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

19979981000100210033690

Comments

  • Posts: 7,946 [Deleted User]


    I mentioned Korea, giving specifics. When did it happen in Vietnam?

    Russian mercenaries are not Russian forces, and don't count, same as US or even Irish volunteers currently in Ukraine not counting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,101 ✭✭✭✭briany


    @Wibbs

    As is always the case in such things when it comes down to it: "Our" side always tells the truth, "Their" side never does. One of the greatest benefits we hold by living in free societies is that we can publicly ask questions. And we should. Those who automatically shout questions down should remember that. And remember this too: Russians don't have that choice. If there's anything we should be fighting for so far away from the actual battlefield it's this.

    Because war is an existential matter, (for the directly sides involved, at least) it doesn't really surprise me that the search for objective truth goes out the window. Self-preservation and self-interest become paramount when fighting to preserve your life and way of life. Whatever can buoy the morale and minimise the enemy will be used. The objective truth of it is that we're all going to die eventually and fighting over a patch of ground will only hasten that for some. This, however, has not really stopped humans from waging wars for thousands of years.

    It is, in my opinion at least, a good thing that we live in a relatively free society where questioning things is tolerated, but that, as we've seen here and elsewhere, is also being used as a cover by bad actors to plant little thought seeds and discord, in among the many people asking honest questions. Questions are good - up to a point, but they should achieve answers, and when it's a case of war or some impending crisis, these should be achieved sooner rather than later. There isn't endless time to moralise and philosophise.



  • Posts: 15,802 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    A good read on the Russian sanctions and where they still need to be applied. One of the last major ones that could be applied is to Sovcomflot, the Russian shipping company. Block that from Western ports and from trade with western companies and it'll be devastating




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭Hobgoblin11


    Nato should step in and do something or leave the fold and allow Ukraine align with like minded countries such as Poland in this prelude to WW3

    Dundalk, Co. Louth



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,479 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    I'm guessing that the Mariupol ultimatum is because the regime thinks if it can take the city, it will be the first step to overthrowing Ukraine - it seems to hold major propaganda value for them (they can sell it to the disciples back home as a major victory).



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,870 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    Neither do I. Any use of nuclear weapons or the threat of their use would oblige the UK and USA and the UN Security Council to become involved.

    If they did not authorise military action to support Ukraine it would send the message to every other nation that if you want security you need your own nuclear weapons and do not give them up under any circumstances.

    The Russian Federation will not want to risk bringing the UK, USA and other UN countries into the war.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    I don't think many people are "turning a blind eye" as you're suggesting. It's about risk versus reward:

    Right now the immediate risk is Ukraine lost to Russia with large numbers of displaced Ukrainians throughout our nations; and the reward is Ukraine crippling Russian forces and forcing a settlement from Russia which leaves Ukraine relatively intact with the support of the West but without the West needing to get involved in direct military action.

    Now that statement doesn't fully capture the devastation being wrought on ordinary Ukrainian people in places like Mariupol but it nevertheless remains accurate from a macro perspective and, crucially, if you take the emotion out of it.

    NATO engaging Russia directly dramatically changes that risk versus reward picture because Russia can then legitimately target NATO countries all over the globe. Think about every coastal NATO military installation or "military-industrial" target; because every single one of those is at immediate risk to Russian missile boats. And that's ignoring the fact Russia clearly has zero qualms about hitting civilian and infrastructure targets which don't seem to have much military or strategic relevance. What effect do you think that will have on the globe? To global economies and supply chains? To food and essential medical supplies? How many extra people around the world do you think will be at added risk of famine and disease and death?

    And if NATO starts to hit Russian soil and sufficiently degrade Russia's military forces that ticks two different boxes of Russia's checklist for using nuclear weapons even if no weapons of mass destruction have been used against Russia first. Can you not see how this squarely places the world in clear danger of a nuclear World War III?

    The benefit of waiting before acting is that we can make our decisions based on what Russia is actually doing; not on what people are afraid it might do. And by acting on what people are afraid it might do we might just very well be the trigger that precipitates that action in the first place; i.e. we're enabling a bunch of self-fulfilling prophecies.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    I think this is more along the lines of what the West might have to do to apply pressure on Russia.

    However this only works effectively if we can get buy-in from the likes of India and China; otherwise they'll just pick up the slack at tidy little discounts. And if China and India start playing ball economically with Russia you can bet military assistance mightn't be that far behind.

    If the West weakens itself too much to try and in turn weaken Russia we could leave ourselves in a precarious position in wider geopolitical terms.

    Naturally I haven't a clue what I'm talking about; but as I've said before none of this horrendous **** is happening in a vacuum and there are more entities than Russia who have it out for Ukraine and the West in general.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    The idea that Russia would be able to organise and build-up forces for an assault on NATO and/or other European countries without the rest of the world knowing it is a little ridiculous.

    It took them months to prepare for Ukraine and we can see how well that played out; and we now know that intelligence was predicting the invasion as far back as early December with a high degree of certainty.

    Add to that the fact NATO is now at a significantly increased readiness level which is likely only to improve over time and I don't see how Russia would have any chance taking on NATO or the EU in a conventional conflict as things stand.

    And of course as you say they still have to "finish up" in Ukraine somehow without having to commit significant numbers of its forces there for security purposes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭Hobgoblin11


    President Duda: According to @ZelenskyyUa, Russians from Syria are coming to Ukraine, and mercenaries from the Middle East supporting RU. Syrians are the most numerous. In this context, more NATO assistance to Ukraine is needed. But this also illustrates Russia's weakness and is an interesting signal for Turkey

    the war in Syria must be over, Syrian regime has lost much

    Dundalk, Co. Louth



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 6,583 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    There is nothing stopping Poland from joining the Ukraine in fighting Russia, outside of what ever legislative requirements they have to meet in terms of participating militarily in a foreign conflict.

    They won't however be able to call on other Nato countries to defend them under the articles of NATO if they do so and the Russians start to attack their cities.

    The same applies to any other like minded countries.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    I do wonder if we shouldn't start sanctioning Western companies who continue to do business in Russia; especially anything related to luxury brands, electronics, non-essential foodstuffs like alcohols and soft drinks and confectioneries etc. Not sure how feasible that is or if that would just be a part of a complete trade ban.

    In any case it seems like we should be firing off a new round of sanctions to remind Russia that this isn't going away anytime soon; targeting the oligarchs and senior politicians doesn't seem to be doing the trick.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭Hobgoblin11


    first they came for the Georgians i said nothing then they came for the Ukraine i said nothing then they came for the Moldovans i said nothing...then they came for the Irish

    Dundalk, Co. Louth



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 266 ✭✭AngeloArgue


    Would the Polish army occupying Lviv and surrounding countryside be a good strategy? This should be clearly notified to the Russians as purely a peacekeeping force.

    This would prevent the Russian army from going right up to the Polish border. It prevents Russia from absorbing the entire Ukrainian state. It provides a safe base for the continuation of the Ukrainian government. It gives leverage to the west in negotiating a settlement.



  • Posts: 6,583 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    You couldn't get out of Russia in the days of the USSR without government sanction, unless you defected, and it is known that members of the Russian airforce flew missions in Korea against U.N. aircraft.

    They also provided munitions as well as military personnel in Vietnam, as did the Chinese. There was even a potential flash point when a Russian ship called Simferopol was hit during American bombing on Haiphong.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,432 ✭✭✭combat14


    or trump makes a comeback and **** hits the fan



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,067 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Putin won't allow it to carry on that long, nevermind just to avoid the threat of Trump again in Washington.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Because the problem is not that NATO has no reason to go to war with Russia; it's that it does not want to go to war with Russia.

    Aside from the fact that NATO and the majority of the democracies in the West are supposed to value the rule of law.



  • Posts: 6,583 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    In that Trump would most likely stop any financial and military aid from the U.S. to the Ukraine would indeed be the sh1t hitting the fan for them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    There's a distinct difference between caring and being aware that actions have consequences.

    If there's an apartment block on fire and filled with thick smoke but people are trapped there's basically nothing you can do; if you go in without equipment you're likely to become overcome yourself. So now not only have you failed to rescue anyone trapped inside you're now actively hindering the effort to save those people when the fire brigade eventually do arrive.

    Just because you don't run in to almost certain injury or death does not mean that you don't care. Likewise if you're a bystander trying to tell other people not to go in it doesn't mean you don't care; and the same applies here.

    Just because people like me are arguing against direct NATO intervention doesn't mean we don't care; it means that we can see the potential for much more significant consequences both for Ukraine and the rest of the world.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,153 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    I answered your question but you still haven't answered mine. How about it?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Looks kinda like there might be another page after that one; interesting that we don't get to see it?

    I mean I don't know what the "shelf life" is for military gear but some of the Soviet stuff (as the name suggests) is from the 70s/80s and is still being used so...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,335 ✭✭✭RGARDINR


    Yeah I saw it. Thought it was a bit mad to be fair. Was more was thinking if Russia had of done that what would be said about it. Ukraine don't need to go down that route, will give propaganda value to Russia to use.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 266 ✭✭AngeloArgue


    NATO will not attack Russian forces over what is happening in Ukraine.

    The strategy will be to supply a guerrilla warfare campaign of attrition at the same time isolating Russia economically and in international relations.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭ronivek


    I mean it's easy to say "NATO no-fly zone doesn't need troops" but the reality is very different.

    NATO would need to control any airfield from which operations were being conducted: this means security personnel, it means logistics personnel and equipment, it means flight crews and all associated personnel and facilities.

    It also means they need air supremacy at and around the airfield which means NATO ground-based air defenses, logistics crews, engineers, transports, and security.

    Securing air supremacy also means a certain radius of secured ground control which means NATO ground-based anti-artillery and mortar radars, security, etc.

    Then they need to be able to supply these airbases which means supply and logistics flights and convoys which need to be able to GET TO the airfield; so you need to secure these supply routes from both air and ground offensives.

    And then you have the mechanics of the actual no-fly zone itself:

    • How does NATO identify Ukrainian anti-air assets versus Russian anti-air assets?
    • How does Ukraine differentiate between NATO and Russian aircraft and missiles?
    • How does NATO identify and differentiate Ukrainian aircraft and missiles versus Russian aircraft and missiles?
    • Outside of standard Ukrainian units how do you stop Independent Territorial Army Unit #2344 from firing MANPADs at NATO aircraft?

    Granted I'm an idiot and far from an expert on these things but none of this is as simple as people seem to believe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,153 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    Yes, Germany offfered to send Ukraiine hundreds of 35 year old obsolete Strella anti-tank weapons before asking their military. When they checked on them, the storage cases were so moldy they had to send people in protective clothing to get them out. Out of 2700 Germany promised, they ended up sending only 500. So if those photos are purporting to show dismayed Ukrainians shocked at what they got, they might just be propagand. The Ukrinians on learning they were obsolete, said said send them anyway, so they wouldn't have been surprised or annoyed at what they got.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 266 ✭✭AngeloArgue


    NATO declares a "theatre of operations" which cover the borders of Ukraine only

    They launch sorties from Nato airfields in Poland

    Escalation of the war to a WWIII scenario is protected by the MAD (mutually assured destruction) scenario

    Russian nukes probably don't work anyway. Have you not seen the clips of the Russian convoys?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,153 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭Timing belt


    There is a lot of bad blood between the polish and Ukrainian’s especially with older generations.

    Poland will only get involved if there is a direct threat from Russia.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 266 ✭✭AngeloArgue


    Wasn't that region once part of the Polish/Lithuanian empire?



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement