They already ignored a veto from the security council in relation to the general assembly.
Who is they? The UN? A veto in the security council gets thrown down to the general assembly to debate why the veto was used. It doesn't actually nullify it and the general assembly can't veto the security council veto.
Bypassing the veto
The veto only applies to votes that come before the United Nations Security Council, so the United Nations General Assembly is unaffected. From Article 27(3), both elected and permanent members must abstain from certain votes about issues where they are among the interested parties.
Issue is China will fill the vacuum for now. I would disband the UN then no issue.
Eh Russia don't/didn't abstain, that's one issue with the UN. It says they shall abstain, but they can still veto.
Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.
That's the text from the UN charter, the shall seems to be the issue.
Your 4D chess is faltering on it's first move.
David Attenborough presents...
BBC Planet Ukraine - HIMARS
Just a quick note on Ukranian missile tech, you'll know this if you are an aviation/space nerd like me.
The press always seem surprised with Ukranian ingenuity, but forget that Ukranian rocket and aviation engineers are up there with the best. From the world's largest Antonov aircraft to Space-faring rockets, the Ukrainians are no strangers to innovation.
In fact, the 1st stage of the successful Antarres ISS resupply spacecraft was built and designed in Ukraine. They are very capable of producing ultra long-range ballistic missile systems to reach even Moscow ( which isn't that far away. It surprises me that one of the first targets on Russia's bombing list wasn't the Ukranian aerospace facilities, which are still functioning.
They even pre-programmed the coordinates of the Crimean airbase into the HARM missiles and back-engineered the launch rail to fit an SU-27, together with a simple launch interface mounted in the cockpit.
This, OSINT people are quietly whispering, is their ace up their sleeve. However, they are reluctant to strike strategic Russian targets deep inside Russia for fear of angering the fearful West.
But, if it comes down to it, and Ukraine feels cornered if the war turns in Russia's favour, I believe Moscow will be targeted.
They have the capability. Question is, what will the warhead be?
Is there a possibility they may have a nuclear warhead left over from the handover… left behind a door by accident maybe?
You obviously didn't read it Tom, otherwise you wouldn't have asked the question.
Play it out fine. NATO takes back the nuclear plant and holds the ground. Kim Jong Un opps sorry Putin does the square root of fcuk all like usual. Just to rub the botox headed fool up the wrong way also we have all NATO livery removed from the troops and military equipment taking back the plant and have them all wear gay rights flags on their uniforms. This will have the added bonus of triggering not only Putin but all republicans in the US also. Win win.
The Russians are all talk. Their army is a ragtag shambles full of under motivated fat soldiers and pilots with clapped out military equipment. The weakness the west is showing towards this "army" is pathetic. I want to see them handed their sorry arses back to the border and cut them off from the world North Korea style.
A dirty warhead would do more psychological damage than actual physical one, but like said above, possibly last resort
As I said I did read it.
If NATO forces attacked Russian forces in the power plants the following scenario springs to mind
During the attack the Russians blow up the plant and blame it on NATO and we end up with a nuclear incident. Russia put their ICBMS on full alert in a “defensive” posture. This triggers the USA in to doing the same. Now we are one step away from Nuclear war.
That doesn’t sound like a great plan tbh.
We all know NATO would destroy the Russian army and that’s great, but you cannot under any circumstance risk Nuclear war.
Well to play devils advocate - one presumes a very basic strategy by such a NATO operation would be that it would only be launched when the prevailing wind and weather would send radiation fallout towards Russian territory.............
The UN are clearly not in a position to do anything useful despite all their hand waving. As an organisation, it's structural faults with vetoes have been shown to be fatal. As useless as the tits on a bull in this scenario.
It is very unlikely to happen but to play it out, if a NATO country did enter the war of its own back to secure the power plants and say that country was Turkey. There would be no fear of the Russians bombing or taking over the Bosporus. The Russians would be afraid of Turkey fully joining the war as the only outcome would be the Russians being driven back out of the Ukraine in double quick time in total defeat. A Western Army like Turkey and the Western supplied Ukranians together would tear the Russian army apart. I would have a feeling if the Turks jumped in, then the Baltic nations, Poland and Czechs would be in there also.
Why is it that some people bang on about the risk of 'nuclear war' and only bring it up whenever NATO or the US is brought into the equation? Have Russia not brought this scenario to our doors with their aggressive behavior and shithousery over the last decade? Russia can behave however the **** it wants, but if the west wishes to stick up for its values, it's 'no, you're risking nuclear war!'
People forget Turkey is a member of NATO. An attack on Turkey would lead to full NATO involvement in the war
You read it but asked a question that was clearly answered in the original post.
You've seen too many movies tbh.
But but but nukes something something.....
In what scenario do you see NATO coming to Turkey’s defence?
If Turkey attacked Russian troops even in Ukraine and Russia somehow retaliated and invaded Turkey (unlikely considering the state of its army) NATO would not be obliged to come to Turkey’s defence. It’s a defence pact with get out clauses like if a NATO country instigated the war.
You know we have a serious problem when even China is concerned about the situation at the nuclear facility.
Sky also reporting the plant has been hit 3 times in the last 24hrs by shelling. Russia claiming it's Ukrainian shelling of course which you'd want to a right wing Trumper to believe that.
Sure let's wait until there is a real disaster before reacting great idea. I'm sure there will be lots more sanctions on Russia when the inevitable happens whilst an army that could crush the Russians in a matter of hours sits idly by and twiddles' it's thumbs.
Not going to happen, empty threats as usual something, something......
Why?
Same reason as all along, Russia uses nukes in Ukraine and they are done, the rest of the World won't allow one rogue nation to put it at risk, it wouldnt be nukes in response either, conventional warfare on a scale never seen before would have them overwhelmed and Moscow flattened in probably less than a week. No one would be coming to help them either.
Turkey had to buy an S300 system, that was the cost.
One packed with nuclear waste, hopefully.
Well there were sanctions, putin banned all flights/trips to turkey. Turkey were losing millions in the tourism sector. Later Erdogan and Putin signed a deal, turkey was buying missiles from Russia, which angered US, and then the sanctions were lifted. And now looks like those missiles are a piece of crap
So you don’t want to entertain the idea that a NATO attack on Russian forces would cause Russia to put its Nuclear detergents on high alert with USA following suit?
You do realise that is actually what will happen.
I'd say though that in the particular case of Israel bombing Hezbollah supported bases in Syria, that there's some kind of unofficial / official agreement that Russia will not interfere in Israeli -Hezbollah military activity. But for sure, that kind of weapons withdrawal from Syria, will further weaken Assad. And there's plenty of unfinished business going on there still.
And this was made very clear after the Russian plane got shot down in Syria. In the after math, there was lots of talk about the incident triggering a war between Turkey and Russia, with of course the participation of NATO support for Turkey. This was flatly refuted by NATO. So no, it was left strictly between themselves. But even the downing of the Russian plane, had elements of a "Family Affair " about it. At the time, ISIS controlled the Syrian oilfields, and were selling this oil to anyone, but mainly Turkey ( who in a roundabout way were in turn reselling it to Assad) Then the wholesale bombing of Syrians by Russian started to take its toll, and and they retaliated by placing a bomb on a Russian plane in Sharm-Elsheik, which was full of mainly Russian holiday makers. Putin retaliated by bombing oil convoys leaving the Syrian oilfields bound for Turkey etc. Erdogan ( or rather his son, who is in charge of Turkish oil business ) retaliated by shooting down a Russian warplane which had entered its airspace ( for something like a minute or two). Discussion's were held and the upshot seems to be that the retaliation would not escalate further. Has Putin forgotten I wonder, or is he powerless to do anything, even at this stage? Seems pretty much like that now anyway.
Oh i completely agree. For one Putin is not the person with his finger hovering over some big red button like in some B listed Hollywood movie which some here seem to think he has. Even if the call came down from him to fire nukes it would be completely ignored by Russian generals and Putin would be found floating in the moskva river some hours later. Unfortunately all we see is weakness from Biden, Boris, Macron and other western leaders towards Putin and he'll continue to laugh at our ineptness.
If one was a bit paranoid... And was worried In advance of a Russian attack , one could have stashed a dirty bomb in a van somewhere in Moscow , and said nothing ....
How do you know this for certain?
Given that the last two pages have nothing but fantasies and idle speculation about nuclear war, seems we can all agree the war has really reached a stalemate with neither side making meaningful gains or losses.
As an expert in the Economist podcast put it this week: neither side has the resources to win, neither side can afford to lose, and neither side seems to interested in a negotiated settlement. Barring a huge unforeseen turn of events, the war is thus set to drag on indefinitely.
Will be a long winter if so.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/eedacf599b4135dfd56d6fdbddcbd867.svg)
