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

1167216731675167716783690

Comments

  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Glad you have the luxury of asking such questions from the comfort of your D4, floor-heated duplex (no doubt).

    Probably unlikely that the Russians would be trying to blow themselves up, but you did hear of a lot of incidences of friendly fire from both sides…



  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Can we have threadbans for posters that continue to use the term “useful idiots” like it’s some sort of “hot take” and an ultimate put down to the person you’re replying to ? I’m beginning to see it every 3 or 4 posts now.

    In the spirit of the ceasefire and peace talks - that we are all desperately praying for between Russia and Ukraine - our side will refrain from using the term “woke” to describe those of you who show sympathy towards Ukraine.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,276 ✭✭✭Economics101


    You seem to have the same authoritarian mindset as the Putinistas. "Useful idiot" usually refers to naive supporters of Moscow: sort of innocent but misguided. I wouldn't dream of calling you a useful idiot.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,998 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    I often wonder if Chamberlain didn’t get a raw deal. The British military in particular was in no condition to pick a fight with Germany at the time. Trying the negotiated limitation whilst simultaneously ramping up British forces may not have been the worst move.

    Ukraine, however, is not so hobbled by military impotence.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,395 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    And the UN flapping their hands around uselessly. An organisation that has been shown up to be useless when push comes to shove.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,274 ✭✭✭EOQRTL


    Whatever about the UN NATO are meant to be the force to protect the west from **** like this. The "Ukraine isn't a part of NATO" excuse is a complete cop out. Using a nuclear reactor as a weapon endangers the whole of Europe. We are literally going to see vast parts of the continent unliveable and millions moving westward to avoid radiation. The response from the west as a whole is absolutely pathetic since day one of this war. We can't even stop funding the Russian's ffs.



  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Yeah, Hilter might even have mellowed in his old age if we hadn’t provoked him so much. I guess we’ll never know..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,739 ✭✭✭20silkcut


    Chamberlain got a very raw deal the effects of his appeasement were done and dusted by 1945. The fallout of the Churchill/Atlee/Roosevelt appeasement are still being dealt with today. Gulags and soviet famines and atrocities in particular the katyn massacre were common knowledge in 1945.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,134 ✭✭✭thomil


    That's the thing, I've kinda come around to that same point of view. Chamberlain gets called out a LOT for his appeasement policies, but it was also under his government that a lot of the programs that would help Britain ultimately win the war got started. The production of the Hawker Hurricane and the massive destroyer-building program (Tribals, L & M Class destroyers, the later wartime emergency program) starting in 1938 are just two examples, though I won't get into the army side of things as I believe that's your area of expertise.

    I think what ultimately did Chamberlain in with regards to his legacy and public image, apart from the fact that the Germans were quite frankly tactically superior in the early stages of the war, was the fact that he was replaced by a supremely charismatic successor, Winston Churchill and that many people simply weren't aware of the massive logistical challenges involved in getting even partially ready for war by September 1939.

    I mean, even today, many people have, quite frankly, no grasp of logistics. Just look at all the calls to get more weapons to Ukraine in this very thread, without taking into consideration that those weapons need to be a) transported there, b) supplied with ammunition & spares, c) have some sort of maintenance base/depot, d) have Ukrainian crews trained up and so on. The importance of logistics, the lead times that the manufacturing of modern weapons systems requires, all these things just don't register in the public consciousness.

    Good luck trying to figure me out. I haven't managed that myself yet!



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,998 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    That's not what I said.

    What was the other choice available to Chamberlain? The UK had no continental-capable army. An air force unable to defend the UK. A great navy, but Germany was sticking to the continent. France, similarly, had just started a massive re-armament program, but the armaments didn't exist yet.If they had declared war in 1938, what would have happened?

    Or, he could buy time to increase the allied military capability to actually provide an alternative choice... which he then took in 1939 by declaring war on Germany.

    I suspect that if a current American president massively ramped up military production and then declared war on someone, they'd be considered a warmonger by a number of today's folks. Chamberlain may not have been a hawk, but he was no dove either.

    The Chamberlain example isn't best used as an example of false hopes for peace, it's best used as an example of letting desire and a belief in peace allow sufficient weakening of a defense budget and military to result in a situation where there is no ability to use it when it's needed right then and there. The failing happened in the early/mid 1930s, not in 1938.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,618 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    You would think the very public vaccine rollout and PPE issues from COVID would give people an idea of how difficult it can be to get the right stuff to the right people at the right time.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,641 ✭✭✭rogber


    The UN is absolutely useless. But someone has to do something. Maybe this is Russia's new tactic: if they can't win the war with weapons, they'll cause a nuclear catastrophe and render huge swathes of the continent uninhabitable. There seems to be an almost suicidal urge among these people to cause an absolute apocalypse even if it takes them down with it. Either that or it's an incredibly reckless attempt to strengthen its hand in negotiations



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,658 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    Saw an interesting comment on Twitter that the occupation / annexation of Kherson is illegal even under Russian law, never mind the international version. There is nothing in the Russian constitution that allows the current regime and its dictator annex a Ukrainian city and region and make it formally part of the Russian Federation.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,641 ✭✭✭rogber


    I doubt the constitution permits murder of political opponents either, but doesn't hold the Russian government back. Putin's whims basically ARE the constitution



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,658 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    For sure, but it does emphasis the absolute illegality of the Putin regime and the fact that the country is being run by a criminal. Kherson cannot 'legally' become part of the Russian Federation....it will just be a case of Putin telling everyone that it is the case.



  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I think the population get to vote on whether or not to join the federation. It’s not like “we own you now”. (That’s my understanding of the thing anyway.)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,739 ✭✭✭storker


    Well, they say people get more right-wing as they get older, so probably not. 😁



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,658 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    In theory, but it would still just be a sham. The Russians literally invaded a Ukrainian city and its region - this would not be a 1938 Anschluss type situation. This is an illegal action even under their own constitutional law.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,517 ✭✭✭zv2


    Let's wait and see (not to be confused with Valery Gerasimov)


    Post edited by zv2 on

    It looks like history is starting up again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 235 ✭✭Repo101


    Three points on this.

    1) Only Crimea is part of Russia as of right now.

    2) The Kremlin has passed laws that allows Russia to defend Russian people which includes people who speak Russian.

    3) Russian law isn't worth the paper it's written on. If there is an issue, it will be changed quickly.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I read this small book on American power after the Iraq war where the guy (Kaplan I think) was poking fun at the criticism of “strong” countries approach to war. The criticism was summed up in the line “when you have a hammer, all you see is nails”. Kaplan pointed out that for weak countries the opposite is true : when you don’t have a hammer you never see any nails. This was probably the case for Chamberlain. To add to Thomil’s point I think the fact that Churchill had been warning for the prior decade for Britain to arm herself against the threat of Germany has more to do why they felt they had to get rid of Chamberlain (who couldn’t see the nails as they were sprouting up in Germany).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,009 ✭✭✭Glenomra


    From even a perfunctory read of the international press its becoming increasingly obvious that negotiations to end this conflict will soon be a matter of urgent debate. Many people were aghast at Sabina Higgins's calls for negotiations but imo her opinion will become increasingly acceptable. Russian control over the future of the nuclear plant is of enormous importance. Any damage to the nuclear station could have enormous repercussions for all of Europe. They can blame any explosions that occur there on Ukrainian shelling real or imagined. Also, the energy situation is becoming progressively worse. Now Norway is threatening to reduce the supply of electricity to its neighbours, while climatic conditions affect the production of nuclear energy in France and the transit of coal on the Rhine. Turkey is the first country to identify the changing circumstances.



  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    The sauna wasn’t on in my gym today. How much more of this do we have to put up with until Zelensky sees sense and comes to the negotiation (surrender) table.



  • Posts: 394 ✭✭ [Deleted User]




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,642 ✭✭✭timmyntc




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,517 ✭✭✭zv2


    "5 months ago" is the screen name! Very misleading.

    It looks like history is starting up again.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Darth Putin


    Chamberlain did not know what them German Nazis where like, we all have benefit of hindsight now

    we however now know what the Russian nazis are like, concentration camps for Ukrainians, repression of Russians, rape, looting, starvation of worlds poorest, daily nuclear threats, mafia like blackmail of Europe, castration and behadings in 6 months

    anyways an article to read for all the Russia appeasers, long history of bending over backwards for Russia which they shat upon


    Post edited by Darth Putin on


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 29,882 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I mean, the NYT would have advocated for complete Ukrainian surrender on Feb 25th. I can't say I've noticed a particular shift anywhere, and there is no indication that there is a shift in attitude among the population of the EU yet.

    Increased energy prices this winter are basically already baked in. The idea that we will go back to normal relations with Russia are just silly, no matter what happens in Ukraine.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,642 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    The account "5 months ago" retweets stuff from.. you guessed it, 5 months ago.

    The spectator tweet claiming Ukraine killed that general was from March 8th of this year - 5 months ago. It is an old tweet. Everything they RT is.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,642 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    US media (not fox news) are becoming increasingly more critical of the situation in Ukraine, and its the US who are basically bankrolling Ukraines economy at the minute. Today they greenlit another package of $4.5 billion - not war materials, just money for keeping the lights on and the country funded for the next while.

    If public opinion starts to shift in the US, then there is a big risk that they may stop funding Ukraine and the country defaults.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement