Whilst my heart longs for Ukrainian victory and the total overthrow of Putin we are dealing with a dangerous madman and the situation is escalating.
The western world is in a very dangerous place right now.
The quickest resolution is the most obvious. Russian leaders have to do what Conservative MPs were too spineless to do.
They have to remove Putin.
We are not here to kick Russia. Actually, most of us love your country and your people. We're here to see a madman carted away before he presses the global destruct button.
We are closing on the point of maximum danger. Russia faces a Ukrainian army that is being reinforced and re-equipped far quicker than they are. The armed forces of both Russia and Belarus are facing significant problems, and clearly Lukashenka is trying to save his own skin by being useful in trying to stop the escalation to a nuclear exchange that Putin is threatening.
Pausing the attack to initiate a "negotiation" might help the invading forces, but it is just as likely that the pause will help the Ukrainians deploy their new weapons and the Russian Stavka knows this. Gerasimov and Shoigu are meeting Putin now. Its going to be very tense. I think there are three choices: either they double down and maybe attack NATO directly and actually use nuclear weapons; or they try and cut a face saving deal; or Putin is removed.
No one is safe until this last happens. We are millimetres from the edge of catastrophe.
Ukraine has shown, once again, I *think*, that having the best intelligence is a war winner. If the UK and US can announce the Russian moves before they can make them , you can bet that the Ukrainians are getting that first.
I think there is a non-trivial possibility that Putin will start thinking in terms of tactical nuclear weapons.
They haven't used the fuel-air explosives yet. I would have thought they could probably flatten Kyiv with those, and not have to use tactical nukes.
FAEs aren't thermobaric weapons, exactly. Neither are uber weapons that wins all wars. They've been around for a long time.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
It’s really simple.
Putin’s generals will make it quite clear, that he launches a nuclear weapon about an hour before downtown Moscow gets turned into glass.
If he still goes for it, and if everyone down the line of command goes for it, then that’s on them.
Yep, I'm sure he and his team know the upshot of going nuclear. But is he mad enough to do it and if he is would others stop him? These are the questions burning for me - not that I expect anybody to know the answers otherwise they should be off here and on the phone to Washington!
I have to believe that the top brass in Moscow have not gone so completely cuckoo as to follow that order. In retaliation to a strike? Sure. But a first strike is something altogether different.
They were cuckoo enough to engage in a full scale (if ineptly carried out) invasion of a large sovereign neighbour, so... I think the psychology of escalation is a real worry here.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
It’s really simple.
Putin’s generals will make it quite clear, that he launches a nuclear weapon about an hour before downtown Moscow gets turned into glass.
If he still goes for it, and if everyone down the line of command goes for it, then that’s on them.
Yep, I'm sure he and his team know the upshot of going nuclear. But is he mad enough to do it and if he is would others stop him? These are the questions burning for me - not that I expect anybody to know the answers otherwise they should be off here and on the phone to Washington!
I have to believe that the top brass in Moscow have not gone so completely cuckoo as to follow that order. In retaliation to a strike? Sure. But a first strike is something altogether different.
They were cuckoo enough to engage in a full scale (if ineptly carried out) invasion of a large sovereign neighbour, so... I think the psychology of escalation is a real worry here.
You have to wonder how many of his top brass knew he was going 'full tonto'.
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
I agree with you. I am just not sure if the leadership of the Western world would see things the same way knowing what the likely consequences would be.
I suspect the response would be slightly delayed as the west worked out where every single missile was so that as many as possible could be destroyed when our response was delivered .
Peter Hitchens' wasp metaphor doesn't work well for anyone who knows even a little bit about wasps. Most species of wasps live by preying on insects and spiders, which they kill by stinging them -- whether or not the prey has "provoked" them.
There are even species of wasps that prey on other wasps, as I learned from a February 22nd article in the New York Times. The first wasp comes along and deposits its eggs in a plant, where the form a "gall". Then other wasps come along and lay their eggs in the developing wasp larvae. (These secondary parasites were thought to be a single species, Omyrus Labotus, but it turns out there are at least sixteen different species which look very much alike.)
Top PB post at this difficult time... Deeply learned, pedantic, informative, utterly tangential to the point and irrelevant to the global situation. In the finest tradition. I salute you, Sir.
Sounds like the Chechens may be on the ropes/demoralised:
"I've been receiving messages from Chechen sources that after huge losses of Kadyrov's personal "army" (in particular: @ 70 of them were reported charred alive after a single Bayraktar strike), most of the rest returned across the border. Scenes like this corroborate such reports.:
First video (graphically) confirms that alongside the Chechens killed in the drone strike, many more were killed while dismounting.
Interesting. But, Max Seddon (FT) is saying that Chechnya's Ramzan Kadyrov has asked Putin to allow special forces Chechen be let lose on Ukr with total destruction policy.
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
They would also be killing thousands of their own troops!
Were anyone to launch a Nuclear bomb, killing a few of your own soldiers probably doesn’t enter into the top 10 concerns
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
There are plenty of crimes against humanity, most of them do not need to World War 3 and involve the UK in a nuclear war.
Yes it would be an appalling act by Putin, yes we would have to cut Russia off economically, yes we could try Putin for war crimes if he was ever toppled. Yet no, we are not going to WW3 over it, only to defend our NATO allies
Your argument seems to be we mustn't provoke [person who would use nuclear weapons without being provoked] so that they don't use nuclear weapons.
Are you aware that there's something of a glaring logical flaw in your argument or did you somehow miss it?
We mustn't no as Putin as clearly ultra aggressive and near mad at the moment. We must just as Heathener correctly states hope the Russians get rid of him themselves.
Only if he starts invading NATO nations would we have no alternative but to go to war
No, I think. Practically it doesn’t make a huge difference, and there’s no need to wind up the paranoiac in the Kremlin.
Doing nothing is rather the equivalent of "point and laugh"....
We don't need to get our nukes out the pawn shop.
No, you borrow Trident from their home at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia.
France has an independent mass murder system. The Yookay doesn’t.
Yes we do, with submarines armed with Trident nuclear missiles on patrol at any one time.
The Naval Submarine Base in Georgia is just the US Trident submarines base. Even if we leased them off the Americans it is still the UK PM who would authorise their use.
The French do not have Trident nuclear weapons though unlike the UK and USA, so their nuclear weapons while still weapons of mass destruction are not as powerful as ours
The French SLBM warheads have similar yields to the UK warheads - neither country deploys a weapon as large as the W-88.
The French missiles have a bit less range and the accuracy is supposed to be a bit less as well.
But we have HYUFD. Who will scare the living squits out of anyone
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Yes, let’s just uninvent nuclear weapons.
Are you an advocate of the kitchen table or the doorway?
I'm in favour of Trident.
Stop them nuking us, because we can nuke them.
You have more faith in Putin’s mental health than I do.
I've got zero faith in his good nature stopping him. Or his generals, or anyone else in the command chain.
Again, not ideal, but the fact that everyone in the command chain would know they're killing themselves, their families, and their loved ones could at least give them pause for thought.
It's why it's called a deterrent.
Russia is a big country they could go to exile in siberia and sacrifice moscow in order to get in a nuclear first strike that would finish the west for good
While you're here, why don't you do something useful, and give us your expert opinion of what percentage of the Russian leadership is (1) as mad as Putin, (2) madder than Putin and (3) less mad than Putin.
Oh, and maybe you happen to know whether there's a duty psychiatrist "on" the Kremlin?
My impression is strongly that l'etat c'est Vlad so (1) is necessarily the answer.
He has backed himself into the corner twice over. He can't back down over the Ukraine without imperilling his position as leader, and he can't imperil his position as leader because demotion and retirement are not options. If he retires he will do an Epstein. So he may have to nuke someone just as a way of shaking the snow globe and changing the landscape.
No, I think. Practically it doesn’t make a huge difference, and there’s no need to wind up the paranoiac in the Kremlin.
Doing nothing is rather the equivalent of "point and laugh"....
We don't need to get our nukes out the pawn shop.
No, you borrow Trident from their home at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia.
France has an independent mass murder system. The Yookay doesn’t.
Yes we do, with submarines armed with Trident nuclear missiles on patrol at any one time.
The Naval Submarine Base in Georgia is just the US Trident submarines base
Ho ho. DYOR.
As the UK has Trident nuclear weapons unlike the French, even if leased, the UK has the most powerful nuclear weapons under their disposal. So while Macron and Boris have a nuclear button of European leaders, Boris' nuclear button has longer range and more power.
Macron and Boris might concern Putin, Sturgeon certainly never will. Hence it is so vital for Scotland it benefits from Trident in the UK
Johnson’s micropenis is slightly larger that Macron’s micropenis.
Welcome to PB: where the intellectual giants of the age engage in mortal combat.
Honestly, it’s like seeing the lobotomised class dunce trying to out-arithmetic Carol Vorderman.
I can't help notice that you've ignored my earlier question about nuclear weapons.
Wouldn't you agree that this war is deeply regrettable? And that if Ukraine was nuclear armed, it wouldn't have happened? And therefore wouldn't you agree that the right thing for Russia - so they can avoid the countrymen returning in bodybags - and for the world is for Ukraine to be given nuclear weapons?
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
Sounds like the Chechens may be on the ropes/demoralised:
"I've been receiving messages from Chechen sources that after huge losses of Kadyrov's personal "army" (in particular: @ 70 of them were reported charred alive after a single Bayraktar strike), most of the rest returned across the border. Scenes like this corroborate such reports.:
Oliver Carroll @olliecarroll · 31m Signs of cracks in Russian elite. First Fridman, then Deripaska. Now Anatoly Chubais has just posted picture of Boris Nemtsov on his Facebook page. Nemtsov, seen by some as Yeltsin’s first choice 4 president, was murdered in front of the Kremlin seven years ago today
I can't help notice that you've ignored my earlier question about nuclear weapons.
Wouldn't you agree that this war is deeply regrettable? And that if Ukraine was nuclear armed, it wouldn't have happened? And therefore wouldn't you agree that the right thing for Russia - so they can avoid the countrymen returning in bodybags - and for the world is for Ukraine to be given nuclear weapons?
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And yet Ukraine has still become a huge net importer of scrap metal.
Its tourism sector is also booming, people are so desperate to visit they'll hitch a ride with any random military vehicle they can find.
Zelensky’s starting point is going to be a Russian withdrawal to the pre-2014 borders, giving up Donbass and Crimea.
Zelensky can’t negotiate away the international sanctions, that are about to tank the markets and cause bank runs in Moscow tomorrow morning.
Oh, and by the way, he has another few thousand NATO-spec anti-tank weapons, and a few hundred NATO-spec anti-aircraft weapons, ready for the next few thousand tanks and few hundred aircraft that try and get to Kiev.
Negotiations difficult now both sides all in...Ukraine will have to put their egos aside a bit and listen to russias concerns...and vice versa
The only concern in this is when will Putin be deposed and put on trial for war crimes
I seriously doubt he'll see a court. In fact I'm certain of it. He wins now or is dead. Literally not metaphorically.
I heard a rumour the other day that Putin has a video of Gaddafi's last minutes on his phone and watches it from time to time.
Probably nonsense, but if true gives an idea of his mentality.
Peter Hitchens' wasp metaphor doesn't work well for anyone who knows even a little bit about wasps. Most species of wasps live by preying on insects and spiders, which they kill by stinging them -- whether or not the prey has "provoked" them.
There are even species of wasps that prey on other wasps, as I learned from a February 22nd article in the New York Times. The first wasp comes along and deposits its eggs in a plant, where the form a "gall". Then other wasps come along and lay their eggs in the developing wasp larvae. (These secondary parasites were thought to be a single species, Omyrus Labotus, but it turns out there are at least sixteen different species which look very much alike.)
Top PB post at this difficult time... Deeply learned, pedantic, informative, utterly tangential to the point and irrelevant to the global situation. In the finest tradition. I salute you, Sir.
Anyway, looks like I was wrong a couple of days ago when I doubted that the Ukrainians would be able to resist the invaders for long. Russian military might turns out to be not so mighty after all.
Sometimes it is wonderful being proved wrong.
It's hard to tell at this point whether it's more a case of the Russian's being weaker, or of the Ukrainian's being stronger, than expected.
Both, of course. Zelensky's inspirational leadership has been a big factor. But I think the biggest surprise has been poor execution by the Russians.
For me the biggest surprise is how poor their propaganda has been. They don't even seem to have agreed a consistent line at home, let alone abroad.
If their efforts here on PB are anything to go by their Propaganda Department is the pits!
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
HYUFD is right. Unpalatable as it is, I don’t believe we would attack Russia directly if Putin nuked Kiev. Neither side wants MAD
The world would instead head into the most freezing Cold War, which might last for a century?
On the other hand, this is not the 1960s. There is a third player now. China. Far more powerful than Russian and able to match the USA economically, and soon militarily
China wants to rise and rule the world, what’s the point of China’s efforts if the world is turned to glass and rubble? China is having fun. China is not mad.
China will have a say. I wonder if Xi will have a menacing word with Putin
"Signs of cracks in Russian elite. First Fridman, then Deripaska. Now Anatoly Chubais has just posted picture of Boris Nemtsov on his Facebook page. Nemtsov, seen by some as Yeltsin’s first choice 4 president, was murdered in front of the Kremlin seven years ago today."
Sounds like the Chechens may be on the ropes/demoralised:
"I've been receiving messages from Chechen sources that after huge losses of Kadyrov's personal "army" (in particular: @ 70 of them were reported charred alive after a single Bayraktar strike), most of the rest returned across the border. Scenes like this corroborate such reports.:
Anyway, looks like I was wrong a couple of days ago when I doubted that the Ukrainians would be able to resist the invaders for long. Russian military might turns out to be not so mighty after all.
Sometimes it is wonderful being proved wrong.
It's hard to tell at this point whether it's more a case of the Russian's being weaker, or of the Ukrainian's being stronger, than expected.
Both, of course. Zelensky's inspirational leadership has been a big factor. But I think the biggest surprise has been poor execution by the Russians.
Yes. Leadership has been a topic on here over the years, and Zelenskyy is doing very well.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And yet Ukraine has still become a huge net importer of scrap metal.
Its tourism sector is also booming, people are so desperate to visit they'll hitch a ride with any random military vehicle they can find.
The recent successes of the Ukrainian armed forces are due to the deployment of the terrible 344mm Lepage Crème Brûlée cannon.
This successor to the legendary Lepage Glue Gun can spread French culinary culture across entire divisions with a single shot.
A sobbing conscript reveals how "one minute the lads were all joking. Next minute they were denying the existence of truth, smoking Gaulois and quoting Sartre."
No, I think. Practically it doesn’t make a huge difference, and there’s no need to wind up the paranoiac in the Kremlin.
Doing nothing is rather the equivalent of "point and laugh"....
We don't need to get our nukes out the pawn shop.
No, you borrow Trident from their home at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia.
France has an independent mass murder system. The Yookay doesn’t.
For the four millionth time, our Trident system is completely operationally independent and only relies on the US help for deep maintenance of missiles.
Fake news.
Presumably Putins propaganda has frazzled your brain already
Zelensky’s starting point is going to be a Russian withdrawal to the pre-2014 borders, giving up Donbass and Crimea.
Zelensky can’t negotiate away the international sanctions, that are about to tank the markets and cause bank runs in Moscow tomorrow morning.
Oh, and by the way, he has another few thousand NATO-spec anti-tank weapons, and a few hundred NATO-spec anti-aircraft weapons, ready for the next few thousand tanks and few hundred aircraft that try and get to Kiev.
Negotiations difficult now both sides all in...Ukraine will have to put their egos aside a bit and listen to russias concerns...and vice versa
The only concern in this is when will Putin be deposed and put on trial for war crimes
I seriously doubt he'll see a court. In fact I'm certain of it. He wins now or is dead. Literally not metaphorically.
I heard a rumour the other day that Putin has a video of Gaddafi's last minutes on his phone and watches it from time to time.
Probably nonsense, but if true gives an idea of his mentality.
Given how paranoid Putin is (and probably in this case rightly so), I doubt he even has a personal phone.
Peter Hitchens' wasp metaphor doesn't work well for anyone who knows even a little bit about wasps. Most species of wasps live by preying on insects and spiders, which they kill by stinging them -- whether or not the prey has "provoked" them.
There are even species of wasps that prey on other wasps, as I learned from a February 22nd article in the New York Times. The first wasp comes along and deposits its eggs in a plant, where the form a "gall". Then other wasps come along and lay their eggs in the developing wasp larvae. (These secondary parasites were thought to be a single species, Omyrus Labotus, but it turns out there are at least sixteen different species which look very much alike.)
Top PB post at this difficult time... Deeply learned, pedantic, informative, utterly tangential to the point and irrelevant to the global situation. In the finest tradition. I salute you, Sir.
Nah. Last night’s top story was… ta da… electoral reform in Alaska! You hear all the big stories first here at PB.
Oliver Carroll @olliecarroll · 31m Signs of cracks in Russian elite. First Fridman, then Deripaska. Now Anatoly Chubais has just posted picture of Boris Nemtsov on his Facebook page. Nemtsov, seen by some as Yeltsin’s first choice 4 president, was murdered in front of the Kremlin seven years ago today
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
Well, to gain an idea of the other way of doing it: all we have to do is assure Putin that if he fires his nukes, we will, under no circumstances, fire back. Even if he rains nuclear fire on London and all of the UK - we won't do anything and will merely accept it.
Personally, I don't think that would help.
The reason that it's of value as a deterrent is that it is a second strike system. Which means that we would use it if we were already attacked. And we would therefore have nothing left to lose.
Game theory came into existence because of the implications of this. We don't threaten to use it unless they use theirs first. At which point, it's no longer the actions of a madman to use it. Because what would we have lost? We'd already have incurred the loss.
And they - their entire command chain down to the people who actually have to turn the keys - would know that the retaliatory strike would be coming if they went ahead.
It may not be sufficient to deter. But its absence would certainly not have any prospect of deterrence.
It fails game theory for me because a rational actor won't use it even if a mad one had used it first. There's nothing gained from that. It's just more loss. And a rational actor certainly won't use it preemptively. It therefore has utility only to the madman. In the hands of a madman it carries genuine threat and can be used as leverage. It's one-sided in this respect. This applies to all weapons to an extent, of course, but with the nuclear WMD it's especially so. Of great value to a lunatic, or somebody believed to be, of little value to everyone else - eg this situation here now (possibly).
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And look at how badly it's going for Russia, they're already asking for peace talks. It turns out those of us who thought Russia a spent force were correct.
One for Leon, TSE (though sadly not a redhead) and other red-blooded males and gay females, I see that Anastasiia Lenna the former Miss Ukraine has taken up arms to fight Putin's evil army. For those of you who want inspiration of various kinds, this may provide it:
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
There are plenty of crimes against humanity, most of them do not need to World War 3 and involve the UK in a nuclear war.
Yes it would be an appalling act by Putin, yes we would have to cut Russia off economically, yes we could try Putin for war crimes if he was ever toppled. Yet no, we are not going to WW3 over it, only to defend our NATO allies
Your argument seems to be we mustn't provoke [person who would use nuclear weapons without being provoked] so that they don't use nuclear weapons.
Are you aware that there's something of a glaring logical flaw in your argument or did you somehow miss it?
If people really think he's capable of using nuclear arms essentially because he's annoyed that the Ukrainians are defending themselves and making him look stupid, then there's a certain logic to the argument that the priority should be his removal from power, not avoiding provoking him.
Dmitry Grozoubinski @DmitryOpines We got a million dumb as fuck takes about how keeping the door open to membership of NATO or the EU "poked the bear".
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
He could invade most of Europe? Is there some recent evidence for that assertion?
The Russian armed forces are bigger than those of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Poland combined.
Without US support in theory yes. Most European nations have cut their defence budgets by far too much in recent years and only the UK and France have nuclear weapons as a last resort
I read that there around 90k members of the US forces (dunno how that breaks down in service arms and kit) currently in Europe with more on the way. Do you think there's the slightest chance of them being withdrawn?
I assume not under Biden, if Trump returns as President in 2024 that is a possibility
If Putin falls, all the Kompromat harvested through two way mirrors in Moscow hotel rooms might become public domain material.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
Well, to gain an idea of the other way of doing it: all we have to do is assure Putin that if he fires his nukes, we will, under no circumstances, fire back. Even if he rains nuclear fire on London and all of the UK - we won't do anything and will merely accept it.
Personally, I don't think that would help.
The reason that it's of value as a deterrent is that it is a second strike system. Which means that we would use it if we were already attacked. And we would therefore have nothing left to lose.
Game theory came into existence because of the implications of this. We don't threaten to use it unless they use theirs first. At which point, it's no longer the actions of a madman to use it. Because what would we have lost? We'd already have incurred the loss.
And they - their entire command chain down to the people who actually have to turn the keys - would know that the retaliatory strike would be coming if they went ahead.
It may not be sufficient to deter. But its absence would certainly not have any prospect of deterrence.
It fails game theory for me because a rational actor won't use it even if a mad one had used it first. There's nothing gained from that. It's just more loss. And a rational actor certainly won't use it preemptively. It therefore has utility only to the madman. In the hands of a madman it carries genuine threat and can be used as leverage. It's one-sided in this respect. This applies to all weapons to an extent, of course, but with the nuclear WMD it's especially so. Of great value to a lunatic, or somebody believed to be, of little value to everyone else - eg this situation here now (possibly).
If Britain has just been vaporised I would be quite angry. Indeed, madly, psychotically angry. I would certainly push the button
So deterrence works even with sane actors, because nuclear attack will drive the sane mad
One for Leon, TSE (though sadly not a redhead) and other red-blooded males and gay females, I see that Anastasiia Lenna the former Miss Ukraine has taken up arms to fight Putin's evil army. For those of you who want inspiration of various kinds, this may provide it:
Anyway, looks like I was wrong a couple of days ago when I doubted that the Ukrainians would be able to resist the invaders for long. Russian military might turns out to be not so mighty after all.
Sometimes it is wonderful being proved wrong.
It's hard to tell at this point whether it's more a case of the Russian's being weaker, or of the Ukrainian's being stronger, than expected.
Both, of course. Zelensky's inspirational leadership has been a big factor. But I think the biggest surprise has been poor execution by the Russians.
For me the biggest surprise is how poor their propaganda has been. They don't even seem to have agreed a consistent line at home, let alone abroad.
If their efforts here on PB are anything to go by their Propaganda Department is the pits!
If you want to believed whilst spreading lies on a uk political blog, why on earth would you start by choosing the name Johnson.....
Zelensky’s starting point is going to be a Russian withdrawal to the pre-2014 borders, giving up Donbass and Crimea.
Zelensky can’t negotiate away the international sanctions, that are about to tank the markets and cause bank runs in Moscow tomorrow morning.
Oh, and by the way, he has another few thousand NATO-spec anti-tank weapons, and a few hundred NATO-spec anti-aircraft weapons, ready for the next few thousand tanks and few hundred aircraft that try and get to Kiev.
Negotiations difficult now both sides all in...Ukraine will have to put their egos aside a bit and listen to russias concerns...and vice versa
The only concern in this is when will Putin be deposed and put on trial for war crimes
I seriously doubt he'll see a court. In fact I'm certain of it. He wins now or is dead. Literally not metaphorically.
I heard a rumour the other day that Putin has a video of Gaddafi's last minutes on his phone and watches it from time to time.
Probably nonsense, but if true gives an idea of his mentality.
Given how paranoid Putin is (and probably in this case rightly so), I doubt he even has a personal phone.
He doesn't apparently. Indeed, he doesn't like paper too much either. Trusts nothing.
One for Leon, TSE (though sadly not a redhead) and other red-blooded males and gay females, I see that Anastasiia Lenna the former Miss Ukraine has taken up arms to fight Putin's evil army. For those of you who want inspiration of various kinds, this may provide it:
Let's suppose the sanctions do lead to Putin getting ousted by the oligarchs, is it realistic than any successor would hand Crimea back to Ukraine if it was a condition of the sanctions being lifted? Strategically and emotionally it's going to be much tougher to get Russia to give it up than the Donbass even if Putin is gone.
Zelensky’s starting point is going to be a Russian withdrawal to the pre-2014 borders, giving up Donbass and Crimea.
Zelensky can’t negotiate away the international sanctions, that are about to tank the markets and cause bank runs in Moscow tomorrow morning.
Oh, and by the way, he has another few thousand NATO-spec anti-tank weapons, and a few hundred NATO-spec anti-aircraft weapons, ready for the next few thousand tanks and few hundred aircraft that try and get to Kiev.
Negotiations difficult now both sides all in...Ukraine will have to put their egos aside a bit and listen to russias concerns...and vice versa
The only concern in this is when will Putin be deposed and put on trial for war crimes
I seriously doubt he'll see a court. In fact I'm certain of it. He wins now or is dead. Literally not metaphorically.
I heard a rumour the other day that Putin has a video of Gaddafi's last minutes on his phone and watches it from time to time.
Probably nonsense, but if true gives an idea of his mentality.
Given how paranoid Putin is (and probably in this case rightly so), I doubt he even has a personal phone.
He doesn't apparently. Indeed, he doesn't like paper too much either. Trusts nothing.
TBH, I find rather baffling how lax in terms of obvious cybersecurity many western leaders / important politicians are.
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
HYUFD is right. Unpalatable as it is, I don’t believe we would attack Russia directly if Putin nuked Kiev. Neither side wants MAD
The world would instead head into the most freezing Cold War, which might last for a century?
On the other hand, this is not the 1960s. There is a third player now. China. Far more powerful than Russian and able to match the USA economically, and soon militarily
China wants to rise and rule the world, what’s the point of China’s efforts if the world is turned to glass and rubble? China is having fun. China is not mad.
China will have a say. I wonder if Xi will have a menacing word with Putin
Do China still have disputed borders with Russia? Just sayin'
One for Leon, TSE (though sadly not a redhead) and other red-blooded males and gay females, I see that Anastasiia Lenna the former Miss Ukraine has taken up arms to fight Putin's evil army. For those of you who want inspiration of various kinds, this may provide it:
One for Leon, TSE (though sadly not a redhead) and other red-blooded males and gay females, I see that Anastasiia Lenna the former Miss Ukraine has taken up arms to fight Putin's evil army. For those of you who want inspiration of various kinds, this may provide it:
No, I think. Practically it doesn’t make a huge difference, and there’s no need to wind up the paranoiac in the Kremlin.
Doing nothing is rather the equivalent of "point and laugh"....
We don't need to get our nukes out the pawn shop.
No, you borrow Trident from their home at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia.
France has an independent mass murder system. The Yookay doesn’t.
Yes we do, with submarines armed with Trident nuclear missiles on patrol at any one time.
The Naval Submarine Base in Georgia is just the US Trident submarines base. Even if we leased them off the Americans it is still the UK PM who would authorise their use.
The French do not have Trident nuclear weapons though unlike the UK and USA, so their nuclear weapons while still weapons of mass destruction are not as powerful as ours
The French SLBM warheads have similar yields to the UK warheads - neither country deploys a weapon as large as the W-88.
The French missiles have a bit less range and the accuracy is supposed to be a bit less as well.
But we have HYUFD. Who will scare the living squits out of anyone
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
Well, to gain an idea of the other way of doing it: all we have to do is assure Putin that if he fires his nukes, we will, under no circumstances, fire back. Even if he rains nuclear fire on London and all of the UK - we won't do anything and will merely accept it.
Personally, I don't think that would help.
The reason that it's of value as a deterrent is that it is a second strike system. Which means that we would use it if we were already attacked. And we would therefore have nothing left to lose.
Game theory came into existence because of the implications of this. We don't threaten to use it unless they use theirs first. At which point, it's no longer the actions of a madman to use it. Because what would we have lost? We'd already have incurred the loss.
And they - their entire command chain down to the people who actually have to turn the keys - would know that the retaliatory strike would be coming if they went ahead.
It may not be sufficient to deter. But its absence would certainly not have any prospect of deterrence.
It fails game theory for me because a rational actor won't use it even if a mad one had used it first. There's nothing gained from that. It's just more loss. And a rational actor certainly won't use it preemptively. It therefore has utility only to the madman. In the hands of a madman it carries genuine threat and can be used as leverage. It's one-sided in this respect. This applies to all weapons to an extent, of course, but with the nuclear WMD it's especially so. Of great value to a lunatic, or somebody believed to be, of little value to everyone else - eg this situation here now (possibly).
Unfortunately, human psychology is such that retaliation is always seen as worthwhile.
There are famous behavioural economics experiments where people willingly accept less in order to punish someone who is seen as acting unfairly.
That is - if you give one party (Party A) £1000 to split between themselves and Party B, and tell both parties that Party A can offer any split they like whilst Party B can merely "accept" or "reject" - and "reject" means both lose everything, then one would assume, rationally, that Party A could offer, say, £990-£10 in their own favour.
Because Party B can either gain £10 (by accepting) or gain nothing by rejecting. However, if the offer is too lopsided, Party B inevitably rejects and both lose.
It is believed that the reason for this is down to instinctive heuristics that both share. And as Party A is aware of this, they will temper their offer to not be too lopsided.
It's the same heuristic that's programmed into us for vengeance even if it costs us our own lives. And as it's one we all share, we're all aware of it.
If you leave the opponent with nothing, they have nothing left to lose.
I imagine similar views are being expressed in private in the Russian military. Putin is a self-cornered rat, who is now seen as a loser. That's both encouraging, and very dangerous.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And look at how badly it's going for Russia, they're already asking for peace talks. It turns out those of us who thought Russia a spent force were correct.
except they have a lot of nuclear weapons. If Russian cannot take Ukraine one of the options for an ending to this has gone - What are the others - Putin removed ? hopefully but no indication likely , at the moment Putin is hinting at another option and it will result in the end of everything. However distasteful if Putin cannot be toppled internally he has to be offered a face saver for the literal sake of humanity .
- Brexit as a war of words between the UK and the EU is over. Both have realised that the other offers more to them than they realised;
- EU expansion is back on the agenda. Poland is pushing for Ukraine to be given candidate status. The EU will surely look again at speeding things up with the western Balkans and Moldova, and perhaps Georgia. Ditto NATO expansion. Pushing Finland and Sweden towards NATO membership is astonishingly counterproductive of Russia;
- Russia’s social media capability has been shown to be utterly inadequate at making a positive case for Russia’s policies. It seems to be good at attack, but useless at defence;
- Judging by the number of denial of service attacks on Russia’s banking and government infrastructure (and perhaps other infrastructure, we wouldn’t get to see that), the West’s cyber capabilities are in excellent shape;
- If, as now looks likely, Russia faces strategic defeat in Ukraine at some point, it will put renewed strain on Russia’s control not just of its so-called near abroad but also of the country within its own boundaries.
The semi-colons are mine. Proper punctuation remains important even in difficult times.
So Tobias Ellwood is the answer to the question of which politician is calling for radically higher UK defence spending. More power to his elbow.
We don't need 'higher defence spending', we need greater defence capabilities. Ellwood and others need to argue what they think we need, and then work backwards as to what it will cost. 'We need to spend more' is just a blank cheque for lousy procurement, white elephant projects and chucking money at defence contractors.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And look at how badly it's going for Russia, they're already asking for peace talks. It turns out those of us who thought Russia a spent force were correct.
Putin has just raised Russia's nuclear deterrent to 'special alert' and Russian troops are still fighting in Ukraine.
Does not look like a man about to sue for peace, looks more like the most dangerous period for the world since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962
One for Leon, TSE (though sadly not a redhead) and other red-blooded males and gay females, I see that Anastasiia Lenna the former Miss Ukraine has taken up arms to fight Putin's evil army. For those of you who want inspiration of various kinds, this may provide it:
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
HYUFD is right. Unpalatable as it is, I don’t believe we would attack Russia directly if Putin nuked Kiev. Neither side wants MAD
The world would instead head into the most freezing Cold War, which might last for a century?
On the other hand, this is not the 1960s. There is a third player now. China. Far more powerful than Russian and able to match the USA economically, and soon militarily
China wants to rise and rule the world, what’s the point of China’s efforts if the world is turned to glass and rubble? China is having fun. China is not mad.
China will have a say. I wonder if Xi will have a menacing word with Putin
Do China still have disputed borders with Russia? Just sayin'
I have no idea what politics is like in Georgia at the moment, but I imagine they are watching the travails of the Russian army with some interest.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
Well, to gain an idea of the other way of doing it: all we have to do is assure Putin that if he fires his nukes, we will, under no circumstances, fire back. Even if he rains nuclear fire on London and all of the UK - we won't do anything and will merely accept it.
Personally, I don't think that would help.
The reason that it's of value as a deterrent is that it is a second strike system. Which means that we would use it if we were already attacked. And we would therefore have nothing left to lose.
Game theory came into existence because of the implications of this. We don't threaten to use it unless they use theirs first. At which point, it's no longer the actions of a madman to use it. Because what would we have lost? We'd already have incurred the loss.
And they - their entire command chain down to the people who actually have to turn the keys - would know that the retaliatory strike would be coming if they went ahead.
It may not be sufficient to deter. But its absence would certainly not have any prospect of deterrence.
It fails game theory for me because a rational actor won't use it even if a mad one had used it first. There's nothing gained from that. It's just more loss. And a rational actor certainly won't use it preemptively. It therefore has utility only to the madman. In the hands of a madman it carries genuine threat and can be used as leverage. It's one-sided in this respect. This applies to all weapons to an extent, of course, but with the nuclear WMD it's especially so. Of great value to a lunatic, or somebody believed to be, of little value to everyone else - eg this situation here now (possibly).
If Britain has just been vaporised I would be quite angry. Indeed, madly, psychotically angry. I would certainly push the button
So deterrence works even with sane actors, because nuclear attack will drive the sane mad
This was a fascinating development. The government saying (presumably accidentally) that people would be supported to go to Ukraine to fight with the Ukranian army.
I have thought about this a bit, and concluded that as an overweight 40 something with no language skills or combat experience and who recently had to take time off work with mental health problems I would not be a great deal of help to the war effort. A very convenient conclusion for me, which permits me to carry on living in England without putting myself at risk of premature violent death or torture upon capture by the Russians. But it has dawned on me that this peace and prosperity we enjoy comes at a price, which is currently being paid by Ukranians. As such, I am going to donate serious amounts of money to this cause, in the hope that the Ukranians prevail and Putin is overthrown. I still feel like a decadent coward, but perhaps slightly less so than other people around me.
- Brexit as a war of words between the UK and the EU is over. Both have realised that the other offers more to them than they realised;
- EU expansion is back on the agenda. Poland is pushing for Ukraine to be given candidate status. The EU will surely look again at speeding things up with the western Balkans and Moldova, and perhaps Georgia. Ditto NATO expansion. Pushing Finland and Sweden towards NATO membership is astonishingly counterproductive of Russia;
- Russia’s social media capability has been shown to be utterly inadequate at making a positive case for Russia’s policies. It seems to be good at attack, but useless at defence;
- Judging by the number of denial of service attacks on Russia’s banking and government infrastructure (and perhaps other infrastructure, we wouldn’t get to see that), the West’s cyber capabilities are in excellent shape;
- If, as now looks likely, Russia faces strategic defeat in Ukraine at some point, it will put renewed strain on Russia’s control not just of its so-called near abroad but also of the country within its own boundaries.
The semi-colons are mine. Proper punctuation remains important even in difficult times.
Bring Antifrank back. PB was much, much better when he was around. The irritating little turd.
Zelensky’s starting point is going to be a Russian withdrawal to the pre-2014 borders, giving up Donbass and Crimea.
Zelensky can’t negotiate away the international sanctions, that are about to tank the markets and cause bank runs in Moscow tomorrow morning.
Oh, and by the way, he has another few thousand NATO-spec anti-tank weapons, and a few hundred NATO-spec anti-aircraft weapons, ready for the next few thousand tanks and few hundred aircraft that try and get to Kiev.
Negotiations difficult now both sides all in...Ukraine will have to put their egos aside a bit and listen to russias concerns...and vice versa
The only concern in this is when will Putin be deposed and put on trial for war crimes
We cannot base policy on wild hopes
Who is 'We'?
Most posters on PB know each other, in many cases personally but otherwise through reputation and thousands of posts. On the evidence of a handful of posts I should say you are a troll, and your views - if indeed they are yours - have attracted well-merited contempt.
You don't speak for anybody except yourself and whoever might be marking your card.
I speak from a deep knowledge of history and human nature...my concern is humanity as a whole...many posters on here are superficial
It might very well have been Xi and the Chinese that put the pressure on for a no-conditions-all-on talks, just a few minutes after Putin started threatening this afternoon. Who else has that level of leverage of him at the moment, offering him an economic lifeline and political survival - very likely, no-one.
So Tobias Ellwood is the answer to the question of which politician is calling for radically higher UK defence spending. More power to his elbow.
We don't need 'higher defence spending', we need greater defence capabilities. Ellwood and others need to argue what they think we need, and then work backwards as to what it will cost. 'We need to spend more' is just a blank cheque for lousy procurement, white elephant projects and chucking money at defence contractors.
I agree, yes, but given the reality of what is happening with the British defence budget, with capability being cut back here and there to pay for higher priorities elsewhere, it's inevitably the case that we do need a higher level of overall spending.
But we need to start the discussion with one of what capabilities we require, and then work out what level of increased spending is needed to deliver that - rather than haphazardly paring back what we deliver to fit into the constrained size of the budget.
- Brexit as a war of words between the UK and the EU is over. Both have realised that the other offers more to them than they realised;
- EU expansion is back on the agenda. Poland is pushing for Ukraine to be given candidate status. The EU will surely look again at speeding things up with the western Balkans and Moldova, and perhaps Georgia. Ditto NATO expansion. Pushing Finland and Sweden towards NATO membership is astonishingly counterproductive of Russia;
- Russia’s social media capability has been shown to be utterly inadequate at making a positive case for Russia’s policies. It seems to be good at attack, but useless at defence;
- Judging by the number of denial of service attacks on Russia’s banking and government infrastructure (and perhaps other infrastructure, we wouldn’t get to see that), the West’s cyber capabilities are in excellent shape;
- If, as now looks likely, Russia faces strategic defeat in Ukraine at some point, it will put renewed strain on Russia’s control not just of its so-called near abroad but also of the country within its own boundaries.
The semi-colons are mine. Proper punctuation remains important even in difficult times.
Re: Meeks 1st point, we have to hope that Northern Ireland can be sorted out in the near future with greater ease
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And look at how badly it's going for Russia, they're already asking for peace talks. It turns out those of us who thought Russia a spent force were correct.
Putin has just raised Russia's nuclear deterrent to 'special alert' and Russian troops are still fighting in Ukraine.
Does not look like a man about to sue for peace, looks more like the most dangerous period for the world since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962
Desperation. I refuse to believe that the commanders would fire a nuke. If anything the order to fire from Putin would result in him hanging by a lamppost outside the Kremlin. There's simply no way the Russian military command will go along with an actual first strike.
Yep it's not just the nuclear threat, we are right on the verge of a huge escalation dragging in other countries.
The western world, probably the whole world, stands right now on the edge of a precipice.
The best hope is that Russian generals see sense and remove the madman. We need to incentivise them to do so.
Yes. This feels awfully dangerous now. We are one or two geopolitical missteps from a massive war across eastern Europe. And a couple more errors from actual nuclear conflict
Putin has just put the Russian nuclear deterrent on 'special alert'.
Partygate is obviously irrelevant now, indeed whether Sunak or Boris or Hunt or Truss or indeed Starmer is PM is relatively irrelevant too for the time being. As indeed is Covid post vaccination.
What matters is containing Putin and ensuring he does not go beyond Ukraine without doing anything to provoke him. Plus seeing if there is an internal coup to replace him
So if he nukes Kiev that is still OK by Jeremy HYUFD Corbyn?
Away with your appeasement.
If he nukes Warsaw then obviously we would be at war, Ukraine though is not in NATO whatever he does there.
He would make Russia into a pariah state, economically isolated but it would not be the same as attacking a NATO member state
That is shameful HY. It really is. Brave Ukrainians withold Russian aggression so Putin withdraws and first strikes Kiev, but they are not in NATO so you can live with that. Shame on you.
Sadly, whilst I believe HYUFD is morally wrong, practically I think he is right. Nuking Kiev is not an act of war against NATO. So what do NATO do in response? Do they put boots on the ground in Ukraine? Do they shoot down Russian aircraft? At that point Putin would argue that legally it is NATO who have attacked Russia. I do think there are any good outcomes from that.
At the same time clearly we would not be able to ignore it. I just don't know what we could do about it without starting a shooting war with Russia which, if he has already had the stupidity to nuke Kiev, can only really end one way.
Nuking Kiev is a crime against humanity that NATO would have to take as an act of war.
HYUFD is right. Unpalatable as it is, I don’t believe we would attack Russia directly if Putin nuked Kiev. Neither side wants MAD
The world would instead head into the most freezing Cold War, which might last for a century?
On the other hand, this is not the 1960s. There is a third player now. China. Far more powerful than Russian and able to match the USA economically, and soon militarily
China wants to rise and rule the world, what’s the point of China’s efforts if the world is turned to glass and rubble? China is having fun. China is not mad.
China will have a say. I wonder if Xi will have a menacing word with Putin
Do China still have disputed borders with Russia? Just sayin'
They do if Mad Vlad says so. He could easily hallucinate about some Russians being subjected to genocidal terror in Changchun at any time. Or, for that matter, in Buenos Aires, Hyderabad, Rabat, Welwyn Garden City or craters on the Moon. Bastard bloody headcase.
Yep it's not just the nuclear threat, we are right on the verge of a huge escalation dragging in other countries.
The western world, probably the whole world, stands right now on the edge of a precipice.
The best hope is that Russian generals see sense and remove the madman. We need to incentivise them to do so.
You may well be right, but I'm not sure Belarus joining in with Putin is a sign of that. Everyone knows the country is now just part of Putin's empire.
Zelensky’s starting point is going to be a Russian withdrawal to the pre-2014 borders, giving up Donbass and Crimea.
Zelensky can’t negotiate away the international sanctions, that are about to tank the markets and cause bank runs in Moscow tomorrow morning.
Oh, and by the way, he has another few thousand NATO-spec anti-tank weapons, and a few hundred NATO-spec anti-aircraft weapons, ready for the next few thousand tanks and few hundred aircraft that try and get to Kiev.
Negotiations difficult now both sides all in...Ukraine will have to put their egos aside a bit and listen to russias concerns...and vice versa
The only concern in this is when will Putin be deposed and put on trial for war crimes
We cannot base policy on wild hopes
Who is 'We'?
Most posters on PB know each other, in many cases personally but otherwise through reputation and thousands of posts. On the evidence of a handful of posts I should say you are a troll, and your views - if indeed they are yours - have attracted well-merited contempt.
You don't speak for anybody except yourself and whoever might be marking your card.
I speak from a deep knowledge of history and human nature...my concern is humanity as a whole...many posters on here are superficial
A deep knowledge of history that somehow failed to notice that Ukraine had voluntarily given up its nukes.
- Brexit as a war of words between the UK and the EU is over. Both have realised that the other offers more to them than they realised;
- EU expansion is back on the agenda. Poland is pushing for Ukraine to be given candidate status. The EU will surely look again at speeding things up with the western Balkans and Moldova, and perhaps Georgia. Ditto NATO expansion. Pushing Finland and Sweden towards NATO membership is astonishingly counterproductive of Russia;
- Russia’s social media capability has been shown to be utterly inadequate at making a positive case for Russia’s policies. It seems to be good at attack, but useless at defence;
- Judging by the number of denial of service attacks on Russia’s banking and government infrastructure (and perhaps other infrastructure, we wouldn’t get to see that), the West’s cyber capabilities are in excellent shape;
- If, as now looks likely, Russia faces strategic defeat in Ukraine at some point, it will put renewed strain on Russia’s control not just of its so-called near abroad but also of the country within its own boundaries.
The semi-colons are mine. Proper punctuation remains important even in difficult times.
Re potential EU expansion. I hope that it leads to the kind of pick-and-mix EU, or least tiered membership levels, that the UK could be part of, rather than everyone progressing to ever closer union which is impossible for the UK to rejoin.
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
It is in the sense that Putin knows if he launched a nuclear missile on the UK, Trident nuclear missiles would in turn be launched on Moscow and St Petersburg by UK submarines.
If he wanted to go on offensive across Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine into NATO nations it is also only the nuclear missiles held by the USA, UK and France as well as their armed forces that would make him think twice based on the NATO concept of mutual self defence.
If not he could invade most of Europe and make use of nuclear weapons too on nations that did not yield to him
Give it a break.
He's struggling to invade his nearest neighbour, after having them surrounded by three sides, with the rest of Europe formally at least not getting involved.
How they hell do you think he could invade "most of Europe"?
Russia has the biggest military in Europe, the biggest airforce in Europe, the most tanks in Europe and the biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world.
He has just invaded Ukraine and is now in Kyiv, its capital.
Yet just a month ago you were saying Russia was no threat to a European nation like the UK at all and we should be more concerned about China which is on the other side of the world!
And look at how badly it's going for Russia, they're already asking for peace talks. It turns out those of us who thought Russia a spent force were correct.
Does not look like a man about to sue for peace, looks more like the most dangerous period for the world since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962
It's even more dangerous that that, surely? And by some margin? We have an actual war not a stand-off, with blood being spilled in bitter battle on the ground. We have far more widespread and capable nuclear weaponry. We have other countries about to be dragged in to the war. And we have a complete lunatic at the Russian helm who is beginning to look and sound desperate.
I mentioned Russian generals but I think Leon's right about President Xi and people like Peter Hitchen are totally wrong.
We probably right now need to go to Xi and incentivise him for the sake of the human race to exert maximum pressure on Putin to stand down.
I know this would stick in the throat but it's the lesser of evils.
Yep it's not just the nuclear threat, we are right on the verge of a huge escalation dragging in other countries.
The western world, probably the whole world, stands right now on the edge of a precipice.
The best hope is that Russian generals see sense and remove the madman. We need to incentivise them to do so.
Yes. This feels awfully dangerous now. We are one or two geopolitical missteps from a massive war across eastern Europe. And a couple more errors from actual nuclear conflict
Agreed Leon russias concerns should have been listened to more before they invaded Ukraine...
This was a fascinating development. The government saying (presumably accidentally) that people would be supported to go to Ukraine to fight with the Ukranian army.
I have thought about this a bit, and concluded that as an overweight 40 something with no language skills or combat experience and who recently had to take time off work with mental health problems I would not be a great deal of help to the war effort. A very convenient conclusion for me, which permits me to carry on living in England without putting myself at risk of premature violent death or torture upon capture by the Russians. But it has dawned on me that this peace and prosperity we enjoy comes at a price, which is currently being paid by Ukranians. As such, I am going to donate serious amounts of money to this cause, in the hope that the Ukranians prevail and Putin is overthrown. I still feel like a decadent coward, but perhaps slightly less so than other people around me.
Don’t underestimate yourself. By presenting a larger target for some Russian to shoot at, you might have saved the life of some Ukrainian freedom fighter who would go on to achieve great things?
But good on you for the donations, regardless. There are a lot of good and relevant causes worth supporting, right now.
Yep it's not just the nuclear threat, we are right on the verge of a huge escalation dragging in other countries.
The western world, probably the whole world, stands right now on the edge of a precipice.
The best hope is that Russian generals see sense and remove the madman. We need to incentivise them to do so.
Yes. This feels awfully dangerous now. We are one or two geopolitical missteps from a massive war across eastern Europe. And a couple more errors from actual nuclear conflict
When it comes nuclear war will be quick - Hopefully governments in the west are toning down their (understandable) reaction so far and offering Putin a way out .Its sad but Ukraine holding out has made the world a more dangerous place. Escalation here can go exponentially within a couple of hours
Putin is meeting defense minister Shoigu and chief of general staff Gerasimov in the Kremlin.
He says western sanctions are "illegitimate" and has ordered to place Russia's deterrence – i.e. nuclear – forces on "a special regime of duty," per @tass_agency
Putin: "Western countries aren't only taking unfriendly economic actions against our country, but leaders of major Nato countries are making aggressive statements about our country. So I order to move Russia's deterrence forces to a special regime of duty."
One way or another, he will make sure that he won't lose this war. Lets hope the oligarchs strike, the war is not good for them either.
Nuclear war it is, then
I forget, where do we hide? Under the kitchen table? In a doorway?
Trident is great when it’s being pointed at other people. Not so great when the nuclear warheads are being pointed at you.
Having Trident available - and known to be available to the other side - is actually quite a relief when nuclear weapons are pointed at you.
After all, it's not as though not having them is any protection. The generals on the other side knowing that launching anything at you will sign their own death warrant is not ideal, but at least makes them think very hard before obeying.
I'm not sure I agree with this actually. Us having Trident doesn't make me feel safer in this situation and if the Russian equivalent were used on us I'd gain no comfort from the thought of the quid pro quo whether I lived to see it or not. Neither imo does it tilt the balance of power in our favour.
The nuclear deterrent - because of the consequences for both target and shooter - cannot be used by anybody other than a madman and every rational person knows this. It's therefore of value only *to* a madman.
Which begs the obvious question. Is Putin mad? And if he is, to what extent can he make decisions alone? Is his power personal and untrammeled or is it more (as with Trump when he was POTUS) that there are people around him who'd be willing and able to "manage" or in extremis neutralize him? This is what I really wish we knew.
Well, to gain an idea of the other way of doing it: all we have to do is assure Putin that if he fires his nukes, we will, under no circumstances, fire back. Even if he rains nuclear fire on London and all of the UK - we won't do anything and will merely accept it.
Personally, I don't think that would help.
The reason that it's of value as a deterrent is that it is a second strike system. Which means that we would use it if we were already attacked. And we would therefore have nothing left to lose.
Game theory came into existence because of the implications of this. We don't threaten to use it unless they use theirs first. At which point, it's no longer the actions of a madman to use it. Because what would we have lost? We'd already have incurred the loss.
And they - their entire command chain down to the people who actually have to turn the keys - would know that the retaliatory strike would be coming if they went ahead.
It may not be sufficient to deter. But its absence would certainly not have any prospect of deterrence.
It fails game theory for me because a rational actor won't use it even if a mad one had used it first. There's nothing gained from that. It's just more loss. And a rational actor certainly won't use it preemptively. It therefore has utility only to the madman. In the hands of a madman it carries genuine threat and can be used as leverage. It's one-sided in this respect. This applies to all weapons to an extent, of course, but with the nuclear WMD it's especially so. Of great value to a lunatic, or somebody believed to be, of little value to everyone else - eg this situation here now (possibly).
If Britain has just been vaporised I would be quite angry. Indeed, madly, psychotically angry. I would certainly push the button
So deterrence works even with sane actors, because nuclear attack will drive the sane mad
That is such a precarious assumption, though, when stacked against the risks and the costs. And the logic still doesn't work. We instinctively know the world would be a more dangerous place of all countries had the nuclear deterrent, don't we? So how can it be a deterrent? It isn't. It's only a deterrent against itself.
Yep it's not just the nuclear threat, we are right on the verge of a huge escalation dragging in other countries.
The western world, probably the whole world, stands right now on the edge of a precipice.
The best hope is that Russian generals see sense and remove the madman. We need to incentivise them to do so.
Yes. This feels awfully dangerous now. We are one or two geopolitical missteps from a massive war across eastern Europe. And a couple more errors from actual nuclear conflict
Agreed Leon russias concerns should have been listened to more before they invaded Ukraine...
I don't think that's what Leon said at all and really does sound like something straight out of Putin's derriere ...
Comments
The western world is in a very dangerous place right now.
The quickest resolution is the most obvious. Russian leaders have to do what Conservative MPs were too spineless to do.
They have to remove Putin.
We are not here to kick Russia. Actually, most of us love your country and your people. We're here to see a madman carted away before he presses the global destruct button.
Deeply learned, pedantic, informative, utterly tangential to the point and irrelevant to the global situation.
In the finest tradition.
I salute you, Sir.
Both could be true of course.
Only if he starts invading NATO nations would we have no alternative but to go to war
He has backed himself into the corner twice over. He can't back down over the Ukraine without imperilling his position as leader, and he can't imperil his position as leader because demotion and retirement are not options. If he retires he will do an Epstein. So he may have to nuke someone just as a way of shaking the snow globe and changing the landscape.
Welcome to PB: where the intellectual giants of the age engage in mortal combat.
Honestly, it’s like seeing the lobotomised class dunce trying to out-arithmetic Carol Vorderman.
I can't help notice that you've ignored my earlier question about nuclear weapons.
Wouldn't you agree that this war is deeply regrettable? And that if Ukraine was nuclear armed, it wouldn't have happened? And therefore wouldn't you agree that the right thing for Russia - so they can avoid the countrymen returning in bodybags - and for the world is for Ukraine to be given nuclear weapons?
Oliver Carroll
@olliecarroll
·
31m
Signs of cracks in Russian elite. First Fridman, then Deripaska. Now Anatoly Chubais has just posted picture of Boris Nemtsov on his Facebook page. Nemtsov, seen by some as Yeltsin’s first choice 4 president, was murdered in front of the Kremlin seven years ago today
https://twitter.com/olliecarroll
Probably nonsense, but if true gives an idea of his mentality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIy_GmvUElE
The world would instead head into the most freezing Cold War, which might last for a century?
On the other hand, this is not the 1960s. There is a third player now. China. Far more powerful than Russian and able to match the USA economically, and soon militarily
China wants to rise and rule the world, what’s the point of China’s efforts if the world is turned to glass and rubble? China is having fun. China is not mad.
China will have a say. I wonder if Xi will have a menacing word with Putin
"Signs of cracks in Russian elite. First Fridman, then Deripaska. Now Anatoly Chubais has just posted picture of Boris Nemtsov on his Facebook page. Nemtsov, seen by some as Yeltsin’s first choice 4 president, was murdered in front of the Kremlin seven years ago today."
War and sanctions are bad for business...
Why do you think that might be?
The recent successes of the Ukrainian armed forces are due to the deployment of the terrible 344mm Lepage Crème Brûlée cannon.
This successor to the legendary Lepage Glue Gun can spread French culinary culture across entire divisions with a single shot.
A sobbing conscript reveals how "one minute the lads were all joking. Next minute they were denying the existence of truth, smoking Gaulois and quoting Sartre."
Russia put its nuclear deterrent forces on a state of heightened alert.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/putins-nuclear-alert-part-pattern-manufacturing-threats-psaki/story?id=83130027
There’ll probably be some holdouts on here month after the last oligarchs have bailed…
No way they want the devastating disruption to the world's economic system that a couple of nukes traded in europe will cause.
https://ipgeolocation.io/browse/ip/92.40.198.210
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10556975/Kyiv-stands-Ex-Miss-Ukraine-takes-arms-fight-Putins-army-capital-survives.html
Am I right in thinking that Ukrainian women are the tallest in the world? Sure I read that somewhere.
Ukrainians of all kinds at the moment are an inspiration.
@DmitryOpines
We got a million dumb as fuck takes about how keeping the door open to membership of NATO or the EU "poked the bear".
Where are all the "poking the bear" articles about how NATO was slumbering away peacefully until Putin decided to poke it so hard even the Germans woke up?
https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1497875580515094528
So deterrence works even with sane actors, because nuclear attack will drive the sane mad
Moscow’s many money exchanges have likely run out of proper currency already.
Nice trigger discipline
Shooting glasses a good touch.
How many days until Replubka Srpska kicks off?
- “Scots of all kinds at the moment are an inspiration.”
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/173634/dutch-latvian-women-tallest-world-according/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10557221/Ukraine-war-Belarus-poised-declare-war-special-forces-loaded-planes-in.html
There are famous behavioural economics experiments where people willingly accept less in order to punish someone who is seen as acting unfairly.
That is - if you give one party (Party A) £1000 to split between themselves and Party B, and tell both parties that Party A can offer any split they like whilst Party B can merely "accept" or "reject" - and "reject" means both lose everything, then one would assume, rationally, that Party A could offer, say, £990-£10 in their own favour.
Because Party B can either gain £10 (by accepting) or gain nothing by rejecting.
However, if the offer is too lopsided, Party B inevitably rejects and both lose.
It is believed that the reason for this is down to instinctive heuristics that both share. And as Party A is aware of this, they will temper their offer to not be too lopsided.
It's the same heuristic that's programmed into us for vengeance even if it costs us our own lives. And as it's one we all share, we're all aware of it.
If you leave the opponent with nothing, they have nothing left to lose.
https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1497951222917128193
I imagine similar views are being expressed in private in the Russian military. Putin is a self-cornered rat, who is now seen as a loser. That's both encouraging, and very dangerous.
- Brexit as a war of words between the UK and the EU is over. Both have realised that the other offers more to them than they realised;
- EU expansion is back on the agenda. Poland is pushing for Ukraine to be given candidate status. The EU will surely look again at speeding things up with the western Balkans and Moldova, and perhaps Georgia. Ditto NATO expansion. Pushing Finland and Sweden towards NATO membership is astonishingly counterproductive of Russia;
- Russia’s social media capability has been shown to be utterly inadequate at making a positive case for Russia’s policies. It seems to be good at attack, but useless at defence;
- Judging by the number of denial of service attacks on Russia’s banking and government infrastructure (and perhaps other infrastructure, we wouldn’t get to see that), the West’s cyber capabilities are in excellent shape;
- If, as now looks likely, Russia faces strategic defeat in Ukraine at some point, it will put renewed strain on Russia’s control not just of its so-called near abroad but also of the country within its own boundaries.
The semi-colons are mine. Proper punctuation remains important even in difficult times.
Does not look like a man about to sue for peace, looks more like the most dangerous period for the world since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962
The western world, probably the whole world, stands right now on the edge of a precipice.
The best hope is that Russian generals see sense and remove the madman. We need to incentivise them to do so.
There is evidence to the contrary.
I have thought about this a bit, and concluded that as an overweight 40 something with no language skills or combat experience and who recently had to take time off work with mental health problems I would not be a great deal of help to the war effort. A very convenient conclusion for me, which permits me to carry on living in England without putting myself at risk of premature violent death or torture upon capture by the Russians. But it has dawned on me that this peace and prosperity we enjoy comes at a price, which is currently being paid by Ukranians. As such, I am going to donate serious amounts of money to this cause, in the hope that the Ukranians prevail and Putin is overthrown. I still feel like a decadent coward, but perhaps slightly less so than other people around me.
We'll be able to exchange views personally.
But we need to start the discussion with one of what capabilities we require, and then work out what level of increased spending is needed to deliver that - rather than haphazardly paring back what we deliver to fit into the constrained size of the budget.
I mentioned Russian generals but I think Leon's right about President Xi and people like Peter Hitchen are totally wrong.
We probably right now need to go to Xi and incentivise him for the sake of the human race to exert maximum pressure on Putin to stand down.
I know this would stick in the throat but it's the lesser of evils.
But good on you for the donations, regardless. There are a lot of good and relevant causes worth supporting, right now.
the river at Hammersmith, and london feels joyous and free
It’s a poignant contrast