Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roar87 said:
Yeah sure, mean while in reality Russia has a massive nuclear arsenal and the goal of NATO is to keep us safe, not bring on world war 3. I think Putin is valid to suggest NATO shouldn't have nukes close to Russia's borders, we don't even need them, we can annihilate Russia with our submarines, why do we have nukes in Germany? Is that bringing on peace and security? The EU needs to also know it has strategic limits, but they're a bunch of idealistic morons as well.
Click to expand...

The clue is in the name, the I in ICBM is for intercontinental, doesn’t really matter where they’re based they’ll still get ya!
 
HEADRAT said:
The clue is in the name, the I in ICBM is for intercontinental, doesn’t really matter where they’re based they’ll still get ya!
Click to expand...

Not strictly true. Time of travel is everything in the madness of nuclear launches.....
You can pray a lot more In 30 mins than 4 mins
 
robfosters said:
Well at least the end of it shows he doesn’t want to totally annihilate the west
Click to expand...

He isn't bat **** crazy, though for some reason his entire rationale and so on seems to be altered of late - but don't equate doesn't want to totally annihilate the West with won't do it if he feels it is necessary.
 
Roar87 said:
Yeah sure, mean while in reality Russia has a massive nuclear arsenal and the goal of NATO is to keep us safe, not bring on world war 3. I think Putin is valid to suggest NATO shouldn't have nukes close to Russia's borders, we don't even need them, we can annihilate Russia with our submarines, why do we have nukes in Germany? Is that bringing on peace and security? The EU needs to also know it has strategic limits, but they're a bunch of idealistic morons as well.
Click to expand...

Yet, Putin is rumoured to have moved Nukes into Belarus. If there is a Nuclear free buffer zone then Putin must capitulate.

The next point is about invasion of sovereign states without nukes. However given the previous agreement and invasion - I would say that is firmly in Putin's court.
 
HEADRAT said:
The clue is in the name, the I in ICBM is for intercontinental, doesn’t really matter where they’re based they’ll still get ya!
Click to expand...

I mean I'm trying to explain how Russia may view nukes on their borders and you're telling me I'm wrong for telling you how they may view it. It's not my view that you're arguing with, do you get that? Maybe just show the Russians a bit of respect by not having nuclear weapons close to their country that aren't even required.
 
Rroff said:
He isn't bat **** crazy, though for some reason his entire rationale and so on seems to be altered of late - but don't equate doesn't want to totally annihilate the West with won't do it if he feels it is necessary.
Click to expand...
If he feels it necessary to destroy the west, it also means it’s necessary to destroy Russia, because that’s a guaranteed outcome
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Well if yesterday was anything to go by we have at least one who is so scared and spineless we may as well start the Russian lessons now.

The fact that anyone should be able to dictate to another country what they can and cannot do is beyond reason to any rational person

I think they think IQ levels are dropping, they are probably using their own as evidence ;)
Click to expand...


I notice that the "We must not anger Putin because he has nukes." crowd seem to also think we are safe if we just let him take what he wants this time because "We are NATO and he would never attack a NATO country."

Why not?

If the "I have nukes" threat is demonstrated to work so well against NATO now, why wouldn't it work when he invades Poland or other NATO country?

"Oh he attacked a NATO country? Well then, *now I want to end life as we know it on the planet." I don't think they will say that.

The "end of the world" is not something the "Don't make the crazy man angry" crowd will be okay with just because a NATO country is attacked.

If Putin is ready to push the end-the-world button, why would NATO have any bearing on who he attacks?
 
robfosters said:
If he feels it necessary to destroy the west, it also means it’s necessary to destroy Russia, because that’s a guaranteed outcome
Click to expand...

When it comes to nuclear weapons the Russian psyche tends to be a bit different - they spent the cold war not seeing it as "the end" but something to plan for and survive but also Putin seems to have something of the if I can't have it no one else can either mentality :s
 
Twinz said:
I notice that the "We must not anger Putin because he has nukes." crowd seem to also think we are safe if we just let him take what he wants this time because "We are NATO and he would never attack a NATO country."

