Russia Invades Ukraine. Volume 4
Discussion
youngsyr said:
borcy said:
youngsyr said:
borcy said:
We're a bit closer to Ukraine as are our neighbours. The closer you are to a problem the bigger the problem.
That's an overly simplistic view - even if the Russians take Ukraine, which I highly doubt Germany and France will let happen, those two countries still stand between us and the Russians.Not to mention the Fins, Swedes and Norwegians who won't stand for Russia invading Western Europe.
I put the chances of that war ever ending up on our doorstep as zero, as by then the US will be forced to join in, or see Europe entirely dominated by Russia.
If anything I'd say you had a simplistic view. Why should France let it happen but not us?
The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
hidetheelephants said:
NATO said:
Article 5
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
Ukraine isn't a NATO member.
borcy said:
I don't think the EU was set up for this.
The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
My point is not that nothing is done about it, just that it's not our responsibility to pay for it.The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
Do you think the EU would have our backs if Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands again?
B'stard Child said:
Wow......... Just slightly fking bitter - it's not a Brexit thread
The EU couldn't run a bath and they've always spent money they don't have.
How did you deal with a bully at school (or in life) roll over and hand over your lunch
Russia needs to be put back in their box and very firmly shown that they should bloody well stay there
This bully doesn't even go to our school though...The EU couldn't run a bath and they've always spent money they don't have.
How did you deal with a bully at school (or in life) roll over and hand over your lunch
Russia needs to be put back in their box and very firmly shown that they should bloody well stay there
And its not our job to plug the EU's finances any more, in case you missed it?
borcy said:
I don't think the EU was set up for this.
The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
Again, I'm not saying do nothing. I'm saying those with the most to lose should be paying the biggest price.The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
We severed our links from the EU don't forget. No access to free markets, no money to make them feel safer, IMO.
youngsyr said:
That's an overly simplistic view - even if the Russians take Ukraine, which I highly doubt Germany and France will let happen, those two countries still stand between us and the Russians.
Not to mention the Fins, Swedes and Norwegians who won't stand for Russia invading Western Europe.
I put the chances of that war ever ending up on our doorstep as zero, as by then the US will be forced to join in, or see Europe entirely dominated by Russia.
So because its not Brits dying, then fk 'em? Nice viewpoint.Not to mention the Fins, Swedes and Norwegians who won't stand for Russia invading Western Europe.
I put the chances of that war ever ending up on our doorstep as zero, as by then the US will be forced to join in, or see Europe entirely dominated by Russia.
youngsyr said:
Do you think Russia wants to invade the rest of Europe?
If not, then your question is moot.
If so, then I think you need your head examined.
Here's Russia saying this week they're not stopping at Ukraine.If not, then your question is moot.
If so, then I think you need your head examined.
https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1773084326957...
Its certain if they get to Odessa they're going to take Moldova. They have "To Berlin" written on their tanks. They've said over and over again they're not stopping at Ukraine. They're threated us with Nuclear Attacks. They've already taken Belarus.
If Russia get Ukraine they could have an army of every single male Ukrainian just as they did in the occupied areas.
Betting the farm on Russia quitting when they are on a roll is a far worse option than spending small amounts of money on stopping them now with (tragically) other people's blood.
BikeBikeBIke said:
Here's Russia saying this week they're not stopping at Ukraine.
https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1773084326957...
Its certain if they get to Odessa they're going to take Moldova. They have "To Berlin" written on their tanks. They've said over and over again they're not stopping at Ukraine. They're threated us with Nuclear Attacks. They've already taken Belarus.
That clip is somewhat laughably tragic & delusional. They are not stopping until they get Alaska back....https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1773084326957...
Its certain if they get to Odessa they're going to take Moldova. They have "To Berlin" written on their tanks. They've said over and over again they're not stopping at Ukraine. They're threated us with Nuclear Attacks. They've already taken Belarus.
They may not be stopping at Ukraine.... but given they haven't actually gone very far in Ukraine. This is a bit presumptuous..
wiffmaster said:
oddball1313 said:
If Russia wins the war in Ukraine the UK and Europe are going to end up spending 8-9% GDP on defense. They are currently investing 40% GDP at the moment and if sustained once Ukraine is supressed will continue to push into other areas, it is in everyones interest to support Ukraine with as much assistance as possible to hopefully force Russia into bankruptcy, its the cheapest option for all concerned
Russia is spending 40% of their government budget on defence, not 40% of GDP. But I totally agree with your sentiment; the UK and EU really needs to ramp up military production and throw a lot more money at defence.
The UK spent about 40% of it's GDP on WWII which was actually the highest percentage of the major participants.
If NATO put 0.5% of their GDP into aid for Ukraine they would out spend Russia by a big margin.
youngsyr said:
borcy said:
I don't think the EU was set up for this.
The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
My point is not that nothing is done about it, just that it's not our responsibility to pay for it.The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
Do you think the EU would have our backs if Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands again?
I've no problem with us funding Ukraine's war effort.
I'm not sure why you keep referring to the EU, i don't know if it's some obscure point about brexit.
I believe it to be in our interest to support Ukraine, regardless of whether we're in the EU or what the EU isn't/is doing.
borcy said:
youngsyr said:
borcy said:
I don't think the EU was set up for this.
The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
My point is not that nothing is done about it, just that it's not our responsibility to pay for it.The cost of not doing anything, I think, will be bigger than acting.
Do you think the EU would have our backs if Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands again?
I've no problem with us funding Ukraine's war effort.
I'm not sure why you keep referring to the EU, i don't know if it's some obscure point about brexit.
I believe it to be in our interest to support Ukraine, regardless of whether we're in the EU or what the EU isn't/is doing.
youngsyr said:
hidetheelephants said:
youngsyr said:
hidetheelephants said:
We're in NATO, if you don't like it lobby your representative.
So are the US.Ukraine aren't.
I've taken the st side of Brexit for 8 years, about time we got some of the payback, wouldn't you say?
aeropilot said:
youngsyr said:
hidetheelephants said:
youngsyr said:
hidetheelephants said:
We're in NATO, if you don't like it lobby your representative.
So are the US.Ukraine aren't.
I've taken the st side of Brexit for 8 years, about time we got some of the payback, wouldn't you say?
BikeBikeBIke said:
aeropilot said:
youngsyr said:
hidetheelephants said:
youngsyr said:
hidetheelephants said:
We're in NATO, if you don't like it lobby your representative.
So are the US.Ukraine aren't.
I've taken the st side of Brexit for 8 years, about time we got some of the payback, wouldn't you say?
I like that
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff