With the CSDP agreement are they still neutral?
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
With the CSDP agreement are they still neutral?
At the moment, yes. Maybe not in another decade but currently Russia is no2.
This is really scary..surely russia cant be this reckless. Damage Chernobyl and the consequences are unimaginable....
"...An official familiar with current assessments said Russian shelling hit a radioactive waste repository at Chernobyl, and an increase in radiation levels was reported. The increase could not be immediately corroborated...."
"...Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, DC, said, “I can’t imagine how it would be in Russia’s interest to allow any facilities at Chernobyl to be damaged.”
Lyman said he is most worried about spent fuel stored at the site, which has not been active since 2000. If the power to cooling pumps is disrupted or fuel-storage tanks are damaged, the results could be catastrophic, he said..."
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/24/chernobyl-nuclear-plant-targeted-as-russia-invades-ukraine
"...An official familiar with current assessments said Russian shelling hit a radioactive waste repository at Chernobyl, and an increase in radiation levels was reported. The increase could not be immediately corroborated...."
"...Edwin Lyman, director of nuclear power safety at the Union of Concerned Scientists in Washington, DC, said, “I can’t imagine how it would be in Russia’s interest to allow any facilities at Chernobyl to be damaged.”
Lyman said he is most worried about spent fuel stored at the site, which has not been active since 2000. If the power to cooling pumps is disrupted or fuel-storage tanks are damaged, the results could be catastrophic, he said..."
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/24/chernobyl-nuclear-plant-targeted-as-russia-invades-ukraine
The regular evening traffic before bed:
You either didn't think rationally before hitting post or you didn't even think at all. How did a "swift russian victory" with as few lives lost as possible go hand in hand in your thought process? You know, since a swift russian victory literally goes hand in hand with a Ukrainan massacre.
You're proud just because of this?
Don’t be a dick
Actually I appreciate the reality that is Russia will win this conflict and protracting it will cost substantially more innocent Ukrainian (and Russian) lives than is needed. It’s easy for you to say they should fight to the death without actually having something on the line.
Some people genuinely care about the sanctity of human life over where a line is drawn on a map. @bosnian_red @Bosnian_fan
Yeah, as an ex soldier myself I can say that there are things worth dying for out there, such as freedom for your sons and daughters.
Russia can take the land, and it will, but the spirit of Ukraine must live on in the survivors.
Russia can take the land, and it will, but the spirit of Ukraine must live on in the survivors.
Yeah, still wouldn't change anything, our troops are a shambles and that's not due to sheer numbers of manpower. It lacks everything the military needs. Funding, Equipment, qualified manpower, pride, social acceptance, organization, leadership, you get the hang.
It's obviously not a completely shaped plan, but there'd be lots of possibilities considering the amount of variables.
If anything, a centrally european commanded army could prevent single european countries from creating a mess. I stand by what I said. The US are not a reliable partner anymore. At the very latest Trump has shown that very drastically. If the US isn't ready for a black female president when Biden's terms end, only god knows which idiot they'll finde to do the job. Eric Trump? Na man, I trust my european neighbors. I really do. It's highly complicated and it's far from happening, but it would be my vision for Europe, as I think the time of national states for Europe has come to an end. We need each other - not just economically.
Exactly. Ukraine is Czecoslovakia. Poland is gonna be...I guess Poland.
Just looked it up, they've served in many peacekeeping missions for the UN & EU, I didn't know. Must not rely on memory, I'm decades out of date half the time.
I did know they weren't in Nato though, that was my starting point I suppose.
Christ. You think it's about a line on a map
Yes, I believe that, too. Still don't think there's anything she could've done about this. Might be possible that Putin was waiting for a change in power in Europe but I can't imagine this was the driving force. And let's be real, as head of state of one of the most important countries in tha NATO for the last 16 years, Merkel has to have a fair share of the blame. Still not as much as her predecessor who should be put in front of a tribunal considering the current developments.
