Joe Baker
Striker
I agree we should have been in the Ukraine prior to the invasion. That may well have stopped putin
It was the threat of NATO and its troops being in Ukraine that Russia is (partially) using to justify the war.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I agree we should have been in the Ukraine prior to the invasion. That may well have stopped putin
They've been doing this every day for the past week.
There's not a lot to stop you getting your boots on the ground in Kyiv, but escalation on a national level would lead to european wide, maybe world wide, maybe nuclear, war.
I expect they’ll change their decision before the opening ceremony on Friday, mind.
Absolutely shite state of affairs.the Russian's are allegedly using ambulances to deliver ammunition to their troops
No, he won't attack NATO territory. Hes struggled against Ukrainians with small arms and molotov cocktails (somewhat over simplified I know), he knows what would happen against the most powerful military force on earthWhat's the alternative? Just keep walking backwards until the fucker is on our doorstep?
Asked what China would think of a nuclear strike and retaliation the other day but it got lost with the thread moving so fast. Wouldn't be good for their markets really would it.I’d be interested to know what China thought of his comments the other day re mobilising his nuclear forces. For all of China’s war of words with the West over Taiwan they don’t make Nuclear threats.
When he makes comments like that, or if he escalates them, he is directing them at the West but threatening every country. It’s a Global planet and there would be no isolation for any country from the impacts and effects if the World ever sees further nuclear weapon use.
If he keeps ratching up the threats and/or their own intelligence starts to get inklings he is a bit unhinged then he is a threat to even his staunchest rivals - China, India, Pakistan, Arab coubtries, and their attitudes might change sharpish
The madman look is s confection I would say -
....to keep the west guessing and on edge
Katherine Belton - A Reuters reporter and Putin writer / expert - said on Newsnight last night that it's theatre and to get to a nuclear button VP would need to go through seversl ranks of military Generals - who all know it would be suicide for them & families - and therefore they would never allow it.
I think Putin is solely fixated with Ukraine - and not the rest of Europe per se
To defeat our enemy we need to understand him first- western politicians have failed miserably in that quest
UK journo / vicar Nigel Fraser gives us an insight here into the religious significance of Kiev to Putin and how is own religious ideas are driving him on
Sorry if this was already posted
![]()
An if it want the threat of nato it would have been some other excuseIt was the threat of NATO and its troops being in Ukraine that Russia is (partially) using to justify the war.
I agree. This time they are 100% baddies. Imho, of course.Most times in life you do. And I never said otherwise.
But people are complex. Most people consistently do good and bad, not one or the other.
Were Russia goodies or baddies in WW2? They stopped the biggest unequivocal baddie in world History pretty much. But many of the things they did to accomplish that were unequivocally bad by pretty much any moral compass.
Let's all hope you are right.This. For all of the talk of "nuclear war" (which our own politicians play up, for their own convenience), it's a vanishingly small possibility. Putin doesn't just have a red button on his desk. This isn't a Bond film. Even if he was mad enough to effectively sentence his own family to death, the Russian military officer class wouldn't be willing to do the same en masse. That order would be the end of him.
You might find this a rather strange reply but I believe that if the Russians killed Zelenskyy they would be totally disowned by the Chinese. China regards the West as being just as mad a a box of frogs as we do them. They are extremely worried that this could get out of hand with Russia and NATO and want an end to it. The killing of Zelenskyy with who the Russians will have to negotiate will be seen by the Chinese as not helping and that it is likely to escalate things. (they may have even warned the Russians of that)Serious question: what happens if he is captured and killed? Is that an act of escalation in terms of Western intervention?
If war is the only way to stop him, then war is inevitable - because he has to be stopped. The pervasive moral cowardice in the West has done nothing but embolden him and make the situation worse. If he'd been stared down ten years ago we wouldn't be in this position.
He does not want war with the West. He clearly fears it. Otherwise Ukraine joining NATO would have been of no significance to him whatsoever. The only significance of NATO membership for Ukraine is that he wouldn't then be able to attack Ukraine without the West declaring war on him. If he didn't fear that war, then Ukraine's membership wouldn't be at all bothersome.
NATO will be sharing intel with UkraineAnd more. Not sure if it benefits Ukraine intelligence or just NATO
This. For all of the talk of "nuclear war" (which our own politicians play up, for their own convenience), it's a vanishingly small possibility. Putin doesn't just have a red button on his desk. This isn't a Bond film. Even if he was mad enough to effectively sentence his own family to death, the Russian military officer class wouldn't be willing to do the same en masse. That order would be the end of him.
Are you serving in the military? Itll be absoloutely devestating if we put boots on the ground. British sons and daughters will die by the thousands and itll drag on for a decade. It is not a light decision.
![]()
NATO bombing of Yugoslavia - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The NATO bombing killed about 1,000 members of the Yugoslav security forces in addition to between 489 and 528 civilians. It destroyed or damaged bridges, industrial plants, hospitals, schools, cultural monuments, private businesses as well as barracks and military installations.
Just because hospitals and schools have been bombed does not mean they're occupied by civilians, it also doesn't rule out them being occupied by enemy forces. I wouldn't put much stock in Victoria Derbyshire or the BBC, they clearly have their point of view. As highlighted previously contrast the western media to RT. RT are stating Ukrainians are killing civilians, whereas the Western media are saying Russia are killing civilians. No doubt both sides are, as an unfortunate consequence of the conflict, is it systematic and top down?, I highly doubt it.
Ive noticed a few posters looking for justification and using terms collateral damage for civilian deaths. In this conflict, one side has been the aggressor and invaded the other. It was not a joint decision to go to war with each other.
Its not acceptable, IMHO, to dismiss or justify civilian casualties like this, as its not like the 2 sides have gone to war with objectives against each other, where you can say "oh well that's the price you pay for your objective".
Asked what China would think of a nuclear strike and retaliation the other day but it got lost with the thread moving so fast. Wouldn't be good for their markets really would it.