I am not an economist, but surely there comes a point where price rises might slow or even reverse. If things get really bad, the economy could properly tank.
A bit of a stupid comment I know but couldn't one response be to mandate people to work from home as with the Covid crisis? Obviously not all can but it would presumably reduce fuel usage / traffic
they'll be asking folk to share baths next (only older PB'ers will know what I mean)
Did it ever stop I did not know that. We will be back to using the kitchen sink next.
Like old man Steptoe
That was a horrific sight indeed.
Grotesque, yet in real life he was really dapper. Dressed extremely well.
"Dapper" being code for something else back in the sixties.
It was most certainly not. It meant you were well dressed and fashionable.
It comes to something when HYUFD is speaking more sense than most people on here.
So let’s say it again. S L O W L Y
A no fly zone requires NATO to shoot down Russian planes and bomb Russian assets on the ground. Most likely including on the Russian side of the border, given they would be firing back from there. It is hot war with a nuclear power, currently run by an apparently unhinged dictator. And he doesn’t just have nukes. He has an active biochemical weapons programme, as well as the ability to weaponise space and interrupt subsea comms.
It is awful that we have to witness the destruction of Ukraine. But we made our choice a long time ago, when we flirted with but never admitted Ukraine to NATO. The only way to stop the kind of flagrant abuses Russia is inflicting on Ukraine, is to make sure the conventional deterrent to invasion is so great that he never tries in the first place. That horse has bolted in their case and our options are sadly far weaker than we would like.
And that I’m afraid is the lesson we must draw. No more “well a minor incursion isn’t an invasion”. Instead it’s unambiguous intent to defend with overwhelming conventional power, such that not a single tank, infantry brigade or aircraft can cross the border into a NATO state. Non-NATO members are no doubt learning this lesson fast.
So cheer for a no fly zone all you want if it helps get you through the day. But be under no doubt that you’re calling for a multiplication of death and suffering that could very easily lead to your own door.
And by the way, go back and look carefully at exactly what happened overnight. Did Russian troops fire recklessly on a nuclear reactor? Or did they deliberately fire on an office building in the complex knowing how this would be presented in the Western media?
You don't need to shoot down Russian planes in Russia. You just don't enforce the NFZ within 20 miles of the Russian border.
You either impose a no fly zone or you don’t. If you do, you have to suppress all enemy air defence in range to keep your aircraft flying, as well as shoot down theirs. As many have said, it’s war. It’s also impossible to do in Ukraine without the US so it’s Biden’s call and he ain’t moving.
I wonder if, on a practical basis, we would be able to enforce a no fly zone for around 10-15m Ukranians, around 10 oblasts, broadly north of Moldova to a little way West of Kiev, then look for opportunities to expand from there.
It would probably harden the idea of a partition of Ukraine, in parallel to post war Germany, but does it constitute a realpolitic something compared with the nothing we currently have?
It comes to something when HYUFD is speaking more sense than most people on here.
So let’s say it again. S L O W L Y
A no fly zone requires NATO to shoot down Russian planes and bomb Russian assets on the ground. Most likely including on the Russian side of the border, given they would be firing back from there. It is hot war with a nuclear power, currently run by an apparently unhinged dictator. And he doesn’t just have nukes. He has an active biochemical weapons programme, as well as the ability to weaponise space and interrupt subsea comms.
It is awful that we have to witness the destruction of Ukraine. But we made our choice a long time ago, when we flirted with but never admitted Ukraine to NATO. The only way to stop the kind of flagrant abuses Russia is inflicting on Ukraine, is to make sure the conventional deterrent to invasion is so great that he never tries in the first place. That horse has bolted in their case and our options are sadly far weaker than we would like.
And that I’m afraid is the lesson we must draw. No more “well a minor incursion isn’t an invasion”. Instead it’s unambiguous intent to defend with overwhelming conventional power, such that not a single tank, infantry brigade or aircraft can cross the border into a NATO state. Non-NATO members are no doubt learning this lesson fast.
So cheer for a no fly zone all you want if it helps get you through the day. But be under no doubt that you’re calling for a multiplication of death and suffering that could very easily lead to your own door.
And by the way, go back and look carefully at exactly what happened overnight. Did Russian troops fire recklessly on a nuclear reactor? Or did they deliberately fire on an office building in the complex knowing how this would be presented in the Western media?
You don't need to shoot down Russian planes in Russia. You just don't enforce the NFZ within 20 miles of the Russian border.
The Russian S-400 Surface to Air missile system has a range of 400km. They could sit in Russia and shoot down aircraft over Kyiv, Kharkiv and most of the other disputed cities.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
If Hitler had had nuclear weapons in 1939 like Putin does now we may not even have gone to war with the Nazis after they invaded Poland.
Thankfully the US got the atom bomb before the Nazis did
Would Hitler have invaded Poland in 1939 if Britain and America also had nuclear weapons at that time? Or Russia?
Like many on here, you seem to be assuming that we don't have nuclear weapons. Or rather, that we will never use them.
Putin takes his cue from assumptions like this. He also takes his cue from the fact there is no no fly zone.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Being sensible, it depends on a psychiatric assessment which is very difficult to make.
Should we risk nuclear war? I don't think Putin is quite mad enough, and I don't think if he gave the order it would be obeyed. But I think the stakes are too high to take the chance.
Putin is relying on this weakness. We tackle Putin or he takes confidence from his eventual victory and will roll up other states with impunity. Democracy comes at a cost and if we do not defend it then we are lost
I agree up to a point. Important new factors are that Russia has been exposed as being fairly weak militarily excluding the nuclear missiles and the regime will have little money to spend on rearming - assuming that internal dissent doesn't result in regime change.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Being sensible, it depends on a psychiatric assessment which is very difficult to make.
Should we risk nuclear war? I don't think Putin is quite mad enough, and I don't think if he gave the order it would be obeyed. But I think the stakes are too high to take the chance.
Putin is relying on this weakness. We tackle Putin or he takes confidence from his eventual victory and will roll up other states with impunity. Democracy comes at a cost and if we do not defend it then we are lost
100% correct.
With Ukraine, we are, in fact, hiding behind the small print. Meanwhile, the world is watching the West stands around while some bullies beat an innocent person to a pulp.
Speak for yourself. You might not want them here but many in the U.K. do. Never had you down as anti-refugee Scott.
It sounds like the sort of kind and well-meaning gesture that could be counter-productive and cause massive chaos for the authorities trying to manage the situation.
Quite so. Exactly the sort of thoughtless interference condemned in the parable of the good samaritan
You'll be fine, they're unlikely to cross the pyrenees
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/a-huge-convoy-of-british-military... Hope you can open this, large column of British armour heading at speed for the Estonia/Russian border, tanks etc, this is part of the 1800 UK led battle group for that state, being supported by 300 French arriving there within 24 hours. So it begins?
Your link doesn't work, and it would be weird if it did since it seems to be to something in the car features section.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
The correct analogy is Czechoslovakia 1968.
No tyrant lasts for ever. Eventually, the madness passes.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
Speak for yourself. You might not want them here but many in the U.K. do. Never had you down as anti-refugee Scott.
It sounds like the sort of kind and well-meaning gesture that could be counter-productive and cause massive chaos for the authorities trying to manage the situation.
Leave it to government then? Unexpected from a Tory.
Shambles and people blocked guaranteed, unless they can come up with shovelful's of money to buy visa's
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
If Hitler had had nuclear weapons in 1939 like Putin does now we may not even have gone to war with the Nazis after they invaded Poland.
Thankfully the US got the atom bomb before the Nazis did
Would Hitler have invaded Poland in 1939 if Britain and America also had nuclear weapons at that time? Or Russia?
Like many on here, you seem to be assuming that we don't have nuclear weapons. Or rather, that we will never use them.
Putin takes his cue from assumptions like this. He also takes his cue from the fact there is no no fly zone.
Carry on bombing, then.
By the time we get to use them you and I and pretty much everyone else in Western Europe will be irradiated dust. They have their place as a last resort if we are attacked. But they are not just another weapon in our arsenal. We will use them if he fires his nukes at us. That is it. He knows that and knows how far he can go just as well as we know how far we can go. You seem to know neither.
Says Russia has “no ill intentions towards its neighbours” and calls for international cooperation to return, for relations to normalize. "We see no need to exacerbate the situation or worsen our relations," Putin said. "I think everyone should think about normalising relations and cooperating normally.""
Starting to realise that they've screwed up? Massive disconnect from the Macron call, so maybe this is for domestic consumption to claim that the West is persecuting him?
It is just possible this can be taken at face value. Our position looks and feels pretty dire but I would hate to be in Putin’s shoes now. If, say, he has realised in the past 24 hours that his military is not what he thought, and Beijing is refusing any form of support, he may have decided to call it a day.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
If Hitler had had nuclear weapons in 1939 like Putin does now we may not even have gone to war with the Nazis after they invaded Poland.
Thankfully the US got the atom bomb before the Nazis did
Would Hitler have invaded Poland in 1939 if Britain and America also had nuclear weapons at that time? Or Russia?
Like many on here, you seem to be assuming that we don't have nuclear weapons. Or rather, that we will never use them.
Putin takes his cue from assumptions like this. He also takes his cue from the fact there is no no fly zone.
Carry on bombing, then.
By the time we get to use them you and I and pretty much everyone else in Western Europe will be irradiated dust. They have their place as a last resort if we are attacked. But they are not just another weapon in our arsenal. We will use them if he fires his nukes at us. That is it. He knows that and knows how far he can go just as well as we know how far we can go. You seem to know neither.
So the only alternatives are surrender to Putin or nuclear holocaust?
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
Finland and Moldova are more at risk as like Ukraine they are not in NATO. Georgia too.
However I doubt Putin would be stupid enough to attack the Baltic States and Poland. For they are in NATO and that means he is then at war with NATO or NATO collapses and we are all on our own (though at least we and France in Western Europe have our own nukes as a last resort defence to ward off Putin)
Speak for yourself. You might not want them here but many in the U.K. do. Never had you down as anti-refugee Scott.
It sounds like the sort of kind and well-meaning gesture that could be counter-productive and cause massive chaos for the authorities trying to manage the situation.
Quite so. Exactly the sort of thoughtless interference condemned in the parable of the good samaritan
You'll be fine, they're unlikely to cross the pyrenees
Enjoy your trip - make sure you fill your car.
Well, I have made substantial donations this morning to Ukraine and Afghanistan relief. Inadequate I know, but a slight advance on mean minded sniping from the costas.
The fact that Russia even thought it was a good idea to attack anything near a nuclear reactor is a game changer .
What if the attack had actually hit the reactor itself .
Any further attacks of that manner should be deemed an attack on fellow NATO countries who could see a catastrophe unfold if the next time a reactor is hit .
The risks are so high that I think any blurred messaging should be avoided. (By Western leaders, I mean, not so much on here!). The line needs to be kept simple and binary. NATO will not defend Ukraine. NATO *will* engage if a member state is attacked. This is the right stance at this point imo. The incident with the power station doesn't change that.
People were chundering on about the risks after Georgia. After Crimea. After Donbass. After Salisbury. And each time, Putin continued onwards towards his twisted goals, and the situation became increasingly dire for the world.
It's fair enough to think that's the correct position to take atm. But you need to ask where you personally draw the line. Because Putin has proved he could do *anything*; and it might not be stuff we expect. Salisbury and Litvinenko shows that.
The situation with the power station is serious, and could have a serious effect on all of Europe. Who Putin now sees as either subservient or the enemy. Or both.
