advertisement


Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
poppop said:
I take it Zelensky wont be there in person? If he is best not accept a coffee - surely remotely would be safer.
Click to expand...
He would have to be insane to go there in person. Also the idea of going to Belarus- you might as well go to Grozny. Geneva would be a good symbolic venue.
 
MikeMA said:
I'm surprised he's agreed to anything suggested by Lukashenko, who is a Russian stooge. He needs to be very careful.
Click to expand...

Lukashenko is a knuckle dragging throw back. Did you see his body language when he met Putin? Very much the apprentice getting a bollocking for not getting the four chair legs the same length.
 
matthewr said:
Sadly I think people are kidding themselves if they think this is going anywhere other than an eventual Russian victory.
Click to expand...
Yes. As the West is going to to very little, the only hope for the Ukraine to retain its present borders is internal pressures from ordinary Russian’s demonstrating against hardships or the logistical and military problems of occupation.

external pressures are ineffective and internal pressures unlikely, isn’t the least catastrophic outcome most likely to be new Ukraine west of the Dnieper?
 
There appears to be some contributors on here who seem to believe that nuclear weapons are in some way usable. If they are then we're all doomed. Don't believe the horse sh*t that tactical nukes aren't a problem. One will lead to many. For those who didn't grow up in the Cold War may not quite realise what fallout is. See the link below for background reading. Even if the UK wasn't directly targeted (& it would be) the fall out will get us, sooner or later. A nuclear escalation has no winners; we all lose.

https://www.epa.gov/radtown/radioactive-fallout-nuclear-weapons-testing
 
PsB said:
Depends how you define "Russian victory". Occupying the place is just Act I. Ask the Americans how Iraq went for them.
Click to expand...

In my view, Ukraine will be a Russian (not quite pyrrhic) victory followed by (costly) occupation followed by (US and EU funded) insurgency followed (years later) by Maidan II.

I do not see a path for Russia to emerge from this without being greatly weakened, both economically and geopolitcally.

Of course, this assumes Mad Vlad doesn't use chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
 
cooky1257 said:
The Dead Hand system means that if, as is NATO policy we decapitate enemy control centres, the software will take over and launch everything they have left. It's beyond terrifying and I really wish the idiots here advocating limited nuclear exchanges would do some research and realise they are advocating Armageddon.
Click to expand...

Cooky, yep I get it and don't want to die either! BUT if this threat works he will be empowered to ask for the keys to wherever he fancies? Is that ok.
 
Hook said:
In my view, Ukraine will be a Russian (not quite pyrrhic) victory followed by (costly) occupation followed by (US and EU funded) insurgency followed (years later) by Maidan II.
Click to expand...

A re-armed Germany and a collapse of his oil and gas export markets would seem the biggest changes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PsB
ks.234 said:
What is the evidence that taking out Putin would see a regime change for the better as far as the West is concerned? If there is any it needs to be compared with the evidence that any regime change will likely be even more reactionary and even more justified in pointing to western aggression to justify extreme nationalism to promote jingoistic paranoia and make another Ukraine a matter of time
Click to expand...

PsB said:
Quite apart from the philosophical debate about the morality of eliminating foreign leaders we happen to disagree with, don't you think that's a tad risky considering said leader controls the second largest nuclear arsenal? What happens, for instance, if you end up nuking one of his body doubles instead, and the real Vlad gets really mad at yer?

There must be safer ways of helping the Ukrainians.
Click to expand...

Against all of that we are in a current situation where a dictator who seems to have lost his marbles is already invading a neighbour and threatening nuclear strikes against third parties. How much more dangerous would you like it to become? Also, nowhere did I advocate using nuclear weapons.
 
kensalriser said:
Against all of that we are in a current situation where a dictator who seems to have lost his marbles is already invading a neighbour and threatening nuclear strikes against third parties. How much more dangerous would you like it to become? Also, nowhere did I advocate using nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...
I would like things to get less dangerous for everybody, not more. Eliminating a paranoid leader like Putin is incredibly difficult, and unlikely to resolve anything.
OK, you said "taking out": any specific idea?
 
Hook said:
In my view, Ukraine will be a Russian (not quite pyrrhic) victory followed by (costly) occupation followed by (US and EU funded) insurgency followed (years later) by Maidan II.

I do not see a path for Russia to emerge from this without being greatly weakened, both economically and geopolitcally.

Of course, this assumes Mad Vlad doesn't use chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...
The best path, both for Ukraine and Russia: immediate ceasefire and negotiations to de-escalate the situation.
 
Apologies to all, but owing to the actions of Google my OnlyFans will no longer be available in Russia for the foreseeable future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top