Starmer still has a 30%+ net approval lead over Johnson – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Sometimes a toll is worth paying.PJohnson said:
More like minimising the suffering of the Ukrainians....Street to Street combat with the Russians will take an immense tollkle4 said:
Why would they not? What lesson are you trying to impart here? It's not a positive one.PJohnson said:FrancisUrquhart said:Russia moves in heavy flamethrower weapon
CNN's Frederik Pleitgen reports on the Russians moving a TOS-1 heavy flamethrower that shoots thermobaric rockets near Kharkiv, Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCsycTW8mGc
Yes the more Ukraine resists the worse and more bloody it will be for them. Do the ukrainian people really want thisFrancisUrquhart said:Russia moves in heavy flamethrower weapon
CNN's Frederik Pleitgen reports on the Russians moving a TOS-1 heavy flamethrower that shoots thermobaric rockets near Kharkiv, Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCsycTW8mGc
We are the Borg. Lower your weapons and surrunder...we will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile.
Of course easy for me to say, but it is also what they seem to be saying. What arrogance it would be to tell them their own country is not worth fighting for, that their choice is merely to be on their knees and hope for mercy from an enemy whose irrationality has just been powerfully demonstrated.6 -
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.3 -
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...0 -
They'll just sell a few of their London properties I imagine.rottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.0 -
I'm glad someone is saying this. Everyone on here feels desperately sorry for Ukraine and wants Putin to be stopped but starting a world war over it just means that everyone dies. What happened to Hungary, Czechoslovakia and East Germany was no less horrific but who can honestly say that things would have been better if the West had intervened? Half a century later those countries are free democracies not an irradiated wasteland. NATO is as it always was the line in the sandstodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.1 -
Yes indeed.Richard_Tyndall said:
This is a straw man argument. We are not talking about boots on the ground inside Ukraine. All the Western governments have been very clear about that. Nor the aerial equivalent with no fly zones etc. But we absolutely should be supplying the Ukrainians with everything they need to try and resist. The only way this ends well is if Putin loses and is removed. If he doesn't then we have sold Ukraine down the river and in a few years we will be having the same arguments about the Baltic States. And at that point Article 5 gets triggered and the whole world goes to hell.ping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal interventionist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
And I have to say I find affected world weary realpolitik attitudes no less artificial than if someone posted they were about to grab a gun and rush to the front. There is nothing wrong, nothing, in people expressing their view about what they believe should be an appropriate course of action, even extreme courses. Some will be wrong, or impractical, and be called out as such, but lazy talk of keyboard warriors is clearly designed to delegitimise any attempt at honest debate and commentary by implying any comment, however reasonable, is fundamentally undermined due to the source.3 -
Yep. We will be back here again in 2024 when Trump wins a landslide only the USA will not be anywhere to be found because POTUS is in Moscow sucking Putin's dick.Richard_Tyndall said:
This is a straw man argument. We are not talking about boots on the ground inside Ukraine. All the Western governments have been very clear about that. Nor the aerial equivalent with no fly zones etc. But we absolutely should be supplying the Ukrainians with everything they need to try and resist. The only way this ends well is if Putin loses and is removed. If he doesn't then we have sold Ukraine down the river and in a few years we will be having the same arguments about the Baltic States. And at that point Article 5 gets triggered and the whole world goes to hell.ping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal interventionist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
Better deal with it now.
4 -
Shooting it down over Poland would be quite an escalation.....for some reason it didn't land.....HYUFD said:
Why publicise? The Russians will now be looking out for it to shoot it down. Putin will try and use it as a warning shot to NATO to stay outCarlottaVance said:🇬🇧🇺🇦 PM tonight with plane stuffed full of “military support” heading out to our comrades in Ukraine - PA
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1497687061582778370
Overflying Germany.....1 -
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.0 -
Very important that whatever your views on gender neutral toilets, Brexit or taxation should be expressed through the medium of telling Vlad to fuck himself.2
-
Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".2 -
Give it five years. The soggy centre evolves. Tbh I think it already has. And it’s not the only thing I believe in, just the only radical position. There’s not many of use who wanted a hard Brexit but open borders….kinabalu said:
Well that's a bit sad. Wet One Nation Tories and New Labour both think the one thing you believe in is a bucket of stupid. So you'd be disenfranchised.biggles said:
The only radical belief I’ve ever held was in favour of Brexit. Can’t I now live with a choice of wet one nation Tories or New Labour? That’s my ideal.kinabalu said:
A sentiment more common than admitted. And nothing wrong with it. I share it slightly. I want radical change but I'm scared of it too.biggles said:
Hey I’m traditionally British. I would be very impressed by a Labour campaign of “we’re perfectly average - vote for us and we won’t do a lot but we’re not the other guys and we won’t break anything”.kinabalu said:
Great to hear. We'll put that on our bus come the GE.biggles said:
Yeah you’re right - in the end I probably won’t vote for Starmer, but he’s perfectly capable of being a bog standard U.K. PM. It’s so, so refreshing vs his predecessor.Richard_Tyndall said:
I don't see that. Practically every leader in Europe and the rest of the first world has chosen to help in this way. I would give Starmer a lot more credit than you seem to be doing. He strikes me as an honourable man.Malmesbury said:
Trying to step back and actually think about events - the thing I could see Starmer doing differently was the decision to supply weapons to Ukraine.TimS said:
There’s actually something a bit Galtieri about the whole military adventure at the moment.DougSeal said:
No analogy is perfect but there’s a lot of talk here of a “Churchillian Bounce”. If you wanted something like that it would be a post Falklands “Thatcher Bounce”. I don’t see how this impacts Johnson’s overall favourability much at all.ydoethur said:
Attlee spent five years managing the wartime economy specifically to help beat Hitler. I know Churchill accused him of wanting to refound the Gestapo but I don't think that cut much ice.DougSeal said:
I’m sure Churchill beat Attlee for standing up to Hitler. Fat lot of good it did the Tories at the 1945 GE.Big_G_NorthWales said:Boris beats Starmer for standing up to Russia by 28% to 19%
https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1497664514946478082?t=etezeFWOPIjWYWBrIYJq4w&s=19
"Vote Labour. We're bog standard."
However something else is common and that is right wingers wanting the choice to be between a red meat Tory Party and a bland managerial Labour.
2 -
When the Russia war plans were revealed at the end of the Cold War, every vaguely Western country was targeted. New Zealand and Australia were to be wiped out - despite their anti-nuclear stances.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...
The conventional military plans included invading Sweden and using chemical weapons there. With escalation to tactical nuclear weapons on the table....2 -
Wait a gosh darn minute, I was told those Tridents based 25 miles away from me were keeping me safe.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...0 -
Zelensky is either going to be a matyr or hero. It means no clean win for Russia, his selflessness has extracted a huge price if Russia does prevail.4
-
No one truly knows whether they would fight to keep their street from an invader until it actually happens.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
2 -
He's not really making any sustained or fleshed-out arguments at all, just giving a very good impression of brief and opportunistic propagandising.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".3 -
And transfer the money how to Moscow?Gallowgate said:
They'll just sell a few of their London properties I imagine.rottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.1 -
You need to be within 15 miles.Theuniondivvie said:
Wait a gosh darn minute, I was told those Tridents based 25 miles away from me were keeping me safe.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...0 -
.
Agreed.kle4 said:
Yes indeed.Richard_Tyndall said:
This is a straw man argument. We are not talking about boots on the ground inside Ukraine. All the Western governments have been very clear about that. Nor the aerial equivalent with no fly zones etc. But we absolutely should be supplying the Ukrainians with everything they need to try and resist. The only way this ends well is if Putin loses and is removed. If he doesn't then we have sold Ukraine down the river and in a few years we will be having the same arguments about the Baltic States. And at that point Article 5 gets triggered and the whole world goes to hell.ping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal interventionist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
And I have to say I find affected world weary realpolitik attitudes no less artificial than if someone posted they were about to grab a gun and rush to the front. There is nothing wrong, nothing, in people expressing their view about what they believe should be an appropriate course of action, even extreme courses. Some will be wrong, or impractical, and be called out as such, but lazy talk of keyboard warriors is clearly designed to delegitimise any attempt at honest debate and commentary by implying any comment, however reasonable, is fundamentally undermined due to the source.
Though I’ll make an exception for @PJohnson .1 -
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.2 -
I want to believe that Zelensky is getting personal protection from a team of specialists. Time for bed and hope for the best in the morning.
Pray for Kiev.2 -
fighting in urban areas is hell, to both the attacker and defender, fighting in urban areas that have been bombed is self evidently supper very bad for the defenders but is also supper-hell for the attackers.rottenborough said:The Kyiv Independent@KyivIndependent·1h⚡️Multiple reports suggest that Russian forces are about to conduct heavy airstrikes and rocket attacks against Kyiv.
If Putin destroys Kyiv its because he no longer plans of taking the city, (or he thinks he has no chose)0 -
I've replied several times. I cannot say it has advanced the debate in any way, some debates are not really capable of being advanced.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".
And while I believe the internet should be a more polite space, you do need to have skin thick enough to survive being called a troll from time to time, particularly if you are making the same point over and over.1 -
Would he care? That's the worry.Aslan said:
Everyone calls his bluff because Russia would be demolished if he started a nuclear exchange.not_on_fire said:
What happens if Russia's economy tanks and then Putin threatens to drop a couple of nukes if the sanctions aren't lifted?rottenborough said:
Tom Tugendhat
@TomTugendhat
The SWIFT sanctions are going through. This could cripple the Russian economy and cause runs on banks.
Putin is sacrificing two countries to his vanity and the lives of millions are suffering for him alone.
Repeatedly deferring the Trident replacement is not looking like a great decision right nowTheuniondivvie said:
Wait a gosh darn minute, I was told those Tridents based 25 miles away from me were keeping me safe.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...0 -
Rolling your shit in glitter, giving it eyes and calling it Colin might persuade some but I'm not eating it.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
The idea is to avoid escalating to a nuclear confrontation because the integrity of Ukraine is not worth the annihilation of Western civilisation.
Not 'hurr durr I reject the last 70 years of nuclear theory' and making us all eat your caterpillar.1 -
Not for Putin now it seemsNigelb said:.
There is also a distinction between supplying weapons, and taking military action - which you do not seem to understand.HYUFD said:
There is a distinction between defending British territory, which I would support even against Russia and taking military action against a military superpower in a war in a foreign country that is not even in NATOBenpointer said:
Good grief! This from the man who was more than happy to send the tanks in to Gibraltar and Scotland.HYUFD said:
Putin has already warned NATO to stay out of Ukraine. He has the biggest nuclear weapons arsenal in the world.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are really not very you good at thisHYUFD said:
Why publicise? The Russians will now be looking out for it to shoot it down. Putin will try and use it as a warning shot to NATO to stay outCarlottaVance said:🇬🇧🇺🇦 PM tonight with plane stuffed full of “military support” heading out to our comrades in Ukraine - PA
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1497687061582778370
Overflying Germany.....
Russia shooting down a UK aircraft would be an act of war against a NATO country
Even if it is shot down, while he remains Russian President what are we going to realistically do beyond economic sanctions? We will in theory defend NATO nations but that is it.
As far as Ukraine goes we have given them all the supplies and weapons we could before the invasion and should now stay out of it
"If you tolerate this..."0 -
I assume their kids would be spending it in London. In Harrods perhaps.rottenborough said:
And transfer the money how to Moscow?Gallowgate said:
They'll just sell a few of their London properties I imagine.rottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.0 -
Up to you to flesh-out a response. Calling "troll" doesn't cut it.WhisperingOracle said:
He's not really making sustained or fleshed-out arguments, just giving a very good impression of brief and opportunistic propagandising.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".
0 -
Feck, that would mean Iiving in Greenock. Come, friendly nukes..kle4 said:
You need to be within 15 miles.Theuniondivvie said:
Wait a gosh darn minute, I was told those Tridents based 25 miles away from me were keeping me safe.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...0 -
No, I wouldn't agree there. It's up to him to find coherent enough arguments worth responding to.geoffw said:
Up to you to flesh-out a response. Calling "troll" doesn't cut it.WhisperingOracle said:
He's not really making sustained or fleshed-out arguments, just giving a very good impression of brief and opportunistic propagandising.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".1 -
Do you approve of Russia's actions and behaviour?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.0 -
Well, Johnson did say he would increase the supply of housing.Gallowgate said:
I assume their kids would be spending it in London. In Harrods perhaps.rottenborough said:
And transfer the money how to Moscow?Gallowgate said:
They'll just sell a few of their London properties I imagine.rottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.0 -
He's already a hero, as is Klitschko. Behind them are hundreds of thousands more heroes.Pulpstar said:Zelensky is either going to be a matyr or hero. It means no clean win for Russia, his selflessness has extracted a huge price if Russia does prevail.
8 -
These were supposed to be the toughest of the tough,,,,,rottenborough said:Visegrád 24 🇨🇿🇭🇺🇵🇱🇸🇰@visegrad24·4mUkrainian Security Service: Kadyrov's Chechen convoy has been crushed by the Ukrainian Army near Hostomel.
This is reported by Channel 24, citing its own sources in the Ukrainian Security Service.
🇺🇦0 -
Someone upthread said this ends one of two ways very soon - with a Russian “victory” in Ukraine or Putin overthrownrottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.
I wonder if the end point might be both. In desperation Putin will hurl maximum violence at Ukraine - as he did in Chechnya - and “win”. But the slaughter of 1000s in Ukraine in the eyes of the entire world will so revulse everyone he will be deposed very quickly by his own disgusted and embarrassed elite.
A better result for all would be a slug of poison in his stupid tea. Putin is a hyena on ket. He needs to go
0 -
(Guardian)
Russia has become a “global economic and financial pariah”, a senior US administration official told the Guardian’s diplomatic editor Julian Borger.
Speaking after western allies announced new financial measures against Russia, including the removal of some Russian banks from the Swift global payments network, the official said the measures were designed to target the Kremlin and individuals tied to the Russian government.
“We’ll go after their yachts, their luxury apartments their money and their ability to send their kids to fancy colleges in the west. We will also engage other governments, so as to detect and disrupt the movement of ill-gotten gains, and deny these individuals their ability to hide their assets in jurisdictions across the world,” the official said.
They said that all 10 of Russia’s largest financial institutions had now been subjected to sanctions – “holding nearly 80% of the Russian banking sector’s total assets”.
As a result, the official said: “Russia’s government borrowing costs have more than doubled to almost 17%. The S&P credit rating agency has downgraded Russia to junk status. Within 24 hours of our actions the demand for cash in Russia spiked 58 fold, according to reports, and the Russian government scrambled to deplete its own resources to try and shore up its banks and its currency. In short, Russia has become a global economic and financial pariah.”…0 -
GOP governors working to stop sale of Russian made vodka in some US states NY Times is reporting.
Symbolic obviously but interesting that it is GOP.
3 -
That presupposes honest debate is open to be had. It takes two to tango. All very well to extend a hand, but if you've seen that path doesn't yield results at a certain point why would others attempt it?geoffw said:
Up to you to flesh-out a response.WhisperingOracle said:
He's not really making sustained or fleshed-out arguments, just giving a very good impression of brief and opportunistic propagandising.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".
1 -
That London restaurant which charges £10,000 per head must be a bit worried at the moment.rottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.1 -
The opposite. Putin knows that if he targets France, the UK or USA with nuclear missiles he risks nuclear weapons being sent to Moscow or St Petersburg by them in return. If London was hit, a UK submarine would send a Trident nuclear missile to Moscow in response.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...
Any other European nation though except France or us he could invade or even launch a nuclear attack on without risk of direct response from them. Albeit if it was a NATO nation he still might risk response on mutual self defence0 -
I'm with Biggles. I'd like a choice between a managerial New Labour, but willing to accept the result of the referendum, and a bland managerial Cameronite Tory party, but willing to accept the result of the referendum.kinabalu said:
Well that's a bit sad. Wet One Nation Tories and New Labour both think the one thing you believe in is a bucket of stupid. So you'd be disenfranchised.biggles said:
The only radical belief I’ve ever held was in favour of Brexit. Can’t I now live with a choice of wet one nation Tories or New Labour? That’s my ideal.kinabalu said:
A sentiment more common than admitted. And nothing wrong with it. I share it slightly. I want radical change but I'm scared of it too.biggles said:
Hey I’m traditionally British. I would be very impressed by a Labour campaign of “we’re perfectly average - vote for us and we won’t do a lot but we’re not the other guys and we won’t break anything”.kinabalu said:
Great to hear. We'll put that on our bus come the GE.biggles said:
Yeah you’re right - in the end I probably won’t vote for Starmer, but he’s perfectly capable of being a bog standard U.K. PM. It’s so, so refreshing vs his predecessor.Richard_Tyndall said:
I don't see that. Practically every leader in Europe and the rest of the first world has chosen to help in this way. I would give Starmer a lot more credit than you seem to be doing. He strikes me as an honourable man.Malmesbury said:
Trying to step back and actually think about events - the thing I could see Starmer doing differently was the decision to supply weapons to Ukraine.TimS said:
There’s actually something a bit Galtieri about the whole military adventure at the moment.DougSeal said:
No analogy is perfect but there’s a lot of talk here of a “Churchillian Bounce”. If you wanted something like that it would be a post Falklands “Thatcher Bounce”. I don’t see how this impacts Johnson’s overall favourability much at all.ydoethur said:
Attlee spent five years managing the wartime economy specifically to help beat Hitler. I know Churchill accused him of wanting to refound the Gestapo but I don't think that cut much ice.DougSeal said:
I’m sure Churchill beat Attlee for standing up to Hitler. Fat lot of good it did the Tories at the 1945 GE.Big_G_NorthWales said:Boris beats Starmer for standing up to Russia by 28% to 19%
https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1497664514946478082?t=etezeFWOPIjWYWBrIYJq4w&s=19
"Vote Labour. We're bog standard."
However something else is common and that is right wingers wanting the choice to be between a red meat Tory Party and a bland managerial Labour.
Not an option, but one can dream.
0 -
Sending one hell of a leaflet stop to Beijing and tweaking the menu…Andy_JS said:
That London restaurant which charges £10,000 per head must be a bit worried at the moment.rottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.
0 -
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.2 -
I fear you are right. In a corner he will demand everything is hurled at Ukr. A rain of fire and so on. But will enough people around him finally realise this will not end well and dispatch him?Leon said:
Someone upthread said this ends one of two ways very soon - with a Russian “victory” in Ukraine or Putin overthrownrottenborough said:
Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.Leon said:This is already turning into a strategic nightmare for Putin, even if he “wins” in Ukraine by changing the regime. He has United the West, fiercely revived NATO, got Germany to reverse decades of pacifism (not in his favour) and made his feared army look feeble. And everyone in the world now hates him, or is, at the very least, horribly embarrassed by him
It is difficult to see how it could have gone worse
Good luck getting your money now kids.
I wonder if the end point might be both. In desperation Putin will hurl maximum violence at Ukraine - as he did in Chechnya - and “win”. But the slaughter of 1000s in Ukraine in the eyes of the entire world will so revulse everyone he will be deposed very quickly by his own disgusted and embarrassed elite.
A better result for all would be a slug of poison in his stupid tea. Putin is a hyena on ket. He needs to go0 -
I did actually 'like' one of PJohnsons posts earlier. I don't agree with (his?) subsequent points that the Ukrainians should give up and submit to the Russians, but it is likely that they could avoid a lot of grief by doing so.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".
There is a bit of wartime fervour going on this evening. It will pass, I think.0 -
BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
Sure...burnt how would you like your wife and daughters killed in a heroic resistance...easy to be a keyboard warrior from over a thousand miles awayBartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.-1 -
No one is as tough as someone defending their own homeland and family.MarqueeMark said:
These were supposed to be the toughest of the tough,,,,,rottenborough said:Visegrád 24 🇨🇿🇭🇺🇵🇱🇸🇰@visegrad24·4mUkrainian Security Service: Kadyrov's Chechen convoy has been crushed by the Ukrainian Army near Hostomel.
This is reported by Channel 24, citing its own sources in the Ukrainian Security Service.
🇺🇦
2 -
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.
1 -
I hope the very toughest got a Klitschko sparring session just before they were captured.MarqueeMark said:
These were supposed to be the toughest of the tough,,,,,rottenborough said:Visegrád 24 🇨🇿🇭🇺🇵🇱🇸🇰@visegrad24·4mUkrainian Security Service: Kadyrov's Chechen convoy has been crushed by the Ukrainian Army near Hostomel.
This is reported by Channel 24, citing its own sources in the Ukrainian Security Service.
🇺🇦2 -
London's safe. Too many Russians!HYUFD said:
The opposite. Putin knows that if he targets France, the UK or USA with nuclear missiles he risks nuclear weapons being sent to Moscow or St Petersburg by them in return. If London was hit, a UK submarine would send a Trident nuclear missile to Moscow in response.Pulpstar said:
Only nuclear powers would likely be targeted in a nuclear war. Noones going to aim at Oslo and Geneva.Casino_Royale said:
This might be scant consolidation but of Russia's 6,000+ nukes most are held in reserve and only 1,600 are immediately deployable. And then there's the question of whether they will all fire and target properly after all these years.stodge said:
There's no suggestion Putin and Russia are going to directly invade or attack the armed forces or territory of any NATO country. As someone who lives in London, my life expectancy in a nuclear war can be measured in minutes - I'll draw little comfort in that period of absolute terror knowing I won't be "Putin's slave".darkage said:I think we have to get over this fear that Putin will use WMDs. What are we going to do, accept his domination because he might use WMD's? Fuck that. I'd rather die than be Putin's slave. The assertive thing to do would subtly mention that mutually assured destruction applies and carry on with the business of defending our allies. We should be fighting with the Ukrainians.
Nuclear conflict means millions of deaths and the degradation of human civilisation - and you worry about being someone's slave. In any case, Putin can barely run a bath let alone conquer Europe.
We need to confine the conflict to Ukraine and work tirelessly for a negotiated ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces. Let's be resolute in support of Ukraine and generous in response to the looming humanitarian crisis.
As a wise man once said, jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.
He doesn't have time to bring all the rest of them online and up to scratch if it gets that far. And he's got to target all of Europe, the UK and the US with that. He wouldn't be able to guarantee universal destruction.
Meanwhile France and the UK (combined) can deploy a third of his number alone, and target them properly, and the US has well over 5,000 of them.
So, if he did use them enough of them in an all-out first strike enough of the West would survive for him to be utterly annihilated*.
It's way too risky and therefore bluster.
(*Btw, total global current nuclear stocks aren't enough to wipe out all of humanity even if evenly targeted on all the major cities at once - I think the estimate is a max of 3 billion dead so 6 billion survivors, and humanity goes on)
Us OTOH...
Any other European nation though except France or us he could invade or even launch a nuclear attack on without risk of direct response from them. Albeit if it was a NATO nation he still might risk response on mutual self defence2 -
I think this is correct. Even if Ukraine falls, even if Russia can subsume the entire country and do so without a hellish resistance, and so achieve all of Putin's military and territorial objectives, the cost is huge. Putin has destroyed the political and economic status quo in Russia. The crooks that run Russia will find life a hell of a lot tougher, and if they find it tougher is it worth them supporting Putin? Putin is trashing their businesses and burning their loot, and for what? Some half-baked plan to restore a Russian Empire that will be isolated from the rest of the world.rottenborough said:Yep. That's the way it looks tonight. And maybe even more of a problem for him, he has utterly fucked the playboy lifestyle of his rich mates and supporters who relied on spending most of the year well away from his shitty regime and living it large in London and Paris and so on.
Good luck getting your money now kids.2 -
deleted - messed up block quotes1
-
Easy to be a snivelling shit when you're the one invading another country instead of being invaded too Vlad.PJohnson said:BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
Sure...burnt how would you like your wife and daughters killed in a heroic resistance...easy to be a keyboard warrior from over a thousand miles awayBartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.5 -
It's already gone far better than I'd feared. Every day Ukraine holds out, every loss Ukraine inflicts on Russia, makes Russia's next step more difficult.kle4 said:
It's only sensible. Even if the positive reports of the first few days are true, no one seems to dispute the facts on paper about the martial resources potentially at play, so despite being true things could yet go even worse.Benpointer said:
In fairness, it's hard for the lay person to tell if they're fake - which is the whole idea of course.IanB2 said:
Is that the third or fourth fake posted here just today? It would be nice if people waited to see if things are genuine before doing the cut ‘n pastestate_go_away said:
yes a deep fakeBarnesian said:
The material is reworked, effects from Instagram have been added, and his statements are cut off old statements that someone pasted on and that do not even match the movement of the mouth. Original video with Kadyrov, from which the frame and his lips are taken here:BlancheLivermore said:I think this is really good news..
@visegrad24·20m
"We are shocked that the Ukrainians have so many weapons.
We have no desire to fight against the Ukrainian people,"
Chechen leader Kadyrov
Commentators say Kadyrov means he wouldn’t fight against the Ukrainian people but would with “Neo-Nazi Ukrainians”
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1497666363871182850
https://youtu.be/rwyfOOTJNpE?t=4
Despite all the positive reports of Ukrainian resistance and Russian ineptitude, I am steeling myself for the prospect that Ukraine falls within the next week.
I do so much hope I am wrong.
Three days ago I was expecting an easy Russian win and a new iron curtain as a best case scenario. Now, we are looking at a weakened Russia- even if it does conquer Ukraine it will have expended considerable treasure and political capital to do so and will have to expend the same again to hold it.
And I am also inspired by the bravery of the Ukrainians; and of the Russian protestors. Truly we have seen some heroism these last few days. And that is cause for celebration if nothing else.
In cricketing terms, this is an astonishing tenth wicket stand after a top order collapse in the first innings - the west might now be going into the second innings in a slightly less disadvantageous position than we had feared and the prospect of ultimate victory is not as remote as it once was.4 -
Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?0 -
I like that analogy. Ukraine has saved us the follow on.Cookie said:
It's already gone far better than I'd feared. Every day Ukraine holds out, every loss Ukraine inflicts on Russia, makes Russia's next step more difficult.kle4 said:
It's only sensible. Even if the positive reports of the first few days are true, no one seems to dispute the facts on paper about the martial resources potentially at play, so despite being true things could yet go even worse.Benpointer said:
In fairness, it's hard for the lay person to tell if they're fake - which is the whole idea of course.IanB2 said:
Is that the third or fourth fake posted here just today? It would be nice if people waited to see if things are genuine before doing the cut ‘n pastestate_go_away said:
yes a deep fakeBarnesian said:
The material is reworked, effects from Instagram have been added, and his statements are cut off old statements that someone pasted on and that do not even match the movement of the mouth. Original video with Kadyrov, from which the frame and his lips are taken here:BlancheLivermore said:I think this is really good news..
@visegrad24·20m
"We are shocked that the Ukrainians have so many weapons.
We have no desire to fight against the Ukrainian people,"
Chechen leader Kadyrov
Commentators say Kadyrov means he wouldn’t fight against the Ukrainian people but would with “Neo-Nazi Ukrainians”
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1497666363871182850
https://youtu.be/rwyfOOTJNpE?t=4
Despite all the positive reports of Ukrainian resistance and Russian ineptitude, I am steeling myself for the prospect that Ukraine falls within the next week.
I do so much hope I am wrong.
Three days ago I was expecting an easy Russian win and a new iron curtain as a best case scenario. Now, we are looking at a weakened Russia- even if it does conquer Ukraine it will have expended considerable treasure and political capital to do so and will have to expend the same again to hold it.
And I am also inspired by the bravery of the Ukrainians; and of the Russian protestors. Truly we have seen some heroism these last few days. And that is cause for celebration if nothing else.
In cricketing terms, this is an astonishing tenth wicket stand after a top order collapse in the first innings - the west might now be going into the second innings in a slightly less disadvantageous position than we had feared and the prospect of ultimate victory is not as remote as it once was.
2 -
Not from me. I don't want to see NATO troops on the ground in Ukraine, but I'm also not particularly impressed by transparent propaganda, either.darkage said:
I did actually 'like' one of PJohnsons posts earlier. I don't agree with (his?) subsequent points that the Ukrainians should give up and submit to the Russians, but it is likely that they could avoid a lot of grief by doing so.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".
There is a bit of wartime fervour going on this evening. It will pass, I think.0 -
I’m 58. My life is nearly done. I’ve had a ton of funPJohnson said:BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
Sure...burnt how would you like your wife and daughters killed in a heroic resistance...easy to be a keyboard warrior from over a thousand miles awayBartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
If invading fascist Russia was trying to destroy my beloved London, and my beloved Britain & British democracy, I would absolutely send my womenfolk to safety (if I could) and take up an AK47 and lie down behind sandbags and shoot any Russian fucker walking down Camden High Street
Why not? What a noble way to go. And we might even win. It’s the younger men who are making the greater sacrifice8 -
Donald H Taylor
@DonaldHTaylor
· 1h
The coming days scare me. Putin, fearing humiliation in Ukraine, will demand advances. The onslaught could be Aleppo/Grozny intense, accelerated by a wish to beat the arrival of western aid. It will be indiscriminately savage, unless Russia really lacks materiel (as some believe)0 -
Hopefully Putin has a "heart attack", and some less crazy person can get Russia out of the mess Putin started.ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?5 -
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?0 -
.
We wouldn’t - anymore than we would like our country invaded by brutal and out of control dictator.PJohnson said:BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
Sure...burnt how would you like your wife and daughters killed in a heroic resistance...easy to be a keyboard warrior from over a thousand miles awayBartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
But given the latter, I’d like to think we’d refuse to surrender our hopes for a better future, just as has Ukraine.
How would you like to be governed by an authoritarian sociopath, in a country which has become an international pariah in the space of a few days ?2 -
..and to your own side.PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?4 -
I'm pretty sure chefs read it too, to perfect the use of pineapple on pizza.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.1 -
Yes, we've had Russian sockpuppets in the past.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.2 -
Journalist Lev Shlosberg, who broke the story in 2014 about the first Russian soldiers being buried back home after dying in the Donbas, says Putin won’t make the same mistake this time. Hence the army’s mobile crematoriums.
https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/14976376549256110110 -
One would hope that if Vlad orders a nuclear strike the people who actually pull the levers would refuse to do so.0
-
Piss off you nasty twat.PJohnson said:BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.BartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.
Sure...burnt how would you like your wife and daughters killed in a heroic resistance...easy to be a keyboard warrior from over a thousand miles awayBartholomewRoberts said:
Your trolling is a tad too obvious Vlad.PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
If they pay a heavy price its because of their would-be oppressors invading them. But hopefully the resistance does well to either prevent that or to at least inflict a heavy price on those invading.3 -
There was a run of antivaxxers with very suspiciously written English last year too, who always seemed like they were probably Russian.Cookie said:
Yes, we've had Russian sockpuppets in the past.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.1 -
It’s the music criticism that drew me in. Without the advice of this site I might have believed that Radiohead had some talent.TheValiant said:
I'm pretty sure chefs read it too, to perfect the use of pineapple on pizza.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.
0 -
The bear has to be confronted at some point. If not now, when?PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?3 -
It is certainly up on the screens of many press agencies and political centres more or less permanently.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.
That's good enough reason to shoo away pesky little farts like P Johnson whenever they show up. They spoil the brand - and it is a very good brand.3 -
Given that Russia has apparently suspected Twitter, and severely limited Facebook, perhaps PB is now their only source of news and commentary….BartholomewRoberts said:
There was a run of antivaxxers with very suspiciously written English last year too, who always seemed like they were probably Russian.Cookie said:
Yes, we've had Russian sockpuppets in the past.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.
God help them.3 -
White House: The Central Bank of Russia has $630 billion in gold and foreign exchange reserves that can be sold to support the ruble, and the purpose of the sanctions is to make it impossible to exchange this currency to rubles by blocking transactions with Western banks
White House: The US expects that, having lost the support of the Russian Central Bank due to the sanctions imposed on it, the ruble will fall into free fall
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/14977179163803238431 -
As can any situationPJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?0 -
Does anyone seriously think that this couldn't spiral unpredictably (apart from Mad Vlad of course)?WhisperingOracle said:
..and to your own side.PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?
This is the most dangerous time most of us have ever lived through. That was clear from the moment Vlad ordered his conscripts in.
1 -
Russia is funding its war effort by correctly predicting election results in obscure US districts. You heard it here first. As ever.Nigelb said:
Given that Russia has apparently suspected Twitter, and severely limited Facebook, perhaps PB is now their only source of news and commentary….BartholomewRoberts said:
There was a run of antivaxxers with very suspiciously written English last year too, who always seemed like they were probably Russian.Cookie said:
Yes, we've had Russian sockpuppets in the past.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.
God help them.
3 -
Yes. Since 1962, at least.rottenborough said:
Does anyone seriously think that this couldn't spiral unpredictably (apart from Mad Vlad of course)?WhisperingOracle said:
..and to your own side.PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?
This is the most dangerous time most of us have ever lived through. That was clear from the moment Vlad ordered his conscripts in.1 -
Yes. It has to be now. Here and now. That much has become obviousdarkage said:
The bear has to be confronted at some point. If not now, when?PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?
Because if we don’t at least try and stop this, then this frothing wolverine of a puffy old man will come for NATO and that means outright nuclear war or pathetic subjugation for all of us3 -
Thank god we don't live in the world you want where Zelensky would turn round and bend over.PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?5 -
This is encouraging.
US Senior Admin Official, in call with reporters, said in addition to disconnecting key Russian banks from SWIFT, the US & Europeans agreed to launch a mutlilateral transatlantic task force to identify, hunt down and seize the assets of sanctioned Russian officials & oligarchs…
… as well as those of their families and enablers. We will take their yachts, their luxury apartments, their money, their ability to send their kids to college abroad, the US official said.
also cracking down on entities that sell citizenship to wealthy russians to bypass sanctions ….
https://twitter.com/lrozen/status/1497706505700847617
3 -
I'll exchange the gold for bitcoinCarlottaVance said:White House: The Central Bank of Russia has $630 billion in gold and foreign exchange reserves that can be sold to support the ruble, and the purpose of the sanctions is to make it impossible to exchange this currency to rubles by blocking transactions with Western banks
White House: The US expects that, having lost the support of the Russian Central Bank due to the sanctions imposed on it, the ruble will fall into free fall
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1497717916380323843
1 -
It does when the comments being made are clearly intended as pro-Putin propaganda. No one had to make logical and reasoned responses to Lord Haw Haw and that is exactly the role 'PJohnson' is playing.geoffw said:
Up to you to flesh-out a response. Calling "troll" doesn't cut it.WhisperingOracle said:
He's not really making sustained or fleshed-out arguments, just giving a very good impression of brief and opportunistic propagandising.geoffw said:Not happy with the pile-on on PJohnson.
Better to counter his points with arguments than just say "troll".3 -
"I promise you after this is over, I will never speak fucking Russian again".
Astonishing video footage from the front line in NY Times blog:
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/26/world/ukraine-russia-war#video-captures-fierce-fighting-near-kyiv0 -
The Russians behave like scum.
The Ukrainians behave like heroes.
The Poles behave as they should.
The Germans behave like always.
🇷🇺🇺🇦🇵🇱🇩🇪
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1497723811415793664?
0 -
None of us would.kinabalu said:
You are well named, I must say. I see and feel the obligation but I can't say with total honesty that I would rather die in a nuclear exchange than fail to back Ukraine to the hilt.biggles said:
And as we’ve told you, we’re not flying into Ukrainian airspace. We will send what we can while there are open borders. And to be fair, with the troops numbers Russia has, there’s always going to be an open border.HYUFD said:
He will soon control most of Ukraine airspace and has warned NATO to stay out. Any NATO nation continuing to get involved in the Ukraine, still a non NATO nation, is therefore also taking a riskbiggles said:
He doesn’t control the borders yet. That’s rather the point….HYUFD said:
Well I assume the supplies it is carrying are still going to Ukraine based on the tweet.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The plane is flying to Poland not UkraineHYUFD said:
Putin has already warned NATO to stay out of Ukraine. He has the biggest nuclear weapons arsenal in the world.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are really not very you good at thisHYUFD said:
Why publicise? The Russians will now be looking out for it to shoot it down. Putin will try and use it as a warning shot to NATO to stay outCarlottaVance said:🇬🇧🇺🇦 PM tonight with plane stuffed full of “military support” heading out to our comrades in Ukraine - PA
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1497687061582778370
Overflying Germany.....
Russia shooting down a UK aircraft would be an act of war against a NATO country
Even if it is shot down, while he remains Russian President what are we going to realistically do beyond economic sanctions? We will in theory defend NATO nations but that is it.
As far as Ukraine goes we have given them all the supplies and weapons we could before the invasion and should now stay out of it
So Putin's warning to NATO to stay out still applies, the Russians could bomb truck convoys of supplies entering Ukraine as much as shoot down planes carrying them
Not even Putin is mad enough to attack us for keeping the weapons flowing, and if he does then, well NATO will hold the line. I accept we can’t sent troops into Ukraine but I’d rather die in a nuclear exchange than refuse to even arm them.
If we don’t stand up to bullies then we aren’t Britain any more.
But that's not the choice being offered.
It's not that we should do what we can to stop aggressive countries invading their neighbours because of the abstract principle of the thing - though the principle of the thing is important - it is that if we do not do what we can then the baddies get a step closer to us. And then another step. And another, until we finally stop them.
Do we stop them in Ukraine, or in the Baltics, or in Scandinavia, or the North Sea, or in the UK? If they're going to chuck bombs at us, they'll do so at some point in the process. It's not immediately obvious that we lessen our chances of avoiding a nuclear attack on the UK by leaving Ukraine to go it alone.5 -
Yes - confronting Russia now is enlightened self interest.Cookie said:
None of us would.kinabalu said:
You are well named, I must say. I see and feel the obligation but I can't say with total honesty that I would rather die in a nuclear exchange than fail to back Ukraine to the hilt.biggles said:
And as we’ve told you, we’re not flying into Ukrainian airspace. We will send what we can while there are open borders. And to be fair, with the troops numbers Russia has, there’s always going to be an open border.HYUFD said:
He will soon control most of Ukraine airspace and has warned NATO to stay out. Any NATO nation continuing to get involved in the Ukraine, still a non NATO nation, is therefore also taking a riskbiggles said:
He doesn’t control the borders yet. That’s rather the point….HYUFD said:
Well I assume the supplies it is carrying are still going to Ukraine based on the tweet.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The plane is flying to Poland not UkraineHYUFD said:
Putin has already warned NATO to stay out of Ukraine. He has the biggest nuclear weapons arsenal in the world.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are really not very you good at thisHYUFD said:
Why publicise? The Russians will now be looking out for it to shoot it down. Putin will try and use it as a warning shot to NATO to stay outCarlottaVance said:🇬🇧🇺🇦 PM tonight with plane stuffed full of “military support” heading out to our comrades in Ukraine - PA
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1497687061582778370
Overflying Germany.....
Russia shooting down a UK aircraft would be an act of war against a NATO country
Even if it is shot down, while he remains Russian President what are we going to realistically do beyond economic sanctions? We will in theory defend NATO nations but that is it.
As far as Ukraine goes we have given them all the supplies and weapons we could before the invasion and should now stay out of it
So Putin's warning to NATO to stay out still applies, the Russians could bomb truck convoys of supplies entering Ukraine as much as shoot down planes carrying them
Not even Putin is mad enough to attack us for keeping the weapons flowing, and if he does then, well NATO will hold the line. I accept we can’t sent troops into Ukraine but I’d rather die in a nuclear exchange than refuse to even arm them.
If we don’t stand up to bullies then we aren’t Britain any more.
But that's not the choice being offered.
It's not that we should do what we can to stop aggressive countries invading their neighbours because of the abstract principle of the thing - though the principle of the thing is important - it is that if we do not do what we can then the baddies get a step closer to us. And then another step. And another, until we finally stop them.
Do we stop them in Ukraine, or in the Baltics, or in Scandinavia, or the North Sea, or in the UK? If they're going to chuck bombs at us, they'll do so at some point in the process. It's not immediately obvious that we lessen our chances of avoiding a nuclear attack on the UK by leaving Ukraine to go it alone.5 -
I don't know whether you've noticed, but the situation has already spiralled in ways to the detriment of the west. There are currently Russian missiles raining down on Kyiv. The worst is already underway. The attack on the west has started.PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?
3 -
That is good but it is a shame it looks like the International Community will have to do our own dirty work for us. We should be cleaning out the Augean Stables ourselves.Nigelb said:This is encouraging.
US Senior Admin Official, in call with reporters, said in addition to disconnecting key Russian banks from SWIFT, the US & Europeans agreed to launch a mutlilateral transatlantic task force to identify, hunt down and seize the assets of sanctioned Russian officials & oligarchs…
… as well as those of their families and enablers. We will take their yachts, their luxury apartments, their money, their ability to send their kids to college abroad, the US official said.
also cracking down on entities that sell citizenship to wealthy russians to bypass sanctions ….
https://twitter.com/lrozen/status/14977065057008476171 -
Wordle 253 5/6
⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜
🟨🟨🟨⬜⬜
⬜⬜🟩🟩🟩
⬜⬜🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
I have to stop doing these drunk at 00:01.0 -
Not to forget the Thursday night local council by-elections.biggles said:
Russia is funding its war effort by correctly predicting election results in obscure US districts. You heard it here first. As ever.Nigelb said:
Given that Russia has apparently suspected Twitter, and severely limited Facebook, perhaps PB is now their only source of news and commentary….BartholomewRoberts said:
There was a run of antivaxxers with very suspiciously written English last year too, who always seemed like they were probably Russian.Cookie said:
Yes, we've had Russian sockpuppets in the past.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.
God help them.5 -
Yes, we all need to collectively realise that this is real. That sounds flippant, but we need to REALLY understand that the world just changed abs the west must wake up abs reunify.Cookie said:
None of us would.kinabalu said:
You are well named, I must say. I see and feel the obligation but I can't say with total honesty that I would rather die in a nuclear exchange than fail to back Ukraine to the hilt.biggles said:
And as we’ve told you, we’re not flying into Ukrainian airspace. We will send what we can while there are open borders. And to be fair, with the troops numbers Russia has, there’s always going to be an open border.HYUFD said:
He will soon control most of Ukraine airspace and has warned NATO to stay out. Any NATO nation continuing to get involved in the Ukraine, still a non NATO nation, is therefore also taking a riskbiggles said:
He doesn’t control the borders yet. That’s rather the point….HYUFD said:
Well I assume the supplies it is carrying are still going to Ukraine based on the tweet.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The plane is flying to Poland not UkraineHYUFD said:
Putin has already warned NATO to stay out of Ukraine. He has the biggest nuclear weapons arsenal in the world.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are really not very you good at thisHYUFD said:
Why publicise? The Russians will now be looking out for it to shoot it down. Putin will try and use it as a warning shot to NATO to stay outCarlottaVance said:🇬🇧🇺🇦 PM tonight with plane stuffed full of “military support” heading out to our comrades in Ukraine - PA
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1497687061582778370
Overflying Germany.....
Russia shooting down a UK aircraft would be an act of war against a NATO country
Even if it is shot down, while he remains Russian President what are we going to realistically do beyond economic sanctions? We will in theory defend NATO nations but that is it.
As far as Ukraine goes we have given them all the supplies and weapons we could before the invasion and should now stay out of it
So Putin's warning to NATO to stay out still applies, the Russians could bomb truck convoys of supplies entering Ukraine as much as shoot down planes carrying them
Not even Putin is mad enough to attack us for keeping the weapons flowing, and if he does then, well NATO will hold the line. I accept we can’t sent troops into Ukraine but I’d rather die in a nuclear exchange than refuse to even arm them.
If we don’t stand up to bullies then we aren’t Britain any more.
But that's not the choice being offered.
It's not that we should do what we can to stop aggressive countries invading their neighbours because of the abstract principle of the thing - though the principle of the thing is important - it is that if we do not do what we can then the baddies get a step closer to us. And then another step. And another, until we finally stop them.
Do we stop them in Ukraine, or in the Baltics, or in Scandinavia, or the North Sea, or in the UK? If they're going to chuck bombs at us, they'll do so at some point in the process. It's not immediately obvious that we lessen our chances of avoiding a nuclear attack on the UK by leaving Ukraine to go it alone.
1 -
It is interesting if we do have a russian troll amongst us. Instead of banning them, I would suggest using the opportunity to ask questions about their situation.0
-
Were they strongly pro masks and lockdowns as well?BartholomewRoberts said:
There was a run of antivaxxers with very suspiciously written English last year too, who always seemed like they were probably Russian.Cookie said:
Yes, we've had Russian sockpuppets in the past.biggles said:
To be fair, given it’s ability to swiftly aggregate news and deliver elections results at pace, I’d think this blog is read by a lot of intelligence agencies to speed up their homework.Mexicanpete said:
Why would a Putin shill want to waste their time posting Putin propaganda on PB?PJohnson said:
Agreed...how many on here would be prepared to fight street to Street...let us pray for the ukrainian people and hope they don't pay a heavy price for their resistanceping said:
Ye. Lots of brave keyboard warriors who have no clue about geopolitics.stodge said:
I have to say once again I find myself in unlikely agreement. NATO has to be very careful not to cross the line into direct involvement. There's an overwhelming notion around we must "do something" to help Ukraine - perhaps but risking an escalation toward the unthinkable isn't it.HYUFD said:
That is up to them. Brave but they do so at their own risk
I realise this may be an unpopular view on here tonight but there's a limit to what we can and should do. Help the refugees by all means, offer sanctuary in the UK if we can but we cannot get drawn into this fight - the stakes are simply too high. We can apply economic pressure on Russia (and we should) but we cannot force Putin into a corner where he feels trapped and has no option but to escalate.
We need to be tirelessly pushing for a negotiated ceasefire - we need to use any back channel we have to tell the Russian Government this is a disastrous course of action and try to persuade the Chinese or any one else to press Putin into ending this sooner rather than later.
Reminds me of my first year seminars during my international relations undergrad. Almost everyone was a liberal internationalist. By the third year, pretty much everyone was a realist.
OGH should be buffing his nails on account of the Kremlin taking his blog so seriously.
And that’s before we discuss the value of the cricket betting tips.1 -
Possibly. 1983 was also very frightening, albeit at the time it wasn't well known (basically, the Stanislav Petrov incident in September 1983 and then Able Archer in October both could've gone nuclear but the general public didn't really know it at the time).WhisperingOracle said:
Yes. Since 1962, at least.rottenborough said:
Does anyone seriously think that this couldn't spiral unpredictably (apart from Mad Vlad of course)?WhisperingOracle said:
..and to your own side.PJohnson said:
This is the worry ignored by many on here...this situation could spiral in unpredictable ways to the detriment of the west....ping said:Adam Tooze
@adam_tooze
·
1h
We are in truly dangerous spiral:
Brave Ukrainian resistance frustrates Russian attack -> Kiev refuses humiliating negotiations.
Russia about to ramp up destructiveness of attack
NATO members rushing weapons to Ukraine
EU/US announce major sanctions.
What is Russia’s next move?
This is the most dangerous time most of us have ever lived through. That was clear from the moment Vlad ordered his conscripts in.0 -
It is too early to be thinking about how to get Putin to back-track.
Our job right now is to strain every sinew to assist Ukraine to avoid decapitation.
If Ukraine and Zelensky can hold on another week, two weeks, then we’ll need to think about it.
The status quo ante is probably not acceptable. We want Russia (or Russian proxies) out of the Donbas full stop. However we should we willing to “trade” Crimea, and Ukranian neutrality.1 -
Something to help people sleep soundly tonight.
‘How World War III became possible’
https://twitter.com/naebd/status/1497709932094894087?s=210
This discussion has been closed.