Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

17217227247267273690

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 521 DontHitTheDitch
    ✭✭✭


    Are you judging the people of Ukraine from the comfort of your armchair?

    We'll stockpile the Xanax and let the hysterical know if Putin gets what he wants and its safe to come out. No one wants a war in Europe, no one wants a nuclear strike. How many wars have the great powers fought since Hiroshima and Nagasaki? How many have resulted in nuclear strikes? Grab a paper bag and take a few deep breaths.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 803 technocrat
    ✭✭✭


    I am just making the point even if there is a nuclear fallout here we don’t know to what extent this will go.

    It could be contained very quickly by the military response from the west.

    The ‘end of the world’ armageddon scenario painted by some posters here is highly unlikely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 858 jolivmmx
    ✭✭✭


    I cannot believe that a world leader is throwing about threats of using nuclear weapons and his troops have twice attacked nuclear facilities and this is actually happening



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,112 Blowfish
    ✭✭✭


    On a somewhat related note, Syria could be an interesting spot to put pressure on Putin as the civil war isn't anywhere close to being resolved. Right now, Assad's regime is basically being propped up by the Russians, but with the focus on Ukraine, plus sanctions etc., resupplying those troops is going to be a fair bit more difficult now. A well timed offensive by the Turkish backed FSA or the coalition backed Kurds might start causing Assad/Russia some serious difficulties, or at the very least drag some of the Kremlins focus and resources away from Ukraine.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,676 Talisman
    ✭✭✭


    Greg Palast has posted the security assurances given to Ukraine in 1994.

    Russia has already violated #1 and #2 of that agreement so why would Ukraine agree to any terms offered now?

    annex-i.jpg




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,453 Cluedo Monopoly
    ✭✭✭✭


    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,052 titan18
    ✭✭✭✭


    So basically declaring a no fly zone and then hoping Russians adhere to it. If they call that bluff, you're fecked if you're not willing to fight them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,478 gmisk
    ✭✭✭✭




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 757 generic_throwaway
    ✭✭✭


    I do not think our politicians are particularly corrupt now, or at least on a scale of 1-10, we were at an 8 back in 2007 and we are at a 2 or a 3 now.

    There is no money in NOT building property. Nobody gives you money to not build. The brown envelopes that Fianna Fail did such a great trade in during the bubble were for planning permissions, rezonings and that sort of thing - trying to get stuff built.

    But that's for another thread. I don't see how we could take 100,000 refugees, but if we could we probably should.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,574 rogber
    ✭✭✭


    Putin will never be in the Hague and doubtless his friends in China and Syria and Israel will be happy to host him in future.

    His downfall is far from certain



  • Advertisement


  • Really? And there was I thinking all Ukrainian men are henceforth conscripted, even if they’ve never held a weapon before. If they can do it, so can you. Off you go to join the international brigade, or dispense with the guff.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,321 Wibbs
    Mod ✭✭✭✭


    No, a no fly zone by NATO would be exactly what putin would love to see. It would be the first time in 20 years he'd get a rush of blood to his little head without the assistance of viagra. It would give him the perfect excuse/reason/propaganda coup to claim to his subjects that the West is out to get them. He's already trying the American/Iraq WMD in Ukraine for just that purpose of the existential Western threat pretense, just like the Yank leadership tried back then with Iraq. A no fly zone would hand that to him on a plate.

    Many worry about Artificial Intelligence. I worry far more about Organic Idiocy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,464 topmanamillion
    ✭✭✭



    It`s bigger than that, there`s been a sea change.

    The world has been living in a bit of a fantasy for the past two decades or so doing business with whoever you want. That`s over now. The EU/USA and China/Russia are just so incomparable now commerce isn`t enough to push them together anymore.

    Russia isn`t leaving Ukraine anytime soon (to admit defeat would be the end of Putin) and the west aren`t backing down from sanctions (to do that would give Putin carte blanche to take Moldova and Georgia and he`d keep going until he was stopped).

    So we`ll be paying at the pumps and the check out counter for the foreseeable future. We`re in a new age cold war now and its fantasy to think we`re going back to how it was.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,660 nullzero
    °°°°°
    ✭✭✭✭


    You're wrong I'm afraid.

    The first city that would likely be hit with a Russian nuke is Berlin. Most of the targets will be across Europe not only the United States. The warheads will be devastating upon detonation and then by their after effects of fallout and soil irradiation.

    Ireland would likely not be struck by any warheads, instead we'd die slowly from the immense levels of nuclear fallout from the warheads used against the United Kingdom and the United States.

    Mutually assured destruction has worked as a deterrent because reasonably rational people have been at the helm up until now. At this stage all bets are off.

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,148 wassie
    ✭✭✭


    NI.JPG

    The Northies get a mention in that treaty!!

    Maybe Paul Givan & Michelle O'Neill could be sent as a joint delegation given there ain't much happening at Stormont these days.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 Gatling
    ✭✭✭✭




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,306 Drumpot
    ✭✭✭✭


    I wasn’t saying nuclear weapons were a conspiracy I meant from the perspective of it staring us in the face as an immediate concern.

    Imagine the response people would of gotten barely 2 weeks ago, if they’d said Putin is gonna threaten the world with nuclear war and start picking out individual countries to threaten if they joined NATO.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,773 Tony EH
    ✭✭✭✭


    The "end of the world" doesn't just look like Mad Max.

    Think about what you're saying for a second.

    If, say, there's just two 50 MT warheads dropped...and unlikely scenario...but let's say one warhead gets used and it's greeted with another single one in retaliation. You will have huge areas of land that will become uninhabitable for decades. It'll make Chernobyl look like a broken ride at Disney Land.

    The fallout in human terms would be almost unimaginable.

    We've already had people bemoaning the Ukrainian refugees moving west because of Russia's invasion. Poland have already been warning of a humanitarian crisis on their border because of a million. Well, imagine many, many, millions more desperately trying escape the long lasting effects of a nuclear exchange on European soil and the effects that that would have on western Europe. It would probably tank western Europe for a long time to come.

    So the "end of the world" might not be a desert wasteland. But it would certainly mean the end of things in Europe as we know it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,453 Cluedo Monopoly
    ✭✭✭✭


    Sweet Enola Gay, son - what planet are you on!?

    Maybe your scenario plays out on the XBox but not in real life. If nuclear weapons are triggered, then it's Goodnight Irene.

    What are they doing in the Hyacinth House?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 894 Bayonet
    ✭✭✭


    One of the fallouts from this war after it's all settled, is countries that are supposed to be allies of the US or under their protection....will seek their own protection. America's word is not worth the paper it's written on. I suspect Gulf states + Israel Re: Iran deal will find that out. Absolutely despicable to disarm Ukraine and assure them of their safety.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 803 technocrat
    ✭✭✭


    If the West takes that view then Putin can do what he likes.

    Hell he might be only starting with Ukraine..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,182 Kermit.de.frog
    ✭✭✭✭


    Not much noted but in the last two weeks the United States has quietly but consistently been upping it's military hardware and personnel presence all over NATO Europe particularly, of course, in Eastern Europe.

    With these additional deployments, the US now has about 100,000 US military personnel either on rotational or permanent orders stationed in Europe right now, the official said.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,046 briany
    ✭✭✭✭


    Even if Russian jets were deterred from entering Ukrainian airspace with NATO jets flying around, there'd be nothing to stop the Russians firing off a few SAMs at those planes from the ground. Therefore, it would be necessary to take out SAM sites and their support/supply infrastructure in order to ensure aerial superiority, and if those supply lines lead back to Russian territory, then it might be good time to stick a bit of coal up our arses, for we might get a diamond.

    Anyway, if the Russians are willing to just not fly planes over Ukraine, they'd be as well to pack up and go home, which would be ideal, since aerial support is a big component in a successful invasion strategy, these days (not that I'd call their invasion strategy particularly successful thus far).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 Gatling
    ✭✭✭✭


    Only one way to find out ,nato aircraft are there most nights ,throw some armed interceptors into the mix ,you could find a lot of Russian pilots calling in sick



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,972 buried
    ✭✭✭


    What's not going to happen? What are you trying to articulate? Just because you have the Roscommon colours draped over your picture doesn't give you the licence to talk derogatory nonsense to me G

    Bullet The Blue Shirts



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 86,725 Overheal
    ✭✭✭✭




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 665 goldenmick
    ✭✭✭



    Don't be so sure.

    To quote the words of Martin Luther King:

    "I Have a Dream"....


    martin luthor.jpg




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 858 jolivmmx
    ✭✭✭


    Unfortunately now the appetite is America first. There is too much internal strife to unify the Americans collectively. They are most keen to use their money to keep down the price of inflation than to save some faraway people. There is no sense of collective good anymore. It is cult of the individual. Being incredibly selfish is lauded. And closer to home, I saw some guy saying that the Ukraine war should stop because it will drive up the price of his petrol. That is their mentality





  • A no fly zone is not possible without taking out ground to air defences. It's why Russia cannot fly with supremacy over Ukraine. There are many devices dotted around Ukraine, thanks to NATO.

    YOU CANNOT ENFORCE A NO FLY ZONE WITHOUT AIR SUPREMACY.

    YOU CANNOT HAVE AIR SUPREMACY WITH SAM SITES ACROSS THE BORDER IN RUSSIA.

    NATO will not attack Russia (for obvious reasons, although some preppers would love it).

    There is no need for a no fly zone, Russian Air Force jets/attack helicopters are getting knocked out of the sky.


    The problem is Russian artillery.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 858 jolivmmx
    ✭✭✭


    I don’t know how the US would react to WWII if it happened now… Would they still fly in to help us…..



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement