If a ceasefire is to happen, Ukraine would be within its rights to ask Russia for a couple of concessions such as accounting for the people who Russia has deported out of occupied areas and agreeing not to implement the results of its sham referendums by calling certain areas of Ukraine 'Russia'.
The reality of war seems to be that ceasefires are only agreed if public/political/strategic pressures are such that they happen. If Ukraine feels like it has the upper hand and that Russia would only use a ceasefire to recuperate for a new push later, it's easier to understand why they wouldn't go for a ceasefire right now. War has to be one of the most regrettable things in existence, but Ukraine didn't start it, and Russia can end it tomorrow by packing up and going home, but less and less does Mr. Putin talk of peace. If anything, his rhetoric is becoming angrier and more bitter.
Have you love the spirit of the Ukrainian population despite being at war and facing daily missle attacks they still manage to carry on as normal despite the chaos kharkiv 5th literary festival was hosted in an underground bunker this year.
Lest you forget, pre-1940's America wasn't exactly a bastion for tolerance. Violence is a thing in America, and the internment camp movement started post-Pearl Harbor. In fact, Canada and Mexico and some countries in South America had internment camps, too. America was not a bastion of civil rights prior to the 1960's.
As for Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the bomb projects were military top secret, the general public heard nothing about them until they went off. IMO as military strategy they were entirely justified, but that's a discussion item for another thread.
I don't think Putin can make his nuclear threats and expect no warnings whatsoever in return, or an "okay, okay we're very scared now and we won't send Ukraine any more weapons, just please don't do that!". That might be what he wants or hopes for, but it is not going to happen.
There's a distance between this idea of a "non threatening stance" you call for now and your original post, which was condemning USA (and allies perhaps) for throwing about their own similar nuclear counter threats aimed at Russia.
I haven't seen that they are. cnocbui posted a long Atlantic article there discussing the subject (of what might happen were Putin to use a nuclear weapon) that I thought was quite good, it comes through from that use of nuclear weapons in response is very unlikely. What could happen may be uncertain (and its possible US has been a lot clearer on how it will respond with Russia/Putin in private than we see/hear about in public too) but it won't be that imo.
Looks like NASAMs are not in Ukraine as reported yesterday,
Not a great situation
It's quite clear from the draft that he's more afraid of the ultra nationalists that surround him then his own people.
That was reported as actually happening in Russia as we speak people people deported from Russia are voting on the referendum ,
But no photos or filming allowed as the boxes have the Russian coat of arms on the ballot boxes
@Run Forest Run . I lived and worked in Russia for a number of years, so I find it deeply offensive to hear people .
Do you actually think people believe this tripe ,
To attempt to draw an equivalence between the scale and extent of Russian war crimes versus Ukraine is a false one.
If you don't acknowledge this then your position in is morally and intellectually bankrupt position. So spare us errant nonsense about lacking in logic and reason.
Atrocities don't stop just because there's a ceasefire when Russia is involved. They have carried out war crimes and atrocities on a daily basis including towards civilians in areas under their control. You would have to be a fool to trust in Russia's tender mercies towards any Ukranians left under Russian controlled territory. It would be like arguing for peace in Europe in 1942 and leaving Germany in possession of France.
And a ceasefire would just be a truce unless Russia are stopped, and Ukraine has secure borders it can defend and alliances into the future that guarantee its security and allow it to rebuild after this illegal invasion and attempt to extinguish it as an country and turn it into a Russian colony. Zero evidence Russia is willing to accede to such a position.
Similar rhetoric was used to depict your average Japanese citizen during ww2, which enabled the Americans to round up Japanese American citizens and place them into internment camps. And also arguably made it much more publicly acceptable and viable to drop two nuclear bombs on thousands of innocent men women and children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
So I would caution against that sort of dangerous rhetoric.
You are falling into a very obvious and foolish trap, when you pursue that line of thinking. And it doesn't bring about any positive outcomes. I lived and worked in Russia for a number of years, so I find it deeply offensive to hear people trying to lump all citizens of a nation that has over 140m people into one lazy sweeping caricature "pure and utter evil scum". It's not right, and most importantly it's not true!
Beyond the public messaging, The Hill is reporting that discussions and messages are ongoing via 'backchannels,' which in my experience is how most negotiations with the Soviet Union and the Putler Federation have taken place in the past.
IMO by the time Reagan was publicly buddying up with Gorbachev, the Soviet Union shutdown was well negotiated.
Previously warned to quit the trolling. Now threadbanned
"I find the opposite to you as the way forward, efforts should be made to pursue a ceasefire and stop the atrocities."
Of course you do. TEAM ru is having their asses handed to them, and it's only the start of it.
There is certainly this idea that of putin goes then celebrations all around. Problem is who replaces him in that case? He's surrounded by ultra nationalists, some of whom could be worse.
All out war would be the end of russia
I mean that's pretty rude.
It seems to me this thread is a radicalised echo chamber severely lacking in logic and reason. The Ukrainian people actually put the leader of tornado battalion on trial and he was sent to jail for horrible crimes. It seems war is a great opportunity for atrocities look at the Vietnam war and yet you continue your juvenile description of all Russian's as lord of the rings orcs and call me deluded and sick.
I find the opposite to you as the way forward, efforts should be made to pursue a ceasefire and stop the atrocities.
What happens if Putin is ousted and the Russian nationalists calling for all out war get into power? Have you even considered a scenario like that?
Huh?
In the 70s and 80s where communication didn't really exist for the vast vast majority, people were much more tense, I'd argue ignorance was bliss?
I just spent the last 7 months watching war and war crimes in 4K sometimes live, compared to the 70s and 80s where you might hear a war reporter on the radio for less than 60 seconds.
Also during that time we had a bit of a "war" going on ourselves.
Correction - from the Irish embassy in Wgypt
The Ru embassy in another country eg Uk , could be acredited to ireland. There are presidents. Sudan for example is /was covered from the Egyptian embassy
Which suggests to me anyway, that if they're being this clear and in public they know their threats will cause the Russians to think more than twice about going nuclear and/or that they have intel that it's more bluster from the Kremlin.
The US have never gone to DEFCON 1. DEFCON 2 twice; Cuban Missile crisis and the first Gulf War. The Able Archer response is a bit of a myth. Such exercises and on both sides were a near annual event and back channels were open before and during. Sometimes one side got more twitchy, like with Able Archer, but nuclear war was a good way off. Things were a lot more twitchy in the 50's and 60's.
About the closest we got to nukes flying(other than the Cuban crisis) was in 83 after the Korean airliner 007 was shot down and tensions went up. Then a glitch in the Soviet air defences made it look like a few American ICBM's were heading their way and they were ready to respond only for a Russian chap in the command chain by the name of Petrov to say no, looks fishy wait for confirmation.
As you say back channels and what is said on them can be very different to what is released for public consumption so we're likely a good way off any escalation. However, and like you I was a teen of the 80's very conscious of nuclear war, I don't recall a Soviet, or US for that matter leader directly and publicly threatening the use of nuclear weapons during a conflict the way putin has been.
I cerainly agree with you that NATO would only love to go conventional on Russian forces, especially since this invasion kicked off we've seen how amateur hour they can be. Russia is trying to spin it for their peoples that they already are, because surely the great stronk Russian military wouldn't be beaten by a bunch of Ukrainians? But that's a nonsense. Summed up by this;
Should it not be the other way around? If embassies are MAINLY for developing trade links and promoting good relations , then surely 5 Ru diplomats are plenty in ireland - we being such a small country with limited Import of Russian goods opportunities- And the opposite re the number of Irish diplomats in Russia with very big potential export opportunities for Irish goods. How did ireland allow such big Russian diplomat numbers. ? What reasons did the Ru give to the Irish gov to allow in suchnumbers -25 + at the moment. Maybe the Irish Gov should review those reasons as some of them may no longer be relevant
And probably all the civilian population they moved into Russia or they would be just forging voting papers with those civilians names on them
As far as I'm aware the Red Cross haven't been given access. Big shock.
There are 35 million men of military age (16-49) in Russia.
It would be interesting to be able to see how many have managed to get away. I fear that not that many Russian men of fighting age have the means to actually escape the country and that the ranks of these conscripts will be filled of poorer fellas who wanted out, but didn't ave anywhere near enough cash to pull it off.
Kaliningrad.
Last night, a US Navy Strike Hawk was advertising the presence of the Amphibious Task Force as it checked some approaches into Kaliningrad. Closest I've seen it operate near the Oblast/Enclave.
It's quite interesting to read the various opinions and discussions between those Boardsies born in the '90's or even late 80''s as they may have missed the bulk of the Cold War.
As a 70's child, I distinctly remember much, much more tension and heightened readiness during certain periods of the Cold War. I hail from a military family so, growing up, we were particularly aware of operations, threats, tensions that were much, much worse that what the younger folks are worriedly discussing in interesting cross-discussions. ( apart from the "Orc" discussion, which is just Wokey nonsense. I have a suggestion to settle the argument. Visit your local Ukranian Refugee centre and ask one of the folks there what they think of your discussion. Should settle it fairly quickly)
I digress. Anyway, living in a world with no mobile phones allowed for easy eavesdropping on conversations from the phone in the hall and around the kitchen sink. In the 80's, Ireland was under immense pressure to join Nato. There was great interest in our aviation infrastructure at the time. Plus there were many, many close calls between the two superpowers.
Both Powers were watching each society with great interest, looking for clues that one side or the other were preparing for war. For example, a blood drive might indicate preparing for the influx of wounded during a battle. Things like that.
In 1983, I was a teen and distinctly remember the excitement around an operation called Able Archer, where NATO conducted an excercise where by, in the story, Russia has invaded some European states and, in order to stop the push forward, NATO has resorted to using a nuclear weapon. ( ring any bells, in the reverse). The excercise was so real to the Russians, that the prepared their nuclear weapons, causing the US to go to Defcon 1. ( higher than the Cuban Missile Crisis). Only the Back Channel communications averted a war.
That brings me to Back channels. What politicians say in Public in one thing, as they speak to three audiences. But what happens in the back rooms and on secure data streams is something totally different. Russia and the US are in constant, private communication, all the time. So read through the Bluster and calm down. The US will know when Russia are likely to use a Nuke well before anyone else. I can see their use only in the circumstances I mentioned on other pages.
I keep saying this, and the older folk know what I mean. NATO and the US want a conventional war with Russia. Its the very, very thing that Russia is avoiding. If NATO go conventional on Russia, its game over in two weeks. Putin Knows this, which makes his rhetoric pointless. Playing to 3 audiences. Ourselves, his country folk and his Military leaders.
It's about time this started to happen in Russia.
ARAT (Abrams Reactive Armor Tiles) can be fitted to the M1, but on the flanks. The US believes the frontal armor is enough, and in fairness, it’s extremely thick. Those 70 tons go somewhere, and it’s not on the roof like Challenger. The bow armor on Challenger 2 looks like reactive but is actually appliqué composite.
Not sure where you’re getting that the British stab system is better. If CR2 has any particularly good feature, it’s the running gear. (Tracks and suspension)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
