Is Russia really a threat to the UK?



hypersonic said:
Yes, but not in the conventional guns and bombs way.

They're cyber warefare division is massive and we're severely underfunded in that area.
Click to expand...
HP marra

And course not, not in our lifetime.

Never while we have a nuclear deterrent...and why would they?

Makes for nice melodrama though
 
Last edited:
I think Russia is a big threat to Europe in general but it seems incomprehensible that Russian tanks would one day stream across Europe and take over.

They might indirectly threaten by having huge military resources but would Russia as a nation really want to take over Europe - really?

It seems most developed nations are more bothered about protecting their own trade and what they have etc than actually invading territory elsewhere.

I suppose in Russias case they might want ukrane, estonia etc back but do they really want France and Spain??

I get impression (might be wrong) that the bit of Ukraine they wanted was linked to get the sea base back which was important to their overall strategic defenses.

I wish they would fuck off with their interference with eletions and their annoying cyber crime mind. No need for that shit at all.

I think Putin is the problem, not Russia itself.
 
Motor City Cobra said:
HP marra

And course not, not in our lifetime.

Never while we have a nuclear deterrent...and why would they?

Makes for nice melodrama though
Click to expand...
They're not going to take over using cyber crime, but they can do a lot of harm to our business and infrastructure; all the while hiding their involvement.

You can google 'russian cyber crime a threat to the uk' and you'll get links for most major newspapers and they're all reporting different stories month after month. As I believe I said earlier, I looked into a career in cyber security a few years back, the MoD are crying out for people.
 
Its more about having the capability to defend and we are approaching zero credibility due to all the forces being pared to the bone. The British Forces are not just a deterrent, they are a worldwide assistance. If the Falklands got invaded we would struggle to get boots on the ground, ships to get them there and fighters to give air cover, helicopters for support. becoming a right tinpot place here at the moment. Do not know why they do not cut foreign aid, when we have so many problems in th UK and sort out our own, and take the trident system out of the forces budgets that way would be more money available in all areas.
 
Jimmer13 said:
Its more about having the capability to defend and we are approaching zero credibility due to all the forces being pared to the bone. The British Forces are not just a deterrent, they are a worldwide assistance. If the Falklands got invaded we would struggle to get boots on the ground, ships to get them there and fighters to give air cover, helicopters for support. becoming a right tinpot place here at the moment. Do not know why they do not cut foreign aid, when we have so many problems in th UK and sort out our own, and take the trident system out of the forces budgets that way would be more money available in all areas.
Click to expand...
Here’s one of the donkeys mentioned earlier...
 
As long as we've got Trident I won't be bothered about invasion anywhere near as much as I am about cyber security and perception manipulation.

Why are our cyber defences in the hands of the MoD? Why wouldn't that be GCHQ ?
 
PhilSAFC said:
that we aren't a pushover. Russia are dangerous with Putin in charge. You think he sails his ships through our waters all the time for a laugh. They are probing all the time.
Click to expand...
It’s like a live exercise. Same as flying the planes over, trains the pilots better than a simulator

Jimmer13 said:
Its more about having the capability to defend and we are approaching zero credibility due to all the forces being pared to the bone. The British Forces are not just a deterrent, they are a worldwide assistance. If the Falklands got invaded we would struggle to get boots on the ground, ships to get them there and fighters to give air cover, helicopters for support. becoming a right tinpot place here at the moment. Do not know why they do not cut foreign aid, when we have so many problems in th UK and sort out our own, and take the trident system out of the forces budgets that way would be more money available in all areas.
Click to expand...
If we took away foreign aid we would lose a lot of allies
 
CheersMarra84 said:
Not while we’ve got CASD, they aren’t. We’ve entered into the second Cold War whether people like it or not and the Russians are up to their old tricks.
Click to expand...
I had to Google that. So you think that Russia is dettered from a single nuclear sub capable of hitting several russian cities? I know there's 4, but usually 1 on patrol.
Genuine question

JonMc said:
I'll give that a watch later thanks. Mini-hitch usually speaks well on the subject.
Click to expand...
"Perception of Russia in the West"

Far too broad, the perception of Russia in Western Europe is quite different to that of the US
 
Last edited:
Jimmer13 said:
Its more about having the capability to defend and we are approaching zero credibility due to all the forces being pared to the bone. The British Forces are not just a deterrent, they are a worldwide assistance. If the Falklands got invaded we would struggle to get boots on the ground, ships to get them there and fighters to give air cover, helicopters for support. becoming a right tinpot place here at the moment. Do not know why they do not cut foreign aid, when we have so many problems in th UK and sort out our own, and take the trident system out of the forces budgets that way would be more money available in all areas.
Click to expand...

We have people already in the Falklands. We can get more personnel there within 24 hours as we also have an airport there. Things are a lot different to what they were during the Falkland invasion.
 
If we took away foreign aid we would lose a lot of allies[/QUOTE]

Its about reducing the the amount of foreign aid from 0.7 of gdp to the same level as our allies pay and using that amount on our own struggling areas be that military, nhs or to look after refuges. We are still supporting allies yet they pay a more realistic affordable amount. We need to look after our own people better as well as the worlds. Look at the miserly increases in pension for forces widows and children. The winter crisis in nhs, payments to EU?, and we do not have limitless funds.

safcforever said:
It’s like a live exercise. Same as flying the planes over, trains the pilots better than a simulator

Sir Lancelot said:
Here’s one of the donkeys mentioned earlier...
Click to expand...


Very insightful. Put lots of thought into that remark. But thanks for your view anyhow.

Perception is fine when we can depend on our forces.

As we have so far in every conflict. Thats history, not donky work.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
PhilSAFC said:
It's threatening behaviour. Stop the fishing trip/
Click to expand...

It's not particularly. Russia doesn't have a deep water port that doesn't freeze in the south so has to sail out of their northern ports and past the U.K. to get down towards the Med etc.
 
HebburnMackem said:
I had to Google that. So you think that Russia is dettered from a single nuclear sub capable of hitting several russian cities? I know there's 4, but usually 1 on patrol.
Genuine question
Click to expand...

Yes, well why haven’t they initiated an attack? Even at their strongest as the Soviet Union. I really don’t think people realise how powerful and accurate these weapons are. I’m not going to delve in to it too much as it’s my job, but there’s a reason why there hasn’t been Third World War and those are it.
 
Red Boz might have more information, bent over backwards to vote to help Vladimir get his wish for a weaker, divided Europe. If he’s away there are plenty of his little helpers on here.
 
CheersMarra84 said:
Yes, well why haven’t they initiated an attack? Even at their strongest as the Soviet Union. I really don’t think people realise how powerful and accurate these weapons are. I’m not going to delve in to it too much as it’s my job, but there’s a reason why there hasn’t been Third World War and those are it.
Click to expand...
Oh I'm fully aware you don't need 8,000, or even 800 nukes to devastate a country.
While Russia could kill us 100 times over, we could destroy all of thier cities at least twice. Both lose.
Then when you include outbursts that cause much wider spread EMPs...
 

Back
Top