You wanted them earlier to just let the Russians in, implying that any civilians fighting were doing the wrong thing.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Given you were actively hoping for a swift Russian victory, I'm not sure you're in a position to criticise others for weird takes.
I'm more embarrassed that the world will learn about the stupid controls we have on alcohol up here.
Safe to say playing Counterstrike wouldn’t have prepared me. It also partly explains why I was so shit at it.
Beijing and Pyongyang.
Always love visiting the LCBO up in Woodbridge.
Are you serious? Is there a poster on here who is hoping for a fast Russian victory? You probably misunderstood something.
Why not just implement a no-go zone.
Pop him on the ignore list and don’t waste your breath.
Because to implement a no-fly zone, it would have to be patrolled by western aircraft.
For western aircraft to be airborne over Ukraine, there'd be a necessity to take out Russia's air defences on the ground beforehand.
He didn't say it wasn't worth fighting for he said they had no hope of obtaining it. Hopefully he's wrong and I'm sure he'd be happy to be wrong. I'm far less sure personally that they can't win out than i was days ago.
None of us are military strategists (some may like to think they are) so that judgement is made with various levels of unqualified opinion.
I'm sure we can be respectful that people will have a difference of opinion of when it's worth sacrificing life or not. We should just be thankful it's not us making the decision about our own life, whatever each Ukranian chooses that's their right. I'm sure you wouldn't be judging those who under terrible odds choose to surrender.
Pennsylvania writ large?
They do a great job but the system in Canada is weirdly puritan and patriarchal.
It obviously wouldn't be a declaration for war for the following reasons.
1. Ukraine is an internationally recognized sovreign state.
2. It has a democratically elected President and cabinet.
3. Its leaders can invite NATO (or any of its individual member states) to create a no fly zone, a humanitarian corridor, or similar and it would be legally recognized.
In all practicality, Putin would view this as an act of war, but excepting the use of nukes (which would guarantee his own destruction), he wouldn't have any power to do anything about it.
Pennsylvania is massively controlled.Oh are they the same?
Please, don't derail this particular thread.
Imagine how many analysts in Western militaries are studying the Russian military right now.
His position was that he viewed Russia as winning to be inevitable and an insurgency as the worst possible scenario in terms of human loss of life. I don't think he's pro Russia, just anti-war. Most want it to end as quickly as possible but it seems an insurgency is inevitable which is why I agree with ThatsHernandez sentiment but the reality is an insurgency will happen either way (so the object seems flawed, hence the criticisms).
It's bizarre how civil traffic is driving on like it's any given saturday
Wouldn’t be surprised at all if non-cover Western intelligence operators are in UKR right now, hoovering up as much hard intel as they can.
Enforcing it is the obvious issue, not the legality.
If a NATO fighter downs a Russian one, or vice versa, that is nuclear war territory in reality not just actuality. Semantics will not matter should this happen.
I will be incredibly surprised if that wasn't the case.
I can’t find anything, does anyone know if khabib made any commentary on this? He’s hugely influential in Russia particularly on socials.
The legal pretext would be Article 51 of the UN Charter.
" The second basis for the use of force is self,defense in response to an armed attack. This authorization is found in Article 51 of the CharterY Albeit visionary, the drafters of the Charter were realists. Understanding that Chapter VII action might not be feasible or likely in all circumstances, they acknowledged the inherent right of States to defend themselve3, and other States, until such time as the Security Council acted. Article 51 provides the legal basis for self,cJefense rules of engagement in effect during no,fly operations. "
https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1459&context=ils
If Russia then fired at them, that would be a declaration of war.
I still don't understand why people think this is a given just because Putin says so.
He basically told me it wasn’t worth fighting for the future of your country because it isn’t 1779 anymore.
This is quite the leap
He said he was hoping for a swift Russian victory as that would result in fewer deaths. He seemed to think that if the Ukranians just gave up then life would continue as normal for them under the brutal, war-crime comitting regime that just invaded their country and would have every reason to eliminate dissidents. Needless to say, it's an extremely bad take.
There's going to be a lot of reassessing of Russian "capability" after this.
What a tweet. Don't do something barbaric like ensuring a landlord doesn't get quite as much as he would normally. Instead, just order the deaths of thousands of men on an industrial scale
It has been for the last 50 years. We've gone to great lengths to avoid direct confrontation between NATO and Russia, and a few times it's been a close run thing.
There's every possibility that NATO getting involved in Ukraine will prompt the Russians to start launching the ICBMs pre-emptively.
What a tweet. Don't do something barbaric like ensuring a landlord doesn't get quite as much as he would normally. Instead, just order the deaths of thousands of men on an industrial scale
Not a real account according to the replies
UK/US/Canada have been supplying and training Ukrainians for months.
I don't think it is, as a NFZ would incentivize both sides to avoid conflict. It would also incentivize Putin to change tactics not involving air surpremacy.
What a tweet. Don't do something barbaric like ensuring a landlord doesn't get quite as much as he would normally. Instead, just order the deaths of thousands of men on an industrial scale
Is this an actual opinion, or some idea of a joke?
How many U.K. fighter jets do you think would need to be shot down by Russian airforces in Ukraine for us to nuke Moscow? I don’t think that number exists.
Pro Nazi US Republican congressman expressing his love for Hitler and Putin...