• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Putin & Russia

scaramanga said:
How heightened is that risk though?

If Putin is willing to and has the backing to launch nuclear strikes against other nuclear-equipped countries, we're not safe anyway. If he's happy with a scorched earth approach then he has no reason to stop at Ukraine.
Click to expand...

We're obviously not fully safe. Further heightened would have been a clearer choice of words.

Escalating, spreading conflicts have an inherent risk of further escalation out of control. Even if all out nuclear war may still be unlikely a direct armed conflict between Russia and NATO forces should be avoided.

The reasons he has to stop are nukes and NATO. I don't think he will initiate a direct war with a NATO country.
 
scaramanga said:
He's either willing to fire nukes at other countries that have them or he isn't.

I don't think allowing him to trample all over Ukraine makes us or the rest of Europe any safer in that regard.
Click to expand...

Are you only factoring in the full blown fudge up humanity nukes or are you including the low-yield missiles that Russia has which could quite easily be used tactically on the battlefield without the hyped MAD theory?
Not that I want to see any nukes used, but the smaller ones are a very possible strategy.
 
Trixster said:
Are you only factoring in the full blown fudge up humanity nukes or are you including the low-yield missiles that Russia has which could quite easily be used tactically on the battlefield without the hyped MAD theory?
Not that I want to see any nukes used, but the smaller ones are a very possible strategy.
Click to expand...
Whilst the result of those would be terrible, I don't think that's what is factoring into these decisions or @braineclipse suggestions.

I think it's the full scale nuclear war threat that we're talking about.
 
braineclipse said:
We're obviously not fully safe. Further heightened would have been a clearer choice of words.

Escalating, spreading conflicts have an inherent risk of further escalation out of control. Even if all out nuclear war may still be unlikely a direct armed conflict between Russia and NATO forces should be avoided.

The reasons he has to stop are nukes and NATO. I don't think he will initiate a direct war with a NATO country.
Click to expand...
I don't think he would either, which is why I was in favour of either signing up Ukraine on a fast track to NATO or putting NATO forces in Ukraine for defence. I don't think Putin would attack those forces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Trixster said:
Are you only factoring in the full blown fudge up humanity nukes or are you including the low-yield missiles that Russia has which could quite easily be used tactically on the battlefield without the hyped MAD theory?
Not that I want to see any nukes used, but the smaller ones are a very possible strategy.
Click to expand...

But the Ukrainian resistance isn’t forming giant Napoleonic battle formations, it’s lurking around motorways to take pot shots at tanks with shoulder-launched missiles. How would nukes help?
 
scaramanga said:
I don't think he would either, which is why I was in favour of either signing up Ukraine on a fast track to NATO or putting NATO forces in Ukraine for defence. I don't think Putin would attack those forces.
Click to expand...

Russia would push the button then. They cannot have ukraine as a member of nato.
 
Finney Is Back said:
SWIFT would be a brilliant option, it would seriously destabilise Russia.... With no access to the major currencies of the World, who is going to want payment in a currency that is likely to massively reduce in value over the near to medium term future? Equally, who is going to want to swap crypto for a weak Russian currency?
Click to expand...

I think a better option is to put a cap on transfers. Say $5,000. That way the normal people can continue with the elites' suffering. The problem is how would Germany etc pay for its Gas and other essentials?
 
SpurMeUp said:
Obama wasn't it. Who was the foreign secretary? Or whatever they call the post over there.
Click to expand...

No can't have been Obama he was a democrat so perfect and free from criticism.

To be fair I am glad Trump is not in charge right now. He might be pally with Putin but I think he is stupid enough to set of the nukes for the sake of it.

What was the story between Biden's son and the Ukrainians? No one seems to be talking about that and you guys are happy to talk about everything else but conveniently leave out that.

I am not trolling an accusation that seems to be thrown at anyone who voices opinions others don't like. But I like you like to see both sides of the story.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
No can't have been Obama he was a democrat so perfect and free from criticism.

To be fair I am glad Trump is not in charge right now. He might be pally with Putin but I think he is stupid enough to set of the nukes for the sake of it.

What was the story between Biden's son and the Ukrainians? No one seems to be talking about that and you guys are happy to talk about everything else but conveniently leave out that.

I am not trolling an accusation that seems to be thrown at anyone who voices opinions others don't like. But I like you like to see both sides of the story.
Click to expand...

I think you are right. If intelligence is correct, Putin has had this plan to surge through Ukraine since 2014, but never enacted it. Doing it with Trump in office is a risk. Because you just don't know what he'd do. He could go either way depending on the direction of the breeze. Biden - who was secretary of state when the US-funded Ukraine revolution occurred in 2014 - is a little more predictable.

What happened with Bidens son and Ukraine?

It is still not clear whether Russia wants to take out Ukraine's military capabilities now post NATO arming Ukraine. It could then fall back and draw a line annexing the east of Ukraine. Or will they just take the whole nation? Tbh I don't think they know, both options are on the table for them.
 
scaramanga said:
Whilst the result of those would be terrible, I don't think that's what is factoring into these decisions or @braineclipse suggestions.

I think it's the full scale nuclear war threat that we're talking about.
Click to expand...
That is actually the only real threat that Russia has. Russia's military isn't very well equipped at all compared to Nato forces. It is only the fact that they have the threat of a madman armed with a large nuclear arsenal that makes Russia relevant. Hopefully the madman will be removed before he decides to press the button.
 
Danishfurniturelover said:
No can't have been Obama he was a democrat so perfect and free from criticism.

To be fair I am glad Trump is not in charge right now. He might be pally with Putin but I think he is stupid enough to set of the nukes for the sake of it.

What was the story between Biden's son and the Ukrainians? No one seems to be talking about that and you guys are happy to talk about everything else but conveniently leave out that.

I am not trolling an accusation that seems to be thrown at anyone who voices opinions others don't like. But I like you like to see both sides of the story.
Click to expand...

If you find yourself accused of trolling perhaps, maybe, just possibly that's not unrelated to what you bring up and how you bring it up.

Full scale war returns to Europe with everything that comes with. But us not talking enough about Biden's son and Ukraine that's an area to focus on. Literal whataboutism.

Plenty of criticism about both the US and Obama has been present on this forum. But no, a day into the outbreak of war in Europe straw man arguments about old disagreements, that's what you want to focus on.

Stop acting like a troll if you don't like being accused of being one. It's really not that difficult.
 
scaramanga said:
Whilst the result of those would be terrible, I don't think that's what is factoring into these decisions or @braineclipse suggestions.

I think it's the full scale nuclear war threat that we're talking about.
Click to expand...

Both and more.

See world war 1. No nukes, escalating conflict. Utter disaster. But also the nukes, obviously. You can't disregard that threat.
 
Can we call Putin's bluff?

He can't launch nuclear weapons on his own. There is a chain of people between the instruction and the button. Twice in the Cold War the USSR's early warning system was triggered, both times the common sense of a human being intervened.

He's a bully, he needs to be stood up too, quickly.
 
Lilbaz said:
Well the taliban do have experience of a great power invading and taking over their country. You'd think they'd have sympathy with ukraine. Also remember the ussr invaded afghanistan.
Click to expand...
Yeah I can see where they are coming from but equally it is just another bizarre incident on the heap.
 
Baleforce said:
Can we call Putin's bluff?

He can't launch nuclear weapons on his own. There is a chain of people between the instruction and the button. Twice in the Cold War the USSR's early warning system was triggered, both times the common sense of a human being intervened.

He's a bully, he needs to be stood up too, quickly.
Click to expand...

He's a bully, he's a coward, he's dangerous. But no, his bluff can't be called on the issue of using nukes. The risk is too big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Baleforce said:
Can we call Putin's bluff?

He can't launch nuclear weapons on his own. There is a chain of people between the instruction and the button. Twice in the Cold War the USSR's early warning system was triggered, both times the common sense of a human being intervened.

He's a bully, he needs to be stood up too, quickly.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately the common sense quota in Russia has reduced drastically since those times....
 
Baleforce said:
Can we call Putin's bluff?

He can't launch nuclear weapons on his own. There is a chain of people between the instruction and the button. Twice in the Cold War the USSR's early warning system was triggered, both times the common sense of a human being intervened.

He's a bully, he needs to be stood up too, quickly.
Click to expand...

Didn't one guy who refused to push the button (cause he rightly believed it was a fault). Get court marshalled and kicked out of the military? As he had failed to follow procedure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back