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

[Poojah]

Emotional interview with Zelenskyy on Sky News. Incredible journalism to get a face-to-face interview with the man at such a time.

Hadn't realised he spoke such good English. I hear his pain and I understand it. Watching families be slaughtered in your own country. There are no words. But I don't know what the answer is; I just don't.

https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-...g-president-zelenskyy-tells-sky-news-12561844

 

[peterward]

A wonderful scenario if it worked, but can you explain to me why Putin would allow himself to be reined-in by China?

His only chance right now of economic survival is China.

If he's a suicide bomber and hell bent on WW3 nothing anybody does will matter, if he's not then he's banking on China to subvert sanctions or bail him out.

China definitely doesnt want WW3. And if they believe we will enforce a no fly unless he is reigned in (and the risks that brings), they have all the leverage. If Putin refuses China, they can pull the plug and he's bankrupt very quick.

The question is do you think the Chinese will take no for an answer from Putin, still offer to bail him out and also just stand back and watch NATO get involved hoping for the best?

The instablity would be crushing for China economically. I bet they wouldnt.

Putin could say no, but then the Chinese can bring him to his knees very quickly. That would still be a better way to go about getting involved with a no fly (potentially), than us just doing it.

The Chinese do have a lot of leverage with Putin as his only major friend.

 

[Triggaaar]

So you’d be happy to risk the deaths of 7 Billion people instead?

You can argue that we're already risking that because we're sending weapons to Ukraine, and imposing economic sanctions on Russia, and that's upsetting Putin and he might start WW3. Unfortunately there's always a risk of that happening when countries have nuclear weapons.

The end of life on this planet is a massive, massive cost to be paid for acting. A cost I don’t believe is anywhere near being worth paying at this time.

It's not a cost worth paying, but it's not a guaranteed cost. It's a potential cost, and while having it even as a potential is awful enough, the fact is that it's already a potential, so it's just about degrees. And the action people are talking about still doesn't involve fighting in Russia, only in Ukraine. And don't forget that places like China also don't want to see 7 billion people killed, and the people that Putin would ask for fire nuclear weapons also won't want that.

Watching 20 million people die and doing nothing to stop it would be beyond words.

 

[crookie]

As has been mentioned many times on this thread, a no-fly zone will not stop most of the bombardment of Ukrainian cities with heavy artillery and missiles fired from Russia

 

[The Clamp]

We are doing lots to help. The idea we are doing nothing to stop it, is inaccurate. Sanctions, weapons, funding. One thing we are very sensibly not doing is establishing a frankly useless no fly zone that we would have to police. The West's military have ruled that out as an option. And we will be glad they did.

 

[birthofanorange]

His only chance right now of economic survival is China.

If he's a suicide bomber and hell bent on WW3 nothing anybody does will matter, if he's not then he's banking on China to subvert sanctions or bail him out.

China definitely doesnt want WW3. And if they believe we will enforce a no fly unless he is reigned in (and the risks that brings), they have all the leverage. If Putin refuses China, they can pull the plug and he's bankrupt very quick.

The question is do you think the Chinese will take no for an answer from Putin, still offer to bail him out and also just stand back and watch NATO get involved hoping for the best?

The instablity would be crushing for China economically. I bet they wouldnt.

Putin could say no, but then the Chinese can bring him to his knees very quickly. That would still be a better way to go about getting involved with a no fly (potentially), than us just doing it.




The Chinese do have a lot of leverage with Putin as his only major friend.

Thank you for replying, and it kinda makes sense, but it IS putting a lot of faith in China (and equally Putin's response).

I would imagine that China has a clear idea of what's going on already, and are currently staying out of it, but I do feel there are far too many things that could go wrong with your suggestion.

We all want more to be 'done', but it seems nigh on impossible to see what exactly that is.

 

[Triggaaar]

If you have to draw comparisons, and he may get there, but right now he's far from Hitler and Stalin at this stage.

Putin hasn't killed anything like the number of people as them. Our concern is that he might. If he starts WW3, he could kill more people than all other murderers in history put together. Your examples of Hitler and Stalin didn't only become evil tyrants once the totals were totted up, they were evil for years. Putin is evil too and I don't want to have to wait until everyone is dead before I can judge him.

He's probably not even done as much damage as the Saudi Regime in Yemen at this stage, and certainly not as much damage as was done by Blair and Bush in Iraq.

I'm pretty sure he's lead to the deaths of many more people than Blair and Bush in Iraq.

 

[Triggaaar]

What's happening now is shocking, where on earth have I said it isn't?

You're more recent posts about Putin are a little more in line with the war he is waging. My post that you've quoted, directly quoted you saying 'Putins behaviour in Ukraine is awful'. School children's behaviour can be awful at times. Calling Putin's behaviour awful (and linked with your other comments, like our media being biased just like theirs) downplays the true atrocities this evil war criminal is causing.

Billions of people are certainly not despicable but they always seem to end up being led by men that continually create war and suffering.

While I can see it often appears that way and it's easy to lose hope in humanity, the reality is that the number of people carrying out the sickening atrocities are very much the minority of people. Unfortunately the few people like Putin can cause so much suffering, but there are millions of people going out of their way to help others.

 

[Triggaaar]

You seem to think that if Nato does get involved Putin will definitely use the Nukes. That's not the case.

That's your opinion, not a fact.

No, you've misread or misunderstood. drew highlighted that Putin may or may not use Nukes, and that it's not a definite. ie, it's not a fact. He's correct, it's not a fact.

You're then replying, stating that his comment that it's not a fact, is also not a fact. Madness.

 

[Triggaaar]

I dont think he'll do it if done the right way, there are ways of doing it indirectly....... We shouldnt take no fly off table, but we wouldnt need to neccessarily just do it which is NATO/US v Russia in Putins eyes.

if we state to the Chinese we are not going to stand by and watch this indiscrimate murder of civillians any longer, that we dont want to ge involved but we will be enforcing a no fly zone to strictly end this murder and bombing of civillian areas in cities, unless you can reign in Putin. Once we do enforce no fly, we will have no choice but to reluctently increase the nuclear state of readiness as Putin may lash out in revenge, the Chinese will then be left with a decision.

Make them 100% convinced that is the course of action and they'll rein him in imho. If they havent got to make a decision they wont, if you give them this choice, theyre not going to choose silence.

Worth a shot (I'm not saying it's come to that, but if it does).

The Chinese benefit hugely from the current economic world model. You can create leverage on the Chinese to rein him in

China also benefits from an atmosphere that humans can live in. If the rest of the world goes nuke mad, China will be uninhabitable too.

 

[birthofanorange]

No, you've misread or misunderstood. drew highlighted that Putin may or may not use Nukes, and that it's not a definite. ie, it's not a fact. He's correct, it's not a fact.

You're then replying, stating that his comment that it's not a fact, is also not a fact. Madness.

Good grief.

 

[The Clamp]

Good grief.

I like Trigaaar and I like his posts but heed thy warning, he will debate every letter of every word of every sentence of every paragraph of every post for far longer than normal human endurance.


Sorry Trig, no offence intended.

 

[Triggaaar]

On a more positive note, I've just received a PM from Swansman:

"Thickest, least fact based words of today-award goes to "I'm pretty sure he's lead to the deaths of many more people than Blair and Bush in Iraq"

Well done."


What a lovely chap. Couldn't he have just posted his views here? I really don't want a PM conversation with someone like that.


I think I'm right in saying that more people died in Chechnya and Syria (plus Ukraine) at the hands of Russia, than in Iraq at the hands of Bush and Blair's armies.

 

[birthofanorange]

I like Trigaaar and I like his posts but heed thy warning, he will debate every letter of every word of every sentence of every paragraph of every post for far longer than normal human endurance.


Sorry Trig, no offence intended.

Yes, I had noticed.

 

[The Clamp]

On a more positive note, I've just received a PM from Swansman:

"Thickest, least fact based words of today-award goes to "I'm pretty sure he's lead to the deaths of many more people than Blair and Bush in Iraq"

Well done."


What a lovely chap. Couldn't he have just posted his views here? I really don't want a PM conversation with someone like that.


I think I'm right in saying that more people died in Chechnya and Syria (plus Ukraine) at the hands of Russia, than in Iraq at the hands of Bush and Blair's armies.

You are not the only user to receive such PM's from him.

 

[birthofanorange]

On a more positive note, I've just received a PM from Swansman:

"Thickest, least fact based words of today-award goes to "I'm pretty sure he's lead to the deaths of many more people than Blair and Bush in Iraq"

Well done."


What a lovely chap. Couldn't he have just posted his views here? I really don't want a PM conversation with someone like that.


I think I'm right in saying that more people died in Chechnya and Syria (plus Ukraine) at the hands of Russia, than in Iraq at the hands of Bush and Blair's armies.

I have no beef with you at all, and I apologise if you thought me rude, the other day.
We do have something in common - receiving random late night PM's from the resident odd-ball.

 

[atomised]

On a more positive note, I've just received a PM from Swansman:

"Thickest, least fact based words of today-award goes to "I'm pretty sure he's lead to the deaths of many more people than Blair and Bush in Iraq"

Well done."


What a lovely chap. Couldn't he have just posted his views here? I really don't want a PM conversation with someone like that.


I think I'm right in saying that more people died in Chechnya and Syria (plus Ukraine) at the hands of Russia, than in Iraq at the hands of Bush and Blair's armies.

I have a feeling he managed to swing himself a ban from this thread.

 

[birthofanorange]

I have a feeling he managed to swing himself a ban from this thread.

Ah, that makes sense.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

On a more positive note, I've just received a PM from Swansman:

"Thickest, least fact based words of today-award goes to "I'm pretty sure he's lead to the deaths of many more people than Blair and Bush in Iraq"

Well done."


What a lovely chap. Couldn't he have just posted his views here? I really don't want a PM conversation with someone like that.


I think I'm right in saying that more people died in Chechnya and Syria (plus Ukraine) at the hands of Russia, than in Iraq at the hands of Bush and Blair's armies.

I disabled my NSC PM facility years ago as I completely agree that conversations are better out in the open for all to see. PMs can just be a delivery system for abuse.

 

[Titanic]

I have a feeling he managed to swing himself a ban from this thread.

Indeed.