I always wondered about M.A.D in the current world. Like just say NATO and Russia ended up nuking each other. Would one side look at China or India and go "fcuk it, if I'm going down you're all coming with me"
There was an assumption throughout the Cold War that if a nuclear war was to break out, both sides would simply fire every single nuclear weapon they had at each other, destroying each other and probably wiping out all life on the planet. In reality though, such a doomsday outcome would surely be the least likely one, even if somebody was insane enough to launch an initial nuclear strike. You would hope that cool heads would prevail and things wouldn't escalate to that degree.
Russian public transport
I had an "interesting" brush with Russian/Pro putin thinking(I use the term loosely) at the weekend. Via someone I knnow through work, a staffmember of his who I'd only know to nod at kinda thing, is from Bulgaria or Belarus(not Russian, but I didn't get into the specifics). The subject of Ukrainian refugees came up. Followed by a quiet if clearly heartfelt insane rant from this guy along the lines of "Oh just you wait, you'll see the people that are coming here pretending to be refugees for what they are". That only the "rich" and "criminals" of Ukraine can afford to pay the "border fees" to get into Poland(10,000 dollars in his head). Followed by tales from family and friends of his that have already witnessed Ukrainian refugees in Ireland acting up and not being grateful etc. Those hearing this were more than a bit WTF? about it. It was like a twisted copy and paste of morons who used to go on about "Blacks get free prams" and "Poles eat swans y'know" type guff. I doubt this guy's an outlier among certain quarters and I can see that kinda thing getting more traction among some, though thankfully small numbers, who have certain "sympathies".
Maybe, but not in the foreseeable future, at least until he rebuilds his mauled army, a mauling that is still ongoing.
Many opinions seem based on the idea of "Mutually Assured Destruction"
Seems to me that no nation would simply launch everything and then have absolutely no options left
Suppose a higher tech. nation actually has the (unannounced) means to deflect or neutralise nuclear missiles in flight
I may be wrong, but my understanding is that destroying a nuclear warhead in flight, won't necessarily initiate a nuclear explosion. As far as I know, nuclear explosions are secondary and require a precise, highly symmetrical, primary explosion to initiate them
It's always good to ponder where your "common sense" was manifested from
And no new spare parts for the existing western build vehicles.......
I meant to post as well, to see Israel start condemning Russian actions is extremely alarming to me. The only people who know more than the Yanks just about anywhere are the Israelis. They played things cool early (could say to try to be a broker, or you could be more cynical :P ) but seeing them picking a side makes me think they know something is coming and they want to be on the right side of it.
"If you want real justice you carry it out in the field."
Ukrainians seemed happy to take Russian POWs early on and use them to send messages back to the home country. You'd have to think that as things go on, they'll opt for more direct solutions.
Yes and then the others who throw in the 'What about Yemen?, What about Eritrea?, What about Afghanistan?, What about Syria?, What about Vietnam? and on and on.
Any old speel to avoid dealing directly with the unpleasant facts of the moment and our obligation to offer shelter to war refugees. The basic that we would expect in return if in that situation.
I think they have intelligence that the wider public have not been privy too.
If Putin is as ill as some of the rumours suggest he's going to want to make as much progress as quickly as possible in search of his legacy.
What's the deal with France these days. Why is the country refusing to send anything useful to Ukraine?
Is there any website showing an overview of what equipment different countries are sending.
100% - most countries went down the appeasement route with Putin and thought they could handle him. Even up until invasion day this year. they thought they could talk him out of attacking Ukraine. It's only since the war started that we're starting to see the 'real' Putin and the real Russia. In hindsight, it's revealed as a totalitarian state and a real basket case of a country with a tyrant in power and a dysfunctional population quite unlike any other.
Oh but I do grasp exactly what happens in a nuclear confrontation.
Whatever makes you think that someone you so casually term a "craw thumping emotional" must be ignorant of elementary nuclear facts?
My opinion, and that is an opinion shared by many, many others, is that we should confront the situation. I'm not so naive as to propose attacking Russia itself (as you will note from my previous posts), but I do suggest an intervention in Ukraine. The alternative is we allow this madman to continue perpetrating his horrors for how long?... and who's next in his firing line?... and what's to say he wont use nuclear warheads now or in the future regardless of our inactivity?
My strong belief is that a humane world should not just stand idly by whilst the most horrendous of crimes are repeatedly committed day after day. And this will continue not just in this war but in many future wars to come the more we turn a blind eye. And yes, I do put the lives of innocent little girls who die defiled and terrified with no-one at their side, above my own fears of nuclear threats. And I'm proud of that. I don't believe anyone has the right to hold their own existence above that of others.
I've said it before in this thread and I'll say it again... We've none of us the right to a future on this planet if we can't confront the butchers of this world and we continue to allow such horrors to be perpetrated, nuclear threat or no nuclear threat. That threat is never going away so do we just allow these atrocities to continue forever and a day? Is a life of fear, foreboding and exposure to these horrors acceptable for our future generations, or do we take the slight nuclear risk and intervene now, thereby setting a precedent for future warmongers and despots?
The analogy is the monkey, bear or some such wild animal confined to a tiny cage for the entirety of its life, poked and prodded every day. If it had a choice would it just accept that existence for the rest of its days, or would it fight for its freedom knowing there's a slight risk it could be shot dead? I believe almost every animal would fight. We cant let the nuclear bars keep us in that cage.
I was a member of Boards many, many years ago but I drifted away, and then forgot my login and password so rejoined again. I've had much respect for a lot of your previous posts but I have to say that since you've become a moderator I've noticed that an increasing number of your posts now incorporate distinctly condescending undertones. I wouldn't class them as intending to belittle people in any way, but an intelligent man such as yourself will know exactly what I mean.
To suggest I am a "craw thumper" is somewhat derogatory. To further suggest "you still cant grasp what happens" is implying my ignorance as opposed to your perceived knowledge. I find this quite insulting, more so coming from you. I wont hold my breath for an apology.
Decent explainer here on the Russian rouble rebound
Yes definitely an I'm alright jack vibe with some, it's sickening. The same guy that I had the run in with wouldn't give 2 fu@ks about the Irish homeless until now, it's just a way for him to be anti refugee. I told him this too but it's pointless really, an unfortunate mixture of ignorance and lack of empathy.
For every war crime very few ever see justice and even then it often takes years.
How many of the thousands of war criminals down through the years have gotten off scot free.
Yeah we can point to a few like the Nuremberg trials, but thousands upon thousands of SS, Gestapo and wehrmacht went on to lead normal lives.
Did any of the Soviets ever get even tried for their atrocities?
Even cut to more recent wars like Yugoslavia or Rwanda ?
Yeah a few high profile ones were made examples of, but did the ones that carried out the murders and rapes of Srebrenica see justice.
If you want real justice you carry it out in the field.
Tito's partisans, the Greeks, the French, the Russians themselves all understood this. That's why so many Germans wanted to surrender to the Brits or the Yanks.
What the hell are you on?
Because the Russians are bogged down in Ukraine right next door to them, they should open a second front in Ireland thousands of miles away?
If they want to screw with the West they can try cut Trans Atlantic communications cables not bloody well invade the Beara peninsula.
The big issue with Angela Merkel is her knee-jerk decision to shut down all remaining nuclear powerplants following the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake. She'd run on a platform of "exiting" the nuclear exit that had been set in motion by the SPD and the Greens when she won against Gerhard Schröder in 2006. Her desire to ride that wave of anti-nuclear sentiment in 2011 played a huge part in leaving Germany vulnerable to Russian extortion. The events of 2014 and onwards are merely a consequence of that singular decision.
edit: Would agree with you (about Merkel). Just another in the posters long long list of angry and hostile comments about Germany/Germans, a nastier edge to that one than most though. Doesn't have a good word for them or their govt.'s, but there are lots of failures all round Europe in our relations with Russia & Putin, including here. Wisdom is very easy in hindsight though.
Ha, you are on some kind of right/left rant here. Not everything comes down to that. I believe the issue with Poland was that they decided to unilaterally remove the supremacy of the European court of justice in Poland, thereby pretty much leaving the eu in all but name. They can overule ecj rulings in Poland, so as far as I can see they can pick and choose what legislation they want to follow, defacto leaving the European union without a vote. Nothing to do with the "gays" I think.
There really is no low to which they will stoop
it seems very unlikely that we can accommodate 100 k ukrainians.
But we can damn well try.
Baltic countries not messing around
You're talking about actual sociopaths and psychopaths on social media. Let's face it - anyone who is a fan of Putin and is cheering him on in this war is degenerate.
These guys would have been cheering Hitler, Himmler and the SS on at the height of the Holocaust if there had been social media back then. You can't even begin to engage with this level of depraved individual.
I believe we have a duty to help out here , we should take in Ukranian refugees but we also need to not censor debate about our readiness to facilitate the numbers being touted . it seems very unlikely that we can accommodate 100 k ukrainians
Angela should be sent to Bucha to see the reality her fat pockets are built on. I doubt it would unsettle her one bit.
As someone who is not a fan of Angela Merkel I think you are dead wrong here. Her stupidest mistakes all seemed to be made out of an excess of compassion and I think she would be more upset than most if not all world leaders seeing what is on the ground in Bucha.
She did get the whole energy security thing badly wrong for Germany by doing the "safe and caring" things i.e. what all of us have been told is the "right" thing to do by the green politicians. Not everything politicians do is down to malice or supporting some nefarious agenda much as we would like to imagine. I don't think that consideration of Ukraine or Crimea came into the German energy calculations since 2014.
Most of these types didn't care about homelessness here until they needed it as a debating prop to be anti refugee.