I know what you mean but I'm not sure it is important I ask myself where I'd draw the line if I were in charge. I probably wouldn't use nuclear weapons under any circumstances, therefore I couldn't be in charge, it rules me out. And I don't see much point in hypothetical simulations, "what if he razes Ukraine to the ground?", "what if he puts a toe in the Baltics?", "what if he attacks Poland?" etc. The position just has to be that NATO is a binding treaty and will be honoured to the letter. Even if that isn't true it has to be the position and we have to believe it. Truly believe it, I mean, not just pretend to. A strange situation, for sure, but this is the essence of it imo.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
100% correct.
PLus....Most Russians probably despise Putin now, but if he succeeds in getting Ukraine more will warm to him. Just as the Germans warmed to Hitler has he was appeased more and more and more and more of his gambles paid off.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/a-huge-convoy-of-british-military... Hope you can open this, large column of British armour heading at speed for the Estonia/Russian border, tanks etc, this is part of the 1800 UK led battle group for that state, being supported by 300 French arriving there within 24 hours. So it begins?
Your link doesn't work, and it would be weird if it did since it seems to be to something in the car features section.
The Americans are in the process of waking up an armoured brigade in Germany.
There's massive and massive.
That one is 10 tanks. Out of our national total of I think just under 230 Main Battle Tanks, which is due to be reduced to under 150 when they have been upgraded to the next version. Given past habits, the others are likely to be destroyed to make sure that no one reverses the decision.
Bovington Tank museum has about 300.
At present the army is not the best managed of our services.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
At worst Putin will just rebuild the USSR and Tsarist empire ie add Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Finland to Russian control.
I highly doubt he will invade a NATO nation, so otherwise we stick to economic sanctions
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
No, Putin realises that NATO means something. He wouldn't pretend to mind about Ukraine joining if he didn't
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
The line is the border of NATO member states. That's always been the line.
We can argue about whether that's the right place to put the line, but I don't think the line is unclear.
Speak for yourself. You might not want them here but many in the U.K. do. Never had you down as anti-refugee Scott.
It sounds like the sort of kind and well-meaning gesture that could be counter-productive and cause massive chaos for the authorities trying to manage the situation.
Quite so. Exactly the sort of thoughtless interference condemned in the parable of the good samaritan
You'll be fine, they're unlikely to cross the pyrenees
Enjoy your trip - make sure you fill your car.
Well, I have made substantial donations this morning to Ukraine and Afghanistan relief. Inadequate I know, but a slight advance on mean minded sniping from the costas.
What I find frustrating is that the European railways are running free services for refugees to disperse them across Europe safely and that as a result the only thing stopping them reaching the UK is the British border policy. It is shameful that we could offer sanctuary to tens (or hundreds) of thousands of Ukrainians but we are not doing so.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Really struck by how the refugee crisis has cut through this time. It was touching to see the crowds at Berlin main station carrying placards urging refugees to come and stay with them indefinitely - and making arrangements on the spot - and I personally know two people who are normally pretty self-preoccupied and totally uninterested in any world events who have volunteered to take some in at no charge, also indefinitely.
I am not an economist, but surely there comes a point where price rises might slow or even reverse. If things get really bad, the economy could properly tank.
A bit of a stupid comment I know but couldn't one response be to mandate people to work from home as with the Covid crisis? Obviously not all can but it would presumably reduce fuel usage / traffic
they'll be asking folk to share baths next (only older PB'ers will know what I mean)
Did it ever stop I did not know that. We will be back to using the kitchen sink next.
Like old man Steptoe
That was a horrific sight indeed.
Grotesque, yet in real life he was really dapper. Dressed extremely well.
"Dapper" being code for something else back in the sixties.
It was most certainly not. It meant you were well dressed and fashionable.
I once said to an elderly friend that he was looking dapper, and he became offended thinking I was saying he looked gay. So yes, it was a word that at least some understood to have an alternative meaning.
Sounds like a homophobe that one. Want to be careful with whom you hang out.
Chinese rights holders have told the Premier League they will not broadcast English top-flight matches this weekend because of the league's planned shows of support for Ukraine, the BBC has learnt.
China is a close political ally of Russia, which has invaded Ukraine.
Inflation is not going away and will get very ugly later in the year.
Boris gets to blame Russia though. All economic disruption becomes Covid or Russia and any issue from Brexit are lost in the margins. If he can be seen to be tough on the first two, and a “strong leader” he might do ok out of this politically.
Who the feck cares about Brexit anymore? Might as well have been an event in the last century now.
We are quite possibly only days away from a war across europe.
Pandemic comes and Brexit seems trivial. Putin comes and Covid seems trivial. WTF next?!
Says Russia has “no ill intentions towards its neighbours” and calls for international cooperation to return, for relations to normalize. "We see no need to exacerbate the situation or worsen our relations," Putin said. "I think everyone should think about normalising relations and cooperating normally.""
Starting to realise that they've screwed up? Massive disconnect from the Macron call, so maybe this is for domestic consumption to claim that the West is persecuting him?
It is just possible this can be taken at face value. Our position looks and feels pretty dire but I would hate to be in Putin’s shoes now. If, say, he has realised in the past 24 hours that his military is not what he thought, and Beijing is refusing any form of support, he may have decided to call it a day.
"During the COVID-19 pandemic, The Federalist published many pieces that contained false information, pseudoscience, and contradictions or misrepresentations of the recommendations of public health authorities. While ballots were being counted in the 2020 United States presidential election, The Federalist made false claims that there had been large-scale election fraud"
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
Tbf, I think it is SNP doubling down on an independent Scotland not having nuclear weapons, which, unless we keep one submarine each, is surely the only possible outcome of independence.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
For all that this outpouring of humanity has been heartening to see, the contrast with what happened to Syrian refugees in exactly the same countries is hard to ignore and rather tragic.
It's certainly made me question why I turned a blind eye to what Russia was helping Assad to do in Syria.
David Cameron's advisors could not contain their fury at Labour's decision not to back military action in Syria until after the conclusion of a UN inspection and report.
“No 10 and the Foreign Office think Ed Miliband is a f***ing c**t and a copper-bottomed shit. The French hate him now and he’s got no chance of building an alliance with the US Democratic Party,” one Government source told The Times.
There is a good case to be made that Ed Miliband has (inadvertently) had the worst impact of any Brit in recent history. Brexit, Corbyn and Syria decision. Not to mention the ******* Climate Change Act.
The Syria decision was actually the right one. However bad Assad is, ISIS taking over in Syria would have been worse
Don't see a particular issue with what Russua was doing in Syria at least in terms of lesser evilism. That stands even if they were doing the right thing for the wrong reasons.
On the no-fly zone, this is the estimated coverage of Russia's latest (S500) AA missiles, though I wouldn't guarantee it. A no-fly zone arguably would need all of these reaching the Ukraine taken out for basic safety.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
An NFZ isn't "risking" direct conflict with Russia. It is direct conflict with Russia and it would go nuclear within a week.
So there's your choice: Ukraine on the butcher's block or When the Wind Blows with Johnson, Raab and Patel directing matters from within the bunker.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Well that is the choice we have made, the whole point of NATO is there is an obligation to defend its members but no obligation to defend non NATO members
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Complete nonsense. Putin's aggression has united the West. Hence the deployments to the front-line NATO members.
Fancy occupying a Russian tank as it rumbles over the NATO border?
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Not casually entering into MAD is NATO "small print"?
I literally have no idea where you are coming from.
Inflation is not going away and will get very ugly later in the year.
Boris gets to blame Russia though. All economic disruption becomes Covid or Russia and any issue from Brexit are lost in the margins. If he can be seen to be tough on the first two, and a “strong leader” he might do ok out of this politically.
Who the feck cares about Brexit anymore? Might as well have been an event in the last century now.
We are quite possibly only days away from a war across europe.
Pandemic comes and Brexit seems trivial. Putin comes and Covid seems trivial. WTF next?!
Asteroid strike I reckon. With my optimistic hat on that is.
I am not an economist, but surely there comes a point where price rises might slow or even reverse. If things get really bad, the economy could properly tank.
A bit of a stupid comment I know but couldn't one response be to mandate people to work from home as with the Covid crisis? Obviously not all can but it would presumably reduce fuel usage / traffic
they'll be asking folk to share baths next (only older PB'ers will know what I mean)
Did it ever stop I did not know that. We will be back to using the kitchen sink next.
Like old man Steptoe
That was a horrific sight indeed.
Grotesque, yet in real life he was really dapper. Dressed extremely well.
"Dapper" being code for something else back in the sixties.
It was most certainly not. It meant you were well dressed and fashionable.
I once said to an elderly friend that he was looking dapper, and he became offended thinking I was saying he looked gay. So yes, it was a word that at least some understood to have an alternative meaning.
Inflation is not going away and will get very ugly later in the year.
Boris gets to blame Russia though. All economic disruption becomes Covid or Russia and any issue from Brexit are lost in the margins. If he can be seen to be tough on the first two, and a “strong leader” he might do ok out of this politically.
Who the feck cares about Brexit anymore? Might as well have been an event in the last century now.
We are quite possibly only days away from a war across europe.
Pandemic comes and Brexit seems trivial. Putin comes and Covid seems trivial. WTF next?!
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
An NFZ isn't "risking" direct conflict with Russia. It is direct conflict with Russia and it would go nuclear within a week.
So there's your choice: Ukraine on the butcher's block or When the Wind Blows with Johnson, Raab and Patel directing matters from within the bunker.
Soon to be replaced with 'the Baltics on the butchers block or When the When Wind Blows.' And afterwards 'Poland on the butchers block or When the Wind Blows.'
Where's the red line? where do we stand and fight?
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
Tbf, I think it is SNP doubling down on an independent Scotland not having nuclear weapons, which, unless we keep one submarine each, is surely the only possible outcome of independence.
Independence si coming , you cannot have all this hullabaloo about free nations and sovereignty yet keep Scotland under the jackboot. Untenable in the future, UK cannot keep breaking International Law.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
I mean we also have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine...
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
At worst Putin will just rebuild the USSR and Tsarist empire ie add Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Finland to Russian control.
I highly doubt he will invade a NATO nation, so otherwise we stick to economic sanctions
Right wing autocrat casually shrugs off Russia annexing Finland.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/a-huge-convoy-of-british-military... Hope you can open this, large column of British armour heading at speed for the Estonia/Russian border, tanks etc, this is part of the 1800 UK led battle group for that state, being supported by 300 French arriving there within 24 hours. So it begins?
Your link doesn't work, and it would be weird if it did since it seems to be to something in the car features section.
The Americans are in the process of waking up an armoured brigade in Germany.
There's massive and massive.
That one is 10 tanks. Out of our national total of I think just under 230 Main Battle Tanks, which is due to be reduced to under 150 when they have been upgraded to the next version. Given past habits, the others are likely to be destroyed to make sure that no one reverses the decision.
Bovington Tank museum has about 300.
At present the army is not the best managed of our services.
Includes at least one working Tiger from 1944... Could still do a job.
I am not an economist, but surely there comes a point where price rises might slow or even reverse. If things get really bad, the economy could properly tank.
A bit of a stupid comment I know but couldn't one response be to mandate people to work from home as with the Covid crisis? Obviously not all can but it would presumably reduce fuel usage / traffic
they'll be asking folk to share baths next (only older PB'ers will know what I mean)
Did it ever stop I did not know that. We will be back to using the kitchen sink next.
Like old man Steptoe
That was a horrific sight indeed.
Grotesque, yet in real life he was really dapper. Dressed extremely well.
"Dapper" being code for something else back in the sixties.
It was most certainly not. It meant you were well dressed and fashionable.
I once said to an elderly friend that he was looking dapper, and he became offended thinking I was saying he looked gay. So yes, it was a word that at least some understood to have an alternative meaning.
Sounds like a homophobe that one. Want to be careful with whom you hang out.
Sounds like a nutter and ill educated one at that.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
An NFZ isn't "risking" direct conflict with Russia. It is direct conflict with Russia and it would go nuclear within a week.
So there's your choice: Ukraine on the butcher's block or When the Wind Blows with Johnson, Raab and Patel directing matters from within the bunker.
Soon to be replaced with 'the Baltics on the butchers block or When the When Wind Blows.' And afterwards 'Poland on the butchers block or When the Wind Blows.'
Where's the red line? where do we stand and fight?
Just reflecting how the No fly zone seems to have created strange bedfellows on here. Misty, Heathener and the venerable JackW. That's a wide ranging political mix to be sure. While DuraAce HYUFD and Barty are on the other.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
I mean we also have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine...
Before we get to NFZ we should first use the weapon of stopping paying for Russian gas. One option is to just put it in an escrow account, to be paid when Russia fully leaves Ukrainian territory.
We should also be giving the Ukrainians fighter jets and training more of their pilots.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
An NFZ isn't "risking" direct conflict with Russia. It is direct conflict with Russia and it would go nuclear within a week.
So there's your choice: Ukraine on the butcher's block or When the Wind Blows with Johnson, Raab and Patel directing matters from within the bunker.
Soon to be replaced with 'the Baltics on the butchers block or When the When Wind Blows.' And afterwards 'Poland on the butchers block or When the Wind Blows.'
Where's the red line? where do we stand and fight?
The red line is where it has always been. An attack on NATO. The adults in this conflict know that. Sadly you are not counted amongst them.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
I mean we also have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine...
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
At worst Putin will just rebuild the USSR and Tsarist empire ie add Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Finland to Russian control.
I highly doubt he will invade a NATO nation, so otherwise we stick to economic sanctions
Right wing autocrat casually shrugs off Russia annexing Finland.
And the suffering of untold millions who are currently free. And the gargantuan refugee flows that would ensue from such a move.
Not to mention Putin growing enormously in power and influence.
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
Tbf, I think it is SNP doubling down on an independent Scotland not having nuclear weapons, which, unless we keep one submarine each, is surely the only possible outcome of independence.
Independence si coming , you cannot have all this hullabaloo about free nations and sovereignty yet keep Scotland under the jackboot. Untenable in the future, UK cannot keep breaking International Law.
Nope - see for example Catalonia within Spain....
You can dream of independence all you want but until the UK Government offers / allows a referendum nothing is going to change.
Inflation is not going away and will get very ugly later in the year.
Boris gets to blame Russia though. All economic disruption becomes Covid or Russia and any issue from Brexit are lost in the margins. If he can be seen to be tough on the first two, and a “strong leader” he might do ok out of this politically.
Who the feck cares about Brexit anymore? Might as well have been an event in the last century now.
We are quite possibly only days away from a war across europe.
Pandemic comes and Brexit seems trivial. Putin comes and Covid seems trivial. WTF next?!
While we are distracted, alien invasion.
Which brings me to the UAW's. Strange lights in the sky were a portent of doom. Maybe our forefathers were onto summat?
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
Hiding. Behind. The. Small. Print.
Typing that like that makes you look very intelligent
Article 5 is in the same font as the rest of the treaty, so why does it count as small print?
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
If Hitler had had nuclear weapons in 1939 like Putin does now we may not even have gone to war with the Nazis after they invaded Poland.
Thankfully the US got the atom bomb before the Nazis did
Would Hitler have invaded Poland in 1939 if Britain and America also had nuclear weapons at that time? Or Russia?
Like many on here, you seem to be assuming that we don't have nuclear weapons. Or rather, that we will never use them.
Putin takes his cue from assumptions like this. He also takes his cue from the fact there is no no fly zone.
Carry on bombing, then.
By the time we get to use them you and I and pretty much everyone else in Western Europe will be irradiated dust. They have their place as a last resort if we are attacked. But they are not just another weapon in our arsenal. We will use them if he fires his nukes at us. That is it. He knows that and knows how far he can go just as well as we know how far we can go. You seem to know neither.
So the only alternatives are surrender to Putin or nuclear holocaust?
Well I guess we better surrender then.
Nope. We (as NATO) defend ourselves if attacked. We are not being attacked.
We have speculated about Putin's health here recently. We've also made comments about timing and readiness: we're a little puzzled that he invaded now, rather than in two months' time. Could it be that his health is even worse than we thought? That his time left can be measured in months rather than years? Is that the imperative for acting now?
The question of why now is probably just the Olympics and not further pissing off China.
Yes, I think so. The idea Putin is sick - other than in the head - strikes me as wishful speculation. He might be but I can't see the evidence. He looks ok to me.
That moon face is either botched surgery or corticosteroids, and I don't think he's a facial procedure kinda guy. That plus the insane distancing stuff: Trump has a germ phobia but that has always been known. It is more likely that it is rational because he is immunocompromised than that it's a phobia which has come from nowhere. I think he has got cancer.
Well that'd be nice - but I'm not really seeing it myself. His face does look kind of round and punchable but I'm putting that down to other things, esp the latter quality.
I was on a call last night and the woman whom I was speaking to (a senior figure in the media world) was saying that look of Putin's is totally from plastic surgery
Easy to imagine he's had a touch-up, I suppose. Man gets to be 69 and he starts to miss the melting looks he used to get from all the young girls when he was 64, so he decides to try and get some of that back with a little something from the Doc. In which case he could be on other things too.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
At worst Putin will just rebuild the USSR and Tsarist empire ie add Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Finland to Russian control.
I highly doubt he will invade a NATO nation, so otherwise we stick to economic sanctions
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
At worst Putin will just rebuild the USSR and Tsarist empire ie add Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Finland to Russian control.
I highly doubt he will invade a NATO nation, so otherwise we stick to economic sanctions
Right wing autocrat casually shrugs off Russia annexing Finland.
And the suffering of untold millions who are currently free. And the gargantuan refugee flows that would ensue from such a move.
Not to mention Putin growing enormously in power and influence.
Just insane.
Hahahaha. You think Putin is growing in power and influence. You are as deluded as he is.
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
Tbf, I think it is SNP doubling down on an independent Scotland not having nuclear weapons, which, unless we keep one submarine each, is surely the only possible outcome of independence.
Independence si coming , you cannot have all this hullabaloo about free nations and sovereignty yet keep Scotland under the jackboot. Untenable in the future, UK cannot keep breaking International Law.
It isn't but as the UK has nuclear weapons like Putin's Russia in reality it could, certainly within its own borders
We have speculated about Putin's health here recently. We've also made comments about timing and readiness: we're a little puzzled that he invaded now, rather than in two months' time. Could it be that his health is even worse than we thought? That his time left can be measured in months rather than years? Is that the imperative for acting now?
The question of why now is probably just the Olympics and not further pissing off China.
Yes, I think so. The idea Putin is sick - other than in the head - strikes me as wishful speculation. He might be but I can't see the evidence. He looks ok to me.
That moon face is either botched surgery or corticosteroids, and I don't think he's a facial procedure kinda guy. That plus the insane distancing stuff: Trump has a germ phobia but that has always been known. It is more likely that it is rational because he is immunocompromised than that it's a phobia which has come from nowhere. I think he has got cancer.
Well that'd be nice - but I'm not really seeing it myself. His face does look kind of round and punchable but I'm putting that down to other things, esp the latter quality.
I was on a call last night and the woman whom I was speaking to (a senior figure in the media world) was saying that look of Putin's is totally from plastic surgery
Easy to imagine he's had a touch-up, I suppose. Man gets to be 69 and he starts to miss the melting looks he used to get from all the young girls when he was 64, so he decides to try and get some of that back with a little something from the Doc. In which case he could be on other things too.
Very knowledgeable analysis. Sounds almost autobiographical?
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
Tbf, I think it is SNP doubling down on an independent Scotland not having nuclear weapons, which, unless we keep one submarine each, is surely the only possible outcome of independence.
Independence si coming , you cannot have all this hullabaloo about free nations and sovereignty yet keep Scotland under the jackboot. Untenable in the future, UK cannot keep breaking International Law.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
I mean we also have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine...
What is the treaty?
The Budapest Memoradum, however it probably does not go as far as would be required.
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
That hideous blob of an SNP witch needs to declare unilateral disavowal of dairy, chocolate and sugars . If she can’t govern her intake of double cheese lard burgers, how is she expected to govern Scotland?
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
To say NATO is useless because it's being adhered to is nonsensical.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/cars/news/a-huge-convoy-of-british-military... Hope you can open this, large column of British armour heading at speed for the Estonia/Russian border, tanks etc, this is part of the 1800 UK led battle group for that state, being supported by 300 French arriving there within 24 hours. So it begins?
Your link doesn't work, and it would be weird if it did since it seems to be to something in the car features section.
The Americans are in the process of waking up an armoured brigade in Germany.
There's massive and massive.
That one is 10 tanks. Out of our national total of I think just under 230 Main Battle Tanks, which is due to be reduced to under 150 when they have been upgraded to the next version. Given past habits, the others are likely to be destroyed to make sure that no one reverses the decision.
Bovington Tank museum has about 300.
At present the army is not the best managed of our services.
Includes at least one working Tiger from 1944... Could still do a job.
I was actually thinking whether the Ukrainians could do with a whole load of Panzerfausts. Obviously useless against the tanks but they should be more than enough to deal with the trucks and even APCs. Obviously not that well suited to being in the open.
Understand that Sage has been effectively abolished - for the time being. Committee will no longer have regular meetings but can be reconvened at any time if necessary.
We have speculated about Putin's health here recently. We've also made comments about timing and readiness: we're a little puzzled that he invaded now, rather than in two months' time. Could it be that his health is even worse than we thought? That his time left can be measured in months rather than years? Is that the imperative for acting now?
The question of why now is probably just the Olympics and not further pissing off China.
Yes, I think so. The idea Putin is sick - other than in the head - strikes me as wishful speculation. He might be but I can't see the evidence. He looks ok to me.
That moon face is either botched surgery or corticosteroids, and I don't think he's a facial procedure kinda guy. That plus the insane distancing stuff: Trump has a germ phobia but that has always been known. It is more likely that it is rational because he is immunocompromised than that it's a phobia which has come from nowhere. I think he has got cancer.
Well that'd be nice - but I'm not really seeing it myself. His face does look kind of round and punchable but I'm putting that down to other things, esp the latter quality.
I was on a call last night and the woman whom I was speaking to (a senior figure in the media world) was saying that look of Putin's is totally from plastic surgery
Easy to imagine he's had a touch-up, I suppose. Man gets to be 69 and he starts to miss the melting looks he used to get from all the young girls when he was 64, so he decides to try and get some of that back with a little something from the Doc. In which case he could be on other things too.
Very knowledgeable analysis. Sounds almost autobiographical?
PROJECTED autobiographical - I'm not quite there yet. But I sense it, I sense it.
"During the COVID-19 pandemic, The Federalist published many pieces that contained false information, pseudoscience, and contradictions or misrepresentations of the recommendations of public health authorities. While ballots were being counted in the 2020 United States presidential election, The Federalist made false claims that there had been large-scale election fraud"
grifters to the end, wonder which one of their chums is coining in from that one.
I haven't looked, but I would presume they have used a 0300 number, which is free on most mobile contracts, but local rate from landline. That is what the government use as standard for lots of "helplines".
The use of totally free numbers, which are widely used in places like the US, is much less common across all sectors in the UK.
Missed this on QT last night. SNP doubling down on stripping away UK's nuclear deterrence.
The guy with his head in his hands is Konstantin Kisin, a kind of Russian version of Volodymyr Zelensky, ie, comedian going into politics. Sadly, not much chance of him being elected president anytime soon.
Tbf, I think it is SNP doubling down on an independent Scotland not having nuclear weapons, which, unless we keep one submarine each, is surely the only possible outcome of independence.
Independence si coming , you cannot have all this hullabaloo about free nations and sovereignty yet keep Scotland under the jackboot. Untenable in the future, UK cannot keep breaking International Law.
Nope - see for example Catalonia within Spain....
You can dream of independence all you want but until the UK Government offers / allows a referendum nothing is going to change.
On the no-fly zone, this is the estimated coverage of Russia's latest (S500) AA missiles, though I wouldn't guarantee it. A no-fly zone arguably would need all of these reaching the Ukraine taken out for basic safety.
So ensuring a proper no fly zone would potentially involve attacking targets around Moscow....
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
I mean we also have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine...
What is the treaty?
The Budapest Memoradum, however it probably does not go as far as would be required.
A treaty is a treaty, a memorandum of assurances is a memorandum of assurances, anfd if that wanted to be the Budapest treaty that is what it would have called itself.
a treaty obligation looks like this:
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
More nonsense.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Another hiding behind the small print of NATO membership.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
Because we have a treaty obligation
Next?
I mean we also have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine...
What is the treaty?
The Budapest Memoradum, however it probably does not go as far as would be required.
I am not an economist, but surely there comes a point where price rises might slow or even reverse. If things get really bad, the economy could properly tank.
A bit of a stupid comment I know but couldn't one response be to mandate people to work from home as with the Covid crisis? Obviously not all can but it would presumably reduce fuel usage / traffic
they'll be asking folk to share baths next (only older PB'ers will know what I mean)
Did it ever stop I did not know that. We will be back to using the kitchen sink next.
Like old man Steptoe
That was a horrific sight indeed.
Grotesque, yet in real life he was really dapper. Dressed extremely well.
"Dapper" being code for something else back in the sixties.
It was most certainly not. It meant you were well dressed and fashionable.
I once said to an elderly friend that he was looking dapper, and he became offended thinking I was saying he looked gay. So yes, it was a word that at least some understood to have an alternative meaning.
Perhaps he misheard you and thought yo were accusing him of wearing a diaper?
On the no-fly zone, this is the estimated coverage of Russia's latest (S500) AA missiles, though I wouldn't guarantee it. A no-fly zone arguably would need all of these reaching the Ukraine taken out for basic safety.
So ensuring a proper no fly zone would potentially involve attacking targets around Moscow....
Aren't the targets in Kaliningrad, Belarus and Crimea? (not that I think a NFZ is a good idea)
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
And the cheers you don't hear are from the millions of victims of all out nuclear war who are not going to be that, because of Stoltenbergs words, and are only not cheering because they don't know that
It's like not changing the clocks in winter. If it saves 2000 lives in the evening but kills an extra 200 in the darker mornings that's a net saving, but the 200 make the news while the 2000 are unidentifiable.
Then NATO is useless. Putin will attack knowing we will not defend a NATO member because of his threat of nuclear weapons. The Baltic states are gone, Finland and Moldova too. How about Poland? Where will we stop him?
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
Farcical war mongering. Exactly how do we “stop him” without going right to the brink of nuclear war, and, by the by, uniting the anti-West behind him (including China, which is, at the moment, helpfully ambivalent)
Ukraine is fucked. There it is. They should probably surrender at some point, to avoid a million dead. It’s not pretty but it is realpolitik
But it is their choice and if they choose to fight on I salute their heroism and we should give them all the weapons we can, but beyond that, No. There isn’t a lot we can do. Putin has nukes and he will use them. He has told us
The red line is NATO, that’s what it was put there for: to deter Russian from attacking the West. We now have to stand by this most solemn treaty obligation quite religiously. If Putin crosses into Estonia, then yes, we go Defcon Apocalypse
Despite the heroic Ukraine defence NATO Secretary, Jens Stoltenberg, has just condemned Ukraine to a slow death and eventual Putin puppet state status - No NATO no fly zone or troops on the ground. The cheers you hear come from the Kremlin.
Sudetenland and Czechoslavakia 1938 rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
If we do not risk direct conflict with Russia then you give Putin a blank cheque for his wars. Where are you drawing the line? Allowing Putin to roll up eastern Europe because he has nukes.
An NFZ isn't "risking" direct conflict with Russia. It is direct conflict with Russia and it would go nuclear within a week.
So there's your choice: Ukraine on the butcher's block or When the Wind Blows with Johnson, Raab and Patel directing matters from within the bunker.
Soon to be replaced with 'the Baltics on the butchers block or When the When Wind Blows.' And afterwards 'Poland on the butchers block or When the Wind Blows.'
Where's the red line? where do we stand and fight?
The red line is where it has always been. An attack on NATO. The adults in this conflict know that. Sadly you are not counted amongst them.
While I agree with this, I wonder what you view is of how NATO would actually respond to an attack on Finland?
I think this was an interesting but academic question until last week, but not now.
I find it impossible fully to believe that NATO (and the EU) would stand idly by, and also impossible to believe they would treat it as an attack on all NATO states.
I am not an economist, but surely there comes a point where price rises might slow or even reverse. If things get really bad, the economy could properly tank.
A bit of a stupid comment I know but couldn't one response be to mandate people to work from home as with the Covid crisis? Obviously not all can but it would presumably reduce fuel usage / traffic
they'll be asking folk to share baths next (only older PB'ers will know what I mean)
Did it ever stop I did not know that. We will be back to using the kitchen sink next.
Like old man Steptoe
That was a horrific sight indeed.
Grotesque, yet in real life he was really dapper. Dressed extremely well.
"Dapper" being code for something else back in the sixties.
It was most certainly not. It meant you were well dressed and fashionable.
I once said to an elderly friend that he was looking dapper, and he became offended thinking I was saying he looked gay. So yes, it was a word that at least some understood to have an alternative meaning.
Never heard of it used in that sense, Farooq, and I thought I was pretty familiar with the local argot in the 60s and 70s. It never meant anything other smartly turned out where I came from. It is certainly used in that sense in the popular cockney song 'Any Old Iron'.
Comments
It would probably harden the idea of a partition of Ukraine, in parallel to post war Germany, but does it constitute a realpolitic something compared with the nothing we currently have?
Like many on here, you seem to be assuming that we don't have nuclear weapons. Or rather, that we will never use them.
Putin takes his cue from assumptions like this. He also takes his cue from the fact there is no no fly zone.
Carry on bombing, then.
NATO cannot risk direct conflict with Russia, a nuclear-armed state headed by dictator with a history of aggression. Surely, that's obvious. An incursion into the territory of a NATO member by Russia is quite another matter. The fact that Stoltenberg, Biden and BJ have made this very clear is to their credit.
This really should not need saying.
With Ukraine, we are, in fact, hiding behind the small print. Meanwhile, the world is watching the West stands around while some bullies beat an innocent person to a pulp.
No tyrant lasts for ever. Eventually, the madness passes.
It is a simple choice. Stop Putin now or accept the consequences.
Well I guess we better surrender then.
However I doubt Putin would be stupid enough to attack the Baltic States and Poland. For they are in NATO and that means he is then at war with NATO or NATO collapses and we are all on our own (though at least we and France in Western Europe have our own nukes as a last resort defence to ward off Putin)
I should imagine the New York opening will decide whether it is breached or not.
https://www.ig.com/uk/indices/markets-indices/ftse-100
Went as low as 6979 an hour or so, ago.
Currently 7026
Interestingly, European markets currently somewhat divorced from the US futures.
PLus....Most Russians probably despise Putin now, but if he succeeds in getting Ukraine more will warm to him. Just as the Germans warmed to Hitler has he was appeased more and more and more and more of his gambles paid off.
That one is 10 tanks. Out of our national total of I think just under 230 Main Battle Tanks, which is due to be reduced to under 150 when they have been upgraded to the next version. Given past habits, the others are likely to be destroyed to make sure that no one reverses the decision.
Bovington Tank museum has about 300.
At present the army is not the best managed of our services.
I highly doubt he will invade a NATO nation, so otherwise we stick to economic sanctions
https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/03/fear-of-donald-trump-kept-putin-from-invading-ukraine-heres-how-trump-pulled-it-off/
We can argue about whether that's the right place to put the line, but I don't think the line is unclear.
If Putin invades a NATO member, the alliance is more than capable of establishing air superiority and destroying his forces. And he can't use nuclear blackmail as NATO has nukes itself. QED.
(Maybe someone can explain this to the loons in the SNP.)
Chinese rights holders have told the Premier League they will not broadcast English top-flight matches this weekend because of the league's planned shows of support for Ukraine, the BBC has learnt.
China is a close political ally of Russia, which has invaded Ukraine.
IF we're not willing to risk confrontation now, what makes you so sure that we will be up for it when a NATO member is attacked?
Putin could be forgiven for thinking that its nothing to do with NATO membership, and everything to do with weakness.
So there's your choice: Ukraine on the butcher's block or When the Wind Blows with Johnson, Raab and Patel directing matters from within the bunker.
Fancy occupying a Russian tank as it rumbles over the NATO border?
I literally have no idea where you are coming from.
With my optimistic hat on that is.
Next?
And afterwards 'Poland on the butchers block or When the Wind Blows.'
Where's the red line? where do we stand and fight?
No, not our government.
Misty, Heathener and the venerable JackW.
That's a wide ranging political mix to be sure.
While DuraAce HYUFD and Barty are on the other.
We should also be giving the Ukrainians fighter jets and training more of their pilots.
Not to mention Putin growing enormously in power and influence.
Just insane.
You can dream of independence all you want but until the UK Government offers / allows a referendum nothing is going to change.
Strange lights in the sky were a portent of doom.
Maybe our forefathers were onto summat?
Article 5 is in the same font as the rest of the treaty, so why does it count as small print?
https://treaties.un.org/Pages/showDetails.aspx?objid=0800000280401fbb
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume 3007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1499747037788745729?s=20&t=T_sGNUZ7UGh2U8wenwhDnQ
Where is the quote from by the way?
The use of totally free numbers, which are widely used in places like the US, is much less common across all sectors in the UK.
a treaty obligation looks like this:
The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Farcical war mongering. Exactly how do we “stop him” without going right to the brink of nuclear war, and, by the by, uniting the anti-West behind him (including China, which is, at the moment, helpfully ambivalent)
Ukraine is fucked. There it is. They should probably surrender at some point, to avoid a million dead. It’s not pretty but it is realpolitik
But it is their choice and if they choose to fight on I salute their heroism and we should give them all the weapons we can, but beyond that, No. There isn’t a lot we can do. Putin has nukes and he will use them. He has told us
The red line is NATO, that’s what it was put there for: to deter Russian from attacking the West. We now have to stand by this most solemn treaty obligation quite religiously. If Putin crosses into Estonia, then yes, we go Defcon Apocalypse
I think this was an interesting but academic question until last week, but not now.
I find it impossible fully to believe that NATO (and the EU) would stand idly by, and also impossible to believe they would treat it as an attack on all NATO states.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4GdWK_WoNs