Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Russia can no longer hold a veto over the UN security council as they do no uphold the tenets of this body, there needs to be a revolution in the RF so that the current regime is overthrown and the integrity of the security council upheld

What a faux pas of an answer.

Believe it or not there are millions who hold the needless deaths of many thousands of women and children as being of far more significant a reason to intervene, than the veiled nuclear threats of a tyrant.

When exactly do you say enough is enough? All we are doing is allowing Russia to commit countless atrocities, and giving China carte blanche to do the same when it chooses to in the future. The nuclear threat will never go away, so do you just ignore the mass slaughtering of innocents for forever and a day?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: better to die fighting for freedom than to live under the jackboot of a despot.

Those troops won't last long if the overland route for supplies is closed off. Supply via the sea will be difficult as well, given the presence and strength of the Russian Baltic Fleet. One of the reasons Ukraine is still going strong is not only NATO support but also the fact that most supply routes are beyond the range of Russian Ground Forces. Even if the crossing to Poland is closed, that still leaves the overland borders with Slovakia, Hungary and Romania. Any overland supplies heading to the Baltic countries meanwhile need to come through the Suwalki corridor, which is an obvious chokepoint.

I wouldn't be so sure about Russia not being able to at least temporarily gain air superiority either. NATO air presence in the Baltics is symbolic at best, seldom amounting to more than half a dozen fighters operating out of a single air base, with said air base being with in easy range of Russian long range SAMs. Will NATO be able to regain air superiority? Most likely, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if Russia would be able to gain and hold air superiority for the first 72 hours of the operation, not least because they'd probably put a lot more "punch" into the operation than they did for Ukraine.

Mariupol not looking good for Ukrainians at the moment.

I think we might not be understanding the purpose of NATO. It is not a force to bring about democratic supremacy in the world. It's a defensive north Atlantic alliance. It has been carried along with the us a couple of times on some unrelated missions which were probably a mistake and would have led to divestment in NATO by European countries. NATO pondered for years before intervening in the Balkan wars. I don't remember a time when a NATO member has been invaded by anyone, I don't know why people are losing confidence in them now. There is no reason to believe that they would not meet their obligations. And they are not mandated to defend Ukraine. I have no doubt that if a NATO member is attacked that all of NATO will respond.

What about Wall Street buying up Russian bonds and the Eu sending billions to Russia every week. You think not buying Nescafe is going to make any difference ?

It’s insanity to be so reliant on Russian energy- there were choices - for example Germany shut down nuclear and coal fired production- Merkel pandering to the woke “the world is about to end” cult. Now we see what a real threat looks like.

This had better be a wake up call for all The idiots that revel in this nonsense. We also could do a lot more with wind and solar energy around Europe. That’s one area I think Ireland has done well with 40% of electricity now wind generated. It’s not without its drawbacks and issues but I’d a strong part of the overall energy mix.

OK that's your solution, that I go to Poland border and fight for Ukraine with just a gun yeah?

You make it sound like there is no possibility of alternative energy supplies, when there probably are. LNG from Australia, the gulf and US being just some.

That 40km convoy would be on Russian soil so now you're really running the risk of this going nuclear. You're not really thinking this through.

Any risk you think you're mitigating now is magnified by 50 if his war moves to the baltics.

The EU is still spending billions on Russian oil/gas, because we can't just "stop" our reliance on them instantly. It's something that has to be phased out (and is planned to be phased out). Stopping Russian oil/gas is going to hurt us, absolutely, but that's the price we are willing to pay.

As for Nestle, it's just one component, every company that stops doing business with Russia, big or small, sends a message and has some impact.

Edit: And for Wall Street, it's typically some Ru debt held by Americans being sold to other Americans. Not much of it either by the looks of it.

Ireland is still going to get it's gas and other countries will pay. If Ireland relied solely on Russian gas it would do **** all and everyone knows it.