It would have to be put in the context that Putin has to be stopped dead (literally, if possible) and either its done now (or ASAP) under conditions of our (west's) choosing, to minimize loss of life, or delay until there will not be any choice because we will be forced to fight, and if that happens, the loss of life may be far greater.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/05/us/politics/biden-trump-2024-poll.html
NY Times
Trump for president :D
Can they really take on heavy duty long range interceptors with extreme long range missiles and long range radars such as the Mig-31 though?
Not to mention the stealthy Su-57 felons (albeit yet to be introduced to Ukrainian theatre) and more modern flankers such as the Su-35s and Su-30s which also can carry very long range AAMs.
Gripens and F-16s are light short range clear weather day fighters that will struggle against more rugged russian gear imo
So no planes and help 'them' to survive. Is 'them' the Russians?
You were actually able to decipher that @saabsaab :D
i could see Macron being a voice in the wilderness with what he said last evening
Don't get me wrong, it's a positive for sure. But Macron can shoot from the hip quite a bit and not always follow it up consistently. At the end of the day, they have seemingly provided less military aid than Germany still (albeit I think they are more secretive about what they provide).
Unfortunately as we've seen the other main NATO partners have all rejected the idea today anyway, much to the delight of Peskov and the other Kremlin criminals, who can again relax knowing there's no real unity or will in the West to deal Russia a fatal blow in this war. It's f*kin depressing, basically just a green light to Russia to hang in there, even Ukraine's allies basically saying the country has little chance of regaining territory this year and none of their allies seem particularly bothered by it:
While France would probably have to go through an EU backed mandate to put boots on the ground, post-Brexit Britain wouldn't.
One could also argue that as signatories of the Budapest Memorandum they're morally if not quite legally obligated to do so. The UK has a longer history and more recent track record of involving itself in international wars too. I'm almost surprised the Tory's haven't already sent troops as part of some last-ditch bid to avoid their inevitable electoral slaughter later this year...
What in the fúck is that? I've read it 3 times and can't even begin to glean something resembling a point. Or something resembling coherence.
And Biden is the one with cognitive decline? Gimme a break. The man isn't just sundowning, his brain's gone.
I think, think mind you, he might be talking about how you don't need jets to prosecute a war? Maybe?
Thankfully there appears to be some adults in the room
So much for behind you all the way from Ireland:
All Irish Left MEPs voted against the vital 50 billion euro in long term support for #Ukraine today - the Ukraine Facility - photo below shows MEPs who voted against.
I know Daly and Wallace a pair of idiots but I had for some reason thought that Flanagan might have had either a bit of a brain left or some semblance of a moral compass. Has he been bought off also by the Kremlin?
So Daly, Wallace and Ming (the Trouserless...I know its low but 🤷♀️!) as usual, at this point what else do you expect?
Poland and Germany and Nato ruling out troops on ground in Ukraine. Kremlin also commented
The Kremlin, meanwhile, warned that direct conflict between Nato and Russia would be inevitable if the alliance sent combat troops.
“In this case, we need to talk not about probability, but about the inevitability (of conflict),” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
Moscow’s warning came a day after French President Emmanuel Macron said sending in Western ground troops should not be “ruled out” in the future, after hosting a conference of top officials from more than 20 of Ukraine’s Western backers.
****.
Pissed their pants.
Putin has their number.
We'd have said a week ago the last person proposing military intervention would be Emmanuel Macron - yet here we are. Things are ruled out til minds are changed, and I don't think Poland of all countries is rejecting the idea out of fear of Putin; they're the ones arming themselves more rapidly than other countries.so they're obviously more tuned to the scenario than most.
Ming can just be an idiot, nothing nefarious needed in his case.
Baffling.. is he getting doddery too?
Since Putin ONLY wants the Luhansk and Donbas oblasts and is not interested in the rest of the country ,then what is wrong with France , Germany, Uk, etc being ‘invited - as individuals-‘ by UKr to help protect the rest of UKr - or at least the western half from being attacked. That strategy would release a lot of ‘equipment’ and needed on the front lines
Don't forget that Sinn Fein's member also voted against it. Weren't SF previously wiping servers to hide Russian stuff?
Article 5 it one of them gets so much as a scratch.
The National Defense Authorization Act, just passed by the US Congress in December, prohibits the President from unilaterally withdrawing from NATO without approval of a two-third Senate super majority.
Serious talk
I am not a big fan of Macron and France like many European countries should be doing more. As an aside I include ours in that. But credit to him here when he says nothing should be ruled out. I agree nothing should be ruled out.
Navalny would have destroyed his own reputation if he had worked with Prigozhin.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
