@ASLuhn Bulgaria will give Ukraine 14 Su-25 & 16 MiG-29 fighter jets, Poland will give it 28 MiG-29s & Slovakia will give it 12 MiG-29s. More importantly--given Russian missile strikes on military airbases--they can fly missions over Ukraine from Poland
I would seriously doubt the truth - actually, I'm 99.9975% sure it's false - of the part about flying missions from Poland. Selling weapons to the Ukrainian Government and offering it the use of NATO airbases are two very different things.
This suggestion appears to emanate from an 'environment journalist' conveying second-hand information from a Ukrainian website. Shocked to concede that not everything on Twitter is true.
Yes, sorry I should have given it a health warning. It looks like Josep Borrell might also have announced things on behalf of the EU that he can't deliver.
I don't know if some of these old Soviet aircraft might end up finding their way to Ukraine: AIUI they're all due to be replaced by more modern American hardware, possibly with the Americans therefore underwriting their "sale" (i.e. donation) to Ukraine. Selling the Ukrainians aircraft wouldn't essentially be any different to selling them crates of anti-tank weapons or artillery pieces, which is what we've already been doing for a while.
But they'd surely have to operate them from their own territory? I don't believe for one minute that NATO will be offering them the use of air bases.
No, it is silly nonsense from EU cheerleaders. It gives Putin the best excuse to directly attack Poland and the Baltics (and with reason), Then we have to negotiate a tense non-nuke-apocalypse truce with him as he quietly takes everything he wants in Ukraine as reward for his injured pride/our over-reach
It would be a calamitously stupid thing to do for the EU/NATO
Right now Putin is busy destroying Russian esteem, pride, power, money and arms in a really bad, misadvised war in Ukraine. In terms of brutal realpolitik, we should let him carry on, while quietly arming the Ukrainians with stingers and drones
That depletes and disarms one of our major global enemies. It is what we want. It is exactly what the Russians and Chinese did when we foolishly invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. They stayed a distance away, but discreetly used it to weaken and distract the West. With great success
It is brutal and cruel, but we should now do the same to Russian in Ukraine. The Cold War is back
Not saying it makes it at all true, but the flying Migs from Poland thing I think came from the facebook page of the Ukrainian army https://www.facebook.com/UkrainianLandForces
Polish official gone rogue, NATO high command to reign them back in?
He was also on entirely the wrong side of the antisemitism debate several years ago. Quite the conspiraloon.
"I think the allegations of anti-semitism in the Labour Party are all fabricated attacks on Jeremy Corbyn" "Most of the people who have been suspended from the Labour Party for anti-semitism seem to be Jewish" https://twitter.com/SussexFriends/status/923868439403515904
@ASLuhn Bulgaria will give Ukraine 14 Su-25 & 16 MiG-29 fighter jets, Poland will give it 28 MiG-29s & Slovakia will give it 12 MiG-29s. More importantly--given Russian missile strikes on military airbases--they can fly missions over Ukraine from Poland
Bravo, but I am (happily) amazed. Unthinkable a week ago.
We are one step away from sending Patriots and Sky Sabres, and clearing the airspace.
But it does raise a slight worry in the back of my mind that at some stage he will just assume we’re directly playing.
As will be clear from my posts, my head and heart are in different places on this.
It is surely bollocks It gives Putin a casus belli for WW3 and certainly the razing of Ukraine. This is exactly what we do not need, over-excited europhile Remainer twats saying Whoah look the EU is now attacking the Russian army! Go Brussels!
The EU? Let’s all be clear - the EU is bankrolling stuff (and very welcome that is too) but all the military effort is NATO. NATO has never looked more relevant, not least because it includes potent non-EU nations like us.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
That 19 year old interview on Newsnight is devastating. If not for a few hundred miles of difference in birth that'd be my sister lamenting my probable death.
We hear rumour of Russian murder squads spirited into Kyiv with a mission to kill Strictly Come Playing the Piano Bear and others of influence there. Have the Ukrainians reciprocated with team(s) to decapitate the Russian government?
If anyone is in any doubt about the malign intentions of Putin and the current regime in Russia, they should investigate this book and its influence.
From wiki
Germany should be offered the de facto political dominance over most Protestant and Catholic states located within Central and Eastern Europe. Kaliningrad Oblast could be given back to Germany. The book uses the term "Moscow–Berlin axis".[9] France should be encouraged to form a bloc with Germany, as they both have a "firm anti-Atlanticist tradition".[9] The United Kingdom, merely described as an "extraterritorial floating base of the U.S.", should be cut off from Europe.[9] Finland should be absorbed into Russia. Southern Finland will be combined with the Republic of Karelia and northern Finland will be "donated to Murmansk Oblast".[9] Estonia should be given to Germany's sphere of influence.[9] Latvia and Lithuania should be given a "special status" in the Eurasian–Russian sphere.[9] Poland should be granted a "special status" in the Eurasian sphere.[9] Romania, North Macedonia, Serbia, "Serbian Bosnia" and Greece – "Orthodox collectivist East" – will unite with "Moscow the Third Rome" and reject the "rational-individualistic West".[9] Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible
I have to read Dugin. He sounds fun
And Russia has successfully detached the UK from the EU, tho the consequent formation of a new English speaking global military alliance, AUKUS, is not on his wishlist, I see
Also, this bit doesn't seem to be going especially well:
China, which represents a danger to Russia, "must, to the maximum degree possible, be dismantled". Dugin suggests that Russia start by taking Tibet–Xinjiang–Inner Mongolia–Manchuria as a security belt.[1] Russia should offer China help "in a southern direction – Indochina (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia" as geopolitical compensation.[9]
He sounds like a tw@t.
Dugin is Russian for Blimp.
Putin's Nazi "Nazi" hunter Utkin, appears to mean Ducky
Incredible footage of ordinary unarmed Ukr peeps telling RU troops to just fuck off back to their own country. The soldiers just stand there. Lost. Clutching guns. The officer attempts to pat them on the shoulders to keep them going. They look haunted and lost. A long way from their real home and utterly not signed up to this bollx.
Putin has lost this already. Just about how it ends now.
That is amazing footage. Those Russians have no will to shoot on the Ukrainians.
It is like the HYUFD Unionist Regiment being asked to brutally gun down the Women's Institute and Royal Gardening Club, quietly gathered by Monmouth Town Hall, after a Welsh vote for independence
I feel for the Russian soldiers, actually. They are being cued up, by Putin, for a lifetime of guilt and torment
They know this is bollx and they know they are being asked to shoot their aunty's second cousin or whatever.
And there's rumours that many of them were told this was still just the biggly training exercise and they are not quite sure where they are but it is definitely no longer Belarus.
It's utterly awe inspiring. The bravery of these people. For two years, we in the west have been sacrificing liberty for safety. All for arguably good reasons, but not very invogorating to the spirit. And now we see this - tremendous personal risks taken in the name of liberty. Because liberty is worth risking all for. This is not just a foundation legend for Ukraine, this is a foundation myth for the west. Since the end of history in 1989 we have prevaricated aout what we stand for; well, now we know. This. Or rather, not what the alternative to this is. Not Vlad. I almost no longer dare to look at the news; surely Kyiv can't still stand? Surely Ukraine must have fallen? Yet it has not; this amazing stand is still going on.
Amazingly, as u say, at the point where the West seemed to have finally just thrown the towel in as far as defending any kind of set of values, Ukr is showing the way. We may have no idea what we believe in but we know what we don't believe in.
Hopefully enough GOP voters will see all this and pause and think whether they really want a Putin-lover back in the WH or whether they want a democracy.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
The 80s seemed pretty peaceful, if I remember correctly. Vietnam was over, Yugoslavia hadn't fallen apart yet, and the Cold War had been around so long that not many people thought it would turn hot. The 60s were the scary years, which seemed to have a possibility of global nuclear war. Listen to Barry McGuire's Eve of Destruction on YouTube for the flavour (1965), when the danger seemed more acute. On the other hand, there wasn't much actual fighting anywhere close, and without social media it was less immediately visible than what's happening now.
"Reservists and militias are setting up checkpoints every few miles between Odessa and Kyiv." [Video attached]
We've seen similar elsewhere, with unarmed townspeople stepping in front of tanks to protect their country but a lot of brave, underarmed Ukrainians will die for their country over the next week. The biggest Ukrainian victory over the past week has been on the morale front. The Russians are reeling (having been told that they were going to be welcomed as heroes), while the civilians feel patriotism like never before.
I worry that food will start to be a problem in a few places, and that will test the unity of the Ukrainian people.
Obviously sending weapons to Ukraine is important, but we have to also think about food, and the problem of food distribution during a war is a hard one.
British Ex-General on Newsnight saying that over the next few days a decision will need to be made by the west whether to stop the carpet bombing of Kyiv if Russia goes ahead with it. This would be likely to be driven by public opinion.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
He is a right wing autocrat in his political views and apologizes for right wing autocratic in positions of power.
Putin has lost this already. Just about how it ends now.
The trouble is he has massive weaponry.
Indeed, all he has mainly sent in so far is conscripts with limited air support.
Most of the elite Russian troops have not been sent to Kyiv. If it does not fall within a week they will be after a massive aerial bombing campaign and supported by heavy artillery and Russian tanks.
It is not over by any means, in reality the war has barely begun
Do you still believe in the myth of the invincibility of the Russian military after what we've seen?
As I said so far it is mainly conscripts who have been doing the fighting, the full scale of the Russian military has yet to be engaged
This was the biggest decision of Putin's life and took months of planning, involving reducing Russia's defences in the far-east and pulling in forces from every available source for a massive mobilisation. Do you really think he told his planners to use the B-team, or is it more likely that we're seeing the limits of their capabilities?
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
That they shouldn't have been allowed to join in the first place, he was clear on that. Why he feels that negates treaty obligations I dont know.
Though until this week I'd have estimated a similar chance of NATO acting. More confident now, though not if Trump wins.
Part of me wonders whether it would be better for the Ukrainians to surrender if the bombing gets really severe. Then wait for the Russian economy to collapse.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
The 80s seemed pretty peaceful, if I remember correctly. Vietnam was over, Yugoslavia hadn't fallen apart yet, the the Cold War had been around so long that not many people thought it would turn hot. The 60s were the scary years, which seemed to have a possibility of global nuclear war. Listen to Barry McGuire's Eve of Destruction on YouTube for the flavour (1965), when the danger seemed more acute. On the other hand, there wasn't much actual fighting anywhere close, and without social media it was less immediately visible than what's happening now.
My memory of growingup in the early 1980s was that nuclear war always felt an existential threat. What children perceive, of course, isn't necessarily what is true but from the history I have subsequently learned I think there was the potential in the early 80s for the cold war to get hot - both sides, I think, had some who thought that it might be imperative to strike first, because if we're thinking like this then they must be too. Happily it didn't come to pass and the world felt a much safer place after 1985 when Gorbachev came to power, and safer again after 1989 when the Eastern Bloc disintegrated. I'd say the period between the fall of the Berlin Wall and the bombing of the twin towers has been the safest the west has ever felt.
@ASLuhn Bulgaria will give Ukraine 14 Su-25 & 16 MiG-29 fighter jets, Poland will give it 28 MiG-29s & Slovakia will give it 12 MiG-29s. More importantly--given Russian missile strikes on military airbases--they can fly missions over Ukraine from Poland
I would seriously doubt the truth - actually, I'm 99.9975% sure it's false - of the part about flying missions from Poland. Selling weapons to the Ukrainian Government and offering it the use of NATO airbases are two very different things.
This suggestion appears to emanate from an 'environment journalist' conveying second-hand information from a Ukrainian website. Shocked to concede that not everything on Twitter is true.
Yes, sorry I should have given it a health warning. It looks like Josep Borrell might also have announced things on behalf of the EU that he can't deliver.
I don't know if some of these old Soviet aircraft might end up finding their way to Ukraine: AIUI they're all due to be replaced by more modern American hardware, possibly with the Americans therefore underwriting their "sale" (i.e. donation) to Ukraine. Selling the Ukrainians aircraft wouldn't essentially be any different to selling them crates of anti-tank weapons or artillery pieces, which is what we've already been doing for a while.
But they'd surely have to operate them from their own territory? I don't believe for one minute that NATO will be offering them the use of air bases.
No, it is silly nonsense from EU cheerleaders. It gives Putin the best excuse to directly attack Poland and the Baltics (and with reason), Then we have to negotiate a tense non-nuke-apocalypse truce with him as he quietly takes everything he wants in Ukraine as reward for his injured pride/our over-reach
It would be a calamitously stupid thing to do for the EU/NATO
Right now Putin is busy destroying Russian esteem, pride, power, money and arms in a really bad, misadvised war in Ukraine. In terms of brutal realpolitik, we should let him carry on, while quietly arming the Ukrainians with stingers and drones
That depletes and disarms one of our major global enemies. It is what we want. It is exactly what the Russians and Chinese did when we foolishly invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. They stayed a distance away, but discreetly used it to weaken and distract the West. With great success
It is brutal and cruel, but we should now do the same to Russian in Ukraine. The Cold War is back
Russia is struggling to fight Ukraine. How exactly is he going to take on four additional countries at the same time? Putin doesn't want a big war. His whole mistake here has been to assume Ukraine was another Chechnya or Georgia. His whole life has been making a success of bullying people weaker than himself.
@ASLuhn Bulgaria will give Ukraine 14 Su-25 & 16 MiG-29 fighter jets, Poland will give it 28 MiG-29s & Slovakia will give it 12 MiG-29s. More importantly--given Russian missile strikes on military airbases--they can fly missions over Ukraine from Poland
I would seriously doubt the truth - actually, I'm 99.9975% sure it's false - of the part about flying missions from Poland. Selling weapons to the Ukrainian Government and offering it the use of NATO airbases are two very different things.
This suggestion appears to emanate from an 'environment journalist' conveying second-hand information from a Ukrainian website. Shocked to concede that not everything on Twitter is true.
Yes, it would open the door to missile strikes on the Polish airbases. Unlikely.
The detailed argument I heard via a specialist the other day wrt No Fly Zone was that it would also pull in long-range AA missiles which are based in Russia, which would mean that those would then have to be attacked to protect the missions, and so into a spiral of escalation.
Another European nation that had previously rejected sending lethal aid to Ukraine has reversed course. Finland’s Prime Minister Sanna Marin said on Monday that the country, which borders Russia to the northwest, will ship 2,500 assault rifles, 1,500 anti-tank weapons, along with food rations, helmets and body armor, to Ukraine.
NY Times
===
Go Sanna.
Go Finland.
Must be particularly worrying for any long term strategists left in Putin's madhouse that this is Finland.
GORDO15 is a 707 capable of directing the US Nuclear arsenal as a command and control centre. The other planes are refuelers. Basically a drill on what to do if there's nuke strikes on mainland US.
If anyone is in any doubt about the malign intentions of Putin and the current regime in Russia, they should investigate this book and its influence.
From wiki
Germany should be offered the de facto political dominance over most Protestant and Catholic states located within Central and Eastern Europe. Kaliningrad Oblast could be given back to Germany. The book uses the term "Moscow–Berlin axis".[9] France should be encouraged to form a bloc with Germany, as they both have a "firm anti-Atlanticist tradition".[9] The United Kingdom, merely described as an "extraterritorial floating base of the U.S.", should be cut off from Europe.[9] Finland should be absorbed into Russia. Southern Finland will be combined with the Republic of Karelia and northern Finland will be "donated to Murmansk Oblast".[9] Estonia should be given to Germany's sphere of influence.[9] Latvia and Lithuania should be given a "special status" in the Eurasian–Russian sphere.[9] Poland should be granted a "special status" in the Eurasian sphere.[9] Romania, North Macedonia, Serbia, "Serbian Bosnia" and Greece – "Orthodox collectivist East" – will unite with "Moscow the Third Rome" and reject the "rational-individualistic West".[9] Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible
Hmmmm...
Getting a "Foundations of the 19th Cent." vibe - the title is almost certainly a reference
It's easy to scoff at these books, but they have seriously influenced global history for the last couple of centuries
Obvioiusly: Marx and Engels on Marxism &c
Slightly less obviously: Gobineau, Darwin, Nietszche and Houston Chamberlain: major influences on Hitler and Nazism
Modern anti-Semitism and general racism is often reliant on the works of a rather obscure but arguably brilliant Californian professor called Kevin Macdonald. His books (I promise) are genuinely eye-opening and challenging. I am sure he is a personal anti-Semite and I reject most of what he says. But not all. He is bloody clever and would be world famous, I suspect, if his political viewpoint wasn't so toxic (for entirely understandable reasons). I remember reading that on the retirement of the great Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad one book was found by his official bed: a book by Kevin Macdonald
And now we see the same process with the Russian nationalists. This guy Dugin
The book with the most disastrous impact might well Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917). Its theory has been comprehensively falsified but it provided the intellectual underpinnings for disastrous anti-capitalist and authoritarian regimes throughout the 20C.
Indeed
Another bunch of books that fucked a chunk of the world is the slew of lazy Marxist, structuralist, existentialist crap that sewered out of Paris in the early post war era. Nothing matters. Money is stupid. Capitalism is a dead end. Only the moment is of concern. Fuck America. Yay for Mao
A lot of Indochinese students in Paris read this bilge, took it seriously, and returned it to Cambodia, and caused one of the greatest tragedies in human history. Even as Sartre lived on in Paris eating oysters on the Left Bank
Quick typo Nominations close March 4th not Feb 4th.
Also doesn't someone have enough spare nominations that he can push both Zemmour and Le Pen across the line - if so required.
Bayrou announced that he signed for her over the weekend. He claims to have enough nominations to offer to Le Pen and Zemmour as well as Dupont-Aignan, all of whom would conveniently split the vote to the right of Macron.
France has second ballot not FPTP elections so provided one of them still comes second to Macron it matters little
It forces a diversity of voices into the election, which reduces their freedom of movement and increases mutual criticism and gaffes. For example, Pécresse would never have got herself into trouble over the "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory without Zemmour's presence.
Quick typo Nominations close March 4th not Feb 4th.
Also doesn't someone have enough spare nominations that he can push both Zemmour and Le Pen across the line - if so required.
Bayrou announced that he signed for her over the weekend. He claims to have enough nominations to offer to Le Pen and Zemmour as well as Dupont-Aignan, all of whom would conveniently split the vote to the right of Macron.
France has second ballot not FPTP elections so provided one of them still comes second to Macron it matters little
It forces a diversity of voices into the election, which reduces their freedom of movement and increases mutual criticism and gaffes. For example, Pécresse would never have got herself into trouble over the "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory without Zemmour's presence.
Pecresse would never have a chance of making the runoff ahead of Le Pen without Zemmour's presence either
We hear rumour of Russian murder squads spirited into Kyiv with a mission to kill Strictly Come Playing the Piano Bear and others of influence there. Have the Ukrainians reciprocated with team(s) to decapitate the Russian government?
Ironically the one they killed was the General Secretary of the Communist Party in Afghanistan, who had been Deputy but had himself killed the previous General Secretary of the Communist party to become the boss.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
Some of them can't help themselves.....Long #FBPE.....
Look, I really didn’t want to bring Brexit into this and I have refrained from doing so until now, but the allegedly ponderous and indecisive EU is now unifying and acting, while UK ministers are not even in the room. Instead they are inviting Ukrainians to pick fruit. https://twitter.com/John_Cotter/status/1498020761289867273
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
Putin has lost this already. Just about how it ends now.
The trouble is he has massive weaponry.
Indeed, all he has mainly sent in so far is conscripts with limited air support.
Most of the elite Russian troops have not been sent to Kyiv. If it does not fall within a week they will be after a massive aerial bombing campaign and supported by heavy artillery and Russian tanks.
It is not over by any means, in reality the war has barely begun
Do you still believe in the myth of the invincibility of the Russian military after what we've seen?
As I said so far it is mainly conscripts who have been doing the fighting, the full scale of the Russian military has yet to be engaged
This was the biggest decision of Putin's life and took months of planning, involving reducing Russia's defences in the far-east and pulling in forces from every available source for a massive mobilisation. Do you really think he told his planners to use the B-team, or is it more likely that we're seeing the limits of their capabilities?
You might be right, BUT it would be astonishing if Russia's conventional forces transpired to be so weak that they couldn't deal with what is a very determined but fundamentally quite feeble power like Ukraine.
I think we're still at the stage where we have to assume that this is the product of, yes, a certain degree of ineptitude in some of the Russian forces sent into Ukraine, not least conscript units who really don't want to be there, but also poor planning as a result of a fundamental underestimation of the willingness and ability of the Ukrainians to stand their ground. Having been disabused of the notion that it would be welcomed with garlands of flowers, you've got to think that the Russian army will call on a lot more firepower and attempt to beat the defenders into submission, with a good chance of success. We have already seen the Russians resorting to heavy rocket barrages, the use of cluster munitions and perhaps worse (the Ukrainians have claimed that the Russians have begun to use thermobaric weapons.) I think we need to steel ourselves for an awful lot more of that sort of thing.
Give it another week or two. If the Ukrainians are still launching successful drone strikes, picking off armoured columns with light infantry and Kyiv is not, at a minimum, completely encircled by that point, then we can begin to talk about the possibility of a humiliating stalemate for the Kremlin.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
You sound more and more like a Putin apolgist as is Farage
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
Too late. The UK leads the NATO battle group in Estonia IIRC.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
This is part of why we have trip wire forces there. Makes an attack on them literally an attack on us, reassuring them and stiffening our own resolve come the day.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
The 80s seemed pretty peaceful, if I remember correctly. Vietnam was over, Yugoslavia hadn't fallen apart yet, and the Cold War had been around so long that not many people thought it would turn hot. The 60s were the scary years, which seemed to have a possibility of global nuclear war. Listen to Barry McGuire's Eve of Destruction on YouTube for the flavour (1965), when the danger seemed more acute. On the other hand, there wasn't much actual fighting anywhere close, and without social media it was less immediately visible than what's happening now.
Don't you remember the CND marches, Greenham Common protests and German equivalent? Not to mention El Salvador, Nicaragua, Iran Iraq war, Soviets in Afghanistan, Cuba in Angola, wars in Mozambique etc? There were plenty of hot wars going on, just mostly via proxies. Remember Protect and Survive, Threads, When the Wind Blows, 99 Red Baloons?
The spectre of nuclear war was a very real thing in my youth, and a backdrop to the hedonism of the Eighties.
Shashank Joshi @shashj · 1h “Finnish political parties will gather on Tuesday to discuss Russia’s attack on Ukraine and Finland’s role in Europe’s new power balance. Finland’s potential NATO membership will also be on the table, Prime Minister Sanna Marin told reporters Monday.”
We should have a list of prominent individuals who are known to have had close contact with Vladimir Putin. Give them all the chance to come out and publicly condemn the war. Or they will face sanctions? Is the reason for the lack of action on oligarchs legal?
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
Too late. The UK leads the NATO battle group in Estonia IIRC.
Indeed Boris is travelling to Poland and Estonia tomorrow as a show of support for our troops
Shashank Joshi @shashj “Finnish political parties will gather on Tuesday to discuss Russia’s attack on Ukraine and Finland’s role in Europe’s new power balance. Finland’s potential NATO membership will also be on the table, Prime Minister Sanna Marin told reporters Monday.”
You'd have to be stupid to say no to NATO at this point. Get under any nuclear umbrella you can.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
Do you still wear short trousers because you wore them 40 or however many years ago? Things and circumstances in life change and develop. Our world isn't a boring existence where every day year and decade repeat hustory as if set in stone or ice. In your world we would still be caveman without the wheel.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
People were worried about nuclear attacks in the first half of the 80s, but the second half of the decade and most of the 90s were very relaxed and happy by comparison with most other periods.
We should have a list of prominent individuals who are known to have had close contact with Vladimir Putin. Give them all the chance to come out and publicly condemn the war. Or they will face sanctions? Is the reason for the lack of action on oligarchs legal?
I believe so. Each one can and will be challenged in court so must be done right. They said, one would hope the right people could be placed in a room and given coffee until it’s done.
I tagged along to see the work of the RAF, keeping us safe in the skies during this unfolding crisis. NATO air patrols have been significantly stepped up in Eastern Europe since the Ukraine invasion 🇺🇦 🎥
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I just can't see UK politicians committing to sending UK soldiers to die over the Baltics though. The average UK man does not differentiate too much between Lviv and Vilnius.
Too late. The UK leads the NATO battle group in Estonia IIRC.
[Addressing both Biggles, rcs, Pigeon et al]. Yep the tripwire is a good idea, especially in Estonia which is by far the best prepared Baltic nation to slow Russia. But I feel that the scars may just be too deep from ME adventures. Certainly given our pitiful deployable power we'd have to resort to conscripts petty quickly, which would be devastating to public morale.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
Thankfully, and to my surprise, it seems that Western leaders are made of sterner stuff than you are. I had never had you marked down as an appeaser.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Agreed. Unlike most of what we write here, I think that any speculation that we wouldn't support NATO countries is actually dangerous. If that starts floating around social media and the wrong people in Russia give it any credibility, it's the sort of thing that leads to *accidental* wars.
I appreciate that sentiment, but OTOH I'm not at all sure that randoms mouthing off on PB will make any more difference to anything than randoms mouthing off on Twitter.
Unless we really are vastly more influential than I realised, in which case why haven't I been headhunted for a lucrative position in a policy think tank?
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
People were worried about nuclear attacks in the first half of the 80s, but the second half of the decade and most of the 90s were very relaxed and happy by comparison with most other periods.
In 1962 my wife and I lived in daily fear of a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
The 80s seemed pretty peaceful, if I remember correctly. Vietnam was over, Yugoslavia hadn't fallen apart yet, and the Cold War had been around so long that not many people thought it would turn hot. The 60s were the scary years, which seemed to have a possibility of global nuclear war. Listen to Barry McGuire's Eve of Destruction on YouTube for the flavour (1965), when the danger seemed more acute. On the other hand, there wasn't much actual fighting anywhere close, and without social media it was less immediately visible than what's happening now.
Or you could watch Threads on Britbox,.pick up the copy of When the Wind Blows bought for you by a kindly mother because it was that Raymond Briggs, and relive every night of your early 80s childhood convinced you weren't going to make it to your teens. That was the 80s for me.
I thin we need to get real here. Russia's economy is about to sink without trace. Would we need too many forces in the Baltics or would we just destroy the Russians in the air?
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
The 80s seemed pretty peaceful, if I remember correctly. Vietnam was over, Yugoslavia hadn't fallen apart yet, and the Cold War had been around so long that not many people thought it would turn hot. The 60s were the scary years, which seemed to have a possibility of global nuclear war. Listen to Barry McGuire's Eve of Destruction on YouTube for the flavour (1965), when the danger seemed more acute. On the other hand, there wasn't much actual fighting anywhere close, and without social media it was less immediately visible than what's happening now.
Don't you remember the CND marches, Greenham Common protests and German equivalent? Not to mention El Salvador, Nicaragua, Iran Iraq war, Soviets in Afghanistan, Cuba in Angola, wars in Mozambique etc? There were plenty of hot wars going on, just mostly via proxies. Remember Protect and Survive, Threads, When the Wind Blows, 99 Red Baloons?
The spectre of nuclear war was a very real thing in my youth, and a backdrop to the hedonism of the Eighties.
I had friends working in Frankfurt and the common perception of the Red Army sweeping across West Germany was a matter of not "if?" but "when?".
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
As Western Europe is 'we' ie France, Germany and the UK. Eastern Europe is not. I am not saying if Russia invaded Eastern Europe NATO would not go to War, most of those nations are now in NATO after all.
However there is still a difference between fighting for other countries against a nuclear armed military superpower which just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway and fighting for your own country.
Plus when we went to war with Hitler over his invasion of Poland he did not have nuclear weapons unlike Putin.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
People were worried about nuclear attacks in the first half of the 80s, but the second half of the decade and most of the 90s were very relaxed and happy by comparison with most other periods.
In 1962 my wife and I lived in daily fear of a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis
It was horrible then and is today
While I wasn’t alive then, I did study the Cuban missile crisis in university.
I think the current situation is actually more serious than back then.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
Thankfully, and to my surprise, it seems that Western leaders are made of sterner stuff than you are. I had never had you marked down as an appeaser.
He only supports appeasing right-wing autocrats, because that's his favoured style of government, as Aslan pointed out earlier. Putin's style of democracy is just enough democracy for him.
He's a threat to British democracy and he'd be a traitor in the right circumstances. You can easily imagine him enthusiastically supporting a puppet King Andrew installed by a triumphant Putin. Absolute disgrace.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
The 80s seemed pretty peaceful, if I remember correctly. Vietnam was over, Yugoslavia hadn't fallen apart yet, and the Cold War had been around so long that not many people thought it would turn hot. The 60s were the scary years, which seemed to have a possibility of global nuclear war. Listen to Barry McGuire's Eve of Destruction on YouTube for the flavour (1965), when the danger seemed more acute. On the other hand, there wasn't much actual fighting anywhere close, and without social media it was less immediately visible than what's happening now.
Thanks Nick, my parents' generation were a bit younger than me in the '60s, with my remaining grandparents' memories understandably centring around the evacuation in WW2 so I have very limited connection to then. It's just a massive shift for those who have grown up in a western-centric relatively stable era.
@mwadams, did that a few months before the pandemic with my then uni housemates. Was not a pleasant experience.
General Sir Richard Barrons, ex-head of Joint Forces Command, says continued Russian aggression may result in no fly zones, conceding that this could mean war with Russia
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
As Western Europe is 'we' ie France, Germany and the UK. Eastern Europe is not. I am not saying if Russia invaded Eastern Europe NATO would not go to War, most of those nations are now in NATO after all.
However there is still a difference between fighting for other countries against a nuclear armed military superpower which just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway and fighting for your own country.
Plus when we went to war with Hitler over his invasion of Poland he did not have nuclear weapons unlike Putin.
You are a Putin apologist but then you are not alone
"And here’s where it’s beginning to trickle (or rather, pour) down on average Russians: As of tomorrow, Sberbank is raising mortgage rates on homes (both finished and under construction) by 7.5% to 18.6%.
This is Putin’s new economy. This will be his legacy."
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
I agree with HY about the necessity of avoiding become directly embroiled in Ukraine, but I also agree with practically everyone else about the need to draw a line in the sand over the NATO alliance. It's a key reason why this show of disgust over Ukraine and the imposition of sweeping sanctions now is so important.
It will hopefully discourage Mad Vlad from making more territorial demands, this time by shedding crocodile tears over oppressed Russians in the Baltic States.
I've entertained the possibility of building a physical wall right across the continent of Europe when the carve up (hopefully with Ukraine on our side of it) is eventually done, and I know that's probably wildly impractical but some kind of obvious barrier would serve an important purpose. To demonstrate to the Russians the limits of their power that we will accept and respect - but also to say thus far and no further. Our side is Europe and they can keep their filthy hands off it. Permanently.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
Thankfully, and to my surprise, it seems that Western leaders are made of sterner stuff than you are. I had never had you marked down as an appeaser.
Are they? I am certainly not 100% certain Biden, Macron and Johnson would go to war with Russia even if Putin went beyond Ukraine and invaded Poland and the Baltic States.
If he invaded France and Germany they would have no choice but to go to war but beyond that you cannot be certain.
I also doubt Biden would launch a nuclear weapon against Russia himself unless a US city was attacked. The same goes for Boris unless London was attacked or Macron unless Paris was attacked
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
As Western Europe is 'we' ie France, Germany and the UK. Eastern Europe is not. I am not saying if Russia invaded Eastern Europe NATO would not go to War, most of those nations are now in NATO after all.
However there is still a difference between fighting for other countries against a nuclear armed military superpower which just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway and fighting for your own country.
Plus when we went to war with Hitler over his invasion of Poland he did not have nuclear weapons unlike Putin.
“[Countries which] just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway”.
Oh Christ…. Yeah, I hope you never get near power.
You have some weird creepy man problem with her. I suspect you fancy her and it disturbs you
She is a very mildly charismatic Tory lady politician who sometimes makes bad (and sometimes good) PR choices. She is not a notable duffer, like Gav Williamson or Grayling. She actually conveys a certain competence, and she annoys/charms others abroad - they certainly notice her, which can't be said for a lot of British Foreign Ministers.
Get off her case or, at least, be less *weird* about it
Successful Tory female politicians with a certain attractiveness have always had this effect on middle aged men. Since Thatch. She evoked some very strange feelings. Oedipal masochism in the switchy posh (spank me Nanny!) basic let-me-suckle-you stuff from the confused cucky left liberal middle classes, and resentful rape play fantasies in working class alphas.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
As Western Europe is 'we' ie France, Germany and the UK. Eastern Europe is not. I am not saying if Russia invaded Eastern Europe NATO would not go to War, most of those nations are now in NATO after all.
However there is still a difference between fighting for other countries against a nuclear armed military superpower which just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway and fighting for your own country.
Plus when we went to war with Hitler over his invasion of Poland he did not have nuclear weapons unlike Putin.
In Scotland 40 years is at least 3 generations. Having nuclear weapons pointed at us isn't something that we stop for. I would rather be glass than live in a world of tyranny, subjugation, torture and no freedom.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
People were worried about nuclear attacks in the first half of the 80s, but the second half of the decade and most of the 90s were very relaxed and happy by comparison with most other periods.
In 1962 my wife and I lived in daily fear of a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis
It was horrible then and is today
While I wasn’t alive then, I did study the Cuban missile crisis in university.
I think the current situation is actually more serious than back then.
Cool heads are required.
To be fair we didn’t think so and had many a disturbing night's sleep as our imagination ran riot
It was so real that today's threats stir our memories of that time
I thin we need to get real here. Russia's economy is about to sink without trace. Would we need too many forces in the Baltics or would we just destroy the Russians in the air?
It sounds like Russia has recently been run on the basis of being optimised for maximum corruption. One possible future is that they respond to this humiliation by prioritising other things than corruption. Things like having enough supplies for their armed forces. That could make the Russian armed forces a lot more effective. And they have a few decades of revenue from selling gas to China to make use of.
Unlike some of the more learned members here, I was not alive and creating memories in the 80s. How does this compare? I assume that it's a decent few steps below, but have no real yardstick.
People were worried about nuclear attacks in the first half of the 80s, but the second half of the decade and most of the 90s were very relaxed and happy by comparison with most other periods.
In 1962 my wife and I lived in daily fear of a nuclear war over the Cuban missile crisis
It was horrible then and is today
While I wasn’t alive then, I did study the Cuban missile crisis in university.
I think the current situation is actually more serious than back then.
Cool heads are required.
From the nuclear armagedon perspective this current situation is one of the top 3 most risky period since nuclear war became possible. It doesn't take much miscalculation.
Shashank Joshi @shashj “Finnish political parties will gather on Tuesday to discuss Russia’s attack on Ukraine and Finland’s role in Europe’s new power balance. Finland’s potential NATO membership will also be on the table, Prime Minister Sanna Marin told reporters Monday.”
You'd have to be stupid to say no to NATO at this point. Get under any nuclear umbrella you can.
It seems a pretty sound calculation. If Russia will invade in part because of the prospect of NATO membership (even an unlikely prospect to say the least), then you may as well join up - Russia would be furious, but what are they going to do, invade? As they have just demonstrated they might well do if you lack membership?
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
One of the reasons WWII came about is that Hitler became used to Britain and France rolling over and not standing by their previous commitments. At the beginning, when he abrogated Versailles by sending the German Army into the Rhineland, he was worried we would force him to back down, but when we declared war on him over Poland he was surprised, because he'd learnt by our earlier actions not to take our commitments seriously.
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
As Western Europe is 'we' ie France, Germany and the UK. Eastern Europe is not. I am not saying if Russia invaded Eastern Europe NATO would not go to War, most of those nations are now in NATO after all.
However there is still a difference between fighting for other countries against a nuclear armed military superpower which just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway and fighting for your own country.
Plus when we went to war with Hitler over his invasion of Poland he did not have nuclear weapons unlike Putin.
You are a Putin apologist but then you are not alone
That’s not fair, BigG.
Hyufd’s views are pretty mainstream in defence circles. As I said, cool heads and cold, hard, rational logic has to be applied in this situation, to protect our interests.
You know, we’re rapidly approaching the point that I want Ukraine in NATO, as should we all, not to help Ukraine but because they are hard as nails and I want them to have my back.
Which while Russia has troops in there means we are then at war with Russia, leading to WW3 and potential nuclear war
Will you change your narrative when Johnson and NATO change theirs?
They won't, we are not going to war with Russia unless they invade Poland and maybe not even then.
Putin is unlikely to invade a NATO state anyway beyond Ukraine the likeliest nation he would attack is Georgia
If Poland is invaded and NATO run away, I can safely say Putin will be emboldened. That being the case he really won't give a ****!
Poland will be defended, the Baltic States will be defended. Ukraine should be defended with a no fly zone. The consequences might be unthinkable, but that bridge needs to be crossed when it is reached.
There is zero chance of NATO imposing a no fly zone over Ukraine with the Russian military and airforce already there. Even defending Poland and the Baltic States is only a 50% chance.
Western Europe's defence is guaranteed, beyond that there is no certainty
Look, I'm supposed to be the limp defeatist wet lettuce, as a hand-wringing lefty, but I'm 100% convinced that we'd stand by Poland and the Baltic States, and I wouldn't have it any other way.
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
The fact it would lead to World War 3 and potential nuclear war.
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
Thankfully, and to my surprise, it seems that Western leaders are made of sterner stuff than you are. I had never had you marked down as an appeaser.
Are they? I am certainly not 100% certain Biden, Macron and Johnson would go to war with Russia even if Putin went beyond Ukraine and invaded Poland and the Baltic States.
If he invaded France and Germany they would have no choice but to go to war but beyond that you cannot be certain.
I also doubt Biden would launch a nuclear weapon against Russia himself unless a US city was attacked. The same goes for Boris unless London was attacked or Macron unless Paris was attacked
You don’t understand any of this. On Eastern Europe - see above re: tripwires and existing presence. On a nuclear exchange, in so far as a leader makes that choice, it’s based on seeing that a launch has happened but not knowing the target (only our sub captains, after the fact, would get to strike with hindsight).
Comments
It would be a calamitously stupid thing to do for the EU/NATO
Right now Putin is busy destroying Russian esteem, pride, power, money and arms in a really bad, misadvised war in Ukraine. In terms of brutal realpolitik, we should let him carry on, while quietly arming the Ukrainians with stingers and drones
That depletes and disarms one of our major global enemies. It is what we want. It is exactly what the Russians and Chinese did when we foolishly invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. They stayed a distance away, but discreetly used it to weaken and distract the West. With great success
It is brutal and cruel, but we should now do the same to Russian in Ukraine. The Cold War is back
Alexei Sayle is one of the first signatories to that Stop the War Coalition letter that Starmer compelled the 11 MPs to remove themselves from.
https://www.stopwar.org.uk/article/list-of-signatories-stop-the-war-statement-on-the-crisis-over-ukraine/
He was also on entirely the wrong side of the antisemitism debate several years ago. Quite the conspiraloon.
"I think the allegations of anti-semitism in the Labour Party are all fabricated attacks on Jeremy Corbyn"
"Most of the people who have been suspended from the Labour Party for anti-semitism seem to be Jewish"
https://twitter.com/SussexFriends/status/923868439403515904
What's your excuse for giving up on Eastern Europe?
Have the Ukrainians reciprocated with team(s) to decapitate the Russian government?
US running doomsday drills.
Hopefully enough GOP voters will see all this and pause and think whether they really want a Putin-lover back in the WH or whether they want a democracy.
This war is appalling. But there is light.
Obviously sending weapons to Ukraine is important, but we have to also think about food, and the problem of food distribution during a war is a hard one.
So what’s your first act in power going to be?
Though until this week I'd have estimated a similar chance of NATO acting. More confident now, though not if Trump wins.
From opposition he has a good chance I reckon.
BREAKING: Russia is making preparations to withdraw its diplomats from Canada.
Not some diplomats — all of them.
Full diplomatic withdrawal from several other western nations will likely also take place.
https://twitter.com/MuhammadLila/status/1498412412357300239
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-6_Mercury
NY Times
===
Go Sanna.
Go Finland.
Must be particularly worrying for any long term strategists left in Putin's madhouse that this is Finland.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet–Afghan_War
Ironically the one they killed was the General Secretary of the Communist Party in Afghanistan, who had been Deputy but had himself killed the previous General Secretary of the Communist party to become the boss.
It's like Klingons.
Thatcher over Heath in 1975, Foot over Healey in 1980, Hague over Clarke in 1997, Ed Miliband over David Miliband in 2010 etc
Look, I really didn’t want to bring Brexit into this and I have refrained from doing so until now, but the allegedly ponderous and indecisive EU is now unifying and acting, while UK ministers are not even in the room. Instead they are inviting Ukrainians to pick fruit.
https://twitter.com/John_Cotter/status/1498020761289867273
Apart from all the weapons we’ve been sending them for weeks? You forgot to mention that for some reason.
https://twitter.com/cjsnowdon/status/1498055276032937985
And two months of US and UK literally in an array of rooms in the EU, giving intelligence briefings. Not believed by the EU, but now vindicated.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/1498432471653883911
Given the choice between a return to the Cold War or WW3, there is no guarantee western leaders will not settle for the former.
NATO after all was originally just set up to defend western Europe from the USSR
I think we're still at the stage where we have to assume that this is the product of, yes, a certain degree of ineptitude in some of the Russian forces sent into Ukraine, not least conscript units who really don't want to be there, but also poor planning as a result of a fundamental underestimation of the willingness and ability of the Ukrainians to stand their ground. Having been disabused of the notion that it would be welcomed with garlands of flowers, you've got to think that the Russian army will call on a lot more firepower and attempt to beat the defenders into submission, with a good chance of success. We have already seen the Russians resorting to heavy rocket barrages, the use of cluster munitions and perhaps worse (the Ukrainians have claimed that the Russians have begun to use thermobaric weapons.) I think we need to steel ourselves for an awful lot more of that sort of thing.
Give it another week or two. If the Ukrainians are still launching successful drone strikes, picking off armoured columns with light infantry and Kyiv is not, at a minimum, completely encircled by that point, then we can begin to talk about the possibility of a humiliating stalemate for the Kremlin.
If the Russians invade, they will die.
The spectre of nuclear war was a very real thing in my youth, and a backdrop to the hedonism of the Eighties.
Shashank Joshi
@shashj
·
1h
“Finnish political parties will gather on Tuesday to discuss Russia’s attack on Ukraine and Finland’s role in Europe’s new power balance. Finland’s potential NATO membership will also be on the table, Prime Minister Sanna Marin told reporters Monday.”
Oh is it Tucker?
(Like Grange Hill)
If we abandon Eastern Europe to Russia it will teach Russia the lesson that we can be bullied and that we will not stand up for our allies, or our interests. So why would they think we would start to do so when they start to bully us in Western Europe? It would actually make WWIII more likely as a result.
Ukraine's highway authorities are busy removing road signs to disorientate Russian invaders. They are being charactistically creative with replacement signs, of course
https://twitter.com/Biz_Ukraine_Mag/status/1498360463469555712
Things and circumstances in life change and develop.
Our world isn't a boring existence where every day year and decade repeat hustory as if set in stone or ice.
In your world we would still be caveman without the wheel.
https://twitter.com/EmmaVardyTV/status/1498438705048137730
Unless we really are vastly more influential than I realised, in which case why haven't I been headhunted for a lucrative position in a policy think tank?
Feeling quite disappointed now TBH.
It was horrible then and is today
However there is still a difference between fighting for other countries against a nuclear armed military superpower which just 4 decades ago were under Russian control anyway and fighting for your own country.
Plus when we went to war with Hitler over his invasion of Poland he did not have nuclear weapons unlike Putin.
I think the current situation is actually more serious than back then.
Cool heads are required.
He's a threat to British democracy and he'd be a traitor in the right circumstances. You can easily imagine him enthusiastically supporting a puppet King Andrew installed by a triumphant Putin. Absolute disgrace.
@mwadams, did that a few months before the pandemic with my then uni housemates. Was not a pleasant experience.
"It does mean war with Russia..."
General Sir Richard Barrons, ex-head of Joint Forces Command, says continued Russian aggression may result in no fly zones, conceding that this could mean war with Russia
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1498437262727647237
"And here’s where it’s beginning to trickle (or rather, pour) down on average Russians: As of tomorrow, Sberbank is raising mortgage rates on homes (both finished and under construction) by 7.5% to 18.6%.
This is Putin’s new economy. This will be his legacy."
It will hopefully discourage Mad Vlad from making more territorial demands, this time by shedding crocodile tears over oppressed Russians in the Baltic States.
I've entertained the possibility of building a physical wall right across the continent of Europe when the carve up (hopefully with Ukraine on our side of it) is eventually done, and I know that's probably wildly impractical but some kind of obvious barrier would serve an important purpose. To demonstrate to the Russians the limits of their power that we will accept and respect - but also to say thus far and no further. Our side is Europe and they can keep their filthy hands off it. Permanently.
If he invaded France and Germany they would have no choice but to go to war but beyond that you cannot be certain.
I also doubt Biden would launch a nuclear weapon against Russia himself unless a US city was attacked. The same goes for Boris unless London was attacked or Macron unless Paris was attacked
Oh Christ…. Yeah, I hope you never get near power.
Having nuclear weapons pointed at us isn't something that we stop for.
I would rather be glass than live in a world of tyranny, subjugation, torture and no freedom.
It was so real that today's threats stir our memories of that time
Robert Reich
@RBReich
·
1h
The world is currently and frighteningly locked in a battle between democracy and authoritarianism.
Which side are you on?
Hyufd’s views are pretty mainstream in defence circles. As I said, cool heads and cold, hard, rational logic has to be applied in this situation, to protect our interests.