[Politics] Should NATO send in troops and planes

[NooBHA]

Yeah. Knowing my luck all I’ll be able to find is a frozen lasagne that says “microwave for 3 minutes. Remove film lid then cook for a further 4 minutes.”

Bugger.

I think if I knew a nuclear bomb was gonna strike me in 7 mins then food would be the last thing on my mind.

I think I would have a w+nk instead

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Bollocks.

All I care about is the safety of civilisation, despite it's myriad faults. Personal safety is a bonus.

I wasn’t replying to you, I quoted a different poster. You seem to share similar levels of anger though..

 

[Icy Gull]

I think if I knew a nuclear bomb was gonna strike me in 7 mins then food would be the last thing on my mind.

I think I would have a w+nk instead

Good for you, I know the thought that I was minutes away from being vaporised or in line to suffer a painful death might make that the last thing on my mind. I doubt I’d have any chance of getting it up either

I’d run around like a headless chicken I imagine

 

[Wrong-Direction]

Good for you, I know the thought that I was minutes away from being vaporised or in line to suffer a painful death might make that the last thing on my mind. I doubt I’d have any chance of getting it up either [emoji2]

I’d run around like a headless chicken I imagine

For some reason I've always thought you were female..?

Sent from my SM-A326B using Tapatalk

 

[Icy Gull]

For some reason I've always thought you were female..?

Sent from my SM-A326B using Tapatalk

Is it because I am always right?

Nah, can’t be that, I am often wrong

Please don’t tell me that you’ve been fancying me

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You astound me with your crap. "Join us or get bombed...." **** me.

Oh come on, you must remember the bombing of Sweden and Finland by NATO ?

 

[Guinness Boy]

Oh come on, you must remember the bombing of Sweden and Finland by NATO ?

In fact, isn't Ukraine being bombed because it wanted to join NATO?

This is a good piece of analysis, showing how successive US Presidents have misread Putin and how Biden, as a Cold War veteran seems to be dealing with him better.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60597186

It asserts that expanding NATO as far east as it has been could be the West's biggest error of the post cold war era, and personally I agree. When the war in Ukraine started I was in Bucharest and there is some unease among Romanians that they represent the easternmost border of NATO.

 

[sydney]

Except there is testimony from thousands in this country with relatives back in the Ukraine. There are several on this board. I know who I believe.

my source is ALJAZEERA , probably one of the straightest shooting news carriers in the western world.i will find the reporters name a post a link , although splitting hairs is pathetic here , the situation is about as grim as it gets , it's unbelievable , surreal, call it what you will.

There is now a huge wild fire in South Korea that is threatening a nuclear power plant , the army and air force are mobilising to try and put it out ........crazy , crazy times ended mate.

 

[virtual22]

'Better now'? For whom?

The Ukrainian people? Too late for the mother of the 18 month old baby who lost its life I was reading about this morning but maybe not the next one. At the moment it’s the same view we always have, we are willing to forego the lives of others as long as it’s not us.

I wonder what the opinion would be if he’d decided to invade the uk instead? Would you be as willing to wait and see if it was your family that were being shelled whilst trying to evacuate? Would you be saying to the rest of the world “don’t worry at the moment guys let him keep shelling and killing as we don’t want to start a bigger war”.

Thing is, in my probably naive view either we stand up now and do something, or we carry on watching him kill innocents in a totally illegal invasion and then carry on into the next country and the next. If he is as mad as people keep saying he won’t stop and then what? We confront him down the line but in the meantime he’s slaughtered hundreds, thousands, but you still end up having to risk ww3.

We all have friends, we all have family and no one wants to see a single life lost. But we also cannot stand by and watch others lose their lives in this way like we’ve been doing for so long now.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Vietnam simply isn’t as simple as that. The US didn’t want to be involved in Vietnam, but given the French colonial administration was defeated by the North Vietnamese, the South Vietnamese desperately looked to the West for help defending their country from the North seeking unification. Much like Russia looking to unify the old Soviet Union through invading Ukraine, the North was doing the same. The question isn’t American aggression, it’s whether America should have just allowed the North to take the South by force and leave them to it? If there is a lesson from Vietnam, it’s that you cannot necessarily resolve a conflict through force in a place who’s history / culture you little understand.

It astonishes me that there are so many people out there with such a lack of a basic knowledge of history.

Vietnam was not split into two - it was a single unified country under French colonial rule. 'North Vietnam' only emerged for the first time (and not as a separate independent state) in Sept 1945 after the surrender of Japan (the Viet Minh had been the main resistance to the Japanese occupation force). The French, with the assistance of Britain (using British and Indian forces) and the Japanese troops who remained in Vietnam, launched a large scale war to resotre French colonial rule and over-threw the provisional Viet Minh government in Hanoi, resulting in a major war that lasted until 1954 (with French defeat at Dien Bien Phu). The Amereicans were already involved in Vietnam before the defeat of the French. Division of the country only emerged after the 1954 Geneva conference. The conference divided the French colonies into Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam - with Vietnam having a demilitarised zone at the 17th parallel pending elections - and election that was held with the stipulation that the country would be unified after the election. Before the elections took place Diem staged what was effectively a coup, with the support of America, and became a dictator - the reason - the communist were odd-on to win the election.

So - there is absolutely zero comparison between what happened in Vietnam and what is currently happening in Ukraine. Vietnam was an attempt by the USA to impose its policy of containment - irrespective of the consequences to the mass of the population in Vietnam. Within NATO, Britain, Italy, West Germany and the Netherlands openly supported the US involvement in Vietnam - and ironically, France was the most vocal opponent within NATO. Indeed the only reason why other NATO were did not send troops was because the Viet Minh never officially declared war on the USA.

There are countless other examples of NATO countries asserting imperialist and colonial interests through conflict - none of which are remotely comparable to what is happening in Ukraine.

At the end of this day this conflict is part of a much wider conflict between competing imperial interests - one that hasn't broken out into a much wider military conflict as of yet. The best historical comparison is the period prior to the outbreak of WW1 when the imperial powers jockeyed for position before the outbreak of global conflict. The conflict in Ukraine is more akin to the Turkish-Italian war of 1911-1912 than anything else in the last century or so.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

The Israeli Defence Forces dropping white phosphorous bombs on Gaza

 

[Swansman]

The Israeli Defence Forces dropping white phosphorous bombs on Gaza

They are Arabs though and the majority of Western who are Western Culture Supremacists either couldnt give a shit or will find some nice justification for why Arabs should be bombed into pieces.

 

[The Clamp]

They are Arabs though and the majority of Western who are Western Culture Supremacists either couldnt give a shit or will find some nice justification for why Arabs should be bombed into pieces.

Do you have evidence of this claim?

Careful please, you’re sailing close to the wind with unfounded accusations like that.

 

[Braggfan]

This explains exactly their chain of launch command and methods of deployment.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europ...potential-russian-nuclear-strikes-2022-03-02/

It won’t put your mind at rest. Although it’s good to know Putin is not the last link in the chain.

Don't ask me to find it but there was a link on here somewhere the other day to article about Russian nuclear policy. It was saying that Russia has never had a first strike policy.
It goes on to say that in 1995 when everyone was crappings themselves when a US weather rocket triggered the early warning system in Russia and a briefcase with the Russian launch codes arrived on Yeltsin's desk, it would never had actually triggered a Russian launch as that could only happen AFTER a nuclear explosion on Russian soil.

 

[Icy Gull]

They are Arabs though and the majority of Western who are Western Culture Supremacists either couldnt give a shit or will find some nice justification for why Arabs should be bombed into pieces.

Absolute bollocks, it may be a Swedish reaction it is definitely not a British one

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It astonishes me that there are so many people out there with such a lack of a basic knowledge of history.

Vietnam was not split into two - it was a single unified country under French colonial rule. 'North Vietnam' only emerged for the first time (and not as a separate independent state) in Sept 1945 after the surrender of Japan (the Viet Minh had been the main resistance to the Japanese occupation force). The French, with the assistance of Britain (using British and Indian forces) and the Japanese troops who remained in Vietnam, launched a large scale war to resotre French colonial rule and over-threw the provisional Viet Minh government in Hanoi, resulting in a major war that lasted until 1954 (with French defeat at Dien Bien Phu). The Amereicans were already involved in Vietnam before the defeat of the French. Division of the country only emerged after the 1954 Geneva conference. The conference divided the French colonies into Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam - with Vietnam having a demilitarised zone at the 17th parallel pending elections - and election that was held with the stipulation that the country would be unified after the election. Before the elections took place Diem staged what was effectively a coup, with the support of America, and became a dictator - the reason - the communist were odd-on to win the election.

So - there is absolutely zero comparison between what happened in Vietnam and what is currently happening in Ukraine. Vietnam was an attempt by the USA to impose its policy of containment - irrespective of the consequences to the mass of the population in Vietnam. Within NATO, Britain, Italy, West Germany and the Netherlands openly supported the US involvement in Vietnam - and ironically, France was the most vocal opponent within NATO. Indeed the only reason why other NATO were did not send troops was because the Viet Minh never officially declared war on the USA.

There are countless other examples of NATO countries asserting imperialist and colonial interests through conflict - none of which are remotely comparable to what is happening in Ukraine.

At the end of this day this conflict is part of a much wider conflict between competing imperial interests - one that hasn't broken out into a much wider military conflict as of yet. The best historical comparison is the period prior to the outbreak of WW1 when the imperial powers jockeyed for position before the outbreak of global conflict. The conflict in Ukraine is more akin to the Turkish-Italian war of 1911-1912 than anything else in the last century or so.

Indeed.

 

[Swansman]

Do you have evidence of this claim?

Careful please, you’re sailing close to the wind with unfounded accusations like that.

Yeah well I guess I'm just taking a chance on the Thought Police and Ministry of Truth are having a day off.

Where are the sanctions against Israel, Saudi Arabia and other Western buddies? Nowhere, because we're a greedy, racist empire.

 

[The Clamp]

Yeah well I guess I'm just taking a chance on the Thought Police and Ministry of Truth are having a day off.

Where are the sanctions against Israel, Saudi Arabia and other Western buddies? Nowhere, because we're a greedy, racist empire.

Thought not.

I know some on here seem to think you’re some harmless nutter. I don’t.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Don't ask me to find it but there was a link on here somewhere the other day to article about Russian nuclear policy. It was saying that Russia has never had a first strike policy.
It goes on to say that in 1995 when everyone was crappings themselves when a US weather rocket triggered the early warning system in Russia and a briefcase with the Russian launch codes arrived on Yeltsin's desk, it would never had actually triggered a Russian launch as that could only happen AFTER a nuclear explosion on Russian soil.

These are tactics not policies. Russia has never publicised their nuclear tactics. Neither have we. Trying to do so has always been a weakness of the british left. Mind you, Johnson has now joined the club of fools by declaring no intervention of any sort.

 

[Swansman]

Thought not.

I know some on here seem to think you’re some harmless nutter. I don’t.

Well, you're wrong.