NATO! What's in a name?

[Smokersmith]

Yep … a bit of a sneaky move by the Poles, and probably the best outcome for the US to avoid having to fly them in!!

 

[12gauge82]

I say we should go in to all ukraine held areas and help to hold it for them, thereby stopping the Russian invasion dead. You simply can't negotiate with people like putin, if that means nuclear war, so be it. I absolutely guarantee if he's stupid enough to use nuclear weapons for that, he'll use them at some point in the future anyway. 

14 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Where were all the outraged people when Pol Pot was killing over a million in Cambodia? Strangely quiet. Idi Amin - quiet again.

We are now in the age of armchair experts who demand that something be done, without ever considering the consequences. People say Putin is mad, but they want to back him into a corner where he might end the World. Ukraine is not a NATO member and the rest of the World (bar India, China and the odd country) are doing what they can.

It's fine to say Putin wouldn't go nuclear, but where is the guarantee from the Putin / Russia / military experts. So far he has mainly used low level rockets. If he drops a large bomb - non-nuclear - what will the experts demand? If he uses a small nuclear device in Ukraine, what then?

The existing sanctions will eventually bite, but at what expense to the Ukraine and the rest of Europe. Fuel / gas, food shortages. How long before the armchair experts are moaning they have no heat, fuel for their car, shortages at the supermarket?

As for WW3 having already started - it is laughable. 

This is yet another war, with the difference being that we seem to care about this one. 

Inaction is also a form of action, particularly when innocent people are being killed because of it. 

Were you sat in your armchair when you gave your opinion? 

[Mungler]

6 hours ago, Dave-G said:

Apparently US has knocked back the MIGs  offer/chicanery - for now at least, seems the correct people in US weren't consulted.

It may have been announced in an attempt to twist Biden's arm - but it ought not to have been made public.

No, one of the few remaining grown ups in the pentagon realised that the supply of outdated aircraft to Ukraine via the states was one step closer to nuclear war and so canned the idea.  

[bluesj]

10 minutes ago, Mungler said:

No, one of the few remaining grown ups in the pentagon realised that the supply of outdated aircraft to Ukraine via the states was one step closer to nuclear war and so canned the idea.  

I'm sure putin will find another reason to threaten the use of nukes, may be the supply of anti tank and anti aircraft missiles. 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

2 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

I say we should go in to all ukraine held areas and help to hold it for them, thereby stopping the Russian invasion dead. You simply can't negotiate with people like putin, if that means nuclear war, so be it. I absolutely guarantee if he's stupid enough to use nuclear weapons for that, he'll use them at some point in the future anyway. 

Inaction is also a form of action, particularly when innocent people are being killed because of it. 

Were you sat in your armchair when you gave your opinion? 

So you are seriously suggesting the west start world war three?

There is no inaction, lots is being done.

[Raja Clavata]

NATO have drawn a line in the sand and Putin knows an invasion on a NATO sovereign nation will start WW3, that's precisely why he is unlikely to do so, unless he suffers from his perspective intolerable provocation - which is why NATO are doing their utmost not to escalate too far.

The harsh reality appears to be, rightly or wrongly, that the pros for Ukraine joining NATO were outweighed by the cons.

What Putin has done to the West is somewhat analogous to the boiling frog syndrome, except this time the frog need not die as the West appears to have finally woken up to the reality of what is happening.

Whilst I don't trust Boris, Macron, Biden & Co. they have people in the military and intelligence services that do know what they are doing and we have to trust them. 

I genuinely think the doom and gloom mongers need to calm down a bit, in some quarters they are the same people that were telling us last year that the world was more or less finished due to COVID.

Ukraine "just" needs to resist and one way or the other it'll all come apart at the seams for Putin, signs are that process has already started and it's apparently now not a forgone conclusion that Ukraine will fail.

[Smokersmith]

A good summary

 

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

 

Inaction is also a form of action, particularly when innocent people are being killed because of it. 

Were you sat in your armchair when you gave your opinion? 

