War with Russia

[Mr Whippy]

Bluebarge said:

Wouldn't make a blind bit of difference given the number of warheads already pointed at the UK.

Exactly.

And given they all point straight up muddies the waters too


People need to go play Civ2 or Civ3 in multiplayer. If you don't shaft others, you'll get shafted yourself.

[AreOut]

Bluebarge said:

Wouldn't make a blind bit of difference given the number of warheads already pointed at the UK.

actually it would, because half an hour of difference in nuclear exchange is huge and could decide a thing or two

[hidetheelephants]

I'm not so sure; in the event a surprise attack destroys HQ at Northwood, kills the PM and knocks out all communication then the Vanguard class at sea has default targets to attack at the commander's and the other keyholders' discretion. It would be a commander with some intestinal fortitude that pulls the trigger, but the scenario outlined means general nuclear war anyway.

[Bluebarge]

AreOut said:

actually it would, because half an hour of difference in nuclear exchange is huge and could decide a thing or two

Don't think so, once one warhead has gone off, the rest will follow.

Besides, the problem with your scenario is that, whilst it is easy to see why a former Soviet Bloc country might want to join the EU and/or NATO, there is absolutely no incentive for an advanced liberal country to join Russia. And that's kind of the problem - Russia's "vision" for the future is all stick and zero carrot; which is why it won't work. The Roman Empire brought benefits, the Russian Empire - cheap vodka? what else is there?

[skyrover]

Bluebarge said:

The Roman Empire brought benefits, the Russian Empire - cheap vodka? what else is there?

Buckwheat

Seriously though... the potential for the Russian economy/people is huge

It's a damn shame for them and everyone else that they keep putting psychopaths in charge.

[Transmitter Man]

skyrover said:

Buckwheat

Seriously though... the potential for the Russian economy/people is huge

It's a damn shame for them and everyone else that they keep putting psychopaths in charge.

Map head was not a psyco, surely.

Phil

[Octoposse]

skyrover said:

It's a damn shame for them and everyone else that they keep putting psychopaths in charge.

Don't think they've had a psychopath since Stalin . . . and even he was more just paranoid and very, very good at game of thrones.

The Russians tried some easy going leaders, and 'we' just pissed on them, such as NATO's dismemberment of their traditional ally Serbia.

So . . now it is inconceivable that the Russian people will elect anybody who they do not perceive as sufficiently strong willed to - as they see it - stand up to western bullying and belittlement. Given that absolute domestic constraint on how a Russian leader can be seen to behave in external relations, the US and EU folly in putting their weight behind regime change in Kiev is off the scale (unless they wanted a reaction?).

If Putin hadn't pushed back, had meekly complied, and the ethnic cleansing of Russians from Ukraine gone the way it looked as if it was going to go, Russia would have a new - harder line - leader by now, and we'd pining for good old easy-to-get-along-with Vladimir . .

[2013BRM]

Transmitter Man said:

skyrover said:

Buckwheat

Seriously though... the potential for the Russian economy/people is huge

It's a damn shame for them and everyone else that they keep putting psychopaths in charge.

Map head was not a psyco, surely.

Phil

a complete headcase, thanks to him we have glasnot

[barryrs]

Octoposse said:

If Putin hadn't pushed back, had meekly complied, and the ethnic cleansing of Russians from Ukraine gone the way it looked as if it was going to go, Russia would have a new - harder line - leader by now, and we'd pining for good old easy-to-get-along-with Vladimir . .

Thats the first time ive heard that suggested and im a tad skeptical that was the true situation on the ground.

[Liokault]

Yeah, like the way Latvia cleansed their Russians?

[Mojocvh]

Octoposse said:

skyrover said:

It's a damn shame for them and everyone else that they keep putting psychopaths in charge.

Don't think they've had a psychopath since Stalin . . . and even he was more just paranoid and very, very good at game of thrones.

The Russians tried some easy going leaders, and 'we' just pissed on them, such as NATO's dismemberment of their traditional ally Serbia.

So . . now it is inconceivable that the Russian people will elect anybody who they do not perceive as sufficiently strong willed to - as they see it - stand up to western bullying and belittlement. Given that absolute domestic constraint on how a Russian leader can be seen to behave in external relations, the US and EU folly in putting their weight behind regime change in Kiev is off the scale (unless they wanted a reaction?).

