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

[Baldseagull]

Judging by the terrible state of the Russian military and added to the myth that they are a high tech military power I wouldn't be surprised if most of their nuclear missiles failed to launch, failed after launch or didn't detonate. Not a theory I'd like to test however!

Also any tactical nuke on Ukraine would be met with a devastating tactical nuking of the entire Russian military by the West

Ukraine had considered retaining the nuclear weapons on it's territory when USSR collapsed. Obviously another nuclear power was unwanted so a deal was reached, but Ukraine had decided the cost of making them functional was not a cost they could bear any way.

 

[A1X]

Russia using a nuclear weapon would instantly put off India and China (neither of which have any interest in a nuclear war, unless they start it). Russian propaganda has been built on the idea they are the wronged party who are taking a stand to protect their own sovereignty and security from a rogue Nazi state and the creeping tentacles of NATO, a story which does gain traction in post-imperial areas such as Africa, the Middle East and South America. Using a nuclear weapon would instantly destroy that particular fairytale, it’s very hard to claim you’re under threat from a non-nuclear country you’ve just dropped The Bomb on.

I can’t see any scenario where using one works to Putin’s advantage.

 

[portlock seagull]

We are closer to midnight than ever before re: doomsday clock.

My advice would be spend your money, enjoy yourself now because humanity really is fecked. Anyone now in say their 20s or 30s planning for old age is a fool. War, famine or pestilence is going to get you way before then. Current generations don’t remember the horrors of total war and the bomb used in anger. And each generation has to learn for itself. In others words, it’s incredibly likely nuclear weapons will soon be used in anger. MAD is no longer a ruling protocol, especially when so many more nations have and more soon will. Total destruction is like an itch for some counties, and nucs like toys some can’t resist playing with. It won’t be the bombs themselves that kill us, but the climate catastrophe that ensues causing billions to starve because of collapsed ecosystems. Which is coming one way or another anyhow.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

We are closer to midnight than ever before re: doomsday clock.

My advice would be spend your money, enjoy yourself now because humanity really is fecked. Anyone now in say their 20s or 30s planning for old age is a fool. War, famine or pestilence is going to get you way before then. Current generations don’t remember the horrors of total war and the bomb used in anger. And each generation has to learn for itself. In others words, it’s incredibly likely nuclear weapons will soon be used in anger. MAD is no longer a ruling protocol, especially when so many more nations have and more soon will. Total destruction is like an itch for some counties, and nucs like toys some can’t resist playing with. It won’t be the bombs themselves that kill us, but the climate catastrophe that ensues causing billions to starve because of collapsed ecosystems. Which is coming one way or another anyhow.

On my last visit to the Hack Green nuclear command bunker [now decommissioned] I was very surprised to learn that most deaths from a nuclear war are predicted to occur 3-6 weeks after detonation. The reason was quite harrowing, it will be the people who survived the initial blasts but are buried in collapsed and destroyed buildings and there is NO ONE able to come to their rescue - death by dehydration to millions of trapped people.

I disagree with you about MAD no longer being the ruling protocol - it has kept [nuclear] peace since 1945 - everyone knows there is NOTHING to be gained by using them save for the nose/face/spite group who don't yet, and won't ever get access to the big red button.

All IMHO like.

 

[Weststander]

Not the ‘world leading’ support for the Ukraine Boris Johnson led many to believe. It’s pretty much all the USA as I’d always thought (thank god Trump was not in power as the spend would be almost zero against his enablers).

Whilst I’m proud of our support, the only potential or actual PM of recent times who would have done less is Corbyn. An embarrassing stat for the French and Mediterranean EU countries but at least Germany and Poland have put their hands in their pockets. WW2 experience of the Russians is obviously still powerful.

The US economy is 7.2x larger than the UK’s, US tax revenues 5.5x that of the UK’s. The UK’s financial response and every other response from day one has matched the US. Only praise from Zelensky.

Even now, he’s pleading for the German weaponry promised.

 

[portlock seagull]

On my last visit to the Hack Green nuclear command bunker [now decommissioned] I was very surprised to learn that most deaths from a nuclear war are predicted to occur 3-6 weeks after detonation. The reason was quite harrowing, it will be the people who survived the initial blasts but are buried in collapsed and destroyed buildings and there is NO ONE able to come to their rescue - death by dehydration to millions of trapped people.

I disagree with you about MAD no longer being the ruling protocol - it has kept [nuclear] peace since 1945 - everyone knows there is NOTHING to be gained by using them save for the nose/face/spite group who don't yet, and won't ever get access to the big red button.

All IMHO like.

Interesting.

Re: MAD, something I was unaware of is the high number of ‘close calls’ - nearly 40 (FORTY!). And these are just the ones that are public knowledge eg Western occurrences or intelligence. The true figure is likely to be even higher given secrecy. Meaning it’s more when, not if, the next situation occurs and triggers MAD. Many Nuclear states aren’t even signed up to the governing world protocols. It’s utterly terrifying stuff really. And the WW2 usage has now all but passed out of living memory. We shouldn’t under estimate the significance of that.

 

[bhafc99]

I can’t see any scenario where using one works to Putin’s advantage.

So, given his track record so far, he'll be using one then?

 

[sparkie]

I expect that fairly soon we'll see a special forces operation to retake the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear plant. The wider battlefield is almost set for it.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

The US economy is 7.2x larger than the UK’s, US tax revenues 5.5x that of the UK’s. The UK’s financial response and every other response from day one has matched the US. Only praise from Zelensky.

Even now, he’s pleading for the German weaponry promised.

Even now political entrenchment is clouding so many people's assessments of our fantastic response. I watched a twitter clip from a Russian talk-show the other day where a participant was bemoaning the rout that had happened to the Russian army, he said miserably that the Ukranian division that had decimated theirs was one that was 'trained in Britain'. I am very proud of our governments response in this war.

