Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Baltic countries not messing around

it seems very unlikely that we can accommodate 100 k ukrainians.

But we can damn well try.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Hard to rebuild an army when you cannot get the parts for it.

Nearly all went down the appeasment route, some went much further and pocketed lots and held back when it came time to reverse appeasement or apply Sanctions or good weapons, even just functional weapons.

Putin invaded in 2014. Let's not pretend what he is at is a surprise.

Some were sending serious weapons before the current invasion, London, Washington especially and the Baltics and Poland what they could.

Even now Germany procrastinates but talks a good game. Kyiv still complains that it is talking to a wall in Berlin.

They remain the wavering link in Western Europe on this.

It's not anti anything to want them to switch camps now.