• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Russia invading Ukraine (NEWS/UPDATES)

Status
Not open for further replies.
SYB_DC said:
I can see it fine. I was in university studying politics and Russian language for part of that period.

The problem is that their position is abusive and unjustifiable morally. Go to Talllinn and ask the Estonians how much respect they have for the “Russian perspective” or desire to be part of the Russian sphere of influence.
Click to expand...

Great, you went to University, thanks for trying to downplay my opinion and exacerbating yours.

Simple answer is Russia isn't happy with NATO creeping East, it's black, white and definitive in reason.

Russia is a nuclear superpower and it's biggest 'opponent' is expanding and building military bases around them, after promising they wouldn't and the justification of this expansion is the Russia bogeyman.

But all that doesn't matter because the West is morally superior.
 

SYB_DC said:
Yes, thank you, I understand what Crimea is.

How does illegally taking it over 8 years ago and encountering predictable and entirely justified intransigence from the Ukrainian government provide any valid reason for shelling Kharkiv?
Click to expand...
You must be logged on to see external links

Because that's where the rest of the oil is. Not excusing or justifying it. He's a pure **** and I hope he'll be in the Hague within the next few years but making sure that Ukraine doesn't become a petro rival is entirely likely to be a reason for this.

You must be logged on to see external links


Look at the map of where Russians have advanced and look at where the natural resources are.

You must be logged on to see external links
 
Last edited:
Cow said:
He has, there’s no denying that, he’s also kept the largest and arguably the most diverse country on the planet together, in a fashion. Let’s be clear, I don’t like him (now), but a lot of people in Russia did like him, even though it’s pretty irrelevant to what’s happening now he has done some good. It’s nice to have a bit of balance when talking about people like this, very very few people are evil 100% of the time. I think it’s fascinating how one person can do so much good and bad.
Click to expand...
A country including 22 pretty autonomous republics of course.

Watch Simon Reeve’s documentary travelling through the remote regions of Russia.

You must be logged on to see external links
 
Charmless Man said:
The actual likelihood of him being able to launch one purely on his say so is quite slim. Just as fears Donald Trump would launch one for shits and giggles were basically unfounded.
Click to expand...

Exactly this. The nuclear fears are massively blown out of proportion. He doesn’t have a red button on his desk. An order like that would need to be signed of and pass through many other senior political and military people - people with families who probably wouldn’t want the whole free world launching back at them, at the same time.
 
Cow said:
Does anyone know what the actual protocol is if he does launch a nuclear missile? I’m assuming it’s a case of the west launch one straight back but don’t know if that’s just Hollywood bollocks?
Click to expand...
I think the prime minister has to write a sealed letter at the start of their time in number ten explaining what he'd do in the event of a nuclear attack on the country (assuming they are compromised). Basically saying if he'd launch one back or not.

They have four options: No attack, attack, up to the commander of the submarine to judge the situation and decide, or give another allied country command e.g. the States or Australia.

I think only Callaghan has said what his letter said, which was that he would have fired in retaliation (this bit might be wrong, but it is what I remember!).
 
DieselBert said:
You must be logged on to see external links

Because that's where the rest of the oil is. Not excusing or justifying it. He's a pure **** and I hope he'll be in the Hague within the next few years but making sure that Ukraine doesn't become a petro rival is entirely likely to be a reason for this.

You must be logged on to see external links


Look at the map of where Russians have advanced and look at where the natural resources are.
Click to expand...
Ah. Yes. I thought you were implying this was somehow other than him wanting to take over Ukraine or somehow it being okay or reasonable for him to do som. There are multiple reasons for that, of course, but resources are a big one.
 
Cow said:
Does anyone know what the actual protocol is if he does launch a nuclear missile? I’m assuming it’s a case of the west launch one straight back but don’t know if that’s just Hollywood bollocks?
Click to expand...

That is a long one with many answers.

Basically the USA/NATO has a basic set of plans that are all deployable. They're secret obv but known to range from single retaliation strike to all out end the planet stuff. There's two main categories...

Counterforce - hitting enemy military assets.
Countervalue - economic & urban.

Generally accepted that any big escalation goes in that order.

IF one was used, my pure guesswork is that if it were a tactical nuke in some corner of Ukraine or even a city in Ukraine or some other non NATO land, then nothing would be sent back.

If a tactical nuke was used against NATO we would respond & it would escalate quickly to full WW3 unless there was immediate evidence it was Putin & that he was gone.

If they hit a NATO city then straight to WW3 I'd say. I think they'd give it a few hrs to see if he'd been taken out then if not they'd retaliate.

I think retaliation would be targeting where they think he is.
 
Sweeper said:
Exactly this. The nuclear fears are massively blown out of proportion. He doesn’t have a red button on his desk. An order like that would need to be signed of and pass through many other senior political and military people - people with families who probably wouldn’t want the whole free world launching back at them, at the same time.
Click to expand...
He’s managed to pass orders through these to invade Ukraine though. There’s obviously more madmen in the chain of command. I agree however that the nuclear option is a different kettle of fish
 
Jgrainger said:
I’m sat googling this, shititng myself. Can he just drop one at a time or can he set off multiple?
Click to expand...
Truthfully he can drop multiple probably hit the uk within 20 minutes or less would he fire at every city something we can’t tell experts say probably not.

What can you do not worry be with your family and what is is what is.

I know this sounds horrible but it isn’t meant to there is literally nothing we can do but be with our loved ones if this happens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top