If Belarus cross the border, I think a fuse could be lit alright.
But the optimist in me hope that if Lukashenko gives the order, the army would topple him.
Raskolnikov is one of the great creations in literature, but despite himself he has one thing Putin doesn't have: a conscience.
Alas, if his creator was alive today I'm not sure he wouldn't be a Putin supporter. Was also a rabid nationalist and anti European.
Love the art, not the artist...
Judging by his post history he's swiss. Probably works for Credit Suisse and has loads of shonky Russian clients performing badly.
I think Russia have probably broken all international laws and geneva conventions in existence allready
They simply dont care,because they have nukes they think they can blackmail everyone and do as they please
"I still think he had to do what he did." Well that's a big steaming pile of shite, this whole war was unnecessary. It's little more than a play to get gas and oil in eastern Ukraine and Crimea. The initial invasion in 2014 was off the back of the Ukrainian government granting exploration rights to non Russian companies, cutting them out.
Putin is no more than a gangster. He didn't get his cut so he's trying to take it by force.
The problem here is geopolitics isn't the same as being a prick on the streets and threatening people for protection money. There's political ideology tied to this and I'd imagine the majority of nations in the world would not want to see people backing down at the first uttering of launching nukes. It sets the precedent that the mere threat is enough to do as you please.
I think Belarus has a protection treaty with Russia
The Eurasian version of NATO known as CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organization), yes Russia can be relied on for protection as Azerbaijan can attest to:-
https://eurasianet.org/for-armenians-csto-missing-in-action
What a stupid comment. Tell that to the poor civilians in Kiev with missiles raining down on there heads.
Having travelled all my life and witnessed the terror these air strikes cause I find your attitude very arrogant. This isn't Call of Duty.
I heard 40 shot down which is 50%. I'll check again...
Edit: cnocbui's post says 43 shot down https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119727556/#Comment_119727556
He's saying he wants to turn us into a poor, hungry and cold Europe, on the brink of survival. Then flood us with a refugee crisis.
I find it amazing that Irish people are still trying to say that we are "neutral" in this or we are a neutral country, when it directly effects us.
We don't have much to offer militarily in this but it doesn't mean we should act like cowards. The price of everything is going up (yes, it was going up before the war too), we are lurking toward an energy crisis, can barely cope with the influx of refugees (who are more than welcome IMO). We are being negatively impacted by this. We are being strategically and purposly negatively impacted by how Russia are behaving, how are we neutral?
There is a difference between neutrality and cowardice. You cant be neutral when it directly effects you. You can be a coward and turn a blind eye though.
He knows fck all about the Geneva convention for a Swiss...
Why try and take out the missile ,when you can take out the ship
Time to wipe out that Black Sea fleet
It effects the whole world,so basically everyone is involved one way or the other.
Neutrality only works if you are not Russias neigbour,or member of NATO
I presume they’re too stupid to see it, but their desire for a surge of refugees to Europe illustrates the idiocy of Putin’s drivel about how Western European countries are supposedly cuck-liberal, deviant-ridden shïtholes.
If it’s so bad here, why do they think refugees will want to come? There certainly is no sign of people queuing to get into Russia
There just claims we've seen the damage and Locations of the strikes very little evidence of any interceptions anywhere in Ukraine today,
8 in posts in 12 years.
Save us all the nonsense of spoof posts
Thats exactly why,because they know they will be taken care lf.
And thats why they sent all their refugeees to Finland and Norway during the ISIS Syria crisis as well,because nobody wanted to stay in Russia.
How many refugees have the Americans taken in? 150,000? They should take in the same number of people that amounts to the same cost of weaponry they have sent over there
But Belarus is a special case when it comes to Putin, there's a good bit of legislation on Belarus that came to be through putins sponsorship,if one country will get military assistance from putin it's Belarus,at this point it's a satellite state of Russia
Yeah I set up my account in 2010 with the knowledge I Would need it one day to post in this thread 🙄
You knew Putin would invade Ukraine,then your 8 years to late
Yeah but protecting Armenia would stretch them thin, it's not like they're surrounded by pro-Russian states. Their selfishness, inaction and inability to fulfil international agreements has also allowed the likes of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and others to distance themselves further by pulling out of the "Indestructible Brotherhood 2022" drills (I **** you not).
They'd be readily more proactive with Belarus since they're right in the middle of it, share logistics and are basically an extension of Russia.
They should take in the same number of people that amounts to the same cost of weaponry they have sent over there
Strange way of equating the total number of refugees, but if that's the case then the entire population of Ukraine, Russia, or indeed the entire former Soviet states will be moving to the US and there still be plenty of room for more, indeed the entire worlds population can move to the US as the costs for US weapons sent is in the billions.
I just find it disgusting all the armchair medal of honour recipients on here thinking a war with the Nuclear armed Russia is a winnable one for anybody.
That fella needs a bomb under his car as well.
Well, if the Russian establishment is now openly claiming to use this sort of tactic as a destabilising effect to destroy Europe and use it as a bargaining chip to win their "special military operation" then the onus is on the American establishment to make sure that this doesn't happen. Currently the Americans have taken in 150,000 people, but they have gifted 20 billion dollars worth in arms and weaponry over there. What is the European ratio equivalent? Not like for like, is it? Ireland has taken in over 50,000 victims alone.
You need to think more about the nuclear balance. NATO has nuclear weapons too. So how does that determine what is winnable?
this is just all looking like a win win for the US, and europe needs to independently decide what is best for it over the next months and possibly years. $20bn cost for for the US to see Europe destabilised and Russia diminished is probably good value for them
Exactly. What Europe now has is a bunch of c**ts across the Atlantic having a willy waving contest with another bunch of c**nts in between the urals and both of them are literally laughing and openly destabilizing our part of the world for the last 20 years while Europe sits with its hands underneath its arse because.....uhhh...I dunno .....somebody enlighten me
There was a Ukrainian on the radio earlier saying that they have received zero tanks from the west. He also said if they get the right equipment they would win in weeks. They are not getting the game changing weaponry though.
This is what I mean. Were very close to a Nuclear exchange which will most likely mean Armageddon.
The utter arrogance of some people on here thinking this is some game. The same folk would soil themselves if a missile landed within a mile of them.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/eaabbaf8a16773590ee22dd6c15f1d68.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/07abd39dc4f0afde3c391afc78cc920e.svg)
