Or else you
[Politics] WWIII
- Thread starter mile oak
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
Putin is all wind and piss and the nuclear weapon threat is bluster. Mutually Assured Destruction is like two people standing in a bath full of petrol with a box of matches; if one of them strikes a match, they both go up.
Deportivo Seagull
I should coco
The two assaults ships were mothballed which is the first step to being scrapped or sold. The fact the money used to keep them in ‘storage’ can be used elsewhere is a bonus. The other issue is that the two carriers have the capacity to fulfil the role of assault ships. We don’t have the sailors or squadrons to man all four Something that you can lay at the door of the previous government. FWIW I work in defence.
As for the bear, is this the bear that has had to go cap in hand to NK because the Ukraines are giving him a bloody nose. These threats are repeats of threats that he has been making on and off since the war started.
You sound very much like a Putin apologist.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
Will Mario Cart be available on it
Deportivo Seagull
I should coco
Apologies. Type 26 aren’t affected but any replacement will be a 31.
portlock seagull
Well-known member
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,780
Democracies always leave it nearly too late or plain too late. Dictatorships know this, and use to their advantage. The key question is when exactly do we stop hoping the nasty man goes away and/or remove one’s head from the proverbial ‘sand?’ When we’re back on those a Zuydcoote? Camber? Blackpool? Or maybe Oban this time before we start to take things seriously?
As for Peston and ITV News generally, far too tabloid and overly dramatic for my tastes. The time to be very concerned was years ago. Let’s hope we don’t leave the inevitable too late eh? Forward, the Light Brigade…!
portlock seagull
Well-known member
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,780
Quite agree. We will never win this war (and we’re in a war even if the ignorant don’t realise or choose to pretend otherwise) until we’re fighting with both hands free, the government is unafraid of social media opinion and we, the people, face up to some cold hard realities and stop being so cowed by idle threats. It’s going to be brutal, many more will die (maybe even some of us on here) but Putin simply must be stopped. No ifs or buts. Once and for all. Blair and the 462 PM’s we’ve had since were all complicit in allowing this tyrant’s shadow to grow so long. It’s now becoming of Starmer and all our Allies to put an end to Putin. With the Nations full support regardless of the inevitable hardships we’ll need to further endure. And which, frankly, pale in comparison to those already suffered by Ukraine. There might even be the odd positive such as younger liberal generations realise peace and security should never, ever, be taken for granted. As it undoubtedly has been since the end of the Cold War.
Cotton Socks
Skint Supporter
- Feb 20, 2017
- 2,159
Oh do f**k off with your stupid thread title.
I was browsing NSC just as I was dropping my X reg Astra off at the garage to have a new clutch & gearbox fitted. Luckily I continued reading & have let the garage continue. It's only going to cost a couple of grand as it took them so long to find diff parts that will actually fit, then it should be good to go for another couple of years after I've chucked some Wyns rad weld in & then some stop leak for the oil.
Mods please change the thread title. I dunno, you could change it to, should I scrap my 24 year old Astra that will cost be a fortune to get back on the road or just put the money towards a newer car that will cost less to maintain & repair in the long run?
Full disclosure... I don't have an Astra or drive a car & have been annoyed by the thread title probably far more than I should have.
Me neither.
Death by drone dropped thermite doesn't appeal to me. Just have to trust fate is kinder.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Being as (along with the Americans) we've now given the green light to Ukraine to use our long-range missiles to hit inside Russia - if Russia started lobbing multiple long range ballistic missiles into Kent and Westfield shopping centre, possibly destroying West Ham FC, could we argue ?
I would say yes, we would have a fairly strong argument. Mainly because we didn’t invade Ukraine.
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,563
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Sure.
But this proxy war has been ramped up to whole new levels this week. We are all properly poking the bear now, and Putin can only appear weak if he does not react.
I might put my app for a Fulham ticket on hold.
Ha!
Yes, indeed we can expect a reaction from Moscow.
Interesting article in the Guardian yesterday from Julian Borger, the world affairs editor, who speculates that we are more likely to see a ramping up of Russia’s clandestine tactics rather than a particularly overt response.
How might Russia respond to UK and US letting Ukraine hit it with their missiles?
Moscow has rattled its nuclear sabres, but experts say an increase in hybrid, ‘grey zone’ warfare is more likely
www.theguardian.com
Ok, I read a headline on a site incorrectly.
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,889
You sound like you don’t know what your talking about.
The carriers are not multi role platforms, they exist to project strategic air power and would never be risked in amphibious operations. If the U.K. cannot maintain amphibious warfare capacity due to cost (or whatever) this Government needs to level with population and step back from representing itself as even a 2nd rank power.
As for Ukraine giving the bear a bloody nose, if that was the case why all the angst about Trump’s victory and the need now for Biden to agree to the use of long range missiles into Russian territory? The hard truth is the opposite, Russia has control of thousands of square miles of Ukrainian territory. Maybe it was costly in lives but that is the fact.
Recognising facts doesn’t make me an apologist for Putin, however if the U.K. Government is willing to spaff millions on the war, it better make sure the decision to do so make sense domestically. I don’t think they do, for multiple reasons and this decision, and the timing of it makes even less sense than your post.
Calling @Dr. No
Deportivo Seagull
I should coco
Having served on a RN squadron whose sole purpose was to support and participate in amphibious landings (i‘ve done a few btw) I think I might have an idea. Amphibious ships are specifically designed for the task but the Hermes was perfectly adequate for the task and she started life as conventional carrier. The invincible class carriers also fulfilled a similar role. The main difference is that assault ships have landing craft.
Russian’s have been so successful that they have had to get NK troops in as they are running out of their own. That is fact. That is a bloody nose in anyone’s book.
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
That would be an attack on a NATO member and Article 5 would apply, deeming it an attack on all.
Whether Trump would honour his obligations in such circumstances is another matter...
A mex eyecan
Well-known member
- Nov 3, 2011
- 3,885
boom boom