there is a difference now...the russian people are more aware...i know Putin has done everything he can to control the influx of "conflicting" information....but he is slowly fighting a losing battle on that front....this is Putins real battle...and it is brutal......thats why i have said on several occasions..i think this will come to an end when he loses the information war.........he knows "the people" will eventually turn on him....a precentent has already been set several times..........

"you can fool some of the people all of the time...BUT you cant fool all the people all of the time"

Let's hope your right, and sooner rather than later.

I do wonder how in this day and age information can be suppressed,  but it obviously is. 

[oowee]

They may get the coastal belt initially but they wont hold onto it. They will have to build a wall and we all know how that ends. 

[clangerman]

36 minutes ago, ditchman said:

 

"you can fool some of the people all of the time...BUT you cant fool all the people all of the time"

this thread proves other wise just look at the tripe repeated jackanory is more accurate lol

[Mice!]

9 minutes ago, oowee said:

They may get the coastal belt initially but they wont hold onto it. They will have to build a wall and we all know how that ends. 

I'm not sure, if they have flattened everything except the Dock area, defending it will be much easier. 

And I would expect the Ukrainians to be looking at rebuilding not continuing the fight.

[ordnance]

• 
   

Quote

 

I don't think you're taking in what I'm saying. 

If there is a chance of victory, without the total destruction of the land you're defending, then yes, go for it, in WW2, if the German army had got across the Channel, gained a bridgehead, this country would have fallen in short order, similar to France, it doesn't matter how hard we would have fought, the end result would be the same, the length of time would purely depend on how many civilian deaths we were prepared to take. 

 

I am taking in what you are saying, basically if a country can't guarantee a victory they should not fight and surrender. The UK had defences in case the Germain army made it across the channel, you seem to be saying they shouldn't have bothered and surrendered the UK to the Nazis to avoid civilian deaths and destruction. It would also depend on what you mean by win, Putin's plan was to march in and in a week or so take over the country and install his people in power, the Ukraine defence has stopped the happening, no matter what happens now Putin has lost the war and will not achieved original his objectives.