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

[Triggaaar]

NATO ultimately exists to defend NATO, and as Ukraine is not in NATO then it would not nuke Moscow if Moscow nuked Kyiv, that's just a statement of fact.

Of course the US wouldn't nuke Moscow, but that's not the same as saying they'd do nothing. And NATO existing to defend NATO doesn't mean that countries like the US can't also do things separate from NATO, which is what they've said they will do.

 

[Baldseagull]

I'm still waiting for Boris' (still unpublished) Russia report !

But on the off chance that it doesn't materialise, here is what the Royal United Services Institute have to say on the extraordinary measures Russian 'special services' undertake.

'The Kaleidoscopic Campaigning of Russia’s Special Services'

https://rusi.org/explore-our-resear...doscopic-campaigning-russias-special-services

In this context, do you see that Medvedev's comments about the west not responding to a nuclear strike, are just another facet of the whole process of Russian political warfare?

The Russia report was published, but with lots of censored parts. Upshot, yes Russia intefreres in UK elections, routinely. No evidence that Russian interference affected the Brexit result, mostly because it was not in the remit of the investigators, and they were warned that any attempt at investigating whether the result was affected would in itself be damaging to democracy, allowing the government to say: "We have seen no evidence of successful interference in the EU referendum."

I wonder why the Russians routinely interfere in our elections if they have no effect?

 

[raymondo]

Looks like up put up job, the question is who put it up, surely a stream of old ladies pledging allegiance to Russia would be more convincing than a chorus line of troops in uniform.

The referendum is a fixed farce but it is hard to believe that video is credible.

It is a weird one...

 

[A1X]

Of course the US wouldn't nuke Moscow, but that's not the same as saying they'd do nothing. And NATO existing to defend NATO doesn't mean that countries like the US can't also do things separate from NATO, which is what they've said they will do.

Oh I agree, my contention was that the use of a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine immediately leads to all out nuclear war, I don't believe it does for the same reason you don't.

 

[Icy Gull]

That won't happen - Ukraine will not threaten the existence of Russia. So no need to read his next point.

I don't think you are paying attention!! Once all the Ukraine occupied territory has "voted" (I use the term lightly) to be Russian, any invasion of these (Ukrainian) areas will be an invasion of Russia according to the nutters running the country. That will be the trigger to "threatening the existence of our state"

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/worl...sedgntp&cvid=a420fc6653d84d898cf3aca0674cc00f

 

[beorhthelm]

I wonder why the Russians routinely interfere in our elections if they have no effect?

would offer that implication of interference does the job for Russians, keeping things stirred up and unsettled.

 

[Wardy's twin]

the US will take this seriously because Russia will try for the Baltic states if they are not stopped in the Ukraine .

 

[Igzilla]

Thought this thread on the reasons why Russia is actually bothering with blatantly fraudulant referenda was very interesting:
[tweet]1574078065143353344[/tweet]

 

[Triggaaar]

I don't think you are paying attention!! Once all the Ukraine occupied territory has "voted" (I use the term lightly) to be Russian, any invasion of these (Ukrainian) areas will be an invasion of Russia according to the nutters running the country. That will be the trigger to "threatening the existence of our state"

Sure I am. I am aware that they will pretend that Russia is being attacked. But even if it were true (which it's not) it would be a small part of Russia, and would not be threatening the existence of Russia.

Now obviously people can make stuff up as much as they like. Putin can say 'I had a phone call from Zelensky, and he said he was going to kill us all, so I have no choice but to nuke them' if he likes. Everyone will know it's nonsense, just as everyone will know Ukraine are not threatening to destroy the existence of Russia by continuing to try and take their territory back. Russia are always free to fire nukes and make up fake excuses, there's nothing that can be done to stop that (save WW3).

 

[Igzilla]

Sure I am. I am aware that they will pretend that Russia is being attacked. But even if it were true (which it's not) it would be a small part of Russia, and would not be threatening the existence of Russia.

Now obviously people can make stuff up as much as they like. Putin can say 'I had a phone call from Zelensky, and he said he was going to kill us all, so I have no choice but to nuke them' if he likes. Everyone will know it's nonsense, just as everyone will know Ukraine are not threatening to destroy the existence of Russia by continuing to try and take their territory back. Russia are always free to fire nukes and make up fake excuses, there's nothing that can be done to stop that (save WW3).

There's a piece from the Telegraph that looks at what the West's (ie USA) options are, and basically it says the West has a choice between vertical retaliation, or horizontal retaliation. Vertical is resonding to a nuke with a bigger nuke, but that would lose all credibility with the rest of the world, so horizontal it will be. What form that takes is the difficult one. Take out Crimean airbases and give Ukraine air support? Take out the Black Sea fleet? Block the Russian fleet from leaving Murmansk? Take out key Russian installations to allow Ukraine to roll through to retake their land? Probably the best response would be to use any Russian use of nuclear weapons to crowbar China and India away from 'neutrality' to opposition. That would leave Russia well and truly isolated and in the end, Putin would fall.