*Disclaimer as people seem to get the wrong message.* I think the govt has been pretty mixed in recent times, i.e. Covid, bad start, fantastic vaccination response, awful example, eg beergate. I won't be voting Tory in the next election, but I try to keep open minded and fair.

 

[Triggaaar]

Carry on the argument with yourself. If your are not going to contradict my point that we’re ‘not’ world leading, why did you reply?

Blimey, chill out.

Johnson suggested time after time we are leading the world in support for the Ukraine against Russia. We never have done.

I never had the impression that we gave more military support for Ukraine than the US. It was regularly in the news that the US were sending billions of dollars worth of equipment. Can you link to direct quotes from Johnson that said otherwise?

 

[Billy the Fish]

Carry on the argument with yourself. If your are not going to contradict my point that we’re ‘not’ world leading, why did you reply? Johnson suggested time after time we are leading the world in support for the Ukraine against Russia. We never have done.

It's all very subjective. I've barely noticed Johnson saying that, probably because he says it about everything, it's just noise.

However, it's could easily be argued that Johnson was the first Western leader to take a hard line against Putin and that paved the way for everyone else. Diplomatically he was first and I think that's reflected in the praise he's receives from Zelensky.

But either way, even if I'm horribly wrong, it's just nitpicking. We're 2nd to the USA, a good performance and really not worth worrying about a bit of loose talk from Johnson.

 

[portslade seagull]

According to that, we've given more than double any other country, bar the US. That's pretty impressive. And no one suggested we were giving as much as the US. We do have a tiny military compared to the them.

France not even on the list? That just shows how brave the Ukrainians are - they rejected the offer for white flags.

Not sure what point he is trying to make here, pretty obvious The USA would be the biggest funder. Should direct his ire at those across the channel but Macron has spent most of his time cosying upto Putin

 

[Eric the meek]

Here's an interesting insight into the Russian political system. It is in shock.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKqGVDvt2zE

Join it at 01:05.

 

[Eric the meek]

Underneath another video (which I didn't think was worth posting), there is a reply, which - is - worth posting.

'The absurdity of Putin's war. The unfree came to free the free.'

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It's all very subjective. I've barely noticed Johnson saying that, probably because he says it about everything, it's just noise.

However, it's could easily be argued that Johnson was the first Western leader to take a hard line against Putin and that paved the way for everyone else. Diplomatically he was first and I think that's reflected in the praise he's receives from Zelensky.

But either way, even if I'm horribly wrong, it's just nitpicking. We're 2nd to the USA, a good performance and really not worth worrying about a bit of loose talk from Johnson.

It depends how you judge “support” for Ukraine. Maybe the UK was the first to give arms or whatever. But they were certainly not the first in other, just as valid areas, like dealing with the displacement of its citizens and other elements of rescue and recovery.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

It depends how you judge “support” for Ukraine. Maybe the UK was the first to give arms or whatever. But they were certainly not the first in other, just as valid areas, like dealing with the displacement of its citizens and other elements of rescue and recovery.

Those aspects you mention, the responsibility falls to the countries in the immediate vicinity. It's natural for Poland to accept more people. I wouldn't expect Spain for instance to house that many refugees. If Russia had invaded Scotland, I would expect us to give shelter to most of the displaced people. I wouldn't moan that Poland or France didn't step up etc.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Those aspects you mention, the responsibility falls to the countries in the immediate vicinity. It's natural for Poland to accept more people. I wouldn't expect Spain for instance to house that many refugees. If Russia had invaded Scotland, I would expect us to give shelter to most of the displaced people. I wouldn't moan that Poland or France didn't step up etc.

Possibly, but this does not change my point.

 

[A1X]

Sounds like yon Vlad has had to explain himself to a president Xi today. Bet he found that awkward. Wish I’d been a fly on the wall.

 

[sparkie]

Sounds like yon Vlad has had to explain himself to a president Xi today. Bet he found that awkward. Wish I’d been a fly on the wall.

Xi's not going to back a loser.

 

[indy3050]

The article on Xi and Putin from the BBC

Vladimir Putin has acknowledged China's "concern" over Ukraine, in his first face-to-face talks with President Xi Jinping since the Russian invasion.
But speaking in Uzbekistan, Mr Putin also thanked China for its "balanced position" - and said US "attempts to create a unipolar world" would fail.
Mr Xi said China was willing to work together with Russia as "great powers".
China hasn't endorsed Russia's invasion but has grown trade and other ties with Moscow since it was launched.
The two leaders' meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Samarkand comes at a crucial point in the Ukraine war, as Russian troops lose ground in parts of the country.
"We highly value the balanced position of our Chinese friends when it comes to the Ukraine crisis," Mr Putin told Mr Xi, on only his second foray abroad since February's invasion.
Revealing that China had "questions and concern" about the situation in Ukraine, he said he understood.
"During today's meeting, we will of course explain our position," Mr Putin said.
The invasion has plunged Moscow into its worst crisis with the West since the Cold War and has sent global food and energy prices soaring.
It also poses a huge challenge for China - whose relations with the West have nosedived in recent years over issues including human rights and the future of Taiwan.
Mr Putin and Mr Xi have met dozens of times over the years but their latest talks received particular scrutiny.
Their growing relationship - which they characterise as a bulwark to Western dominance - signifies a major shift in the world order following the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The roles are reversed now, with China the dominant partner, having risen to become an economic superpower.
"Putin is getting more out of it than Xi - Russia is quite isolated internationally," Professor Emeritus Rosemary Foot, a senior research fellow in international relations at Oxford University, told the BBC.
"So it's important to show that China is a supportive partner, not an ally but certainly a supportive actor. There is a close relationship."