Putin likely to invade Ukraine before Christmas. He knows if Trump wins he'll make NATO tighten its belt meaning a move on Ukraine in 2017 won't be possible. He knows America is at its most vulnerable in this transistory state and while everyone is busy taking about Hilary's health.
Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
how does trump forcing nato to reduce spending/kicking out members/refusing to help other members make it harder for Russia to invade?
I dunno - they've got about a month and a bit where the weather and conditions are ideal for Russian armour but after that conditions would be against them and once winter sets in no one wants to be launching a large scale offensive in Ukraine especially not an invading force.
I'm curious though why Russia is making such an effort to shore up their anti-air capabilities in the region - pushing a ton of it into Donetsk, S400 setup into Crimea and other areas in the region - from what I recall Ukraine's air capabilities are pretty impacted at the moment and no threat to Russia - seems quite some lengths for them to go to if they weren't concerned of immediate action against them or planning something major.
It's to stop the West from helping out, clear as day.
Associate
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 189
- Location
- UK
The Russians have amassed troops in their own country next to the border of a country with a civil war? They obviously want to start WW3!
What do they gain from Eastern Ukraine? Think about it. Some charred soil, a few coal mines and factories? They're not exactly short of any of those things. Nor are they idiots, the cost-benefit analysis isn't positive. Crimea was a fundamentally different proposition - it was their only Black Sea port.
The power to Crimea from Ukraine was cut earlier this year after some people blew up the transmission lines. Russia claims they have discovered more plots to disrupt infrastructure in Crimea. What's more Russia is bombing in Syria and supporting Iranian operations in the country against the wishes of NATO countries. NATO members have been clear that they may take Kaliningrad in retaliation for any further aggression and have escalated exercises in surrounding countries. It doesn't take a genius to work out that Russia is making clear what their own retaliation would be if NATO makes any aggressive moves.
It's all just a dance, don't expect anything big to happen.
What do they gain from Eastern Ukraine? Think about it. Some charred soil, a few coal mines and factories? They're not exactly short of any of those things. Nor are they idiots, the cost-benefit analysis isn't positive. Crimea was a fundamentally different proposition - it was their only Black Sea port.
The power to Crimea from Ukraine was cut earlier this year after some people blew up the transmission lines. Russia claims they have discovered more plots to disrupt infrastructure in Crimea. What's more Russia is bombing in Syria and supporting Iranian operations in the country against the wishes of NATO countries. NATO members have been clear that they may take Kaliningrad in retaliation for any further aggression and have escalated exercises in surrounding countries. It doesn't take a genius to work out that Russia is making clear what their own retaliation would be if NATO makes any aggressive moves.
It's all just a dance, don't expect anything big to happen.
Nice post
Russia has its forces amassed in the event ethnic Russians becomes a deliberate target for the puppet in Kiev. This is nothing of a surprise. They did something similar with the CIA op in Georgia that then backfired spectacularly.
Realistically, Kaliningrad is not going to be taken back as "revenge".
that makes no sense, if Trump wins and makes NATO 'tighten its belt' then invading would be easier not harder.
[citation needed]
Indeed - that would likely lead to nuclear war - plus it is largely a militarised enclave and in range of Russia's long range weapons so no easy thing to accomplish.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,597
Trumps speech was about getting NATO members to pay the X% of GDP that they are meant to. There are quite a few who pay less and the Americans are left to pick up the tab.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-37495067
Missile that shot down MH17 was fired from Russian-controlled part of Ukraine. Missile launcher later sent back to Russia proper.
Missile that shot down MH17 was fired from Russian-controlled part of Ukraine. Missile launcher later sent back to Russia proper.
Have they decided which one of their three stories is the right one yet?
Which stories are those then scorza? US fired missile from Saturn... Ukrainian missile shoulder launched from Prague... A stray stone thrown by Captain Marvel?
Not remember this embarrassing example of maskirovka? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-state-broadcaster-MH17-shot-shoddy-fake.html
On post #2417 I said one thing is certain, don't believe bellingcat. Its bellingcat who give the analysis. Their publications and the owner are heaped in controversy. They also have clearly a very strong anti-Russia bias.
I cant trust the piece for that reason, they have an agenda.
I cant trust the piece for that reason, they have an agenda.
So do you
Fortunately his agenda has no bearing on world whatsoever
Dictionary said:
Thankfully we don't rely on your wording much either. We know us lads are prone to exaggerate, but 62 isn't by any stretch "a few".
- Status