 

Perhaps you could explain this rubbish.

Raja Clavata - I agree with Smokersmith - good summary.

[mel b3]

33 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

NATO have drawn a line in the sand and Putin knows an invasion on a NATO sovereign nation will start WW3, that's precisely why he is unlikely to do so, unless he suffers from his perspective intolerable provocation - which is why NATO are doing their utmost not to escalate too far.

 

Whilst I don't trust Boris, Macron, Biden & Co. they have people in the military and intelligence services that do know what they are doing and we have to trust them. 

 

Ukraine "just" needs to resist and one way or the other it'll all come apart at the seams for Putin, signs are that process has already started and it's apparently now not a forgone conclusion that Ukraine will fail.

Very much this 👍.

[countryman]

Vlad the blackmailer, I was hoping to see someone close to him take him out. The world will never be safe with this man’s mind.

[Dave-G]

39 minutes ago, countryman said:

Vlad the blackmailer, I was hoping to see someone close to him take him out. The world will never be safe with this man’s mind.

LOL, few can get close enough to use a tiny easily concealed pistol on him given the huge length of his table.

[12gauge82]

2 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

So you are seriously suggesting the west start world war three?

There is no inaction, lots is being done.

Please highlight where I said that? 

I'm suggesting we enter what's left of Ukraine as a free, democratic and sovering nation, just as we are and protect them from being invaded, we would not attack Russia unless they do so first. 

Put yourself in the Ukrainians shoes, what would you hope we did? 

Sometimes doing the right thing is hard, but it doesn't stop it being the right thing, in my opinion of course. 

1 hour ago, Gordon R said:

Perhaps you could explain this rubbish.

Raja Clavata - I agree with Smokersmith - good summary.

Perhaps you could explain what is rubbish about it. 

Oh don't tell me, "I'm out of my depth" 😂

[TIGHTCHOKE]

4 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

 

7 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Please highlight where I said that? 

I'm suggesting we enter what's left of Ukraine as a free, democratic and sovering nation, just as we are and protect them from being invaded, we would not attack Russia unless they do so first. 

Put yourself in the Ukrainians shoes, what would you hope we did? 

Sometimes doing the right thing is hard, but it doesn't stop it being the right thing, in my opinion of course. 

Perhaps you could explain what is rubbish about it. 

Oh don't tell me, "I'm out of my depth" 😂

 

4 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

I say we should go in to all ukraine held areas and help to hold it for them, thereby stopping the Russian invasion dead. You simply can't negotiate with people like putin, if that means nuclear war, so be it. I absolutely guarantee if he's stupid enough to use nuclear weapons for that, he'll use them at some point in the future anyway. 

Inaction is also a form of action, particularly when innocent people are being killed because of it. 

Were you sat in your armchair when you gave your opinion? 

 

Edited March 9, 2022 by TIGHTCHOKE

[12gauge82]

2 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

 

 

 

Thank you for highlighting I said no such thing, we'd hold Ukrainian territory and if the Russians invade the land we held, it would obviously be them who started it. That is unless you believe if you invade somewhere and the other side defends themselves, the defender is the aggressor, because if you do, that's some very strange logic. 

[Vince Green]

1 hour ago, countryman said:

Vlad the blackmailer, I was hoping to see someone close to him take him out. The world will never be safe with this man’s mind.

He doesn't let anybody get that close

He is quite possibly the richest man in the world with all the money he has creamed off. But he can't spend it

He is also possibly the most powerful man in the world, depending on how you judge these things

and yet he lives a total prisoner in his own high security prison and the indications are he is losing his grasp of reality.

you have to wonder if life has turned out the way he hoped 

 

[Smokersmith]

22 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Thank you for highlighting I said no such thing, we'd hold Ukrainian territory and if the Russians invade the land we held, it would obviously be them who started it. That is unless you believe if you invade somewhere and the other side defends themselves, the defender is the aggressor, because if you do, that's some very strange logic. 

Unfortunately ...  early on in the conflict Putin said that exactly that situation would result in us seeing 'consequences like we've never seen before' ...

So ... YES ... very strange logic .. to most of us at least! 

[Gordon R]

If we enter Ukraine, we are in effect declaring war on Russia. I am amazed that the odd person can't see that.

Quote

Oh don't tell me, "I'm out of my depth" 😂

I can't argue with your logic on that one.

[TIGHTCHOKE]

2 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

Thank you for highlighting I said no such thing, we'd hold Ukrainian territory and if the Russians invade the land we held, it would obviously be them who started it. That is unless you believe if you invade somewhere and the other side defends themselves, the defender is the aggressor, because if you do, that's some very strange logic. 

Strange logic eh?

Look inwards and accept you are wrong.

2 hours ago, Vince Green said:

He doesn't let anybody get that close

He is quite possibly the richest man in the world with all the money he has creamed off. But he can't spend it

He is also possibly the most powerful man in the world, depending on how you judge these things

and yet he lives a total prisoner in his own high security prison and the indications are he is losing his grasp of reality.

you have to wonder if life has turned out the way he hoped 

No it hasn't YET!

In Putin's world, he wants to go back pre Gorbachev when the wall was solid and a cold war existed.

[12gauge82]

6 hours ago, Smokersmith said:

Unfortunately ...  early on in the conflict Putin said that exactly that situation would result in us seeing 'consequences like we've never seen before' ...

So ... YES ... very strange logic .. to most of us at least! 

I still don't see how that's US starting ww3, that would be Russian aggression. 

What if they told us to surrender the UK or else face consequences, should we just do that as well? 

If we enter Ukraine, hold a line and they attack us, it will be Russia, starting a war with us. In my opinion, they need dealing with. 

5 hours ago, Gordon R said:

If we enter Ukraine, we are in effect declaring war on Russia. 

Why, because they said so? Its not their country. 

Would you jump off a cliff if Putin told you to! 

[TIGHTCHOKE]

4 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

I still don't see how that's US starting ww3, that would be Russian aggression. 

What if they told us to surrender the UK or else face consequences, should we just do that as well? 

If we enter Ukraine, hold a line and they attack us, it will be Russia, starting a war with us. In my opinion, they need dealing with. 

Why, because they said so? Its not their country. 

Would you jump off a cliff if Putin told you to! 

You really do not get it do you!

[Smokersmith]

There’s a pan of boiling water … you put your hand in and burn it …

Your fault or the water’s?

[ShootingEgg]

8 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said:

Why, because they said so? Its not their country. 

Would you jump off a cliff if Putin told you to!

No, but because right now the conflict is between Ukraine and Russia, if we go in we will in effect be attacking Russia, so we would be starting the fight.

 

12 minutes ago, Smokersmith said:

There’s a pan of boiling water … you put your hand in and burn it …

Your fault or the water’s?

The water????? Haha

[12gauge82]

7 minutes ago, ShootingEgg said:

No, but because right now the conflict is between Ukraine and Russia, if we go in we will in effect be attacking Russia, so we would be starting the fight.

 

The water????? Haha

No we wouldn't, we go into Ukrainian held areas only. If Russia crosses the line and attacks us, the blame would be there's. 

25 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

You really do not get it do you!

Ditto

[McSpredder]

7 hours ago, 12gauge82 said:

..... if the Russians invade the land we held, it would obviously be them who started it. That is unless you believe if you invade somewhere and the other side defends themselves, the defender is the aggressor, because if you do, that's some very strange logic. 

"Cet animal est très méchant. Quand on l'attaque, il se défend."   That would appear to be Vlad's logic.

[Walker570]

21 hours ago, enfieldspares said:

People and politicians often look back to history and draw the wrong conclusion. Some are saying this is Hitler and Munich in 1938. I'd disagree. It's Stalin and Finland in 1939-40.

Yes, folks tend to forget little Finland stuck up there on the border. Mind the Finns gave them a bloody nose as well.