• 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.
englishman abroad said:
Putin's going full Hitler
Russia has drawn up plans for public executions in
You must be logged on to see external links
as and when cities are captured by Russian troops, Bloomberg reports.

Bloomberg
You must be logged on to see external links
a European intelligence official as saying that Moscow has drafted strategies to break morale in order to discourage Ukrainians from fighting back as cities fall under the Kremlin’s control.

The official said Moscow plans to crack down on protest, detain opponents and potentially carry out public executions, the news agency writes.
Click to expand...
What a disgusting, evil bastard.
 

box2box said:
agree, Russia will in a week or so likely ‘ take the capital’ of Ukraine and have some tanks outside the presidential palace , but how it intends to finance and resource managing a population of 40m people across a huge land mass who don’t want them to be there is hard to see.

add in the punishing central bank sanctions and the economy will be on its knees within a couple of months.
Click to expand...
This article quite nicely summarises what some of us have asked.

You must be logged on to see external links
 
😞

You must be logged on to see media items

You must be logged on to see media items
 
Last edited by a moderator:
UpTheDuff said:
No killing of civilians is welcome or justified. But, you are now the one being disingenuous.

NATO/UK/US bombing in Libya, Iraq and Yugoslavia was an intervention in response to tyrants, murderous regimes, and war criminals. NATO/UK/US were the good guys, going in to take out bad guys. The bad guys were also killing (gassing in Iraq or ethnically cleansing in Yugoslavia) civilians and were doing so before NATO/UK/US got involved.

In Ukraine, Russia is the bad guy and aggressor and targeting civilians in an unprovoked invasion. I am sure NATO/UK/US would also kill civilians if we went in to stop the invasion and force the Russians out - the sad price of war.

But we would be doing that in defence of the free world against tyranny, and as shown by pleas from within Ukraine NATO/UK/US forces would be welcome by the Ukrainian government and population.

Russia started this war with the unprovoked invasion. No civilians would die if they withdrew and went home.
Click to expand...

UpTheDuff said:
Only one person to blame. Putin.

The blood of any civilians killed by the Russian invaders, or by any armed response to kick them out, is on Putin’s hands.

Sorry for accusing you. Thanks for clarifying.
Click to expand...

See I'm going to disagree with you here, the idea that NATO, the West and specifically the US are the 'good guys' is impalpable. They will do and have done in the past what's best for them, as one would expect but this does not make their actions moral or virtuous.

Singling out Iraq and Libya, involvement in these two conflicts was not as you described and was never about removing a dictator and saving people from totalitarian regimes.

In regards to Russia being the bad guy, if you're going to use child like analogies would you not assume Russians see themselves as the good guy and the West as the bad guys?

The West (NATO) have crept east since the second world war and even more so since the fall of the Soviet Union. If you don't think that American imperialism, eastward expansion and American international dominance/influence aren't factors in this unfolding tragedy then I'm lost.

You must be logged on to see media items

This conflict is hardly unprovoked or unexpected, greater minds than you and I discuss this in length above.
 
Stevie Freestein II said:
Russia has already inflicted damage onto itself that will last until Putin stays in charge.

Even if Russia controls Ukraine it will swallow up vast resources, and if there’s any organised resistance the West/NATO will back it imho.

I’m really not sure of the Russian aims.

A quick knock out blow then claim east of the Dniepr?

How can they subdue the population who want closer ties to the EU/NATO?
Click to expand...
he's probably mad enough for a proper carve up

give Belarus a slice of the pie, a big chunk to his 2 puppets and/or a land bridge from Crimea towards Rostov

does he also want an expanded Crimea westwards to take Odesa and landlock whats left of Ukraine?? - which also removes a player from the Black Sea

how mad is mad
 
royaldragon said:
It would be a massive risk of WW3 if it was a Nato peacekeeping force, it would 100% have to be a UN force.
Click to expand...
would need troops from almost every county inc India and China to be part of it. Not for any organisational perspective as will be a nightmare - but just one that shows solidarity
 
Hugh Gains said:
See I'm going to disagree with you here, the idea that NATO, the West and specifically the US are the 'good guys' is impalpable. They will do and have done in the past what's best for them, as one would expect but this does not make their actions moral or virtuous.

Singling out Iraq and Libya, involvement in these two conflicts was not as you described and was never about removing a dictator and saving people from totalitarian regimes.

In regards to Russia being the bad guy, if you're going to use child like analogies would you not assume Russians see themselves as the good guy and the West as the bad guys?

The West (NATO) have crept east since the second world war and even more so since the fall of the Soviet Union. If you don't think that American imperialism, eastward expansion and American international dominance/influence aren't factors in this unfolding tragedy then I'm lost.

You must be logged on to see media items

This conflict is hardly unprovoked or unexpected, greater minds than you and I discuss this in length above.
Click to expand...

I don’t care if Russia sees itself as the good guy. It isn’t.

NATO membership for Ukraine would have no impact on Russia. NATO is a defence alliance, not an aggressor. Ukraine may “be more than just another country” to Russia, but that’s Russia’s problem, no one else’s.

Ukraine is an independent sovereign nation and it is entitled to join any group or organisation it wants without fear of attack from a neighbouring country.

Being an independent sovereign nation making your own decisions is not provocation.

So yes, the invasion is unprovoked.
 
Kevj said:
The thing is, we are doing something. We are probably inflicting more hard to Russia than fighting grunts on the streets of Ukraine. But I also get why you would think this as the retaliation you want is visceral and one in similar nature to what they are doing.
No military action doesn’t mean no discernible action.


Don’t agree. At all.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the everyday Ukrainian people are thinking. Or the ones who have had to take up arms.
I know posters on here are talking about how they would be out there throwing Molotov’s and single handed taking out ruskies but it’s easy from our front rooms knowing deep down it would never come to that even if the shit hit the fan.
 
Hugh Gains said:
Whataboutery
Click to expand...
Says the poster who bangs on saying whatabout Iraq etc. lol.
Sweeper said:
Still, it's very important that we don't get in Putin's way here. We really must not do anything to annoy Putin. That's the priority. Etc etc.
Click to expand...
400,000 British people died in the battle to stop Hitler. It’s an insult to everyone who grieved those deaths if 80 years later we just let Putin do the same.
 
Last edited:
Hugh Gains said:
See I'm going to disagree with you here, the idea that NATO, the West and specifically the US are the 'good guys' is impalpable. They will do and have done in the past what's best for them, as one would expect but this does not make their actions moral or virtuous.

Singling out Iraq and Libya, involvement in these two conflicts was not as you described and was never about removing a dictator and saving people from totalitarian regimes.

In regards to Russia being the bad guy, if you're going to use child like analogies would you not assume Russians see themselves as the good guy and the West as the bad guys?

The West (NATO) have crept east since the second world war and even more so since the fall of the Soviet Union. If you don't think that American imperialism, eastward expansion and American international dominance/influence aren't factors in this unfolding tragedy then I'm lost.

You must be logged on to see media items

This conflict is hardly unprovoked or unexpected, greater minds than you and I discuss this in length above.
Click to expand...
I dunno how many times it has to be pointed out to you that NATO is a union for defence only, but hopefully this time will be the one that does it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top