[Politics] Russia invades Ukraine (24/02/2022)

[raymondo]

Ukrainian drones reportedly strike Russian refinery in Ryazan Oblast for 3rd time in 2025

The Ryazan Oil Refining Company's facility was previously struck overnight on Jan. 24 and Jan. 26.

kyivindependent.com

 

[Triggaaar]

If we take your assumption of 5 dead pw overall with wounded it’s 30 pw. Plus, if you could indulge my ignorance on warfare, a war in Vietnam and its environment between a conventional army fighting a guerrilla insurgency is light years away from a two more conventional armies fighting across open territory.

If you compare the war in Vietnam with WW1, yes, they're light years apart. The current war doesn't have two armies up against each other with machine guns, it's more guerrilla warfare. The Russians are losing many more troops as they march people (including wounded soldiers on crutches) across open fields, but Ukraine don't do that, and we obviously wouldn't either.

That’s what we dealing with in Ukraine

It isn't.

and therefore the rate of losses will be from destruction of vehicles and the degradation of military units is likely to mean a higher rate than 5 dead and 25 wounded per week. Even if it’s just double what you think and 10 dead 50 wounded per week that rate will build, notwithstanding the likelihood say we lose a ship and its immediately 100+

5 & 25 would be based on the UK being on the front line, rather than acting in a supporting role. The notion of British troops in the war is complete guesswork at this point. As explained, it's wrong to double it, and now you're throwing in a lost ship with 100+ casualties. Who says we'd have ships there, and why would we lose 100+? We lost 4 ships in the Falklands war, and didn't have 100 casualties between them. You keep trying to exaggerate our possible losses.

Either way, we agree this country does not have the stomach for a brutal losses for a war it does not have to fight.

When was the last was you think we had to fight? We didn't have to fight in WW1 or WW2, but we did. We've had many conflicts since then too, and we've done what we've had to do.

As I have maintained, I don’t doubt the British public overwhelmingly back Ukraine, that backing however is not without thresholds, and the costs in increasing financial aid will diminish that support as it would in blood

Are you talking about this war ending and us sending peacekeepers to Ukraine, to put Russia off starting another war, or are you talking about Russia trying to take the rest of Europe?

Which brings us to Gen Z, and splitting hairs. The polling indicates there would be problems in generating support from them to fight the U.K. for any cause and for the U.K. generally.

If you're talking about troops being sent to Ukraine, then it would be military personnel, not Joe public. But if you're talking about Russia trying to take over the whole of Europe, and us having to conscript the public, that's a different thing altogether and I assume you'd agree that is then a war we do have to fight. If we had to defend against an expanding Russia, we would. Simple as that.

 

[raymondo]

 

[peterward]

It is ASTONISHINGLY good fortune, decent voters turning out... thank you Germany .
May sound odd, but Europe NEEDS strong leadership from Germany now, to help Ukraine and Europe: taurus, Rheinmetall, industrial base, large economy...and Merz is clearly going to push back against the US.

It looks really promising so far, and he is the most pro Ukraine of the German bundeskanzler choices. He will though have to go into coalition and its cited the likely pairing will be with the outgoing SPD of Scholz, who are full of Russian sympathisers like Shroeder, and the Greens (Annalena Baerbock) who has been the foreign minister in previous coalition, is also very pro Ukraine and clashed constantly with Scholz's weak and cowardly heel dragging.

Both Merz and Baerbock are massively positive, the SPD could be the problem child with Taurus?

Ultimately whether you're left or right of centre, as long as the German incumbent isn't a dangerous far left or far right nutjob party like Afd, it matters not where they sit on the political spectrum, thats for German domestic politics and can't say I care too much about that tbh, the only bit that interests me is their international stance, Ukraine, Euro Atlanticism and now their policies to a US gone rogue.

So far Merz is hitting all the right notes,

 

[Triggaaar]

So what I think you are saying is France beat Germany in 1940.

People who understand conflicts better than you are explaining where you're mistaken, and in response you're being obtuse. France didn't lose just 20% of territory in 1940, they lost it all and surrendered. That's not what happened in Stalingrad (where Russia conceded territory and Germany lost a lot of soldiers) and it's not what's happening now in Ukraine.

 

[peterward]

If you compare the war in Vietnam with WW1, yes, they're light years apart. The current war doesn't have two armies up against each other with machine guns, it's more guerrilla warfare. The Russians are losing many more troops as they march people (including wounded soldiers on crutches) across open fields, but Ukraine don't do that, and we obviously wouldn't either.



It isn't.



5 & 25 would be based on the UK being on the front line, rather than acting in a supporting role. The notion of British troops in the war is complete guesswork at this point. As explained, it's wrong to double it, and now you're throwing in a lost ship with 100+ casualties. Who says we'd have ships there, and why would we lose 100+? We lost 4 ships in the Falklands war, and didn't have 100 casualties between them. You keep trying to exaggerate our possible losses.




When was the last was you think we had to fight? We didn't have to fight in WW1 or WW2, but we did. We've had many conflicts since then too, and we've done what we've had to do.




Are you talking about this war ending and us sending peacekeepers to Ukraine, to put Russia off starting another war, or are you talking about Russia trying to take the rest of Europe?




If you're talking about troops being sent to Ukraine, then it would be military personnel, not Joe public. But if you're talking about Russia trying to take over the whole of Europe, and us having to conscript the public, that's a different thing altogether and I assume you'd agree that is then a war we do have to fight. If we had to defend against an expanding Russia, we would. Simple as that.

I'd guess one of the big reasons and plusses of an international peacekeeping force, is they would be deployed in Western Ukraine, near Belarus border, Odessa etc and well aware from the actual line of contact.

This would give Ukraine the ability to move a lot of troops currently forced to maintain defensive postures in other parts of the country, towards the current front lines and would help hugely with their manpower issues.

 

[sparkie]

It is amusing to watch all the replies to posts I am ignoring, not interested in having a look as I know the writing will be complete Kremlin talking points. Lol.

On another point are there any anti-immigration parties in Europe that are not pro-Putin ?

 

[Eric the meek]

It is amusing to watch all the replies to posts I am ignoring, not interested in having a look as I know the writing will be complete Kremlin talking points. Lol.

On another point are there any anti-immigration parties in Europe that are not pro-Putin ?

Skimming through the updates this morning, I was thinking the same as you in your first point.

Cunning Fergus must be writing all kinds of nonsense, as he's getting a right old hammering.

Still, he may be a racist troll, but he's OUR racist troll.

 

[Eric the meek]

Interesting to see Musk has denied threatening to cut Starlink to Ukraine.

The Trump team are beginning to roll back....

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

Skimming through the updates this morning, I was thinking the same as you in your first point.

Cunning Fergus must be writing all kinds of nonsense, as he's getting a right old hammering.

Still, he may be a racist troll, but he's OUR racist troll.

I feel it as our duty to keep him here otherwise he’d just end up polluting some other message board. A civic duty if you like.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Skimming through the updates this morning, I was thinking the same as you in your first point.

Cunning Fergus must be writing all kinds of nonsense, as he's getting a right old hammering.

Still, he may be a racist troll, but he's OUR racist troll.

I do feel the need to point out that it's not racist trolling on this one particular occasion, it's russian propaganda trolling this time

 

[SouthSaxon]

Skimming through the updates this morning, I was thinking the same as you in your first point.

Cunning Fergus must be writing all kinds of nonsense, as he's getting a right old hammering.

Still, he may be a racist troll, but he's OUR racist troll.

From my perspective, I’ve engaged with him because it’s not obvious to me from what he’s posting exactly what he believes. A lot of his posts are, IMO, misinformed and it could be interpreted as Russian talking points, but it could just be a genuine misunderstanding of what’s going on.

He’s not resorting to personal attacks, so I’m happy to share my perspective and offer corrections, which might at least help other readers.

The pure trolls on this board, who just gloat and posture, I am happy to ignore.

 

[peterward]

ineresting to see Musk has denied threatening to cut Starlink to Ukraine.

The Trump team are beginning to roll back....

I honestly think they would if they could. But the consequences to Musk and the potential trust/loss of faith damage to purchasers of US technologies if they did suck a thing, would probably outweigh their desire to hurt Ukraine and help Putin.

Its not a moral decision, its least damaging financially.

 

[Eric the meek]

I do feel the need to point out that it's not racist trolling on this one particular occasion, it's russian propaganda trolling this time

Fair enough. I've not read any of it. I just remember before I put him on ignore, that he was linking a gen z report that only 11% of them would fight for Britain. He linked this to Southport and diversity etc.

 

[peterward]

From my perspective, I’ve engaged with him because it’s not obvious to me from what he’s posting exactly what he believes. A lot of his posts are, IMO, misinformed and it could be interpreted as Russian talking points, but it could just be a genuine misunderstanding of what’s going on.

He’s not resorting to personal attacks, so I’m happy to share my perspective and offer corrections, which might at least help other readers.

The pure trolls on this board, who just gloat and posture, I am happy to ignore.

I dont have anyone on ignore, take the good with the shit and happy to pushback against the obvious bollocks. Agree with too about the honourble member from Fergus.

Looks like someone whos spent time on truth social, watching RT or other mediums ingesting pro Russian horseshit, but still well mannered even if misguided imho.

 

[Eric the meek]

From my perspective, I’ve engaged with him because it’s not obvious to me from what he’s posting exactly what he believes. A lot of his posts are, IMO, misinformed and it could be interpreted as Russian talking points, but it could just be a genuine misunderstanding of what’s going on.

He’s not resorting to personal attacks, so I’m happy to share my perspective and offer corrections, which might at least help other readers.

The pure trolls on this board, who just gloat and posture, I am happy to ignore.

People must respond as they see fit. There's no right or wrong, and I wouldn't presume to tell people to ignore him.

I personally find it a pain to correct him all the time. It's almost as if he misreads, misinterprets and misunderstands deliberately. He seems to enjoy wasting people's time.

 

[SouthSaxon]

People must respond as they see fit. There's no right or wrong, and I wouldn't presume to tell people to ignore him.

I personally find it a pain to correct him all the time. It's almost as if he misreads, misinterprets and misunderstands deliberately. He seems to enjoy wasting people's time.

That is certainly possible, and I don’t claim to have an endless well of patience with it.

 

[peterward]

Strong Words from German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, even more so as hes an SPD politician

"German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier has just addressed the summit in Kyiv via video link.

"It is Russia that started this war," he says. "Russia may have gained an open ear in the White House but they have not gained an inch of legitimacy."

"Does anybody honestly think that some thoughtless conversations, or some reckless statements, can crush our resolve?" he asks.

"No, quite the opposite. The past two weeks have only strengthened our resolve as Europeans. More than ever we have to stand up for ourselves and Ukraine."

 

[raymondo]

It looks really promising so far, and he is the most pro Ukraine of the German bundeskanzler choices. He will though have to go into coalition and its cited the likely pairing will be with the outgoing SPD of Scholz, who are full of Russian sympathisers like Shroeder, and the Greens (Annalena Baerbock) who has been the foreign minister in previous coalition, is also very pro Ukraine and clashed constantly with Scholz's weak and cowardly heel dragging.

Both Merz and Baerbock are massively positive, the SPD could be the problem child with Taurus?

Ultimately whether you're left or right of centre, as long as the German incumbent isn't a dangerous far left or far right nutjob party like Afd, it matters not where they sit on the political spectrum, thats for German domestic politics and can't say I care too much about that tbh, the only bit that interests me is their international stance, Ukraine, Euro Atlanticism and now their policies to a US gone rogue.

So far Merz is hitting all the right notes,

Yes to all of that, it's not a perfect set up but could have been a hell of a lot worse.
I hope that Merz and Baerbock can show up Schroeder for what he is.
Strong leadership from Germany, France, Poland and the UK may even get those frozen Russian assets put to use finally ...find away around EU voting vetoes.

 

[raymondo]

Interesting to see Musk has denied threatening to cut Starlink to Ukraine.

The Trump team are beginning to roll back....

Yep, I just seem to assume now that Trump and Musk will lie most of time, like their pal Putin.