USSR invades Ukraine. (17 Viewers)

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Which one exactly?

The one I assume that Mr Starmer has now totally distanced himself from

This must be a very difficult time for you as in recent history people in Mr Johnson’s position at these times become very popular

Do you support Ms Sultana wanting to stop Russia in it’s actions?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Cowards and traitors every one of them

 

Alan Dugdales Moustache

Well-Known Member
Jesus Christ this is turning into the EU in out shake it all about Brexit bollocks threads.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member
It's not that he cares or not about sanctions. It's more that conditions for the people in Russia including those close to him become so bad Putins power slips.

There will be no WW3 as we won't directly fight in the Ukraine and Putin won't attack a NATO country as that triggers actual conventional war which he can't win.

Nuclear weapons are a nonsense as well as no one is going use them knowing they'll destroy their own country as well.

I don't think that really answers it, obviously nobody wants an all out war so it looks like the only option is to watch on and offer moral support in a fight that looks like ukraine can't win.

What I'm asking, what happens if putin threatens war on countries aiding ukraine or sanctioning Russia, do they call it a bluff that he won't start a war and carry on or do they back down under the threat of war?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I don't think that really answers it, obviously nobody wants an all out war so it looks like the only option is to watch on and offer moral support in a fight that looks like ukraine can't win.

What I'm asking, what happens if putin threatens war on countries aiding ukraine or sanctioning Russia, do they call it a bluff that he won't start a war and carry on or do they back down under the threat of war?

Actually the real problem is if missiles accidentally cross borders and cause casualties in neighbouring countries
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
I don't think that really answers it, obviously nobody wants an all out war so it looks like the only option is to watch on and offer moral support in a fight that looks like ukraine can't win.

What I'm asking, what happens if putin threatens war on countries aiding ukraine or sanctioning Russia, do they call it a bluff that he won't start a war and carry on or do they back down under the threat of war?

It answers it perfectly, Putin will not declare war on the west.

the sanctions are here to stay
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
You seems confident in that, I am by no means an expert so I'll take your word. Sounds like playing a game of poker with a mad man

Basically you can take nuclear weapons off the off the table. Mutually assured destruction sees to that.

Putin isn't going to get involved in a conventional war that he can't win. He goes to war against the west then he has to fight a combined force a much bigger and more advanced force than he has while watch his ability to spunk money on war dwindle as his economy crashes.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
A sizeable protest in St Petersburg tonight, Putins home city. Maybe this isn’t going the way he planned in Russia.

Also some talk that Ukrainian soldiers have taken back the airport and done enough damage to the runway to stop planes landing on it. Big stumbling block for Putin if true.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Their position (which I disagree with) is certainly not as cowardly as “let them get on with it”.

well they want them to get on with it
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
The one I assume that Mr Starmer has now totally distanced himself from

This must be a very difficult time for you as in recent history people in Mr Johnson’s position at these times become very popular

Do you support Ms Sultana wanting to stop Russia in it’s actions?
So not an actual policy you have read or know of. Not like you to make something up with no actual evidence to back it up.
FYI - Labour 2019 manifesto said it would reiterate its commitment to be a part of NATO.

I’m more than aware that in times of war the incumbent is more popular - it’s hardly a secret nor a ‘hard time for me’

As for her statement - let’s get it up here and see what it says seeing as you seem to not look for facts before making statements.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I’m just thinking back to the Falklands war when a frightened weak dictatorship invaded it in an attempt to look strong which was actually a sign of weakness and led to it’s downfall. Is it too much to hope that this will go the same way for Putin?
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
I’m just thinking back to the Falklands war when a frightened weak dictatorship invaded it in an attempt to look strong which was actually a sign of weakness and led to it’s downfall. Is it too much to hope that this will go the same way for Putin?

It’s telling that despite his dictatorial grip on the press that some over there have been brave enough to call this out on day one.
 

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member
Basically you can take nuclear weapons off the off the table. Mutually assured destruction sees to that.

Putin isn't going to get involved in a conventional war that he can't win. He goes to war against the west then he has to fight a combined force a much bigger and more advanced force than he has while watch his ability to spunk money on war dwindle as his economy crashes.
I don't see how Ukraine win, so it looks like Russia takes Ukraine and then we hope the sanctions and economic impact of that prevent Russia from doing it again.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
It’s telling that despite his dictatorial grip on the press that some over there have been brave enough to call this out on day one.
Pretty much my thoughts. Suppressing free speech, protest (breaking Covid rules apparently), locking away opposition politicians etc USA sign of weakness not strength. Maybe just maybe these are the actions of a desperate man who is loosing his grip.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Basically you can take nuclear weapons off the off the table. Mutually assured destruction sees to that.

To paraphrase Blackadder:

"The idea was to have huge nuclear arsenals on both sides, so that everyone would be too scared of mutually assured destruction to ever use them. Of course there was one tiny flaw in the plan. It was bollocks!"
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
You’re in good company then!

Bit of a nightmare all round for you, this one.

You keep saying “bit of a nightmare” - I hate to tell you but this is a football forum which has morons regarding politics who disagree with me like UKIP Tony, David “special brew” O day, the ever so earnest and ever so stupid PVA, the utter hopeless child who pretends he’s a teacher Ian and others who literally have the gravitas of losers in the first round of a 6th form debating society

The politics aspect of this forum misjudges the wider view of the country every single time. It’s just a bunch of sad bitter losers who well at election time just lose

Keep carry on losing
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
I’m just thinking back to the Falklands war when a frightened weak dictatorship invaded it in an attempt to look strong which was actually a sign of weakness and led to it’s downfall. Is it too much to hope that this will go the same way for Putin?
Putin has quite a bit more at his disposal than Argentina.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top