If Putin hadn't pushed back, had meekly complied, and the ethnic cleansing of Russians from Ukraine gone the way it looked as if it was going to go, Russia would have a new - harder line - leader by now, and we'd pining for good old easy-to-get-along-with Vladimir . .

It's amazing the lengths some people will go to "win" an internet argument ...

[skyrover]

barryrs said:

Octoposse said:

If Putin hadn't pushed back, had meekly complied, and the ethnic cleansing of Russians from Ukraine gone the way it looked as if it was going to go, Russia would have a new - harder line - leader by now, and we'd pining for good old easy-to-get-along-with Vladimir . .

Thats the first time ive heard that suggested and im a tad skeptical that was the true situation on the ground.

That's because it's not

The Tatars in Crimea now face an uncertain future though

http://www.dw.de/crimean-tatar-media-forced-to-shu...

Edited by skyrover on Saturday 18th April 08:07

[Transmitter Man]

2013BRM said:

a complete headcase, thanks to him we have glasnot

Ah I see, you preferred the fella that came after Mike;

http://dailypicksandflicks.com/2014/03/24/best-of-...

Phil

[2013BRM]

Transmitter Man said:

2013BRM said:

a complete headcase, thanks to him we have glasnot

Ah I see, you preferred the fella that came after Mike;

http://dailypicksandflicks.com/2014/03/24/best-of-...

Phil

oops

[scherzkeks]

Octoposse said:

the US and EU folly in putting their weight behind regime change in Kiev is off the scale (unless they wanted a reaction?)..

Not to state the obvious, but yes.

[Octoposse]

The Guardian said:

(re proposed military operations against people trafficers in the Med)
Dimitris Avramopoulos, the European commissioner for migration issues, said the operation would be “civil-military” modelled on previous military action in the Horn of Africa to combat Somali piracy. The military action would require a UN mandate.

Which - presumably - the Russians will veto "on humanitarian grounds" whilst pissing themselves to death laughing.

Oh, the infinite wisdom of our leaders . . . maybe they should have gone for regime change in Kiev or Tripoli, just not both?

[isee]

Saw this video last night, though I don't want to fight propaganda with propaganda, it does have a point in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42RnhSS7WV0

Warning: contains graphic scenes at the end.

[Transmitter Man]

That video would have not been produced had Vladimir not invaded.

Phil

[isee]

Transmitter Man said:

That video would have not been produced had Vladimir not invaded.

Phil

What a convenient way to throw away a point of view.. A simple one liner straight out of the western press, not a moment's consideration for the message I tried to convey.

here is a video by vice news, dated april 2014.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNig07RtWxA
what do you see?
In your opinion.
Who is the attacking force?
Who is the defending/protesting/disarming force?

[isee]

So in my effort to de-polarise opinion and promote dialogue and without any gloating or taunting sond-bytes, what do you guys make of this?

http://tass.ru/en/world/790717

tass said:

"I sit in the EU Parliament next to Mr. Urmas Paetz, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Estonia who acknowledged in a telephone conversation with Baroness Catherine Ashton that it was "our people" who shot on the Maidan, and not [former Ukrainian President Viktor] Yanukovych’s people, or [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s people. Trained by us, in Western countries," Korwin-Mikke, who is also a Polish presidential candidate, was quoted by Poland’s sixth-largest web portal as saying.
"The snipers were also trained in Poland. Even Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung already wrote, who was really shooting on the Maidan. The terrorists had shot 40 demonstrators and 20 police officers in order to provoke riots. The truth is finally coming out," the Polish politician said.

Tass is one of Russia's oldest news services and while I loathe to be linking Russian news-sources for the usual "Russian propaganda init" chant, I struggle to find the same news in the Western media for the same reason I suppose, plus I don't think they would blatantly misquote an official like this if it didn't really happen, would they?

Provided the claim is true, is it going to change any views on who is to blame for this entire palaver? Does it even matter?

Feel free to discredit the news using factual evidence, I would genuinely welcome it.

I am looking for genuine and thoughtful responses, I am not interested in having a discussion with one-liner responses based on a 1960s Bond movie view of the world.
Your opinion can be opposite, but it needs to be backed up by logic.