Why not?

If the "I have nukes" threat is demonstrated to work so well against NATO now, why wouldn't it work when he invades Poland or other NATO country?

The "end of the world" is not something the "Don't make the crazy man angry" crowd will be okay with just because a NATO country is attacked.

If Putin is ready to push the end-the-world button, why would NATO have any bearing on who he attacks?
Click to expand...

We're not saying let him take what he wants, our red line are countries in NATO. To be honest though I don't think he's capable of waging any sort of land war against countries in NATO so it's a pretty mute point.
 
Im just hoping that these sanctions are kept until Russia pull out or the people of Russia overthrow the government on mass I mean millions.

I have nothing against the Russian people and I understand these sanctions will hurt the people hard, but Putin must end up in a jail cell for this as far as im concerned.

I really do hope these sanctions force Putin to give up we shouldnt let him take anymore land of Ukraine.
 
Roar87 said:
I mean I'm trying to explain how Russia may view nukes on their borders and you're telling me I'm wrong for telling you how they may view it. It's not my view that you're arguing with, do you get that? Maybe just show the Russians a bit of respect by not having nuclear weapons close to their country that aren't even required.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what Russia thinks, or you think they think

Do you think Ukraine was happy with loads of Russian tanks and troops on their border?
 
EddScott said:
The annexation of Crimea was a far more chaotic time and the "West" for want of a better term, didn't react much.
Click to expand...

That's missing the point. If Putin didn't feel like he had to attack the rest of Ukraine in order to annexe Crimea, then why would he feel like he had to so in order to annexe Donesk and Luhansk?

"it was different" is not the same as "it is different". It isn't, the only reason there's been a different reaction from the west is the invasion of Ukraine itself and the build up beforehand.

And if "of course Ukraine would try to take them back" then why haven't they tried to take back Crimea?

Of course the truth is as always nuanced, but I don't think there's much, if any truth that Putin would in any way feel like he should have to apply attrition to Ukraine to do either or any of these things and that POV is supported both by Putin's disregard of the Ukrainian military so far during his "special operations" and that Ukraine made no attempt whatsoever to try to reassert their sovereignty over Crimea since the Russians pulled out, which they did within months of taking control back in 2014.

This is not about just taking Donesk and Luhansk.
 
Roar87 said:
We're not saying let him take what he wants, our red line are countries in NATO. To be honest though I don't think he's capable of waging any sort of land war against countries in NATO so it's a pretty mute point.
Click to expand...

But he has nukes and threatens he will use them. Is the end of the world okay if he attacks NATO, or will you recommend we just roll over then too?

He has nukes after all.

The fear his nuke threat seems to instill means he doesnt need to wage a ground war. "Surrender or I will nuke you." is all he has to say.
 
Last edited:
Lavrov has said that Russia, which launched what it calls a special military operation against Ukraine last week, would face a "real danger" if Kyiv acquired nuclear weapons.
Click to expand...

The irony being the only motivation Ukraine has had to acquire nuclear weapons is the past few days.
 
In my opinion (which isn't worth much lol), now is the time to bolster the defenses of NATO countries, and move all the missiles/air defence etc into place. Don't wait, get it done now. Russia has already raised the bar for this trash, so do it now while tensions are already there. He has clearly shown he really doesn't care, and if he takes Ukraine, will be placing nukes and defences in Ukraine. Quite literally what he said was provocation by NATO, he WILL be doing himself. So do it now.
 
bingham67 said:
Im just hoping that these sanctions are kept until Russia pull out or the people of Russia overthrow the government on mass I mean millions.

I have nothing against the Russian people and I understand these sanctions will hurt the people hard, but Putin must end up in a jail cell for this as far as im concerned.

I really do hope these sanctions force Putin to give up we shouldnt let him take anymore land of Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Look at North Korea, Iran and Cuba. Heavy sanctions. Cuba is under a complete embargo. Did it change the regime? No it did not. So why would you expect a change of regime now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom