MPH Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 1 hour ago, urban.spaceman said: Facebook and Twitter now banned in Russia there’s an article on the BBC website of a young woman in Kyiv who is messaging her mum in Russia telling her of the indiscriminate bombing of civilians. ( including this girls own apartment complex!) Her mum is absolutely refusing to believe her and is quoting back ver batum what the Russian media is saying- it’s a small amount and is accidental. It’s because of its banning of twitter and Facebook that’s it’s allowed to get away with things like this..
MPH Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 1 hour ago, Sol thewall Bamba said: Reports of a friendly fire incident between Russians destroying 9 tanks and 4 APCs. that’s unfortunate. 1
st albans fox Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 9 minutes ago, MPH said: ? China is a strong Ally of Vladimir Putin. China is a strong ally of China …… no one else if they were a strong ally of Russia then they would not have abstained on the SC vote 4
Lionator Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 14 minutes ago, MPH said: ? China is a strong Ally of Vladimir Putin. Western sanctions will basically mean Russia can become China’s economic b*tch. Which works well for China and will see Putin through. 1
Guesty Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 Sky News come under fire in their car. Not quite sure how they all survived that.
Lionator Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 4 minutes ago, Guesty said: Sky News come under fire in their car. Not quite sure how they all survived that. Mental to go to a war zone
EnderbyFox Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 So in the space of a year Stuart Ramsey has been almost shot at by the Taliban and now actually shot at by Russian Death squads, blokes got some balls on him 1
Buzzell Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 47 minutes ago, Guesty said: Sky News come under fire in their car. Not quite sure how they all survived that. Bastard that was scary.
Guest kristianity77 Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 Watching that video just reaffirms that the Russians really do not care one bit what they are shooting at. Women, children, doesn't matter, its all the same to them.
Blarmy Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 (edited) @MarshallForEngland care to comment? Edited 4 March 2022 by Blarmy 1
st albans fox Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 7 minutes ago, Blarmy said: @MarshallForEngland care to comment? No evidence that those shooting at the sky journalists are Russian ……..they could be from Singapore ….. 4
thursday_next Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 5 minutes ago, kristianity77 said: Watching that video just reaffirms that the Russians really do not care one bit what they are shooting at. Women, children, doesn't matter, its all the same to them. That's war, I'm afraid. War largely consists of men who are frightened to death trying to kill other men who are frightened to death, even journalists. I blame Hollywood for trying to pretend otherwise and lend some dignity and romance to the whole thing. (With the notable exception of 'Schindler's List' first half an hour, which ought to be recommended viewing for all those planning to go to conflict with one another). They tend to shoot back, which adds a disagreeable tone to the entire enterprise. I bet the Russian soldiers were relieved to hear the word 'journalisti' because it meant they were unarmed and could be shot without risk. I'm willing to bet that most of the Russian army would give anything not to be there, but what choice do they have? It's either kill or be killed. The Russian troops that surrendered to the Ukrainians are going to catch some shit when the regular army catches up with them, as they no doubt will. There are no deaths with anything to commend them, either Russian or Ukrainian.
BlueSi13 Posted 4 March 2022 Author Posted 4 March 2022 (edited) https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-war-president-volodymyr-zelensky-slams-nato-for-rejecting-ukraine-no-fly-zone-2804705 I've been hugely impressed with Zelensky so far during the conflict and I completely understand his frustration but this is disappointing on so many levels. A no-fly zone would mean ourselves and other NATO allies shooting down Russia aircraft and thus immediately starting WW3. We'd also be obliged to shoot down Ukrainian aircraft if they tried something as well. It's also very likely that without NATO weaponry and intelligence this war would have already been lost for Ukraine. All these comments do is poison Ukrainian popular opinion against the west (potentially vice-versa) and is a gift for Putin who will no doubt try and turn the Ukrainians against the West in upcoming negotiations ("told you they didn't care about you, this is all their fault, they want you to die for them blah blah blah"). A dangerous game long term. But then again, it's probably more than likely that Zelensky doesn't care about the risk, he wants direct military support and he wants it now. Why would he care about the West being dragged in to the war directly, his country is already being invaded. Edited 4 March 2022 by BlueSi13 2
st albans fox Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 The no fly zone The decision of NATO to rule it out is a de facto acceptance of Russia’s right to be in ukraine. That’s what’s basically wrong with it. Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Under international law. Putin can say what he likes but Russia has signed agreements that state this. the Russians will simply not want to enter into combat with NATO warplanes. It is likely that they will have to pretty much withdraw their air attack to avoid this. But I think ukraine would have to accept that a no fly zone refers to their aircraft too. I’m not sure that’s going to be a lot of benefit to ukraine. At the moment,the Russians are not committing a lot of helicopters and jets for fear of them being shot down. removing all aircraft will not change Russian artillery continuing to pound away at Ukraine’s cities. a no fly zone which only applies to russian aircraft will receive short shrift from Moscow and they will make noises to the extent that the Americans won’t countenance it. these are the musings of a very tired mind!
Foxdiamond Posted 4 March 2022 Posted 4 March 2022 5 minutes ago, st albans fox said: The no fly zone The decision of NATO to rule it out is a de facto acceptance of Russia’s right to be in ukraine. That’s what’s basically wrong with it. Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Under international law. Putin can say what he likes but Russia has signed agreements that state this. the Russians will simply not want to enter into combat with NATO warplanes. It is likely that they will have to pretty much withdraw their air attack to avoid this. But I think ukraine would have to accept that a no fly zone refers to their aircraft too. I’m not sure that’s going to be a lot of benefit to ukraine. At the moment,the Russians are not committing a lot of helicopters and jets for fear of them being shot down. removing all aircraft will not change Russian artillery continuing to pound away at Ukraine’s cities. a no fly zone which only applies to russian aircraft will receive short shrift from Moscow and they will make noises to the extent that the Americans won’t countenance it. these are the musings of a very tired mind! I don't think it is anything other than not wanting to escalate to something even worse. No guarantee a no fly zone would stop the war in Ukraine and a high risk of ww3. It all stinks but this is where we are.
Popular Post Innovindil Posted 4 March 2022 Popular Post Posted 4 March 2022 22 minutes ago, BlueSi13 said: https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-war-president-volodymyr-zelensky-slams-nato-for-rejecting-ukraine-no-fly-zone-2804705 I've been hugely impressed with Zelensky so far during the conflict and I completely understand his frustration but this is disappointing on so many levels. A no-fly zone would mean ourselves and other NATO allies shooting down Russia aircraft and thus immediately starting WW3. We'd also be obliged to shoot down Ukrainian aircraft if they tried something as well. It's also very likely that without NATO weaponry and intelligence this war would have already been lost for Ukraine. All these comments do is poison Ukrainian popular opinion against the west (potentially vice-versa) and is a gift for Putin who will no doubt try and turn the Ukrainians against the West in upcoming negotiations ("told you they didn't care about you, this is all their fault, they want you to die for them blah blah blah"). A dangerous game long term. But then again, it's probably more than likely that Zelensky doesn't care about the risk, he wants direct military support and he wants it now. Why would he care about the West being dragged in to the war directly, his country is already being invaded. I'm struggling to even be disappointed in him tbh. He's watching huge swathes of his country reduced to rubble, his countrymen piling up in bodybags and his people fleeing en mass probably never to return, all the while knowing that even if by some miracle he wins, or the russians withdraw after negotiations, it will take decades, maybe his entire lifetime, before his country looks close to what it did just a couple of weeks ago. Any man or woman going through that and not lashing out (rightly or wrongly) probably isn't human. 7
Guesty Posted 5 March 2022 Posted 5 March 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Innovindil said: I'm struggling to even be disappointed in him tbh. He's watching huge swathes of his country reduced to rubble, his countrymen piling up in bodybags and his people fleeing en mass probably never to return, all the while knowing that even if by some miracle he wins, or the russians withdraw after negotiations, it will take decades, maybe his entire lifetime, before his country looks close to what it did just a couple of weeks ago. Any man or woman going through that and not lashing out (rightly or wrongly) probably isn't human. I agree. Plus, I think he asked for a no fly zone - or for them to give him planes. Maybe he and other Ukrainians also think we owe them since in the 1990's the US, UK and Russia convinced his country to give up the third largest stockpile of nuclear weapons - in the Budapest Memorandum. Among the 6 assurances was that Ukraine's boarders would be respected or there would be consequences. And the (US and UK) weaselled out of it by saying they were only assurances and not guarantees. The fact the US/UK basically did nothing when Russia invaded Crimea is in part, why we are where we are now. The memorandum was Ukraine's first step on the way to joining Europe where they effectively made it clear they wanted to leave Russia behind - and where has it got them... Edited 5 March 2022 by Guesty 3
ajthefox Posted 5 March 2022 Posted 5 March 2022 2 hours ago, EnderbyFox said: So in the space of a year Stuart Ramsey has been almost shot at by the Taliban and now actually shot at by Russian Death squads, blokes got some balls on him Can he withstand a cold Tuesday night in Stoke though?
MPH Posted 5 March 2022 Posted 5 March 2022 (edited) 12 hours ago, Ian Nacho said: I wonder how Trump would’ve handled this. well, he was all for energy independence for the United States, and was a big fan of the keystone pipeline that Biden halted the use of. It’s hard to say he would have prevented this but maybe prevent is the wrong word.. but he would have used other tactics . The U.S allegedly buys $55m worth of Russian oil a day and this could have been a huge bargaining power.. he was also sickeningly pally pally with Putin so he might have been able to use that. I never liked Trump but it’s possible he could have used different tactics. That’s not to say they would have worked, of course.. Edited 5 March 2022 by MPH 3
BlueSi13 Posted 5 March 2022 Author Posted 5 March 2022 2 hours ago, st albans fox said: The no fly zone The decision of NATO to rule it out is a de facto acceptance of Russia’s right to be in ukraine. That’s what’s basically wrong with it. Ukraine is a sovereign nation. Under international law. Putin can say what he likes but Russia has signed agreements that state this. the Russians will simply not want to enter into combat with NATO warplanes. It is likely that they will have to pretty much withdraw their air attack to avoid this. But I think ukraine would have to accept that a no fly zone refers to their aircraft too. I’m not sure that’s going to be a lot of benefit to ukraine. At the moment,the Russians are not committing a lot of helicopters and jets for fear of them being shot down. removing all aircraft will not change Russian artillery continuing to pound away at Ukraine’s cities. a no fly zone which only applies to russian aircraft will receive short shrift from Moscow and they will make noises to the extent that the Americans won’t countenance it. these are the musings of a very tired mind! Agree on the 1st part. Disagree on the 2nd. The Russians would likely just choose to ignore the NATO planes in the air and attack ground targets regardless. It would be for NATO to take the 1st shot and if we did, boom, Putin is on TV immediately saying that Russia is officially under attack from NATO and that he was right all along. It's a terrible situation for NATO/the West, but unfortunately I think we are doing all we can...which is still a lot to be fair. So far the Ukrainians are well in this fight, all hope is not lost yet.
BlueSi13 Posted 5 March 2022 Author Posted 5 March 2022 Alternative strategy. As Russia has attacked our ally Ukraine. What if NATO decides to take out Russia's ally Belarus? Just a thought.
leicsmac Posted 5 March 2022 Posted 5 March 2022 5 hours ago, Paninistickers said: I presume nuke codes have to be authorised/coded by 2 or 3 separate people to engage them. I just can't see all of those with the proverbial 'finger on the button' accepting the order to end the human race all at the same time. I suspect had Trump issued an order to Nuke Russia or China in a fit of pique, the US military would have arrested him. I like to think the Russian military top brass would do the same to Putin From what we know the US nuclear release authority does reside solely with the President - the "second person" can only indicate and confirm that the order comes from the President, not countermand it because the President has gone nuts. Perhaps Russian launch authority is different but there's no proof saying so. You'd like to think that someone would step in and prevent the end of the world, but these systems are designed in mind that once the order is given, that's it - all or nothing. Speaking personally, I'd rather not gamble with the future of civilisation on one or more Russian military members having a fit of conscience and giving their own lives and careers to stop a launch from happening. 2 hours ago, Innovindil said: I'm struggling to even be disappointed in him tbh. He's watching huge swathes of his country reduced to rubble, his countrymen piling up in bodybags and his people fleeing en mass probably never to return, all the while knowing that even if by some miracle he wins, or the russians withdraw after negotiations, it will take decades, maybe his entire lifetime, before his country looks close to what it did just a couple of weeks ago. Any man or woman going through that and not lashing out (rightly or wrongly) probably isn't human. Right. It takes a seriously special mind to be able to look at steps rationally when all you know and cherish is crumbling around you. His reaction is totally understandable, but at the same time the big picture is important.
gerblod Posted 5 March 2022 Posted 5 March 2022 On 04/03/2022 at 07:22, ARTY_FOX said: I think you'd be suprised how accurate artillery can be. It would be incredibly easy to hit really. The co-ordinates will be known without having to send someone to mark it down and call it in in all likeliness The context was in response to MPH's reply to me that artillery could destroy the power conduit outside the plant itself. No doubt, with the advent of GPS artillery sighting has become more accurate. Yet I think you're confusing real war with some platform game - some kind of pushbutton, clean and clinical operation. Right through this conflict the Russian army has demonstrated its usual inept field tactics. Attacking a nuclear power station with artillery is, in itself, wildly dangerous - in terms of potential outcomes. I can sense here the cold hand of Putin around the commander's neck - "get it done, or else". The reassuring fact is that the NPS is designed to withstand the impact of a crashing aircraft. But, after Chernobyl, would you trust to their construction expertise? This was an exercise in isolating power from Kiev/Kyiv and hurting Kyevan morale. I think it will fail. Ukrainians are tough and have a long history of surviving this kind of aggression. For now the Kremlin is controlled by an unstable, egomaniac fantasist (bit like the UK - sozz Bojo, couldn't resist that ). I hope some brave souls around him decide to get the straitjacket out and whisk him away to a secure establishment somewhere in Siberia.
Recommended Posts