Crystal clear threat to use nuclear weapons from Putin. Bone-chilling to listen to.
It was always obvious that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were never going to be the only and final victims. Who’ll be No.3?
It does not bear thinking about but never before has our nuclear deterrent been as important
Is that IMPORTANT or IMPOTENT?
Indeed.
Shocking how many mugs swallow the “Nuclear Deterrent” (sic) propaganda. Their equivalents in Russia are cheering on Putin.
Orwell had England sussed.
Only 2 nations in Europe have nuclear weapons, us and France.
If Putin used nuclear weapons against a NATO nation it would therefore be you whinging Scottish Nationalist anti Trident haters who would be relying on the UK PM to launch a Trident nuclear missile on Moscow in response
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
I was a Remainer at the time and had just voted Remain in the referendum Leave won, so could be included in that category.
However I now accept Brexit and remain committed to our UK unlike some diehard Remainers
You may have accepted Brexit but many Scots who voted against it have not, so the reasonable thing to do given what you yourself have decided is their separate culture and identity is to ask them what they think and let them decide for themselves.
I hope the world of sport reacts strongly. No Russians in the Giro or Tour. No football tournaments. No ice hockey. Ban 100% of Russian competitors, all the way down to junior level. Give them the full South Africa apartheid treatment.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
That's the point though. The weapon system we can never use also means the enemy can never use theirs.
Without nukes, the Cold War would not have remained Cold.
Trident and our allies having it too has saved probably hundreds of millions of lives. It prevents WWIII which would be far worse than WWII if it ever started - with or without nukes.
Nuclear weapons have done more to prevent war than probably all "Nobel Peace Prize" winners in history combined.
Read what I said. I am pro-nukes. Bombs. Theatre weapons that don't end the world once fired. Its absolutely the case that nuclear weapons have prevented WWIII. As Thatcher once said "our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for decades".
The problem is that with the withdrawal of RAF delivery we have been left with a doomsday weapon. Which we would not even fire as we were being destroyed if we were following NATOs warplan.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
Did the Arab states know Israel had nuclear weapons?
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
Bloomberg @bpolitics China opposes sanctions against Russia and criticizes the U.S. for inflaming the Ukraine crisis, suggesting its support for NATO’s expansion left Vladimir Putin with few options
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
I was a Remainer at the time and had just voted Remain in the referendum Leave won, so could be included in that category.
However I now accept Brexit and remain committed to our UK unlike some diehard Remainers
You may have accepted Brexit but many Scots who voted against it have not, so the reasonable thing to do given what you yourself have decided is their separate culture and identity is to ask them what they think and let them decide for themselves.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
US could nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki without fear. They were the only ones with the Big Stick.
Would they have done so if the quid pro quo was losing New York and Chicago?
Probably not, but that just proves my point. Nuclear weapons are so fearsome they successfully deter major, direct attacks
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
A big part of that was that Isreal told the Russians, after '73, that if they backed another attack on Israel, the Sampson Option would apply to Russia as well.
Bloomberg @bpolitics China opposes sanctions against Russia and criticizes the U.S. for inflaming the Ukraine crisis, suggesting its support for NATO’s expansion left Vladimir Putin with few options
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
There was the Yom Kippur war as well, but I don't really understand how public or not Israel's nuclear programme was or not when that one started. It looks like the warning may have been towards the end of that one, I think.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
Since the retirement of WE.177 and the various arms agreements, some of the Trident missiles have been downloaded to a single warhead. If you commanded the software not to inject the tritium, the warhead would have a yield of 300 tons of TNT (aprox). Most of that yield would be in neutrons, incidentally - way more than half.
So you have a very, very expensive way of reliving a tactical nuclear weapon.
Yep. And expensive in two ways. One, a fabulously expensive way to deliver a single bomb. But catastrophically expensive as PVO Stany detects SLBM launches and Putin launches a full counterforce strike.
An air-dropped dial-a-yield B61mod12 gives nuclear capability without automatically ending the UK when you use it. Because lets be clear about it - nuclear war ends this country. Bits of it will be left (hello from Aberdeenshire) but it won't be a country any more.
Your solution would not avoid war. The Donbass voted 84/16 % for independence from Russia in 1991. Do you truly believe that Putin cares about the views of its inhabitants, or would respect any vote to remain part of Ukraine?
As to your final point, if eighty years ago, England had invaded Wales, murdered its political and military leaders, and deported tens of thousands of Welsh people to be worked to death in concentration camps, then an independent Wales would have every right to join such an alliance. That is the position that the Baltic States are in.
I think 1991 was 1991, quite a while ago. Perfectly fair to test the matter again. I'd also say that if the UN plebiscite went Ukraine's way in every district, then Putin would not have been able to invade. It could have worked to Ukraine's advantage, and strengthened its hand.
England did invade Wales, murder its leaders, suppress its culture, though not 80 years ago.
But my real point is, if Wales was independent today, and contracted a military alliance with a hostile power (say Putin) then England would invade Wales.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
That's the point though. The weapon system we can never use also means the enemy can never use theirs.
Without nukes, the Cold War would not have remained Cold.
Trident and our allies having it too has saved probably hundreds of millions of lives. It prevents WWIII which would be far worse than WWII if it ever started - with or without nukes.
Nuclear weapons have done more to prevent war than probably all "Nobel Peace Prize" winners in history combined.
Read what I said. I am pro-nukes. Bombs. Theatre weapons that don't end the world once fired. Its absolutely the case that nuclear weapons have prevented WWIII. As Thatcher once said "our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for decades".
The problem is that with the withdrawal of RAF delivery we have been left with a doomsday weapon. Which we would not even fire as we were being destroyed if we were following NATOs warplan.
Their entire purpose is as a doomsday weapon. That is quite literally their only point.
We don't want 'tactical' nukes that its OK to use in war as a first strike without triggering doomsday, that's not what they're there for. Who exactly would you want to first strike with nukes who either (a) wouldn't retaliate with their own, leading to doomsday or (b) we could stomp over in a conventional war [maybe not occupation] without nukes anyway.
Tactical nukes play no strategic role. Their only strategic role is a doomsday trigger.
My hatred for Putin today is so great, that as a staunch leaver I'd offer the UK to rejoin the EU just because I know it would piss him off.
[1] Gotta talk about Brexit I suppose. Wouldn't be a PB thread without it.
I think both you and Nick are right - refighting the Brexit debate, whether one believes it a good decision or a mistake, is utterly irrelevant this morning.
I'm afraid I don't see that happening. Much of current daily politics is still about quite fundamental questions which will not go away.
There has been no slowdown in of snide-asides about UK and UK-politicians in the Brussels-based yellow media. When Dave Keating reported on statements by FMs, he still added "with a photograph" to the tweet wrt Liz Truss - following his usual line of a smidgeon of studied contempt while boosting EU/UK polarisation.
Macron is still in his post-Aukus sulk and in search of a Greater France and reelection, and Boris will still use whatever ammunition is necessary to save his miserable neck. Will Macron really wind down maximum bureaucracy on frontiers with the UK? Angela Rayner will continue her usual mudslinging with anything she can get her hands on, whether true or fabricated. And so on.
Some of the intra-UK politics may be recast in form to suit the time, just as it was for COVID, but it will not go away.
Ah, I'm sure you're right, and democracy extends to them too. If anyone wants to talk about Brexit or whatever, feel free. I'm just saying that personally I don't want to, even with my own usual preoccupations.
On the actual events unfolding, the most significant is perhaps the report of troop landings in Odessa. That is well past the claimed borders of the self-declared eastern statelets, and if confirmed it does suggest he aims to go for the whole country.
Fair comment.
I would say that Mariupol / Odessa could equally be aiming for all the coasts of the Sea of Azov, to create a land-bridge to Crimea from Russia, and to control a further piece of the coast of the Black Sea.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
That's the point though. The weapon system we can never use also means the enemy can never use theirs.
Without nukes, the Cold War would not have remained Cold.
Trident and our allies having it too has saved probably hundreds of millions of lives. It prevents WWIII which would be far worse than WWII if it ever started - with or without nukes.
Nuclear weapons have done more to prevent war than probably all "Nobel Peace Prize" winners in history combined.
Highly debateable. Putin is behaving now as if he's willing to contemplate first strike. Hopefully a bluff. But if he dropped say one bomb on Ukraine or the Baltics, we're not going to nuke Moscow, are we? At which point its futility becomes crystal clear.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
A big part of that was that Isreal told the Russians, after '73, that if they backed another attack on Israel, the Sampson Option would apply to Russia as well.
A pedant writes that actually Israel attacked its neighbours and not vice versa, though in the belief that vice versa was imminent. What any of this has to do with the price of sturgeon is beyond me.
Joint statement by the three Baltic foreign ministers 🇪🇪@eliimets, 🇱🇻@edgarsrinkevics, 🇱🇹 @GLandsbergis in support of Ukraine 🇺🇦, condemning in a strongest possible way the open large scale Russian aggression against the independent, peaceful and democratic Ukraine
“ We, the foreign ministers of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania condemn in a strongest possible way the open large scale Russian aggression against the independent, peaceful and democratic Ukraine. This act of aggression is not acceptable, it's a blatant violation of the international law, of all international norms and a crime against Ukrainian people that we condemn. All of us in the whole international community need to condemn it in a strongest possible way, to impose strongest possible sanctions on Russia, including disengaging Russia from SWIFT, isolating it politically and be firm in our support to the sovereignty, territorial integrity of independent Ukraine. We would need to urgently provide Ukrainian people with weapons, ammunition and any other kind of military support to defend itself as well as economic, financial and political assistance and support, humanitarian aid. In this difficult moment we stand united with the people of Ukraine. Dear Ukrainian friends, we are in your historic capital Kyiv, we support you and do anything possible so that Man SO 7Ukraini! 17 209 1 553 1
They are the ones who should be driving the responses, as the most under threat, with full backing of larger allies. Otherwise why spend all this time helping them go Western in the first place.
If we let the Baltic States fall, then NATO is effectively finished.
If Putin wants the Baltic states, all he has to do is sneeze.
No offence, but you've been Putin's cheerleader throughtout this crisis.
No offence taken, because you are wrong.
I have repeatedly drawn a difference between "Putin" and "Russia". Just as there is a difference between "England" and "Johnson"
I have repeatedly proposed the only solution that could have avoided war -- namely independently organised plebiscites in Donetsk and Luhansk. I have repeatedly (along with Nick Palmer) indicated that -- when organised by the UN/LoN -- this has been historically successful.
This could have worked, and the people who will now suffer from such inaction are those in the Ukraine.
As regards the Baltics, they are independent states, the historic homelands of the Estonians, the Letts & the Lithuanians.
They are smaller in population size to Wales. I instinctively sympathise with them, as I know what it is like to have a huge bully as a neighbouring country.
I understand how weak they are.
But if Wales was independent, do you seriously think it could join a military alliance against England, without very serious repercussions?
Ah, plebiscites. CNN published polling data, yesterday....
I used to have some respect for you, but your posts these days are really stupid.
Your smearing of me as a supporter of White Australia after I posted something specifically in support of multi-ethnic Yugoslavia was really quite something.
There is a big difference between a CNN poll and a UN organised plebiscite. As any fule know.
The results of any UN plebiscite would be binding -- Silesia was divided, Schleswig/Slesvig was divided.
The plebiscite may have divided Donetsk & Luhansk, I really don't know. So be it.
Excellent - so you are angry now.
You were selling the bollocks that all multi-ethnic states must be about to break into their constituent ethnicities - which is exactly the sales pitch of Blood and Soil Nationalist - "We! Must! Keep! The! Nation! Pure! And! Intact!"
A poll is indicative of the sentiment. The poll above shows that Putin isn't going to get an Anschluss style welcome in the disputed areas.
Any UN run poll that is vaguely free and fair will mean that Putin loses.
And, ah yes, salami slicing to find an area that Putin *will* win. How very nice for him. But haven't you noticed that he has claimed a bit more than that?
The whole argument is silly when Putin's wider views about Ukraine as a whole were very clearly laid out.
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
The reduction in interest rate is a curious change because it means more high earners will be able to repay the loans and escape the tax, while those on middle incomes still won't be able to, and so some will end up paying more tax than the higher earners.
Joint statement by the three Baltic foreign ministers 🇪🇪@eliimets, 🇱🇻@edgarsrinkevics, 🇱🇹 @GLandsbergis in support of Ukraine 🇺🇦, condemning in a strongest possible way the open large scale Russian aggression against the independent, peaceful and democratic Ukraine
“ We, the foreign ministers of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania condemn in a strongest possible way the open large scale Russian aggression against the independent, peaceful and democratic Ukraine. This act of aggression is not acceptable, it's a blatant violation of the international law, of all international norms and a crime against Ukrainian people that we condemn. All of us in the whole international community need to condemn it in a strongest possible way, to impose strongest possible sanctions on Russia, including disengaging Russia from SWIFT, isolating it politically and be firm in our support to the sovereignty, territorial integrity of independent Ukraine. We would need to urgently provide Ukrainian people with weapons, ammunition and any other kind of military support to defend itself as well as economic, financial and political assistance and support, humanitarian aid. In this difficult moment we stand united with the people of Ukraine. Dear Ukrainian friends, we are in your historic capital Kyiv, we support you and do anything possible so that Man SO 7Ukraini! 17 209 1 553 1
They are the ones who should be driving the responses, as the most under threat, with full backing of larger allies. Otherwise why spend all this time helping them go Western in the first place.
If we let the Baltic States fall, then NATO is effectively finished.
If Putin wants the Baltic states, all he has to do is sneeze.
No offence, but you've been Putin's cheerleader throughtout this crisis.
No offence taken, because you are wrong.
I have repeatedly drawn a difference between "Putin" and "Russia". Just as there is a difference between "England" and "Johnson"
I have repeatedly proposed the only solution that could have avoided war -- namely independently organised plebiscites in Donetsk and Luhansk. I have repeatedly (along with Nick Palmer) indicated that -- when organised by the UN/LoN -- this has been historically successful.
This could have worked, and the people who will now suffer from such inaction are those in the Ukraine.
As regards the Baltics, they are independent states, the historic homelands of the Estonians, the Letts & the Lithuanians.
They are smaller in population size to Wales. I instinctively sympathise with them, as I know what it is like to have a huge bully as a neighbouring country.
I understand how weak they are.
But if Wales was independent, do you seriously think it could join a military alliance against England, without very serious repercussions?
Ah, plebiscites. CNN published polling data, yesterday....
I used to have some respect for you, but your posts these days are really stupid.
Your smearing of me as a supporter of White Australia after I posted something specifically in support of multi-ethnic Yugoslavia was really quite something.
There is a big difference between a CNN poll and a UN organised plebiscite. As any fule know.
The results of any UN plebiscite would be binding -- Silesia was divided, Schleswig/Slesvig was divided.
The plebiscite may have divided Donetsk & Luhansk, I really don't know. So be it.
Excellent - so you are angry now.
You were selling the bollocks that all multi-ethnic states must be about to break into their constituent ethnicities - which is exactly the sales pitch of Blood and Soil Nationalist - "We! Must! Keep! The! Nation! Pure! And! Intact!"
A poll is indicative of the sentiment. The poll above shows that Putin isn't going to get an Anschluss style welcome in the disputed areas.
Any UN run poll that is vaguely free and fair will mean that Putin loses.
And, ah yes, salami slicing to find an area that Putin *will* win. How very nice for him. But haven't you noticed that he has claimed a bit more than that?
I was not, as you well know. I gave the explicit example of Canada as a reasonably successful example of a multi-ethnic state.
I specifically said if there was a war, Putin will take much more than Donetsk and Luhansk.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
US could nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki without fear. They were the only ones with the Big Stick.
Would they have done so if the quid pro quo was losing New York and Chicago?
1945 was probably the first and last time a western nuclear nation would use nuclear weapons for offense rather than last resort defence
That late? I can only assume they're working out new sanctions.
He'd need to speak to international partners and co-ordinate it first. 5pm is midday in Washington DC isn't it, so gives time to try to reach an agreed global response.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
That's the point though. The weapon system we can never use also means the enemy can never use theirs.
Without nukes, the Cold War would not have remained Cold.
Trident and our allies having it too has saved probably hundreds of millions of lives. It prevents WWIII which would be far worse than WWII if it ever started - with or without nukes.
Nuclear weapons have done more to prevent war than probably all "Nobel Peace Prize" winners in history combined.
Read what I said. I am pro-nukes. Bombs. Theatre weapons that don't end the world once fired. Its absolutely the case that nuclear weapons have prevented WWIII. As Thatcher once said "our own independent nuclear deterrent has helped to keep the peace for decades".
The problem is that with the withdrawal of RAF delivery we have been left with a doomsday weapon. Which we would not even fire as we were being destroyed if we were following NATOs warplan.
Trident is the nuclear missile that Harrods would sell.
Niall Ferguson: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/vlad-the-invader-putin-is-trying-to-recreate-the-tsarist-russian-empire Those who dread war approach diplomacy the wrong way, as if it is an alternative to war. This gives rise to the delusion that, so long as talks are continuing, war is being averted. But unless you are prepared ultimately to resort to force yourself, negotiations are merely a postponement of the other side’s aggression. They will avert war only if you concede peacefully what the aggressor is prepared to take by force.
. . .
You might say that has been the history of Ukraine going back to the time of Peter the Great. It is certainly the way Tsar Vladimir wants Ukraine’s latest bid for independence to end. If he succeeds, the responsibility will lie heavily on those western leaders who forgot their Clausewitz and wished war away.
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
The reduction in interest rate is a curious change because it means more high earners will be able to repay the loans and escape the tax, while those on middle incomes still won't be able to, and so some will end up paying more tax than the higher earners.
The thickos in the media still have cottoned on to the fact that it's a tax and not a loan.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
Did the Arab states know Israel had nuclear weapons?
Your solution would not avoid war. The Donbass voted 84/16 % for independence from Russia in 1991. Do you truly believe that Putin cares about the views of its inhabitants, or would respect any vote to remain part of Ukraine?
As to your final point, if eighty years ago, England had invaded Wales, murdered its political and military leaders, and deported tens of thousands of Welsh people to be worked to death in concentration camps, then an independent Wales would have every right to join such an alliance. That is the position that the Baltic States are in.
I think 1991 was 1991, quite a while ago. Perfectly fair to test the matter again. I'd also say that if the UN plebiscite went Ukraine's way in every district, then Putin would not have been able to invade. It could have worked to Ukraine's advantage, and strengthened its hand.
England did invade Wales, murder its leaders, suppress its culture, though not 80 years ago.
But my real point is, if Wales was independent today, and contracted a military alliance with a hostile power (say Putin) then England would invade Wales.
Mr. Cwsc, there was no unified Welsh state to invade. It was a patchwork of small territories beset with endemic infighting due to the less than sensible inheritance laws (which also buggered the Carolingians on a far larger scale).
In that sense, Wales was more akin to Renaissance Italy or classical Greece, with rampant political divisions but a common culture.
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
The reduction in interest rate is a curious change because it means more high earners will be able to repay the loans and escape the tax, while those on middle incomes still won't be able to, and so some will end up paying more tax than the higher earners.
It's the Tories undoing some of the changes the LibDems achieved in coalition to make it work, in practice, more like a graduate tax. They've shifted it back towards the loan system they always wanted.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
Since the retirement of WE.177 and the various arms agreements, some of the Trident missiles have been downloaded to a single warhead. If you commanded the software not to inject the tritium, the warhead would have a yield of 300 tons of TNT (aprox). Most of that yield would be in neutrons, incidentally - way more than half.
So you have a very, very expensive way of reliving a tactical nuclear weapon.
Yep. And expensive in two ways. One, a fabulously expensive way to deliver a single bomb. But catastrophically expensive as PVO Stany detects SLBM launches and Putin launches a full counterforce strike.
An air-dropped dial-a-yield B61mod12 gives nuclear capability without automatically ending the UK when you use it. Because lets be clear about it - nuclear war ends this country. Bits of it will be left (hello from Aberdeenshire) but it won't be a country any more.
Any nuke that gets dropped rapidly escalates to strategic level. To the point that the above was more about having the ability to hit a target for certain non-strategic crises.
There is next to no interest in tactical nuclear weapons anymore, in the West. The Americans only retain the B-61 and the B-83 to keep the flyboys political backers happy.
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
I was a Remainer at the time and had just voted Remain in the referendum Leave won, so could be included in that category.
However I now accept Brexit and remain committed to our UK unlike some diehard Remainers
You may have accepted Brexit but many Scots who voted against it have not, so the reasonable thing to do given what you yourself have decided is their separate culture and identity is to ask them what they think and let them decide for themselves.
Absolutely not.
They voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation referendum in 2014 and that vote stands.
Niall Ferguson: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/vlad-the-invader-putin-is-trying-to-recreate-the-tsarist-russian-empire Those who dread war approach diplomacy the wrong way, as if it is an alternative to war. This gives rise to the delusion that, so long as talks are continuing, war is being averted. But unless you are prepared ultimately to resort to force yourself, negotiations are merely a postponement of the other side’s aggression. They will avert war only if you concede peacefully what the aggressor is prepared to take by force.
. . .
You might say that has been the history of Ukraine going back to the time of Peter the Great. It is certainly the way Tsar Vladimir wants Ukraine’s latest bid for independence to end. If he succeeds, the responsibility will lie heavily on those western leaders who forgot their Clausewitz and wished war away.
Unfortunate, but with the Putins of the world it is si vis pacem, para bellum.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
I am pro-nuke and anti-Trident. A distinction that is apparently beyond you.
Hiroshima - theatre weapon dropped by a bomber. Can be tracked by both sides and called off to the last minute. Trident. As soon as we push the button Russia pushes its own button - or it already has. If they have already fired and we are retaliating then it hasn't deterred them. If we are preempting then they also fire and we can't stop that either.
During the cold war SLBM systems were - and still are - a second strike platform. After you have fought a more limited nuclear exchange you deter the other side from going all out. But thanks to a generation of defence cuts we now have nothing in between tank warfare and the end of the world. If we had shiny British nukes ready to be dropped on Russian formations from our expensive new jets then we can stop a war happening at all.
Otherwise lets really look at WWIII. Lets say that Putin decides he wants the Baltics. We can fight a general war. Have nukes deterred him then? It steps on and threats are made - are nukes a deterrent then? Is America prepared to get turned into molten glass for Tallinn?
The truth about the missile war is that it made WWIII unthinkable. Which is why we have fought so many proxy wars as a safer alternative.
I'm fretting about all the emissions those Russian tanks are belching into the atmosphere. And the potential spread of new covid variants by their soldiers.
Our leaders have told us, after all, that covid and climate change are the chief threats to our safety and it is to address these threats we must gear our lives and give our money.
It's almost as if the Russians, and their Chinese allies, don't understand this.
Your solution would not avoid war. The Donbass voted 84/16 % for independence from Russia in 1991. Do you truly believe that Putin cares about the views of its inhabitants, or would respect any vote to remain part of Ukraine?
As to your final point, if eighty years ago, England had invaded Wales, murdered its political and military leaders, and deported tens of thousands of Welsh people to be worked to death in concentration camps, then an independent Wales would have every right to join such an alliance. That is the position that the Baltic States are in.
I think 1991 was 1991, quite a while ago. Perfectly fair to test the matter again. I'd also say that if the UN plebiscite went Ukraine's way in every district, then Putin would not have been able to invade. It could have worked to Ukraine's advantage, and strengthened its hand.
England did invade Wales, murder its leaders, suppress its culture, though not 80 years ago.
But my real point is, if Wales was independent today, and contracted a military alliance with a hostile power (say Putin) then England would invade Wales.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
A big part of that was that Isreal told the Russians, after '73, that if they backed another attack on Israel, the Sampson Option would apply to Russia as well.
A pedant writes that actually Israel attacked its neighbours and not vice versa, though in the belief that vice versa was imminent. What any of this has to do with the price of sturgeon is beyond me.
That was The Six Day War in 1967 you're thinking of, not the Yom Kippur War in 1973 - which was a surprise attack on Israel. Also, no-one sane disputes that Israel's actions in the 67 war were self defence and totally legal.
My hatred for Putin today is so great, that as a staunch leaver I'd offer the UK to rejoin the EU just because I know it would piss him off.
[1] Gotta talk about Brexit I suppose. Wouldn't be a PB thread without it.
I think both you and Nick are right - refighting the Brexit debate, whether one believes it a good decision or a mistake, is utterly irrelevant this morning.
I'm afraid I don't see that happening. Much of current daily politics is still about quite fundamental questions which will not go away.
There has been no slowdown in of snide-asides about UK and UK-politicians in the Brussels-based yellow media. When Dave Keating reported on statements by FMs, he still added "with a photograph" to the tweet wrt Liz Truss - following his usual line of a smidgeon of studied contempt while boosting EU/UK polarisation.
Macron is still in his post-Aukus sulk and in search of a Greater France and reelection, and Boris will still use whatever ammunition is necessary to save his miserable neck. Will Macron really wind down maximum bureaucracy on frontiers with the UK? Angela Rayner will continue her usual mudslinging with anything she can get her hands on, whether true or fabricated. And so on.
Some of the intra-UK politics may be recast in form to suit the time, just as it was for COVID, but it will not go away.
Ah, I'm sure you're right, and democracy extends to them too. If anyone wants to talk about Brexit or whatever, feel free. I'm just saying that personally I don't want to, even with my own usual preoccupations.
On the actual events unfolding, the most significant is perhaps the report of troop landings in Odessa. That is well past the claimed borders of the self-declared eastern statelets, and if confirmed it does suggest he aims to go for the whole country.
Fair comment.
I would say that Mariupol / Odessa could equally be aiming for all the coasts of the Sea of Azov, to create a land-bridge to Crimea from Russia, and to control a further piece of the coast of the Black Sea.
These are the previous ones. With Abkhazia Russia occupied half of Georgia's coastline.
Joint statement by the three Baltic foreign ministers 🇪🇪@eliimets, 🇱🇻@edgarsrinkevics, 🇱🇹 @GLandsbergis in support of Ukraine 🇺🇦, condemning in a strongest possible way the open large scale Russian aggression against the independent, peaceful and democratic Ukraine
“ We, the foreign ministers of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania condemn in a strongest possible way the open large scale Russian aggression against the independent, peaceful and democratic Ukraine. This act of aggression is not acceptable, it's a blatant violation of the international law, of all international norms and a crime against Ukrainian people that we condemn. All of us in the whole international community need to condemn it in a strongest possible way, to impose strongest possible sanctions on Russia, including disengaging Russia from SWIFT, isolating it politically and be firm in our support to the sovereignty, territorial integrity of independent Ukraine. We would need to urgently provide Ukrainian people with weapons, ammunition and any other kind of military support to defend itself as well as economic, financial and political assistance and support, humanitarian aid. In this difficult moment we stand united with the people of Ukraine. Dear Ukrainian friends, we are in your historic capital Kyiv, we support you and do anything possible so that Man SO 7Ukraini! 17 209 1 553 1
They are the ones who should be driving the responses, as the most under threat, with full backing of larger allies. Otherwise why spend all this time helping them go Western in the first place.
If we let the Baltic States fall, then NATO is effectively finished.
If Putin wants the Baltic states, all he has to do is sneeze.
No offence, but you've been Putin's cheerleader throughtout this crisis.
No offence taken, because you are wrong.
I have repeatedly drawn a difference between "Putin" and "Russia". Just as there is a difference between "England" and "Johnson"
I have repeatedly proposed the only solution that could have avoided war -- namely independently organised plebiscites in Donetsk and Luhansk.
You have repeatedly proposed appeasing the bully Putin by giving him exactly what he is asking for.
Bloomberg @bpolitics China opposes sanctions against Russia and criticizes the U.S. for inflaming the Ukraine crisis, suggesting its support for NATO’s expansion left Vladimir Putin with few options
It's almost hilarious. An expansion 20 or so years ago left him few options but water (more recent joiners have not been Russia focused).
Also the classic 'your responding to the invasion is inflaming this crisis not the invasion itself'.
Aren't the chinese concerned about the emissions the war will create? I was told last night that climate change was their chief concern, and not global dominance hand in hand with Russia.
I'm fretting about all the emissions those Russian tanks are belching into the atmosphere. And the potential spread of new covid variants by their soldiers.
Our leaders have told us, after all, that covid and climate change are the chief threats to our safety and it is to address these threats we must gear our lives and give our money.
It's almost as if the Russians, and their Chinese allies, don't understand this.
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
Yeah. Russians. That's what I am saying by posting "Russians". Read my posts not what you think I am posting.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
Mr. Cwsc, there was no unified Welsh state to invade. It was a patchwork of small territories beset with endemic infighting due to the less than sensible inheritance laws (which also buggered the Carolingians on a far larger scale).
In that sense, Wales was more akin to Renaissance Italy or classical Greece, with rampant political divisions but a common culture.
This is true.
But, my point is only that an independent Wales -- or an independent Scotland -- would have to take into account reactions of its powerful neighbour in any foreign policy/alliances.
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
Did the Arab states know Israel had nuclear weapons?
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
The reduction in interest rate is a curious change because it means more high earners will be able to repay the loans and escape the tax, while those on middle incomes still won't be able to, and so some will end up paying more tax than the higher earners.
The thickos in the media still have cottoned on to the fact that it's a tax and not a loan.
And designed to make more space in Uni's for the sons and daughters of wealthy Asians. Sounds more racist than am, but if middle income Brits don't fill these expensive spaces, who will?
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
A big part of that was that Isreal told the Russians, after '73, that if they backed another attack on Israel, the Sampson Option would apply to Russia as well.
A pedant writes that actually Israel attacked its neighbours and not vice versa, though in the belief that vice versa was imminent. What any of this has to do with the price of sturgeon is beyond me.
That was The Six Day War in 1967 you're thinking of, not the Yom Kippur War in 1973 - which was a surprise attack on Israel. Also, no-one sane disputes that Israel's actions in the 67 war were self defence and totally legal.
Indeed. It was after 73 that Israel started explicitly telling the Arab world and the USSR about what some called the Sampson Option. In the event of total defeat, Israel will nuke all those who are at war with it at the time - and their backer.
Egypt made peace first. Which might be something to do with the fact that a single nuke on the Aswan Dam would kill 99% of the population of Egypt and render all the useful land an irradiated mud patch......
The Estonian PM on Sky News literally speaks better English than Nadine Dorries.
A few years back I recall seeing the Estonian or possibly Latvian leader in an interview and they accurately talked about prognostication, which I'd not expect from most of us native speakers.
Does Putin speak English? I've never seen a clip of him doing so but I assume he understands it a bit at least.
I'm fretting about all the emissions those Russian tanks are belching into the atmosphere. And the potential spread of new covid variants by their soldiers.
Our leaders have told us, after all, that covid and climate change are the chief threats to our safety and it is to address these threats we must gear our lives and give our money.
It's almost as if the Russians, and their Chinese allies, don't understand this.
Daily Express comments section that way. ➡️
You'll fit right in.
You can defend Western governments that have made colossal strategic errors over the last few years if you want.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
Although Israel was attacked by its neighbours in 1967, shortly after it had developed nuclear weapons. It wasn't conquered, though.
As has been said below, that was about the time the Arabs realised the extent of Israel’s nuclear armoury, and how Israel was willing to turn the entire mid-east to glass if it came down to it. No such large-scale assaults on Israel have happened since, even tho the Arabs have overwhelming strength in numbers and would eventually win a ‘conventional’ war
A big part of that was that Isreal told the Russians, after '73, that if they backed another attack on Israel, the Sampson Option would apply to Russia as well.
A pedant writes that actually Israel attacked its neighbours and not vice versa, though in the belief that vice versa was imminent. What any of this has to do with the price of sturgeon is beyond me.
That was The Six Day War in 1967 you're thinking of, not the Yom Kippur War in 1973 - which was a surprise attack on Israel. Also, no-one sane disputes that Israel's actions in the 67 war were self defence and totally legal.
Excuse me if I was confused by the reference to attacks in 1967.
The Estonian PM on Sky News literally speaks better English than Nadine Dorries.
A few years back I recall seeing the Estonian or possibly Latvian leader in an interview and they accurately talked about prognostication, which I'd not expect from most of us native speakers.
Does Putin speak English? I've never seen a clip of him doing so but I assume he understands it a bit at least.
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
Yeah. Russians. That's what I am saying by posting "Russians". Read my posts not what you think I am posting.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
Is any distinction made between a Russian with long-standing business and family connections to the UK, including residential property here that they actually use, who subsequently obtains citizenship, and another Russian with no such connections who simply pays up for a golden passport?
I'm fretting about all the emissions those Russian tanks are belching into the atmosphere. And the potential spread of new covid variants by their soldiers.
Our leaders have told us, after all, that covid and climate change are the chief threats to our safety and it is to address these threats we must gear our lives and give our money.
It's almost as if the Russians, and their Chinese allies, don't understand this.
Daily Express comments section that way. ➡️
You'll fit right in.
It's gonna be tough for the Trump fans to try and reconcile this all.
Thank God we have Trident. It may be half-American, it may be quasi-non-independent, it may spend half the time up on blocks, but thank God we never listened to the crazed CND/Labour fuckwits and gave it away for no reason
Thank God we have nukes. The world is a cruel and dangerous place
There is a major problem with Trident. It is a second strike weapon. Should we end up with codes input and keys turned it will be land weapons against land weapons, bombers against bombers.
During a nuclear war the function of all of the sub-launched systems is to ride it out. If you recall our sub commanders have a letter of last resort - what to do once they resurface for orders if we're all dead. Listening for the BBC World Service.
So what use is Trident? We would have been much MUCH better equipped with nuclear bombs we could drop on the bastards. Once you launch a bomber all sides can see where it is going and you can withdraw it right up to the final drop zone.
Once you fire a ballistic missile the other side will fire theirs. They are an Armageddon weapon, only a deterrent in the form of being able to kill you as you kill me. War - as horrific as it is - needs to be able to be fought without the threat of the end of all things. A weapon system you can never use? That is Trident.
What bollocks. It’s a deterrent. “You hit us, you destroy us, we can still utterly annihilate you”. So they are deterred from hitting us in the first place
Also, we are perfectly capable of lobbing just one missile and taking out a small city. As a warning.
Cf Hiroshima. It worked.
No nuclear armed state has ever faced full on invasion and conquest
I am pro-nuke and anti-Trident. A distinction that is apparently beyond you.
Hiroshima - theatre weapon dropped by a bomber. Can be tracked by both sides and called off to the last minute. Trident. As soon as we push the button Russia pushes its own button - or it already has. If they have already fired and we are retaliating then it hasn't deterred them. If we are preempting then they also fire and we can't stop that either.
During the cold war SLBM systems were - and still are - a second strike platform. After you have fought a more limited nuclear exchange you deter the other side from going all out. But thanks to a generation of defence cuts we now have nothing in between tank warfare and the end of the world. If we had shiny British nukes ready to be dropped on Russian formations from our expensive new jets then we can stop a war happening at all.
Otherwise lets really look at WWIII. Lets say that Putin decides he wants the Baltics. We can fight a general war. Have nukes deterred him then? It steps on and threats are made - are nukes a deterrent then? Is America prepared to get turned into molten glass for Tallinn?
The truth about the missile war is that it made WWIII unthinkable. Which is why we have fought so many proxy wars as a safer alternative.
Tactical weapon usage escalates to strategic, in nearly every serious war game that has been tried.
That is why NATO military were so keen to get rid of them.
In the USSR, such thinking was considered... unwise. At least if expressed. So they kept on wanting the things...
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
But we know this isn't the government’s view, because they are willing to strip Britons of their nationality even if their parents have a foreign passport. So treating these people as though they are just the same as any other Briton for the purposes of trousering their money smacks of hypocrisy. And when you look at some of their past or even current associations with prominent figures close to Putin's regime, I think that you would be naive not to at least wonder whether it is sensible for the party of government to have taken their money. Especially when the UK unveiled such an absurdly weak set of sanctions - don't be surprised if people join the dots. Shouting "racism" every time someone says something you disagree with isn't an adequate defence.
The Estonian PM on Sky News literally speaks better English than Nadine Dorries.
A few years back I recall seeing the Estonian or possibly Latvian leader in an interview and they accurately talked about prognostication, which I'd not expect from most of us native speakers.
Does Putin speak English? I've never seen a clip of him doing so but I assume he understands it a bit at least.
I think he speaks good english, but doesn't for political reasons. Speaking via an interpreter gives you more time on questions, allows you to reply in your native language and if something gets err "misspoken" it's off to Siberia for the interpreter. It also allows you to reserve English for when you really want or need it to make a point.
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
Yeah. Russians. That's what I am saying by posting "Russians". Read my posts not what you think I am posting.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
Indeed but what we were discussing yesterday was the likes of Temerko.
If you're happy to accept that he's British not Russian (which others weren't) then we can move on. Absolutely sanction Russians, no objection from me to that. So long as we're crystal clear we're talking about Russians, not Britons, that we're talking about then we're on the same page and fully agreed.
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
The reduction in interest rate is a curious change because it means more high earners will be able to repay the loans and escape the tax, while those on middle incomes still won't be able to, and so some will end up paying more tax than the higher earners.
If the earnings level isn't increased then pretty much everyone will end up repaying everything.
It will be effectively an extra 9% income tax for graduates working lives.
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
I also read the Alternative History forum, and of course they have a discussion about Ukraine. Seems to me, over there, they think Ukraine is gone (annexed), Belarus will be too (Lukshenko will simply be got rid of) and Moldova as well, before Putin turns back to central Asia and takes/puppets a few of the 'stans.
Quite different from here were the only thing I've seen is Putin will rip off a bit of Eastern Ukraine and puppet the rest.
I'm inclined to agree with Alt-History. I don't think Ukraine will exist even as a puppet IF Putin gets his way.
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
It is well known on here I was a Remainer in 2016 when you voted Leave.
However I have accepted the Brexit result and back the trade deal we have with the EU.
In any case we have a Leave voting Tory PM and there is near zero chance of a Remain voting Tory like me becoming Tory leader or PM for a generation so what I said and other Remainer Tories said immediately after the result is not really relevant.
It is Leave voting Tory PMs or Remain voting Labour PMs who will decide the future of the Union for this generation
Bloomberg @bpolitics China opposes sanctions against Russia and criticizes the U.S. for inflaming the Ukraine crisis, suggesting its support for NATO’s expansion left Vladimir Putin with few options
It's almost hilarious. An expansion 20 or so years ago left him few options but water (more recent joiners have not been Russia focused).