Hey leave us alone, we’re green and like to drink Guinness tee hee
Putin warned countries about interfering but some of that has got to be bullshit because the Soviets/Russia and the US have been killing each other indirectly since Korea (Afghanistan in the 80s, US; Afghanistan recently, Russia). Also because surely all the weaponry is already in Ukraine. Has it not been building up for eight years? The sanctity of the NATO thing is maybe slightly overplayed when everyone is killing everyone by proxy anyway.
Edit: I guess he might have meant "direct" interference of some sort.
Haha, but yes. Here we are, Poland again.
You think that is just a Western Europe phenomenon?
The Germans once elected Hitler. France almost elected Lepen. Don't let me start about Austria, Poland and Hungary. What happens when Germany elects Hitler lite?
Christ. You think it's about a line on a map
Imagine trying to take the moral high ground, sitting at your computer miles away...
Do you perhaps have an example of when giving in was beneficial for the victim in the long term? Of course in the short term lives may be saved but at what cost to the individuals who survive? And since when does giving into aggressors stop them from continuing to take? If there is no resistance Russia will keep going, there has to be a line somewhere, where resistance is necessary; surely being invaded by a violent, autocratic kleptocracy is somewhat past that line?
Christ. You think it's about a line on a map
It’s all about lines on a map and where superpowers’ weapons are kept. It’s all fecking made up to pit us against one another.
I find it absurd so many people buy into this crap.
War isn't the only answer to a conflict. If the rest of the world are serious, they could inflict serious economic damage without escalating the situation.
Based on this it seems you've no clue how war works or even comprehend anything about the circumstances in this particular war. For the russians to win this quickly there will be a massive death toll as a result on both sides. There won't be any less lives lost just more dead quicker untill you are left with a nation that will live in opression.
The war has only begun and a great deal civillians are already dead. They are dropping bombs from jets on non military areas and villages where the only thing existing there are old people and their kids. So this delusional thought process from you is very strange.
Read the post straight below yours. What exactly do you consider sanctity of human life? It's really a simple question of being a slave forever or dying for freedom. And I'm not speaking out of my ass here, there was a relatively recent conflict in my country. I have members of my family who died fighting for freedom. And in the end, the freedom prevailed.
NATO is essentially the US, with a bit of help from UK.
The others follow the US lead, and in turn are protected by US.
That is why the big European countries (Germany, France and to a lesser degree Italy and Spain) should have militaries that are capable of defending themselves. Because, if something happens with the US, then the Europe is in trouble.
What do you understand. The idea you would take two bosnians as well and tell them "meh it's just boundaries". You think these boundaries have no consequences. Ridiculous. Yeah Ukraine should just let 'em have it. So should Palestine, so should every other armed struggle. Let the oppressor win because they have might?
Have to imagine that much of the American security establishment will be licking their lips at the prospect of bleeding Russia dry through an Operation Cyclone type arrangement, without much serious consideration of the consequences.
What a condescending rant. You're ignoring that he mentioned "fewest lives lost as possible" and youre going on about "slaughters".
2nd rate citizenry already exists in Ukraine. They're just not the Ukrainians.
OP is correct, if US/EU dont want the Ukrainians to win the war, theyll lose it. Better get it over with quickly with the lowest death count possible.
This view lacks historical awareness. All countries exist because wars were won or lost.
What if Austro-Hungarians or Yugoslavs too up the mentality you're propogating?
They may well have and it wouldn't have changed a thing.
I don’t know why you are arguing with me as though I have the answers to these questions. I am not a world leader or someone qualified to make decisions that prevent these actions. I’m just someone who thinks people across the world are the same, with more in common than what divides us and I find all of this entirely unnecessary and counterproductive to where we should be as a people.
This isn’t the 1940s any more. Once you open Pandora’s box on a world war in all likelihood humanity ceases to exist.
It's much, much more absurd that you think these people have the option to just lay down their arms and give up and everything will be fine.
This is the real counteroffensive:
That applies to pretty much every current European countries, none of them started the way they currently are. All of them started as much smaller entities that had their own languages and cultures.
It's wild that we're gettin reasonably high quality military analysis through Twitter.
Did you just realise democracy has risks? And that we would need constitutional mechanisms to control the state and the army?
Military, yes. Economically, of course not.