 

[Triggaaar]

There's a piece from the Telegraph that looks at what the West's (ie USA) options are, and basically it says the West has a choice between vertical retaliation, or horizontal retaliation. Vertical is resonding to a nuke with a bigger nuke, but that would lose all credibility with the rest of the world, so horizontal it will be.

Losing credibility would be the least of their concerns - firing a large nuke at Russia would mean a large nuke hitting the US. Obviously the US will not be firing nukes.

What form that takes is the difficult one. Take out Crimean airbases and give Ukraine air support? Take out the Black Sea fleet? Block the Russian fleet from leaving Murmansk? Take out key Russian installations to allow Ukraine to roll through to retake their land? Probably the best response would be to use any Russian use of nuclear weapons to crowbar China and India away from 'neutrality' to opposition. That would leave Russia well and truly isolated and in the end, Putin would fall.

The option you like is not mutually exclusive from any of the other options.

That option alone seems far too weak. India and China might say some words, but sooner or later they'll be buying Russian fuel etc. And that isn't what the US have already threatened Russia with either. The US has threatened a military response, so it would look very weak to then not carry it out.

Also, imagine Russia then threatening other countries - 'do what we say or we'll nuke you', and they'll know the threat is real because the punishment for doing so would simply be some words.

Anyway, let's hope it doesn't come to that. I suspect the war will continue as it is, and Russia will continue to threaten to nuke us all.

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

‘Exit polls’ indicating 95% - 98% of voters choosing to join Russia.

Admittedly I’m no propagandist, but what is the benefit of claiming such wildly high figures? Would it not be a bit more believable if you rigged your elections to be 70%-ish in favour to make it at least appear like an actual vote took place to at least plant the seed of doubt?

 

[Triggaaar]

what is the benefit of claiming such wildly high figures? Would it not be a bit more believable if you rigged your elections to be 70%-ish in favour to make it at least appear like an actual vote took place to at least plant the seed of doubt?

The answer may lie in the tweet quoted by Igzilla:

Thought this thread on the reasons why Russia is actually bothering with blatantly fraudulant referenda was very interesting:
[tweet]1574078065143353344[/tweet]

brief summary - they know that everyone here knows it's fake, but they're forcing the Ukrainians to accept they're now being controlled by Russia.

 

[Igzilla]

Losing credibility would be the least of their concerns - firing a large nuke at Russia would mean a large nuke hitting the US. Obviously the US will not be firing nukes.

The option you like is not mutually exclusive from any of the other options.

That option alone seems far too weak. India and China might say some words, but sooner or later they'll be buying Russian fuel etc. And that isn't what the US have already threatened Russia with either. The US has threatened a military response, so it would look very weak to then not carry it out.

Also, imagine Russia then threatening other countries - 'do what we say or we'll nuke you', and they'll know the threat is real because the punishment for doing so would simply be some words.

Anyway, let's hope it doesn't come to that. I suspect the war will continue as it is, and Russia will continue to threaten to nuke us all.

I suspect any NATO/US response will be a mixture of all of those, but I still think the China/India piece will be key, even if it's only for 6 months. The Russian economy is fast approaching breaking point and if China and India stop trading in the rouble, evenfor a limited period, it would be catastrophic for Russia.

Ultimately though, I agree with you. It won't get to nukes and Russia will niggle away for the next few decades trying to regain their lost holdings of the Donbas and Crimea.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

If the US nuke fired on Russia is dispatched from non-US soil [Greenham Common anybody] - is that where Russia will retaliate.
Oooh, so what if the US nuke strike on Russia is fired from a submarine - how will Russia know who / what to target in retaliation to that?
I can see this leading to Armageddon and the end of our planet.

Thank good for the impasse of MAD that stops all this ....

 

[Springal]

[tweet]1574821033928015872[/tweet]

 

[pb21]

[tweet]1574821033928015872[/tweet]

Was just about to post about this too.

Seems that nord stream 1 has been deliberately damaged, or at least that's what we are led to believe, reports of explosion (or similar), now a leaking pipe.

Something weird going on here...

 

[Springal]

Was just about to post about this too.

Seems that nord stream 1 has been deliberately damaged, or at least that's what we are led to believe, reports of explosion (or similar), now a leaking pipe.

Something weird going on here...

Biden did threaten that Nord Stream 2 ‘would no longer exist’ if Russian invaded Ukraine, back in Feb…

 

[sparkie]

‘Exit polls’ indicating 95% - 98% of voters choosing to join Russia.

Admittedly I’m no propagandist, but what is the benefit of claiming such wildly high figures? Would it not be a bit more believable if you rigged your elections to be 70%-ish in favour to make it at least appear like an actual vote took place to at least plant the seed of doubt?

They know it's not believable. It's deliberately not believable. They don't care if they are believed. It is a statement of power.

 

[Springal]

[tweet]1574758898086694912[/tweet]