Also the classic 'your responding to the invasion is inflaming this crisis not the invasion itself'.
Aren't the chinese concerned about the emissions the war will create? I was told last night that climate change was their chief concern, and not global dominance hand in hand with Russia.
Some of us are capable of walking and talking even if doing more than one thing at a time is beyond you.
Glad I’m extremely heavy on gold and cash. Stock markets going into full panic mode.
2-3% down is hardly full panic mode facing the biggest war in Europe in 75 years, wouldnt have been surprised if it was 5-10% down.
The lesson of these things is that the first day is only the start. As in March 2020.
But folk are determined to *never* learn from history.
Remember the Sudetenland? Too many clearly forgot. Remember that the next time a “muscular Unionist” (sic) proposes the partition of Scotland. They’re not the good guys.
Some diehard Remainers were happy to propose the partition of the UK after Brexit
Could the West declare Kaliningrad's independence and move in peacekeeping/deNazification forces?
From my visit, it is a shithole.
I believe it is also the world capital for STDs.
Just the place to send a peace-keeping force.
Yet according to WP: It was recognized as the best city in Russia in 2012, 2013 and 2014 according to Kommersant's magazine The Firm's Secret, the best city in Russia for business in 2013 according to Forbes, and was ranked fifth in the Urban Environment Quality Index published by Minstroy in 2019. Kaliningrad has been a major internal migration attraction in Russia over the past two decades
Mr. Cwsc, there was no unified Welsh state to invade. It was a patchwork of small territories beset with endemic infighting due to the less than sensible inheritance laws (which also buggered the Carolingians on a far larger scale).
In that sense, Wales was more akin to Renaissance Italy or classical Greece, with rampant political divisions but a common culture.
This is true.
But, my point is only that an independent Wales -- or an independent Scotland -- would have to take into account reactions of its powerful neighbour in any foreign policy/alliances.
That is all.
England did of course fight many wars with Scotland in the Middle Ages and Tudor period when the Scots were allied with France, true
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
“… under new government plans for England.“
Boris does a good job of Bad Government making Half-decent Governments look good.
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
Yeah. Russians. That's what I am saying by posting "Russians". Read my posts not what you think I am posting.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
Indeed but what we were discussing yesterday was the likes of Temerko.
If you're happy to accept that he's British not Russian (which others weren't) then we can move on. Absolutely sanction Russians, no objection from me to that. So long as we're crystal clear we're talking about Russians, not Britons, that we're talking about then we're on the same page and fully agreed.
We could investigate rich ex-Russian Britons for corruption and theft though.
Yes, he's said if he was in charge this never would have happened and Biden is a poopy pants old man
As well as that Putin is a genius. I think that Putin has been planning this for so many years he probably even had the expectation that Trump would be in power during the operation itself.
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
Yeah. Russians. That's what I am saying by posting "Russians". Read my posts not what you think I am posting.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
Is any distinction made between a Russian with long-standing business and family connections to the UK, including residential property here that they actually use, who subsequently obtains citizenship, and another Russian with no such connections who simply pays up for a golden passport?
Of course - it isn't as if our authorities don't already know. Daisy Cooper read out a list of 35 names in parliament. In my part of the world we have quite a few Russians connected to fishing and energy. They - unlike other people listed - aren't former members of Putin's security council who brought vast sums of suspect money to these shores.
Our sanctions should be so heavy that we feel pain, let alone Russia. Such an act of unprovoked war in Europe cannot go unpunished and we should be collectively willing to pay some sacrifice to make sure Russia suffers for these actions.
Freeze and start legal action to confiscate assets of anyone linked to Putin. Ban anyone in the West from holding Russian government or Ruble denominated debt. Cut access to Swift. Sanction all Russian banks. Implement a energy plan that makes Europe independent of Russian oil/gas as soon as possible.
Agreed. We need a complete and 100% isolation of Russia akin to and beyond what happened to the Apartheid South Africa. Ban them from finance, from sports, from anything and everything.
On the latter, not to be replaced with "I can't believe it's not Russia" Olympic teams ... Banned full stop. Cut off entirely from the world.
So, about yesterday's debate where you were dead against freezing Russian assets and suspected Russian assets in the UK...
What Russian assets?
Yesterday we were talking about British assets of Britons who are Putin's enemies who have lived in the UK and acquired citizenship for decades?
Are you wanting to revert to Russophobia and racistly seizing the assets of all of Putin's enemies who happened to be born in Russia?
Get a grip!
Yep. "you're all racists if you impose sanctions on russian accounts of russian passport holders and russian property in the UK" is providing succour to Putin.
Well done.
More racism. Calling Britons by their nation of birth, rather than their real nationality, is unadulterated racism.
sanctions on russianBritish accounts of russianBritish passport holders and russianBritish property in the UK.
Sanction Russians by all means. Not Britons.
Yeah. Russians. That's what I am saying by posting "Russians". Read my posts not what you think I am posting.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
Indeed but what we were discussing yesterday was the likes of Temerko.
If you're happy to accept that he's British not Russian (which others weren't) then we can move on. Absolutely sanction Russians, no objection from me to that. So long as we're crystal clear we're talking about Russians, not Britons, that we're talking about then we're on the same page and fully agreed.
We could investigate rich ex-Russian Britons for corruption and theft though.
Of course. But in this country, unlike Putin's Russia, we have a system where we don't just confiscate the assets of people without pesky little things like evidence and due process.
If anyone has any evidence of wrong doing, that should go to the relevant authorities.
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
“… under new government plans for England.“
Boris does a good job of Bad Government making Half-decent Governments look good.
Ukraine at least has a comedian who became a politician, whereas we have the reverse.
Comments
There is no such thing as a good mass murder.
The problem is that with the withdrawal of RAF delivery we have been left with a doomsday weapon. Which we would not even fire as we were being destroyed if we were following NATOs warplan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel
https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/1496777883674714116
Also the classic 'your responding to the invasion is inflaming this crisis not the invasion itself'.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-60498245
Although the reduction in the interest rate to RPI is certainly a good thing.
I would really recommend that any future students delay university for at least a year so as to get more experience of the world generally and possible careers specifically before accepting such lifetime debt servitude.
A new world order is looming.
An air-dropped dial-a-yield B61mod12 gives nuclear capability without automatically ending the UK when you use it. Because lets be clear about it - nuclear war ends this country. Bits of it will be left (hello from Aberdeenshire) but it won't be a country any more.
England did invade Wales, murder its leaders, suppress its culture, though not 80 years ago.
But my real point is, if Wales was independent today, and contracted a military alliance with a hostile power (say Putin) then England would invade Wales.
I understand that. You understand that.
We don't want 'tactical' nukes that its OK to use in war as a first strike without triggering doomsday, that's not what they're there for. Who exactly would you want to first strike with nukes who either (a) wouldn't retaliate with their own, leading to doomsday or (b) we could stomp over in a conventional war [maybe not occupation] without nukes anyway.
Tactical nukes play no strategic role. Their only strategic role is a doomsday trigger.
If even this sort of event cannot fracture American partisanship that's really bad.
I would say that Mariupol / Odessa could equally be aiming for all the coasts of the Sea of Azov, to create a land-bridge to Crimea from Russia, and to control a further piece of the coast of the Black Sea.
@ClarkeMicah
Vladimir Putin turns out to be stark staring mad. Aggressive war is a crime. Nothing excuses it.
7:44 AM · Feb 24, 2022"
https://twitter.com/ClarkeMicah/status/1496752877619929088
I specifically said if there was a war, Putin will take much more than Donetsk and Luhansk.
1945 was probably the first and last time a western nuclear nation would use nuclear weapons for offense rather than last resort defence
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/vlad-the-invader-putin-is-trying-to-recreate-the-tsarist-russian-empire
Those who dread war approach diplomacy the wrong way, as if it is an alternative to war. This gives rise to the delusion that, so long as talks are continuing, war is being averted. But unless you are prepared ultimately to resort to force yourself, negotiations are merely a postponement of the other side’s aggression. They will avert war only if you concede peacefully what the aggressor is prepared to take by force.
. . .
You might say that has been the history of Ukraine going back to the time of Peter the Great. It is certainly the way Tsar Vladimir wants Ukraine’s latest bid for independence to end. If he succeeds, the responsibility will lie heavily on those western leaders who forgot their Clausewitz and wished war away.
‘Of course it’s impossible to know what he’ll do next.’
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1496781553715851266
Famine must be cantering our way, not far behind. Then Death
In that sense, Wales was more akin to Renaissance Italy or classical Greece, with rampant political divisions but a common culture.
There is next to no interest in tactical nuclear weapons anymore, in the West. The Americans only retain the B-61 and the B-83 to keep the flyboys political backers happy.
They voted to stay in the UK in a once in a generation referendum in 2014 and that vote stands.
Hiroshima - theatre weapon dropped by a bomber. Can be tracked by both sides and called off to the last minute.
Trident. As soon as we push the button Russia pushes its own button - or it already has. If they have already fired and we are retaliating then it hasn't deterred them. If we are preempting then they also fire and we can't stop that either.
During the cold war SLBM systems were - and still are - a second strike platform. After you have fought a more limited nuclear exchange you deter the other side from going all out. But thanks to a generation of defence cuts we now have nothing in between tank warfare and the end of the world. If we had shiny British nukes ready to be dropped on Russian formations from our expensive new jets then we can stop a war happening at all.
Otherwise lets really look at WWIII. Lets say that Putin decides he wants the Baltics. We can fight a general war. Have nukes deterred him then? It steps on and threats are made - are nukes a deterrent then? Is America prepared to get turned into molten glass for Tallinn?
The truth about the missile war is that it made WWIII unthinkable. Which is why we have fought so many proxy wars as a safer alternative.
Our leaders have told us, after all, that covid and climate change are the chief threats to our safety and it is to address these threats we must gear our lives and give our money.
It's almost as if the Russians, and their Chinese allies, don't understand this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian-occupied_territories
That doesn't avoid war. It only delays it.
You have been Putin's cheerleader.
You'll fit right in.
We all need to be very clear who we are going after. I mistook Temerko for Russian, Big Dog the same for Abramovich. For Russian assets it is simple. For ex-Russian assets we have existing laws which apply to all British passport holders. Either way, we can freeze any and all money and assets from Russia.
You said "what Russian assets".
You may be the only person in this country who doesn't understand that Russia has an awful lot of money and property on our soil.
But, my point is only that an independent Wales -- or an independent Scotland -- would have to take into account reactions of its powerful neighbour in any foreign policy/alliances.
That is all.
Sounds more racist than am, but if middle income Brits don't fill these expensive spaces, who will?
Egypt made peace first. Which might be something to do with the fact that a single nuke on the Aswan Dam would kill 99% of the population of Egypt and render all the useful land an irradiated mud patch......
Does Putin speak English? I've never seen a clip of him doing so but I assume he understands it a bit at least.
Best of luck with that.
First, you are better prepared when it comes. Second, you can delay and delay and delay and delay.
I have never posted anything in favour of Putin, who I have repeatedly said is a thug and a bully.
We have let Putin plan this over eight years, and we have no plan how to deal with today and the coming days.
I believe it is also the world capital for STDs.
Just the place to send a peace-keeping force.
That is why NATO military were so keen to get rid of them.
In the USSR, such thinking was considered... unwise. At least if expressed. So they kept on wanting the things...
Shouting "racism" every time someone says something you disagree with isn't an adequate defence.
It also allows you to reserve English for when you really want or need it to make a point.
If you're happy to accept that he's British not Russian (which others weren't) then we can move on. Absolutely sanction Russians, no objection from me to that. So long as we're crystal clear we're talking about Russians, not Britons, that we're talking about then we're on the same page and fully agreed.
It will be effectively an extra 9% income tax for graduates working lives.
I also read the Alternative History forum, and of course they have a discussion about Ukraine.
Seems to me, over there, they think Ukraine is gone (annexed), Belarus will be too (Lukshenko will simply be got rid of) and Moldova as well, before Putin turns back to central Asia and takes/puppets a few of the 'stans.
Quite different from here were the only thing I've seen is Putin will rip off a bit of Eastern Ukraine and puppet the rest.
I'm inclined to agree with Alt-History. I don't think Ukraine will exist even as a puppet IF Putin gets his way.
However I have accepted the Brexit result and back the trade deal we have with the EU.
In any case we have a Leave voting Tory PM and there is near zero chance of a Remain voting Tory like me becoming Tory leader or PM for a generation so what I said and other Remainer Tories said immediately after the result is not really relevant.
It is Leave voting Tory PMs or Remain voting Labour PMs who will decide the future of the Union for this generation
Boris does a good job of Bad Government making Half-decent Governments look good.
If anyone has any evidence of wrong doing, that should go to the relevant authorities.
Point 1 probably true.