Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Punters think the Ukraine invasion will help Johnson’s survival chances – politicalbetting.com

1235710

Comments

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Some thoughts, pretty grim, I'm afraid:

    - For all their bravery and resolve, I can't see the Ukrainian army being able to mount an effective defence against such a large attach from three sides. In particular, with Kyiv so close to the northern border, and the Ukrainian army concentrated towards the east, the situation looks pretty hopeless in the short term.

    - Putin has understood the messages which the West has been giving him for nearly a decade. His expectation will be that, as with his operations in Syria, Crimea, Georgia, and even Salisbury, we will huff and puff for a while, but soon drift back into buying Russian oil and gas.

    - That calculation might, and should, be wrong, but there's nothing we can now do to deter him. A puppet regime will no doubt be installed, and Ukraine declared 'de-nazified'.

    - I don't really buy the idea that there will be a prolonged period of effective Ukrainian resistance, sufficient to give Putin nightmares, after the Russian army has taken control. This is not Afghanistan with warlords and private armies hidden in mountain redoubts. It's mostly flat country (other than the Carpathian Mountains in the far south-west), which is not good terrain for an asymmetric war. There will be some pockets of resistance, for sure, but Putin will be calculating, correctly I think, that he will be able to crush them.

    - If I'm right, the West cannot save Ukraine in the short term, but it needs to ensure that we don't simply go back into tut-tutting whilst going back to business as usual. There will be a big economic hit from taking robust long-term action, but it has to be done.

    - I'm not convinced it will be done, but we shall see.

    - As for Trump, Corbyn, Burgon, Abbott, McDonnell, Farage, Banks, and the rest of them: let's hope they are now consigned to the universal opprobrium they deserve.

    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.
    Surely they would have to deploy substantially more than 100,000 troops to mount an occupation. Does Russia want to tie up its armed forces in such a way?
    Perhaps Putin is now so deluded that he thinks most Ukrainians will actually be glad to be part of his Russian superstate?
    Maybe. I suspect more likely he calculates many might hate it but not to the point of dying in a long guerilla war to prevent it.
    My assumption is that he will replace the current Ukrainian leadership with his puppets, and then withdraw. Fear of another invasion, he'll reckon, will prevent any kind of uprising.
    There's a constitutional 'referendum' in Belarus in a couple of days that could lead to its absorbtion into Russia. The question is how much of Ukraine will be taken too.
  • Ukraine's foreign secretary

    Dmytro Kuleba
    @DmytroKuleba
    · 1m
    Я не буду дипломатичним у цій темі. Всі, хто зараз сумнівається, чи треба відключати Росію від SWIFT, мають розуміти, що кров невинних українських чоловіків, жінок і дітей буде і на їхніх руках. Відключіть Росію від SWIFT!
    https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1496875093712064518

    google gives me

    "I'm not going to be diplomatic about this. Anyone who now doubts whether Russia should be cut off from SWIFT should understand that the blood of innocent Ukrainian men, women and children will be on their hands. Disconnect Russia from SWIFT!"

    *U.K. PM PUSHES FOR RUSSIA TO BE EJECTED FROM SWIFT SYSTEM: FT

    https://twitter.com/DeItaone/status/1496872988607668230
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,729
    Interesting thread from Senator Marco Rubio (Rep).

    "Russia’s invasion has already taken longer & been costlier than #Putin expected. Almost certain his military & intel leaders knew this ahead of time but no one dared tell him his expectations were unrealistic."

    You'd expect him to be pretty well-briefed. He's been warning about Putin for some time.

    https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1496870020646850561
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928

    A Grandmaster's thoughts..

    Garry Kasparov
    @Kasparov63
    Ok, after years of warnings were ignored and hearing "Garry, you were right!" all damn day today, I'll repeat what I said in 2014: Stop telling me I was right and listen to what I'm saying now. My recommendations follow:
    -Support Ukraine militarily, immediately, everything but boots on the ground. All weapons, intel, cyber.
    -Bankrupt Putin's war machine. Freeze & seize Russia's finances & those of him and his gang.
    -Kick Russia out of every intl & financial institution. PACE, Interpol, etc 2/5
    -Recall all ambassadors from Russia. There is no point in talking. The new unified message is "stop or be isolated completely".
    -Ban all elements of Putin's global propaganda machine. Turn them off, shut them down, send them home. Stop helping the dictator spread lies & hate.
    -Expose and act against Putin's lackeys in the free world. If Schröder and his ilk continue to work for Putin, bring charges. Ask the owners & advertisers of networks platforming Putin propagandists like Carlson why they allow it. 4/5
    -Replace Russian oil & gas. Pressure OPEC, increase production, reopen Keystone. You can't save the planet if you don't save the people on it.
    -Acknowledge there will be costs, sacrifices. We waited to long, the price is high, but it will only get higher. It's time to fight. 5/5
    Cannot ignore the political 5th column of Putinists, from the far right & left in EU to the tankies & Trump & his GOP followers in the US. They may have the right to support a brutal dictator's war in order to criticize Biden, but it's disgusting and anti-American. Do not forget.
    https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/1496865471995523080

    Reopening Keystone doesn't generate new oil, it just improves Gulf Coast refining margins.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,678
    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    It's far easier to hold people down if you truly believe you're building a better world, as the Eastern European Communists did in the 1940's. And, of course, many of them could point to their heroic war record, and the fact that some of their enemies were Nazi collaborators, as further justification for their project.

    It's far harder to have that will to power, when all that you're doing is maintaining a bunch of kleptocrats in power.
    Yes exactly. The only way Putin can keep Ukraine quiet is either by stationing large Russian armed forces there (at great cost and hassle), or by trusting his puppet Kiev regime to be brutally ruthless in suppressing its own people

    Where is this regime going to recruit its soldiers and coppers? Who will do the enforcing, for Kiev, on their own friends and family?

    I do not see the endgame for Putin here. I really do wonder if he has lost his senses
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    Leon said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.

    What is there militarily in Chernobyl for the first wave of targeting and capture? Putting my head in the minds of Russian planners gives me two aims for day one. Certainly airports, airfields, and everything to help with air supremacy in the coming days. In the same thinking other targets for day one, radar, comms, intelligence gathering and holding network. The second aim is it will be much easier for Russia if the civilians bugger off out the way, so sow seeds of terror, fear, panic and fill the roads fleeing West.

    PS. Just a word to say Yokes isn’t a poster getting it all from a circus in my opinion, nor a darling John le Carre killed on rewrite like some have posted. Although extremely rude and hastily judgemental about me when I tried to engage conversation, Yokes posts a must read in this crisis.

    Does Yokes only come out during UK night? All I am getting from MSM is waffle, not the insights I crave.
    This is good

    A live interactive map of everything going on. Russia is attacking from all sides

    https://liveuamap.com/
    War is a bit weird in 2022, it kicked off on the scheduled hour, cricket matches don’t even manage that, and you have linked to a heatmap of action spots like Sky use for Football Coverage. It’s all a bit unreal today.
  • Russia will meet unprecedented condemnation and isolation' is a big claim for EU sanctions to live up to.

    https://twitter.com/nickgutteridge/status/1496876343962877961
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084
    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    edited February 2022
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    There's the Chinese occupation of Tibet - as an earlier poster argued it's easier when you have a large number of people you can send in.

    Very little is ever said about the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, so perhaps that is reasonably successful.

    Ukraine will be the wealthiest population to have been occupied for some time. Will that give them greater means to fight, or greater means to flee? I think a lot of Afghans signed on to fight for the Taliban because it was a way to get paid.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    I guess he misspoke. Again.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205
    Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    He's calling it the 'Compensating for my Small Penis War."
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    That’s actually a good joke 🙂
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205
    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,720
    Nigelb said:

    Some thoughts, pretty grim, I'm afraid:

    - For all their bravery and resolve, I can't see the Ukrainian army being able to mount an effective defence against such a large attach from three sides. In particular, with Kyiv so close to the northern border, and the Ukrainian army concentrated towards the east, the situation looks pretty hopeless in the short term.

    - Putin has understood the messages which the West has been giving him for nearly a decade. His expectation will be that, as with his operations in Syria, Crimea, Georgia, and even Salisbury, we will huff and puff for a while, but soon drift back into buying Russian oil and gas.

    - That calculation might, and should, be wrong, but there's nothing we can now do to deter him. A puppet regime will no doubt be installed, and Ukraine declared 'de-nazified'.

    - I don't really buy the idea that there will be a prolonged period of effective Ukrainian resistance, sufficient to give Putin nightmares, after the Russian army has taken control. This is not Afghanistan with warlords and private armies hidden in mountain redoubts. It's mostly flat country (other than the Carpathian Mountains in the far south-west), which is not good terrain for an asymmetric war. There will be some pockets of resistance, for sure, but Putin will be calculating, correctly I think, that he will be able to crush them.

    - If I'm right, the West cannot save Ukraine in the short term, but it needs to ensure that we don't simply go back into tut-tutting whilst going back to business as usual. There will be a big economic hit from taking robust long-term action, but it has to be done.

    - I'm not convinced it will be done, but we shall see.

    - As for Trump, Corbyn, Burgon, Abbott, McDonnell, Farage, Banks, and the rest of them: let's hope they are now consigned to the universal opprobrium they deserve.

    Apart from the last bit, I'm not sure about any of that.

    Ukraine has not yet given up, and I think it way too early to judge the outcome. We will see.
    As far as resistance to a successful Russian occupier is concerned, the terrain isn't as important as the determination to fight, which appears to be significant. Again, we will see.

    And if it were prepared to roll the dice right now, 'the West' probably could save Ukraine.
    It's not prepared to do so.
    Iraq is also mostly flat, very flat indeed in the areas where the Sunni and Shia insurgencies were most intense, and well connected by road. Insurgencies turned it into a nightmare.

    In the Soviet Afghanistan conflict it was indeed the mountain redoubts that housed much of the Mujahideen, but after 2001 the most troublesome areas were flat and expansive: Helmand and Kandahar provinces.

    I would hope that the "mountain redoubts" for Ukrainian resistance, if they do resist, will be the cities and villages.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084

    .

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    There's the Chinese occupation of Tibet - as an earlier poster argued it's easier when you have a large number of people you can send in.
    The first time the peaceful quiet people of Tibet were invaded by a grotesque armed military might was ...

    ... by Britain.

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1097909.The_British_Invasion_Of_Tibet
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,678

    .

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    There's the Chinese occupation of Tibet - as an earlier poster argued it's easier when you have a large number of people you can send in.

    Very little is ever said about the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, so perhaps that is reasonably successful.

    Ukraine will be the wealthiest population to have been occupied for some time. Will that give them greater means to fight, or greater means to flee? I think a lot of Afghans signed on to fight for the Taliban because it was a way to get paid.
    Tibet did occur to me. 70 years ago mind. But yes, "successful"

    Hong Kong is another example, but there it's not quite an occupation, it's more de facto annexation like Crimea

  • HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Cold War II is on.

    This is going to have seismic implications for the world security structure. The west are now going to have to reassemble the barriers that were dismantled in the 1990s. That is likely to have significant political implications and ramifications. It is at least theoretical that unity in the West is going to be the order of the day and a lot of the divisions that have been the focus of the past 10 years are going to be forgotten. The geopolitical map could change drastically in the next 12 months.

    I think many of us would gladly take cw2 vs ww3 just now

    Bloody hell Brexit looks stupid today
    No it doesn't.

    The EU nations still need non EU Turkey, the USA and Canada as well as the UK to provide an effective military and economic force that will be clearly enough to contain Putin's Russia. That comes via NATO mainly not the EU
    Of course it does. Brexit was endorsed by Putin as he knew it would significantly weaken Europe and the Western Alliance. It is the same reason he supports and tries to encourage Scottish separatism. Wake up people ffs! He has been laughing his man tits off at us, and it has emboldened him considerably.
    This is clearly garbage given that the strongest responses in Europe to the threat of invasion of Ukraine including supplying arms and training to them came from the UK (Outside of the EU) and the Netherlands, Denmark and Spain (Inside the EU) whilst the supposed big players in the EU - France and Germany - either dithered or openly criticised that support.

    The EU has been an irrelevance in this crisis and that would have been exactly the same were we inside or outside.
    I think you missed my point Richard, which may have been deliberate. Brexit has weakened the Western Alliance and emboldened Putin, that is a fact. You may think it is worth that risk, but it doesn't change the reality
    I genuinely don't agree with that. It is such a superficial and false idea that it should not even be considered. As a military entity the EU has always been, and to date remains, an irrelevance. As a diplomatic entity designed to project soft power it is also an irrelevance since the individual countries have so many diverse views on every single subject. You only have to look at the current situation within the EU to see that in action with countries all wanting their own carve outs from any sanctions. Indeed the only meaningful sanction to date - the suspension of Nordstream - came about because of one EU country (Germany) being pressured into it by a non EU country (The US). The UK being inside or outside makes no difference to any of that. EU countries will do their own thing when it comes to reacting to this and the only multi-national organisation that matters right now is NATO.
    Good articulate post Richard, but methinks you are simply trying to justify a foreign policy and security disaster because you were emotionally engaged with it. Brexit has created significant division and has emboldened Putin. It is not the only thing that has, but it is important. To suggest otherwise is putting your head in the sand .
    I would suggest you cannot point to a single way in which things would have turned out differently regarding Russia and Ukraine if Brexit had not happened. It is not putting head in the sand, it is simply recognising the irrelevance of Brexit and the impotence of the EU in matters of both high diplomacy and military operations.

    NATO matters. The EU does not.
    Without a parallel universe that would be impossible to know for certain. All I can say is that Putin wanted Brexit. Whether he influenced it via social media manipulation we will probably never know, but I suspect you won't want to believe that because it would be too uncomfortable for you. Anyone who know s a little about social media marketing will know it is very possible and probably most likely, particularly considering the resources a hostile state can throw at such things.

    However, my point was not that the Ukraine invasion would not have happened without Brexit per se, and I think you know that. It was that it is one more thing that emboldened him. As to whether the EU is as impotent as you wish to believe, we will have to see. As the largest economic bloc in the world it has the potential to damage Russia via sanctions in a very serious way.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,050
    edited February 2022
    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    Which may mean a smash and grab is the plan instead. He can always return if they get uppity again.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141
    Leon said:

    Sean_F said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    It's far easier to hold people down if you truly believe you're building a better world, as the Eastern European Communists did in the 1940's. And, of course, many of them could point to their heroic war record, and the fact that some of their enemies were Nazi collaborators, as further justification for their project.

    It's far harder to have that will to power, when all that you're doing is maintaining a bunch of kleptocrats in power.
    Yes exactly. The only way Putin can keep Ukraine quiet is either by stationing large Russian armed forces there (at great cost and hassle), or by trusting his puppet Kiev regime to be brutally ruthless in suppressing its own people

    Where is this regime going to recruit its soldiers and coppers? Who will do the enforcing, for Kiev, on their own friends and family?

    I do not see the endgame for Putin here. I really do wonder if he has lost his senses
    You can always find collaborators for gain, but there won't be many true believers. There were only three genuine elections in Eastern Europe from 1945-90, in Hungary, Czechoslovakia and East Berlin. The Communists won 17%, 31%, and 18% respectively; a minority in each case, but a big minority. Putin certainly does not have that level of support in Ukraine.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 10,696

    .

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    There's the Chinese occupation of Tibet - as an earlier poster argued it's easier when you have a large number of people you can send in.

    Very little is ever said about the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, so perhaps that is reasonably successful.

    Ukraine will be the wealthiest population to have been occupied for some time. Will that give them greater means to fight, or greater means to flee? I think a lot of Afghans signed on to fight for the Taliban because it was a way to get paid.
    I'm glad you raised Western Sahara, a much forgotten conflict. I note Tibet and Western Sahara both also have tiny populations compared to Ukraine: less than a tenth? Palestine is much smaller too. Ukraine is another level of challenge to occupy.

    But I have no idea what will actually happen!
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379

    Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    That’s actually a good joke 🙂
    Thank you :)
  • Not sure i would want to be a Zenit player playing tonight - i would think the reception will be a touch hostile- well hope so anyway ( even if maybe not fair on players) as that will get back to putin and those around him who can remove him
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084
    edited February 2022

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
  • rcs1000 said:

    A Grandmaster's thoughts..

    Garry Kasparov
    @Kasparov63
    Ok, after years of warnings were ignored and hearing "Garry, you were right!" all damn day today, I'll repeat what I said in 2014: Stop telling me I was right and listen to what I'm saying now. My recommendations follow:
    -Support Ukraine militarily, immediately, everything but boots on the ground. All weapons, intel, cyber.
    -Bankrupt Putin's war machine. Freeze & seize Russia's finances & those of him and his gang.
    -Kick Russia out of every intl & financial institution. PACE, Interpol, etc 2/5
    -Recall all ambassadors from Russia. There is no point in talking. The new unified message is "stop or be isolated completely".
    -Ban all elements of Putin's global propaganda machine. Turn them off, shut them down, send them home. Stop helping the dictator spread lies & hate.
    -Expose and act against Putin's lackeys in the free world. If Schröder and his ilk continue to work for Putin, bring charges. Ask the owners & advertisers of networks platforming Putin propagandists like Carlson why they allow it. 4/5
    -Replace Russian oil & gas. Pressure OPEC, increase production, reopen Keystone. You can't save the planet if you don't save the people on it.
    -Acknowledge there will be costs, sacrifices. We waited to long, the price is high, but it will only get higher. It's time to fight. 5/5
    Cannot ignore the political 5th column of Putinists, from the far right & left in EU to the tankies & Trump & his GOP followers in the US. They may have the right to support a brutal dictator's war in order to criticize Biden, but it's disgusting and anti-American. Do not forget.
    https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/1496865471995523080

    Reopening Keystone doesn't generate new oil, it just improves Gulf Coast refining margins.
    True but apart from that understandable lack of knowledge the rest of what he says seems sensible to me.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    Tibet?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    edited February 2022
    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 54,678
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    Which may mean a smash and grab is the plan instead. He can always return if they get uppity again.
    I'm pretty sure smash and grab is his plan, he doesn't want half his army tied down in a rebellious neighbouring country, being constantly attacked with IEDs

    However I don't see how smash and grab works either, because as soon as the Russians leave I reckon the Ukrainians WILL rise up

    Anyway, my flints await, Even war cannot stop the demand for satisfying granitic foreplay
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Some thoughts, pretty grim, I'm afraid:

    - For all their bravery and resolve, I can't see the Ukrainian army being able to mount an effective defence against such a large attach from three sides. In particular, with Kyiv so close to the northern border, and the Ukrainian army concentrated towards the east, the situation looks pretty hopeless in the short term.

    - Putin has understood the messages which the West has been giving him for nearly a decade. His expectation will be that, as with his operations in Syria, Crimea, Georgia, and even Salisbury, we will huff and puff for a while, but soon drift back into buying Russian oil and gas.

    - That calculation might, and should, be wrong, but there's nothing we can now do to deter him. A puppet regime will no doubt be installed, and Ukraine declared 'de-nazified'.

    - I don't really buy the idea that there will be a prolonged period of effective Ukrainian resistance, sufficient to give Putin nightmares, after the Russian army has taken control. This is not Afghanistan with warlords and private armies hidden in mountain redoubts. It's mostly flat country (other than the Carpathian Mountains in the far south-west), which is not good terrain for an asymmetric war. There will be some pockets of resistance, for sure, but Putin will be calculating, correctly I think, that he will be able to crush them.

    - If I'm right, the West cannot save Ukraine in the short term, but it needs to ensure that we don't simply go back into tut-tutting whilst going back to business as usual. There will be a big economic hit from taking robust long-term action, but it has to be done.

    - I'm not convinced it will be done, but we shall see.

    - As for Trump, Corbyn, Burgon, Abbott, McDonnell, Farage, Banks, and the rest of them: let's hope they are now consigned to the universal opprobrium they deserve.

    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.
    Surely they would have to deploy substantially more than 100,000 troops to mount an occupation. Does Russia want to tie up its armed forces in such a way?
    Perhaps Putin is now so deluded that he thinks most Ukrainians will actually be glad to be part of his Russian superstate?
    Maybe. I suspect more likely he calculates many might hate it but not to the point of dying in a long guerilla war to prevent it.
    My assumption is that he will replace the current Ukrainian leadership with his puppets, and then withdraw. Fear of another invasion, he'll reckon, will prevent any kind of uprising.
    There's a constitutional 'referendum' in Belarus in a couple of days that could lead to its absorbtion into Russia
    Really? Litvenenko must be very weak. His heir gets to play the same role as Kadyrov in Chechnya i guess.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,585
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    Please stop saying anyone who disagrees with you is an extreme right winger.
  • Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
    What do you think the Ukrainians are doing, if not trying to stop it militarily?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    He's calling it the 'Compensating for my Small Penis War."
    Probably sounds cooler in Russian.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,360
    edited February 2022
    Scott_xP said:

    Incidentally, in an exchange with my MP, I said on 25th January "I think only Putin invading Ukraine saves Boris..."

    It only saves BoZo if he doesn't fuck up the response.

    Off to a bad start...
    And a good start would be....?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320
    Antonello Guerrera
    @antoguerrera
    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 50% OF OUR COAL COMES FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 55% OF OUR GAS FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 35% OF OUR OIL COMES FROM RUSSIA


    https://twitter.com/antoguerrera/status/1496848585882746881
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,598

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    More the thought of the contents being deployed in Moscow, I imagine.
  • Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    He's calling it the 'Compensating for my Small Penis War."
    "Overcoming My Repressed Sexuality War"
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,456
    edited February 2022
    Trying to focus on something more positive.

    COVID figures today show that new infections are still at a rate of over a million per month, but hospitalizations and deaths are falling like a stone. I really hope this does mean that HMG are right and that we are now firmly into the endemic phase of COVID.

    A couple of research papers from South Africa and Denmark indicate that omicron BA.2 is not creating a new wave of infections, but rather a prolongation of the BA.1 wave's tail. And that, while it does create breakthrough infections for the vaccinated and those who've had delta or BA.1, hospitalizations and severe outcomes are overwhelmingly in the unvaccinated.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353

    Ukraine's foreign secretary

    Dmytro Kuleba
    @DmytroKuleba
    · 1m
    Я не буду дипломатичним у цій темі. Всі, хто зараз сумнівається, чи треба відключати Росію від SWIFT, мають розуміти, що кров невинних українських чоловіків, жінок і дітей буде і на їхніх руках. Відключіть Росію від SWIFT!
    https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba/status/1496875093712064518

    google gives me

    "I'm not going to be diplomatic about this. Anyone who now doubts whether Russia should be cut off from SWIFT should understand that the blood of innocent Ukrainian men, women and children will be on their hands. Disconnect Russia from SWIFT!"

    *U.K. PM PUSHES FOR RUSSIA TO BE EJECTED FROM SWIFT SYSTEM: FT

    https://twitter.com/DeItaone/status/1496872988607668230
    I think the counter argument is Russia have partly planned for this with and alternative set up, so it hurts West more than hurts Putin? Are they really still in interpol and we give them money for space programme?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    Heathener said:

    .

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    There's the Chinese occupation of Tibet - as an earlier poster argued it's easier when you have a large number of people you can send in.
    The first time the peaceful quiet people of Tibet were invaded by a grotesque armed military might was ...

    ... by Britain.

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1097909.The_British_Invasion_Of_Tibet
    And? We're not back at the fallacy past misdeeds prevent modern comment on others?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,123
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    How does it feel to be on the same side as Farage?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    That’s actually a good joke 🙂
    Also one on his explicit demands.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Some thoughts, pretty grim, I'm afraid:

    - For all their bravery and resolve, I can't see the Ukrainian army being able to mount an effective defence against such a large attach from three sides. In particular, with Kyiv so close to the northern border, and the Ukrainian army concentrated towards the east, the situation looks pretty hopeless in the short term.

    - Putin has understood the messages which the West has been giving him for nearly a decade. His expectation will be that, as with his operations in Syria, Crimea, Georgia, and even Salisbury, we will huff and puff for a while, but soon drift back into buying Russian oil and gas.

    - That calculation might, and should, be wrong, but there's nothing we can now do to deter him. A puppet regime will no doubt be installed, and Ukraine declared 'de-nazified'.

    - I don't really buy the idea that there will be a prolonged period of effective Ukrainian resistance, sufficient to give Putin nightmares, after the Russian army has taken control. This is not Afghanistan with warlords and private armies hidden in mountain redoubts. It's mostly flat country (other than the Carpathian Mountains in the far south-west), which is not good terrain for an asymmetric war. There will be some pockets of resistance, for sure, but Putin will be calculating, correctly I think, that he will be able to crush them.

    - If I'm right, the West cannot save Ukraine in the short term, but it needs to ensure that we don't simply go back into tut-tutting whilst going back to business as usual. There will be a big economic hit from taking robust long-term action, but it has to be done.

    - I'm not convinced it will be done, but we shall see.

    - As for Trump, Corbyn, Burgon, Abbott, McDonnell, Farage, Banks, and the rest of them: let's hope they are now consigned to the universal opprobrium they deserve.

    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.
    Surely they would have to deploy substantially more than 100,000 troops to mount an occupation. Does Russia want to tie up its armed forces in such a way?
    Perhaps Putin is now so deluded that he thinks most Ukrainians will actually be glad to be part of his Russian superstate?
    Maybe. I suspect more likely he calculates many might hate it but not to the point of dying in a long guerilla war to prevent it.
    My assumption is that he will replace the current Ukrainian leadership with his puppets, and then withdraw. Fear of another invasion, he'll reckon, will prevent any kind of uprising.
    I don’t think that will work, the people will take to the streets, the puppets have to clamp down on the protesters in a beastly way with a security structure they won’t have unless imported.
  • Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    Deborah Haynes is saying it is on the most direct route through to Kyiv.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,851
    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    More the thought of the contents being deployed in Moscow, I imagine.
    See my post below - Putin is claiming that Ukraine has nuclear ambitions. There are tons of plutonium in the old power plants.....
  • What happens if Ukraine does push back the initial invasion?

    Is Putin going to deploy another large chunk of the Russian military? What an embarassment.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    This is an important point. Hated and nasty regimes can endure a long time. In much of the world that's all you ever get.
    When was the last successful "occupation" by a large power over a smaller, resistant, unhappy nation?

    Afghanistan was a trillion dollar disaster and a defeat (as was the USSR's attempt beforehand)

    Iraq was hideously costly (in lives and money, more than Russia can afford)

    Israel has occupied Palestine at the cost of decades of terrorism and hatred

    Kashmir is a nightmare

    Kurdistan ditto

    And many more. Occupations generally don't work. The Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe from 1945-89 was one of the last examples of a "successful" subjugation and, as others have noted, it benefited from elites in all the countries genuinely believing in Marxist-Leninism. No one believes in "Putinism"
    There's the Chinese occupation of Tibet - as an earlier poster argued it's easier when you have a large number of people you can send in.

    Very little is ever said about the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara, so perhaps that is reasonably successful.

    Ukraine will be the wealthiest population to have been occupied for some time. Will that give them greater means to fight, or greater means to flee? I think a lot of Afghans signed on to fight for the Taliban because it was a way to get paid.
    Tibet did occur to me. 70 years ago mind. But yes, "successful"

    Hong Kong is another example, but there it's not quite an occupation, it's more de facto annexation like Crimea

    One thing that occurs to me about your list is that all of them involve occupiers of a different religion (except Kurdistan, but how bad is that really for Turkey and Iran?)

    Resistance to occupation might be harder to sustain when the occupiers are less different.
  • Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
    So Ukraine should surrender?

    How else do you propose stopping Putin?
  • Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    There are functioning reactors on the site that continue to provide much of Ukraine's electricity. Combined with controlling the gas supply, Putin has a stranglehold over power supply to Ukraine in winter.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353
    IshmaelZ said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.

    What is there militarily in Chernobyl for the first wave of targeting and capture? Putting my head in the minds of Russian planners gives me two aims for day one. Certainly airports, airfields, and everything to help with air supremacy in the coming days. In the same thinking other targets for day one, radar, comms, intelligence gathering and holding network. The second aim is it will be much easier for Russia if the civilians bugger off out the way, so sow seeds of terror, fear, panic and fill the roads fleeing West.

    PS. Just a word to say Yokes isn’t a poster getting it all from a circus in my opinion, nor a darling John le Carre killed on rewrite like some have posted. Although extremely rude and hastily judgemental about me when I tried to engage conversation, Yokes posts a must read in this crisis.

    Does Yokes only come out during UK night? All I am getting from MSM is waffle, not the insights I crave.
    Not a circus, the Circus. You don't read J Le Carre obv.
    You are more like something from a spy novel! You are a game player Z. 🙂
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141
    Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    I don't think the Ukrainians had much choice in the matter.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    Murdering anyone vaguely looking like leading their country always helps with taking it over.

    Which is what the Stalin did - following up with importing Russians to make the place "more Russian"

    Comparing that with immigration in the UK isn't grotesque. It's just moronic.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,749
    edited February 2022

    What happens if Ukraine does push back the initial invasion?

    Is Putin going to deploy another large chunk of the Russian military? What an embarassment.

    Sky reporting just now that the US are saying a large number of Russian military transport planes are heading for Kiev
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    I've already warned you about how counterproductive it is for people on the left to dismiss centrist floating voters as extreme right wingers.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,598
    edited February 2022

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    More the thought of the contents being deployed in Moscow, I imagine.
    See my post below - Putin is claiming that Ukraine has nuclear ambitions. There are tons of plutonium in the old power plants.....
    If they didn't have such ambitions before, they may well do now.

    As you suggest, it really wouldn't take a massive effort. Particularly if you are prepared to take a few shortcuts.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928

    Antonello Guerrera
    @antoguerrera
    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 50% OF OUR COAL COMES FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 55% OF OUR GAS FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 35% OF OUR OIL COMES FROM RUSSIA


    https://twitter.com/antoguerrera/status/1496848585882746881

    I think he means coal imports rather than overall coal, as most coal burnt in Germany is lignite and is locally mined.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    I'd call something an escalation if it significantly transforms the nature of the dispute. I'm not sure responding to an all out invasion with a military counter would be an escalation. It might merely be a response. Russia would call Ukraine not laying down its arms as an escalation after all.

    So bad idea or not I'm not sure it would be escalation.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190

    Yesterday Wallace stated in public, on camera, that essentially we can and should try and beat Russia as in 1853, and today Cleverly thinks he can make a public call for a coup in Russia, which he also presumably thinks is the right way to achieve this goal.

    The competence level of this government is absolutely staggering and shocking. There's no joke about that.

    Cleverly was shockingly, worryingly inept this morning on R5LIVE.

    Unfortunately he seems representative of the entire Western political class.

    The "experts" on the BBC have also appeared clueless.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528
    edited February 2022
    @Heathener not content with violently attacking people who aren't breaking the law by not wearing masks now happy for Putin to colonise Ukraine. I thought you were anti colonialist? Or is that it for democratic nations?
  • What happens if Ukraine does push back the initial invasion?

    Is Putin going to deploy another large chunk of the Russian military? What an embarassment.

    It could be a bit like the Italians versus the Greeks in WW2. Allow them to overrun and then give them a good kicking when the supply lines are at full stretch..

    And for those that say this is no Afghanistan, which has some truth, I would point out that Ukraine is very much bigger than Northern Ireland.....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,928

    rcs1000 said:

    A Grandmaster's thoughts..

    Garry Kasparov
    @Kasparov63
    Ok, after years of warnings were ignored and hearing "Garry, you were right!" all damn day today, I'll repeat what I said in 2014: Stop telling me I was right and listen to what I'm saying now. My recommendations follow:
    -Support Ukraine militarily, immediately, everything but boots on the ground. All weapons, intel, cyber.
    -Bankrupt Putin's war machine. Freeze & seize Russia's finances & those of him and his gang.
    -Kick Russia out of every intl & financial institution. PACE, Interpol, etc 2/5
    -Recall all ambassadors from Russia. There is no point in talking. The new unified message is "stop or be isolated completely".
    -Ban all elements of Putin's global propaganda machine. Turn them off, shut them down, send them home. Stop helping the dictator spread lies & hate.
    -Expose and act against Putin's lackeys in the free world. If Schröder and his ilk continue to work for Putin, bring charges. Ask the owners & advertisers of networks platforming Putin propagandists like Carlson why they allow it. 4/5
    -Replace Russian oil & gas. Pressure OPEC, increase production, reopen Keystone. You can't save the planet if you don't save the people on it.
    -Acknowledge there will be costs, sacrifices. We waited to long, the price is high, but it will only get higher. It's time to fight. 5/5
    Cannot ignore the political 5th column of Putinists, from the far right & left in EU to the tankies & Trump & his GOP followers in the US. They may have the right to support a brutal dictator's war in order to criticize Biden, but it's disgusting and anti-American. Do not forget.
    https://twitter.com/Kasparov63/status/1496865471995523080

    Reopening Keystone doesn't generate new oil, it just improves Gulf Coast refining margins.
    True but apart from that understandable lack of knowledge the rest of what he says seems sensible to me.
    Agreed 100%. (And on reflection, I may have been excessively pessimistic. Keystone probably shifts the needle slightly on new oil sands projects.)
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,317

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    I hope everyone is ready to attend next week's Stop the War rally against war in Ukraine. I don't think they've updated their statements since it has kicked off, but it would be a welcome opportunity for them to disprove their doubters for once and actually focus ire where it is warranted.

    Presumably it is now 'Back the War' as Putin started it and they love him?
    Surprised you're not backing Putin (and Trump):

    Zelensky = Centrist liberal
    Putin = Right-wing conservative
    In 2019 it was Corbyn Labour that was more pro Putin than the Boris led Tories
    So you categorise Johnson as Right-wing Conservative? Good point!

    Nonetheless, I present evidence item 2 M'Lud. Nigel Farage's tweet from today and evidence item 3, Trump's pro-Putin eulogy...er yesterday and the day before!
    The far left and the far right love Putin. Corbyn loves Putin as much as Farage does.

    The centre right and the centre left and liberals dislike Putin. Hence Johnson, Starmer and Davey are all united against Putin.

    It is more an authoritarian v liberal divide than a left v right divide
    Corbyn roundly condemned Putin today. Because he's basically a British pacifist, he's known for being anti-war conducted by Britain, but it misreads him to think he's therefore in favour of a war conducted by somebody else. He's rigidly consistent, to a degree that I suspect disconcerts some of his usual more, um, flexible allies.
    He is an apologist for Putin and it does you no credit that you defend him. He is also an apologist for anti-Semites and terrorists, and that fact also does you no credit for defending him either.
    Corbyns view of international relations can be summarised as naive. He thinks that renouncing violence and embracing peace is part of a human progression that will ultimately lead to socialism. But this is just a belief which is disproven by a century or so of experience. He isn't actually evil, just naive.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,412

    Applicant said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:


    It's not Afghanistan, but it is a country the size of France, filled with tens of millions of people who, if they didn't hate Russia previously, will certainly do so now.

    I'm not sure that Russia has anything like the military resources to conduct an occupation.

    The Soviet empire in eastern Europe was full of people who hated Russia, but that didn't prevent the Soviet occupation lasting 40-odd years. A puppet regime, some nasty targetting of anyone who resists, a veneer of respectability through 'elections': the playbook is one Putin knows inside-out.
    IMHO, the modern Russian army is a shadow of what the Red Army was. And, back then, there were enthusiastic communist parties in most of Eastern Europe. The Communists actually believed in what they doing.
    The Red Army was prepared to lose hundreds of thousands to cross the Dnepr back in late 1943. Don't see that happening now.
    1.2 m casualties; 700,000 in Operation Bagration. 200,000 in the Battle for Berlin. You have to have incredible commitment to take those losses and fight on.
    Stalin had the best branding, calling it the Great Patriotic War.

    What's Putin calling this one? The Reverse The Last Thirty Years War?
    He's calling it the 'Compensating for my Small Penis War."
    It will join the short list of wars known after someone’s body part.

    The war of Jenkins’ ear.

    The war of Vlad’s small dick.
  • Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    When you look at the sort of things that most of humanity has to deal with in their daily life then look at the things that send people in the pampered West into paroxysms of fury it does make you wonder why we have so lost our sense of perspective.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    More the thought of the contents being deployed in Moscow, I imagine.
    See my post below - Putin is claiming that Ukraine has nuclear ambitions. There are tons of plutonium in the old power plants.....
    If they didn't have such ambitions before, they may well do now.

    As you suggest, it really wouldn't take a massive effort. Particularly if you are prepared to take a few shortcuts.
    Shortcuts, Soviet Style... if you haven't got enough "canyons" due to a shortage of concrete, get some Zeks to stir the vats of nitric acid you are dissolving the fuel rods in.

    Zeks are a renewable resource, after all...
  • Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    Murdering anyone vaguely looking like leading their country always helps with taking it over.

    Which is what the Stalin did - following up with importing Russians to make the place "more Russian"

    Comparing that with immigration in the UK isn't grotesque. It's just moronic.
    Yep and deporting vast numbers of the original inhabitants to the other side of the Soviet Union also helps. I wold have hoped that an internationalist like Roger might have been aware of these things.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,050
    edited February 2022

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
    So Ukraine should surrender?

    How else do you propose stopping Putin?
    We can't stop the invasion of Ukraine militarily. Putin is demonstrating that he is out of control. That would be an utterly deranged calculus of potential risk and potential gain for us.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,190

    ...and just in case Nick should continue to make apologies for Corbyn, this is one of the lines in the statement from SWC that Corbyn and all his left wing nutjob supporters signed:

    'in taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes.'

    They want to suggest that the Ukrainian "regime" is equivalent to Russia. FFS!

    Witheringly stupid from Team Corbyn, nonetheless how do we define the reaction from Team Farage/Banks?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141

    Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    Murdering anyone vaguely looking like leading their country always helps with taking it over.

    Which is what the Stalin did - following up with importing Russians to make the place "more Russian"

    Comparing that with immigration in the UK isn't grotesque. It's just moronic.
    Yep and deporting vast numbers of the original inhabitants to the other side of the Soviet Union also helps. I wold have hoped that an internationalist like Roger might have been aware of these things.
    He's one of those for whom imperial aggression is only bad if it's done by the West.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,528

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
    So Ukraine should surrender?

    How else do you propose stopping Putin?
    We can't stop the invasion of Ukraine militarily. Putin is demonstrating that he is out of control. That would be deranged risk/gain thinking for us.
    I think the idea is that we'd supply a Ukrainian military response, not send British and American soldiers to drive Putin back.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205
    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    "extreme bellicose right wingers"

    Yeah, right.

    Do you realise your posts on this topic recently make you sound a little like a Russian sockpuppet? Do you reside at 55 Savushkina Street ?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,205

    ...and just in case Nick should continue to make apologies for Corbyn, this is one of the lines in the statement from SWC that Corbyn and all his left wing nutjob supporters signed:

    'in taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes.'

    They want to suggest that the Ukrainian "regime" is equivalent to Russia. FFS!

    Witheringly stupid from Team Corbyn, nonetheless how do we define the reaction from Team Farage/Banks?
    Traitorous against UK interests.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,050
    edited February 2022
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
    So Ukraine should surrender?

    How else do you propose stopping Putin?
    We can't stop the invasion of Ukraine militarily. Putin is demonstrating that he is out of control. That would be deranged risk/gain thinking for us.
    I think the idea is that we'd supply a Ukrainian military response, not send British and American soldiers to drive Putin back.
    In which case Johnson needs to be very careful what he's saying in public, beyond his pathetic day-to-day crowd-pleasing. Putin is clearly out of control, and there's no sign as yet of any full attempt to topple him.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited February 2022
    A package of additional tough sanctions against Russia from the EU is approaching. Discussed all the details with @EmmanuelMacron. We demand the disconnection of Russia from SWIFT, the introduction of a no-fly zone over Ukraine and other effective steps to stop the aggressor.

    https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1496877445332582407

    I’ll be very pleasantly surprised if he gets more than half of one (sanctions) out of three. We need to work out how we get more arms to the Ukrainians. Bringing down a Russian transport plane or two might concentrate minds…
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,320
    @marcorubio
    #Russia plans to encircle #Kyiv, force the legitimate govt of #Ukraine to flee & install “Vichy Ukranian”puppets

    Key to this plan is a large #Russian Airborne Forces operation

    We may see an attempt to execute on that operation within a matter of hours #UkraineRussiaConflict


    https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1496881477723865092
  • ...and just in case Nick should continue to make apologies for Corbyn, this is one of the lines in the statement from SWC that Corbyn and all his left wing nutjob supporters signed:

    'in taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes.'

    They want to suggest that the Ukrainian "regime" is equivalent to Russia. FFS!

    Witheringly stupid from Team Corbyn, nonetheless how do we define the reaction from Team Farage/Banks?
    I don't think anyone on here was sympathising with those couple of c*nts
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,749
    edited February 2022
    rcs1000 said:

    Antonello Guerrera
    @antoguerrera
    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 50% OF OUR COAL COMES FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 55% OF OUR GAS FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 35% OF OUR OIL COMES FROM RUSSIA


    https://twitter.com/antoguerrera/status/1496848585882746881

    I think he means coal imports rather than overall coal, as most coal burnt in Germany is lignite and is locally mined.
    Reported US and UK would like Russia out of the swift payment system but push back coming from Europe and in particular France and Italy who would lose 30 billion euros or more

    Furthermore energy payments to Russia would end thereby seeing retaliation from Russia by cutting off energy to Europe

    There are some posters who seem to delight in trashing the UK and Boris over our actions, when clearly this is very complex and seemingly it is Europe who have the wider consequences and problems in this crisis
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Sean_F said:

    Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    Murdering anyone vaguely looking like leading their country always helps with taking it over.

    Which is what the Stalin did - following up with importing Russians to make the place "more Russian"

    Comparing that with immigration in the UK isn't grotesque. It's just moronic.
    Yep and deporting vast numbers of the original inhabitants to the other side of the Soviet Union also helps. I wold have hoped that an internationalist like Roger might have been aware of these things.
    He's one of those for whom imperial aggression is only bad if it's done by the West.
    Makes you wonder what he thinks 1857 was like for the inhabitants of India - "culturally complex" ?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    When you look at the sort of things that most of humanity has to deal with in their daily life then look at the things that send people in the pampered West into paroxysms of fury it does make you wonder why we have so lost our sense of perspective.
    Because we dont compare ourselves to history or most of the world we compare ourselves to the ideal. And we are fortunate enough that we can reasonably achieve it.

    People adjust their perspective and toughen up when they need to, not before.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    UK cases by specimen date

    image
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,080
    edited February 2022
    kle4 said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    I'd call something an escalation if it significantly transforms the nature of the dispute. I'm not sure responding to an all out invasion with a military counter would be an escalation. It might merely be a response. Russia would call Ukraine not laying down its arms as an escalation after all.

    So bad idea or not I'm not sure it would be escalation.
    I think a direct military conflict between two nuclear countries would be an escalation on the current situation.

    Maybe we need to escalate the situation to force Putin to back down, but it would be a hell of a risk.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    UK local R

    image
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,353

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    More the thought of the contents being deployed in Moscow, I imagine.
    See my post below - Putin is claiming that Ukraine has nuclear ambitions. There are tons of plutonium in the old power plants.....
    Apologise, I saw that nuclear post below after I asked the question. Too many posts to keep up and watch telly at same time. Damned war.

    As our SMERSH expert Malmesbury what do you make of Putin Power desk he announced the war from? The gadgets on the right looked a fifty years old! I presume it’s the one he first had as a KGB analyst is still his favourite so he won’t let them upgrade it? The old gadgets looked creepy.
  • kle4 said:

    Heathener said:

    Heathener said:

    Nigelb said:

    Heathener said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    What does this even mean? If he means NATO pitching in, then we would have needed to be in place weeks ago. It might all be over in days.
    Air cover, I'd guess.
    Interesting.

    We could launch cruise missiles and drone attacks on their military.

    But, wow, that would escalate things even further.
    The person 'escalating things' is Putin. We have no idea where his ambitions stop.
    You and your extreme bellicose right wingers like felix and Applicant are very categorical and black and white and, thankfully, confined to your armchairs.

    Of course Putin has escalated things but that doesn't make your response any more right, or any more bright.

    If NATO did now counter militarily it would escalate things further. And how. I suspect Putin would take it as carte blanche not to stop at Ukraine's borders.

    I'm not saying we shouldn't. I'm merely pointing out that it would be an escalation.
    I'd call something an escalation if it significantly transforms the nature of the dispute. I'm not sure responding to an all out invasion with a military counter would be an escalation. It might merely be a response. Russia would call Ukraine not laying down its arms as an escalation after all.

    So bad idea or not I'm not sure it would be escalation.
    When both sides are nuclear powers the rules of engagement have to be absolutely clear to both sides ex ante or you risk a cataclysmic mistake. I think that Western military action in Ukraine is ruled out for that reason. Whether you would call it an escalation or not is semantics - it would just be too risky. We can of course arm the Ukrainians like we armed the Afghans. Economic measures need to be used to their fullest potential, regardless of whether those harm us too. And it is clear ex ante that we will defend any NATO member who is attacked.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873

    ...and just in case Nick should continue to make apologies for Corbyn, this is one of the lines in the statement from SWC that Corbyn and all his left wing nutjob supporters signed:

    'in taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes.'

    They want to suggest that the Ukrainian "regime" is equivalent to Russia. FFS!

    Witheringly stupid from Team Corbyn, nonetheless how do we define the reaction from Team Farage/Banks?
    Homoousion.
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594
    MaxPB said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "The Russian invasion of Ukraine may have to be stopped "militarily", Boris Johnson has suggested."

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/24/boris-johnson-russia-ukraine-joe-biden-liz-truss-cobra/

    He's a total fool.

    Cleverly and Wallace not much better.
    So Ukraine should surrender?

    How else do you propose stopping Putin?
    We can't stop the invasion of Ukraine militarily. Putin is demonstrating that he is out of control. That would be deranged risk/gain thinking for us.
    I think the idea is that we'd supply a Ukrainian military response, not send British and American soldiers to drive Putin back.
    Yes that's the point isn't it? The Ukrainians biggest problem I would have thought is running out of kit. We need to keep the supply lines open.

    The mail reports they already took out' dozens' of Putin's tanks and captured some personnel.

    Judging by the photos, those are not exactly crack and highly motivated troops.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Case summary

    image
    image
    image
    image
    image
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    edited February 2022
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:



    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    I hope everyone is ready to attend next week's Stop the War rally against war in Ukraine. I don't think they've updated their statements since it has kicked off, but it would be a welcome opportunity for them to disprove their doubters for once and actually focus ire where it is warranted.

    Presumably it is now 'Back the War' as Putin started it and they love him?
    Surprised you're not backing Putin (and Trump):

    Zelensky = Centrist liberal
    Putin = Right-wing conservative
    In 2019 it was Corbyn Labour that was more pro Putin than the Boris led Tories
    So you categorise Johnson as Right-wing Conservative? Good point!

    Nonetheless, I present evidence item 2 M'Lud. Nigel Farage's tweet from today and evidence item 3, Trump's pro-Putin eulogy...er yesterday and the day before!
    The far left and the far right love Putin. Corbyn loves Putin as much as Farage does.

    The centre right and the centre left and liberals dislike Putin. Hence Johnson, Starmer and Davey are all united against Putin.

    It is more an authoritarian v liberal divide than a left v right divide
    I'm not sure 'authoritarian v liberal' is quite the full essence of it, although it does explain a lot. The softhead pro-Russia sentiment on the left has 2 main drivers imo - a sentimental attachment to the cradle of communism and a crude anti-Western world view in which enemies of the West (and esp the US) become allies to be rooted for.

    On the right it's less to do with Russia and more about Vladimir Putin himself. There is admiration for the man and 'gut and brain' support for what he represents. They like his aggressive white orthodox ethno-nationalism, his robust rejection of what progressives call minority empowerment and they call 'woke', his attachment to what progressives call outmoded bigotry and they call traditional values.

    Putin is something of a role model for these types. We see this hinted by Farage and more overtly with Donald Trump and those who follow him. Eg I haven't checked Truth Social lately but if I did I bet I'd see lots of 'Vlad's so tough and clever, shame we're stuck with sloppy senile Joe' postings.
  • Evening address from Zelensky. “If you my dear European leaders, my dear world leaders, leaders of the free world, don’t help us today, if you do not strongly help Ukraine, then tomorrow war will knock on your doors."

    https://twitter.com/maxseddon/status/1496884388868595714
  • HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Cold War II is on.

    This is going to have seismic implications for the world security structure. The west are now going to have to reassemble the barriers that were dismantled in the 1990s. That is likely to have significant political implications and ramifications. It is at least theoretical that unity in the West is going to be the order of the day and a lot of the divisions that have been the focus of the past 10 years are going to be forgotten. The geopolitical map could change drastically in the next 12 months.

    I think many of us would gladly take cw2 vs ww3 just now

    Bloody hell Brexit looks stupid today
    No it doesn't.

    The EU nations still need non EU Turkey, the USA and Canada as well as the UK to provide an effective military and economic force that will be clearly enough to contain Putin's Russia. That comes via NATO mainly not the EU
    Of course it does. Brexit was endorsed by Putin as he knew it would significantly weaken Europe and the Western Alliance. It is the same reason he supports and tries to encourage Scottish separatism. Wake up people ffs! He has been laughing his man tits off at us, and it has emboldened him considerably.
    This is clearly garbage given that the strongest responses in Europe to the threat of invasion of Ukraine including supplying arms and training to them came from the UK (Outside of the EU) and the Netherlands, Denmark and Spain (Inside the EU) whilst the supposed big players in the EU - France and Germany - either dithered or openly criticised that support.

    The EU has been an irrelevance in this crisis and that would have been exactly the same were we inside or outside.
    I think you missed my point Richard, which may have been deliberate. Brexit has weakened the Western Alliance and emboldened Putin, that is a fact. You may think it is worth that risk, but it doesn't change the reality
    I genuinely don't agree with that. It is such a superficial and false idea that it should not even be considered. As a military entity the EU has always been, and to date remains, an irrelevance. As a diplomatic entity designed to project soft power it is also an irrelevance since the individual countries have so many diverse views on every single subject. You only have to look at the current situation within the EU to see that in action with countries all wanting their own carve outs from any sanctions. Indeed the only meaningful sanction to date - the suspension of Nordstream - came about because of one EU country (Germany) being pressured into it by a non EU country (The US). The UK being inside or outside makes no difference to any of that. EU countries will do their own thing when it comes to reacting to this and the only multi-national organisation that matters right now is NATO.
    Good articulate post Richard, but methinks you are simply trying to justify a foreign policy and security disaster because you were emotionally engaged with it. Brexit has created significant division and has emboldened Putin. It is not the only thing that has, but it is important. To suggest otherwise is putting your head in the sand .
    I would suggest you cannot point to a single way in which things would have turned out differently regarding Russia and Ukraine if Brexit had not happened. It is not putting head in the sand, it is simply recognising the irrelevance of Brexit and the impotence of the EU in matters of both high diplomacy and military operations.

    NATO matters. The EU does not.
    Without a parallel universe that would be impossible to know for certain. All I can say is that Putin wanted Brexit. Whether he influenced it via social media manipulation we will probably never know, but I suspect you won't want to believe that because it would be too uncomfortable for you. Anyone who know s a little about social media marketing will know it is very possible and probably most likely, particularly considering the resources a hostile state can throw at such things.

    However, my point was not that the Ukraine invasion would not have happened without Brexit per se, and I think you know that. It was that it is one more thing that emboldened him. As to whether the EU is as impotent as you wish to believe, we will have to see. As the largest economic bloc in the world it has the potential to damage Russia via sanctions in a very serious way.
    Nah yet again you are trying to tie your favourite hobby horse to these events and it doesn't work.

    Brexit had bugger all to do with this for the reasons I have already set out.

    What led to this was:

    The lack of any meaningful response to his annexation of Crimea in 2014 (when we were still in the EU)
    The scandalous way we (as the West) scuttled out of Afghanistan with our tail between our legs
    The knowledge that the EU is utterly inept and divided when it comes to things like sanctions and even more so when it comes to meaningful military action.
    The energy crisis and the huge reliance of Europe in particular on Russian energy reserves

    And as Robert points out the resulting jump in energy prices tied with having a ready made replacement customer in China.

    Brexit doesn't even rank as a blip on this particular timeline.

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Hospitals

    image
    image
    image
    image
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,578
    edited February 2022

    Roger said:

    Alistair said:

    Roger said:

    As luck would have it I've got a Ukrainian builder with me today. These things are never quite as simple as they seem. As you'd expect he thinks Putin is a madman and he's scared for his family in Kiev.

    The things that surprised me are that it sounds very much like the Old Yugoslavia. He was schooled in Russian and his family only used Russian at home though that wasn't that common. They arrived after the 'Holocaust of 1930-33'which I'd never heard of and which killed millions of Ukrainians.....it's complicated. He believes Putin has quite a lot of support from countries outside of Russia and Ukraine.

    Interestingly his solution is for the West to give them a nuclear weapon.

    You are a joke.
    Yes my Ukrainian history C1930 is limited. I was more interested in the cultural side. How a country was able to absorb millions of Russian in a very short space of time and how they coexisted with separate schools for at least the next 40 odd years.

    When you see it in the context of the UK experience where 52% f the population couldn't cope with a small influx of Europeans who integrated almost immediately it shows the cultural complexities that the Russian Ukrainians and the Ukrainians had to deal with
    Murdering anyone vaguely looking like leading their country always helps with taking it over.

    Which is what the Stalin did - following up with importing Russians to make the place "more Russian"

    Comparing that with immigration in the UK isn't grotesque. It's just moronic.
    Yep and deporting vast numbers of the original inhabitants to the other side of the Soviet Union also helps. I wold have hoped that an internationalist like Roger might have been aware of these things.
    The Jewish Autonomous Oblast is still around with us today (in its ludicrous location deep in the Russian Far East). But even more fascinating still is the Volga German Republic (straddling what are today's Volgograd and Saratov Oblasts). Between 1918 and 1941, there was part of Russia with a German majority (66% at its peak) with German as one of its official languages.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volga_German_Autonomous_Soviet_Socialist_Republic
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 49,586
    Deaths

    image
  • MISTYMISTY Posts: 1,594

    rcs1000 said:

    Antonello Guerrera
    @antoguerrera
    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 50% OF OUR COAL COMES FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 55% OF OUR GAS FROM RUSSIA

    GERMAN ECONOMY MINISTER HABECK SAYS 35% OF OUR OIL COMES FROM RUSSIA


    https://twitter.com/antoguerrera/status/1496848585882746881

    I think he means coal imports rather than overall coal, as most coal burnt in Germany is lignite and is locally mined.
    Reported US and UK would like Russia out of the swift payment system but push back coming from Europe and in particular France and Italy who would lose 30 billion euros or more

    Furthermore energy payments to Russia would end thereby seeing retaliation from Russia by cutting off energy to Europe

    There are some posters who seem to delight in trashing the UK and Boris over our actions, when clearly this is very complex and seemingly it is Europe who have the wider consequences and problems in this crisis
    Very good points here.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 4,598

    Nigelb said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    I don’t wish to be rude like earlier when I doubted tanks already in Kyiv, like I doubt this where are you getting this from.....
    CNN and the Ukraine president.
    Ukraine's president says Russian forces are attempting to seize control of Chernobyl nuclear power plant
    https://twitter.com/cnni/status/1496872355347550216
    Hm. Why? Secure it fearing sabotage?
    More the thought of the contents being deployed in Moscow, I imagine.
    See my post below - Putin is claiming that Ukraine has nuclear ambitions. There are tons of plutonium in the old power plants.....
    If they didn't have such ambitions before, they may well do now.

    As you suggest, it really wouldn't take a massive effort. Particularly if you are prepared to take a few shortcuts.
    Shortcuts, Soviet Style... if you haven't got enough "canyons" due to a shortage of concrete, get some Zeks to stir the vats of nitric acid you are dissolving the fuel rods in.

    Zeks are a renewable resource, after all...
    Well, quite.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 95,873
    edited February 2022

    A package of additional tough sanctions against Russia from the EU is approaching. Discussed all the details with @EmmanuelMacron. We demand the disconnection of Russia from SWIFT, the introduction of a no-fly zone over Ukraine and other effective steps to stop the aggressor.

    https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1496877445332582407

    I’ll be very pleasantly surprised if he gets more than half of one (sanctions) out of three. We need to work out how we get more arms to the Ukrainians. Bringing down a Russian transport plane or two might concentrate minds…

    No fly zone looks tricky. No way to get that without force I'd assume.

    I'd never heard of SWIFT until a few weeks ago. Is it that big a deal?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,874

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Leon said:

    Apparently fighting in Chernobyl. A nuclear waste store has been blown up.

    Russia obviously paranoid about ponds full of fuel rods... so makes a really stupid mistake...
    I think the report was that fighting was occurring in the region and it 'may cause damage', not that damage has actually occurred. Still, can't be long...
    Doesn't sound good

    The Independent
    @Independent
    ·
    11m
    BREAKING: Chernobyl nuclear waste facility destroyed amid Russian invasion, reports say


    https://twitter.com/Independent/status/1496862467414106112?s=20&t=-eN-FBxzBSy4VJwNhAP9CQ

    BUT: fog of war and all that
    Hands up anyone else who thought until 3 minutes ago that Chernobyl was in Russia...
    IIRC, it's in Ukraine, but very close to Belorus.

    If the wind is blowing the wrong way, it could be pretty awful for Minsk.
    I've been there, and you are quite right. The nuclear plant is in Ukraine, just, but the Exclusion Zone straddles the Ukraine-Belarus border, and both countries were horribly afflicted

    It is one of the eeriest places on earth. Fighting there is madness
    Putin is mad.

    Its scary as learning about things like the Cuban Missile Crisis and similar in the past I at least knew (a) it was in the past and (b) Khrushchev and Kennedy were both sane.

    Putin seems to have lost his grip on sanity. That is scary.
    What would be even more scary would be if Trump was POTUS and they weren’t on the same side as each other.
This discussion has been closed.