Putin, arse, elbow

From what I can gather there were some NATO troops there. Training. The gung ho brigade need to realise the implications of the west jointing in. It isn't straight forward. eg Seems Lithuania wont back down on Russian stuff passing through their territory even after being asked to. Putin could send them a few missiles. What would NATO do? Send some missiles to Russia maybe? Where would it end? Various engagements are just likely to spread the area of the conflict. A point Biden made. This would happen if any of the local NATO states got involved even if just used as a base. Russia could probably plant a cruise missile directly onto the house of commons. Needn't be a nuke or an ICBM. Either side using those could result in a lot of mess in many countries. If Russia feels it's had it as a country that is when just like others they will be used in enormous numbers.

A link that looks at it all from a different perspective. A fair bit of which is valid.

The ecconomic war is probably the main factor of concern to some. Maybe not the final result from Ukraine's point of view. But as I have said I am not a fan of geopolitics. They often stink and can even go awol and cause additional problems.

If a missile was launched at London, do you think we would wait and see what type it was before launching Trident at moscow, non nuclear ballistic missiles are a silly choice to attack a nuclear power with, so they wouldn't be used.

Charlie George said:

If a missile was launched at London, do you think we would wait and see what type it was before launching Trident at moscow, non nuclear ballistic missiles are a silly choice to attack a nuclear power with, so they wouldn't be used.

Click to expand...

How "astute" of you. They would phone up first and state it wasn't a nuke just like NATO would if they fired one into Russia.

They have one with twice the range needed direct moscow to london.

ajohn said:

How "astute" of you. They would phone up first and state it wasn't a nuke just like NATO would if they fired one into Russia.

They have one with twice the range needed direct moscow to london.

Click to expand...

And what if they was lying?(it has been known) do you think we would wait and see before readying an attack, and the only real missile we have capable of hitting moscow in retaliation is nuclear Trident.

Many of us have felt since day one that, though it's understandable to resist Russia, that would only get "our side" more people killed. Posted that months ago.

Nothing has changed. It is/was always possible that something in Putin's edifice might crack, but I don't see it as imminent.
He'll stop when he wants to stop, or the world will blow up. This little annoying island might go first in a round of brinkmanship.

Justin Passing said:

Nothing has changed. It is/was always possible that something in Putin's edifice might crack

Click to expand...

That's what the sanctions are about. There seems to be a generally accepted that they will do little for some undefined time that wont be short. Some mention the money going in for gas but that is only part of the problem. Putin has said that the west is wrecking their own economy. In a sense he is correct. Inflation here isn't all that far of what was reported from Russia earlier, might reach the same. There is currently an attempt to replace a lot of the missing oil but for some reason not all of it. The increased supply also appears to have a time limit of a few of months. Maybe the powers assume there will be some sort of solution by then but remove Russian sanctions?????? It is going to cost a packet to remove need and it wont happen overnight. It seems arms company shares prices have rocketed, defence spending increased but where is the rush to do something about power. Are we all going to start running EV's next week? Brexit freaks point at the EU who are having similar inflation levels to ours. Our GDP is seen as going awol and theirs will too. If the EU takes gas from other suppliers what do you think will happen to prices?

Then I wonder if Ukraine is a proxy war an ideal one to have to get at Russia which is where that alternate view link comes in. Some one else's body bags. How will it finish up for them? I'm not suggesting that Russia should be allowed to do what ever it wants but problems preventing it.

Sanctions. Iran has had them for years. Brief description
The United States has imposed an arms ban and an almost total economic embargo on Iran, which includes sanctions on companies doing business with Iran, a ban on all Iranian-origin imports, sanctions on Iranian financial institutions, and an almost total ban on selling aircraft or repair parts to Iranian aviation ...
Put down to human rights - a problem mentioned concerning several arab states. Iran had a revolution.

More recently Venezuela, USA embargo, plenty of oil. Trump not happy with the bloke that was elected.. Earlier news suggests that the oil money was not getting to the people or they wanted more of it. Refugees pouring out. Washington has OK'd some oil for debt flow. Not much can be provided by the sound of it. They have the largest reserves. Saudi similar. None of it will last for ever.

Zelenskyy has recently said he wants the war over by the end of the year. Will Russia run out of kit / people or the sanctions achieve anything by then? I can't see an end to Russian sanctions in anything like the near future. All wait and see again really.

There has been a strike on Kremenchuk. That is on the old east west dividing line. A bridge, a mall and a weapons dump mentioned. More civilian deaths. Miss hit, missile shot down, deliberate, dump blowing up? Are they preparing to take all of the east? Putin mentioned more if no solution once Donbas has been taken - yet to be done but one province more or less completed.

Seems Russia is calling up reservists. UN etc say not enough troops.

Seems my mention of problems with shooting missiles into other states is a bit to obscure for some. Obviously phone calls wouldn't be reassuring. I am a bit concerned that I suspect they are thinking about how to have wars in other states rather than their own or the enemy's.

DevilWorshipper said:

raison d'être behind the sacrifices of WW2.

Click to expand...

The presence of nuclear power makes things rather different these days. They are referred to as a deterrent - if push come to shove and a country feels it's had it they get used. Mutually Assured Destruction. Warning time used to be 4min. Interesting documentary on BBC2 - A Very British Deterrent. It'll be on iplayer. Shows how politics works to some extent too but much of the work is usually done by people we don't here from. Diplo's and their advisors. Probably why Wilson built subs. Boris runs around spouting as do other leaders. Eg It's UN diplo's trying to sort grain out - not the G7 heads they are just mentioning it.

Talk of 2 new sanction from the G7. Gold and a cap of some sort on the price of Russian oil. They are not sure how to do it. Gold did look like a certainty.
In recent years, gold has been the top Russian export after energy — reaching almost $19 billion or about 5% of global gold exports, in 2020, according to the White House. Of Russian gold exports, 90% was consigned to G-7 countries. Of these Russian exports, over 90%, or nearly $17 billion, was exported to the UK.

Recent wars have changed as well. They generally involve troops scuttling around in populated areas. Armies are smaller and the days of forming shield walls and fighting in a field some where are over. Bows and arrows were long range weapons, cannon too. Thins have moved on destruction wise.

Our new chief of staff says he is mobilising our army. Talk or what. I have wondered if troops would go in at some point. It seems that NATO allies have 40,000 troops in E Europe currently and some gear. The forthcoming meeting is talking about 300,000 and more gear. Getting gear there if ever needed takes an unacceptable time. Troops probably figure in that too. 2% GDP on defence now seen as a lower limit but countries can't always up it immediately even to 2%. If GDP falls, looks likely in some areas the contribution falls.

Maybe they use it all to do a Putin but get out of Ukraine or else. What if he says no.

Might be heading for a time where the cost of winter woollies shoots up and it's already a good time to loose weight if you can. If only it was all so simple to sort out. It might not be.

The parts of Ukraine that Putin is after wont make much difference to Russia's grain production which isn't negligible even without any additions.
Fertiliser and ingredients - high proportions come from Russia and Belarus. There essentially isn't much of change in these areas what ever happens in Ukraine - other than sanctions which aren't applied to food. That is what Blinken said when the subject popped up anyway.It could be seen as the evil west starving people when grain is available.

The nukes. MAD sounds great until some country with them would ideally be invaded. This touches on why N Korea wants them. It complicates things so we get an economic and a proxy war.

The war. I still see it as open ended but we are short on accurate info really. Western pundits stick to what they see as Putin's original aims which do not match what he originally said that well. One today said Russia appears to be winning. Western weapons may change that at some point. Some of the views go back to Kyiv which personally I don't think Russia had much chance of taking unless it decided to just give up or they flattened it.

NATO gearing up has also been mentioned but no firm details yet. It can spend way more than Russia etc but pointing out this has an economic effects on both sides. Also that Putin can use it to show that the west is "attacking them". Having talked to a Russian this area relates to him being popular in the first place. Another pundit mentioned that the size of the NATO build up is large enough for a serious war on European soil. He feels that Russia wont be too bothered about Finland joining NATO but probably will be if USA troops and nukes were stationed there. This one lives in Moscow. AlJ have had him on before. He doesn't seem to push Russian propaganda. It's a view. UK news rattles on about nukes being stationed on Russia boarder. I think the reporter thinks everybody still uses silos. They can be launched in a number of ways these days.

300,000 quick reaction NATO troops is a lot. I suspect it will all come down to economics eventually and in Russia's case supplies. Touble is ecconomics don't look good for anyone involved at the moment.

Give out talking head, Boris, something to report, and forget maybe
Britain's top soldier blasted the Government for slashing the Army by 9,000 troops today.

By 2025 and the top soldier may have been replaced

“We will not be cutting our armed forces in any form. We will be maintaining the size of our armed forces because we are increasing funding for them,” Johnson told reporters at the event.

There are all sorts of cuts but more war heads - I think

ajohn said:

The parts of Ukraine that Putin is after

Click to expand...

He shouldn't be allowed to succeed, whatever it takes. He has carried out an illegal invasion of a neighbouring sovereign country. He can't get away with it.

DevilWorshipper said:

A threat to remove that permanent member status might be a big stick, but an effective stick.

Click to expand...

Why? The reason stated for not doing that is to leave that channel open. The UN was the channel used to get evacuations working from Mariupol others too. It's currently being used to try and sort out Ukraine's grain exports. It's where nations meet to sort these sort of things out via their own UN representatives. In this case it appears to be UN head, Ukraine's, Russia's and Turkey's. The aim appears to be some demining, UN inspections and a Turkish war ship. Then grain can flow as usual out of Odessa. Russia's initial suggestion providing there ships aren't sunk, They will demine, they will inspect and provide the war ship. That was a while ago now and little chance of it being accepted for obvious reasons. The inspections to check that arms aren't sent to Ukraine in grain ships. Turkey gets drawn in as they are the ones most likely to be acceptable to both sides. As it's not happening I suspect it may never work but it is an optimal solution in terms of feeding the world.

The man from UN wants fertiliser to flow freely as well. This in some ways is more important as it has a bearing on world wide grain and food production.

The UN is also involved in a number of other world wide aspects. The UN reps are likely to be the people that sort out any "final" solution. If that doesn't leave Ukraine free of Russian occupation it wont be seen as acceptable but it still the most likely place. The UN reps of the 2 countries.

DevilWorshipper said:

It isn't the Russian food production that is of concern,

Click to expand...

Russia's export of these and a number of other things being absent is of concern. A mayor impact on the effect of sanctions, They can ship grain and food anyway irrespective but not the rest and that isn't just gas and oil.

Russia has decided to pull out of Snake Island as a 'step of good will'.

Nothing to do with the repeated MRLS strikes that Ukraine was dropping in and making the island untenable of course. Oh no, not that.

Eventually there will be some negotiated settlement

Ukraine needs some thing like 4 billion a month ?? To sustain there defence efforts ??

Parts of the occupied Ukraine will remain under Russian control for the foreseeable future certainly as long as Putin is in power

IT Minion said:

Russia has decided to pull out of Snake Island as a 'step of good will'.

Nothing to do with the repeated MRLS strikes that Ukraine was dropping in and making the island untenable of course. Oh no, not that.

Click to expand...

They say to help Ukraine establish a grain corridor. It's adjacent to an area of Ukraine that effectively land locks Moldova. Google maps appear to show low population levels and beaches. It's area is ~0.08 miles^2.

Ukraine claimed that Russia was stationing missile launch stuff on it and war in ukrain mention ukraine attacking it a while ago now. This appears to show stuff blowing up

transam said:

Parts of the occupied Ukraine will remain under Russian control for the foreseeable future certainly as long as Putin is in power

Click to expand...

That will not end sanctions against Russia. It might achieve a cease fire which if left alone Rusisia may do of it's own accord but it means Ukraine ceases firing as well.

NATO permanent reps

NATO was formed because of concerns about Russian expansion and also importantly due to conditions post WWII an increase in the spread of communism The Marshall plan also figured in that.

Maybe people should look at who is in what and what organisations are for.