Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Is anyone else concerned about how much of what we've been hearing so far is contradicted by the Klitschko statement saying that they're surrounded?

Are we being fed information far more optimistic than the reality of the situation?
What happens, imo, is that the Russians make advances during the day, then the Ukrainians take it back during the night.
 
I know words. The best words. All sort of words!
It's quotes like this, the fact that Johnson got anywhere near Downing Street and all the madness over the last 10/15 years, that makes me think the large hadron collider really fecked things up and they've not said owt.
 
I see a lot of parallels here with the Cuban missile crisis. The US couldn't condone Russian missiles on Cuban soil in the same way Russia is not going tolerate NATO missiles in Ukraine. So this was a preemptive strike to quell the risk before it got out of hand.

This video helped me to at least understand Putin's perspective.



Did I miss the US moving nukes to Ukraine?
 
Political scientist from RAND Corporation:


There must be additional authorization needed for a first strike to be ordered if we're talking about the nuclear option here. I'd understand a quick response time is needed to retaliate but surely Putin doesn't have the power to simply press the button whenever he feels like it?
 
If he is going to escalate he is going to escalate. If not now then next time he bites off more than he can chew. Unfortunately you can’t just keep being held hostage to the threats of Putin indefinitely.

As others have said, the best solution now would be for the Russians to step up and remove him.

He is losing the war. Everything shows that he's miscalculated this or was misled by intelligence telling him what he wanted to hear.

Hopefully, the CIA has got some backchannel thing going on to ensure a bloodless Palace coup would happen and prevent him from going nuclear.
 
It didn’t take Putin very long to come out with the “I’ll press the button” line, he’s such a small man, really pathetic.
 
Yet they still have Kiev surrounded and look poised to have toppled the capital city of a 30m+ country in less than a week

So I guess it comes down to what the expectations were.... I would have thought 2 weeks to take the land east of the river and coastline would have sounded really optimistic if somebody said that a week ago

Certainly don't recall at the time people.saying he would take over Kiev in 48 hours

Hard to know the truth but overlaying the info I would say it can't have gone that bad if they have surrounded Kiev and have left a lot of units in reserve to date

Equally it's clearly not been a blitzkrieg of shock and awe that has terrified other countries
They haven't done that, they've sent a spearhead to Kyiv (border os only 50 miles away). Russia has occupied hardly any ground.
 
Is anyone else concerned about how much of what we've been hearing so far is contradicted by the Klitschko statement saying that they're surrounded?

Are we being fed information far more optimistic than the reality of the situation?
Yep absolutely. Would love it not to be so but we're also susceptible to state disinformation here. Not to anything like the same extent but I always take reporting with a pinch of salt.
 
Is anyone else getting YouTube suggestions on how to survive the fall out from a nuke?
 
From the BBC
I know it seems laughable to some, but this is genuinely one of my major concerns. Not necessarily resulting in nuclear obliteration of the world, but this attitude in general resulting in escalation upon escalation. In other words, the hit to ego of defeat is more painful to bear for someone like Putin than the cost to humanity of doing something drastic.
 
Assuming the world doesn’t end over the course of this war, I think a condition for the lifting of sanctions on Russia needs to be some form of nuclear disarmament. You can’t have someone just threatening to launch nukes every time they don’t get their own way. Keep the sanctions on until they massively reduce (or completely dispose of) their nukes, with a guarantee of protection from probably China.
 
I doubt it. The world has moved on and CAS would be done if they did.

I can't think of any precedent supporting unilateral expulsion of Russia (or whatever name they compete under in international sporting competitions) from the WC. And there have been many wars.

But yeah, only one way to find out for sure, I'm only going off of past history and this is different in so many ways.
 
I know it seems laughable to some, but this is genuinely one of my major concerns. Not necessarily resulting in nuclear obliteration of the world, but this attitude in general resulting in escalation upon escalation. In other words, the hit to ego of defeat is more painful to bear for someone like Putin than the cost to humanity of doing something drastic.
Even in Russia there must be a way to prevent him from just doing it though.
 
Sigh. Promised in what sense? Show me the treaty where we agreed this. You can't because there isn't one.

No treaty signed. But all in letters by president Clinton, Papa Bush, The German Chancellor and The French president and foreign ministers. The Russians were bloody idiots to accept these letters and minutes as honest responses. To be honest I don't think Papa Bush intended to push NATO eastwards at all. None of them at that time intended. It was Clinton who started it. Who also refused to accept Russia into NATO.
 
Assuming the world doesn’t end over the course of this war, I think a condition for the lifting of sanctions on Russia needs to be some form of nuclear disarmament. You can’t have someone just threatening to launch nukes every time they don’t get their own way. Keep the sanctions on until they massively reduce (or completely dispose of) their nukes, with a guarantee of protection from probably China.

That would never happen. No nuclear power would go on record supporting nuclear disarmament.
 
I can't think of any precedent supporting unilateral expulsion of Russia (or whatever name they compete under in international sporting competitions) from the WC. And there have been many wars.

But yeah, only one way to find out for sure, I'm only going off of past history and this is different in so many ways.

Weren't Yugoslavia removed from Euro 92 during their war, through which Denmark qualified and won?
 
Honestly, this is the most pointless kind of post. If you're ignoring him, just ignore him. I don't see why people feel the need to constantly comment on their ignore decisions.
I'm definitely ignoring this post. :rolleyes:
 
Getting a bit embarrassing from our (Indian) side, voting against the emergency meeting:

Why should you? When the Indo Pakistan war was on and the Americans wanted to censure India, it was the Soviets who stopped it. When the 7th fleet was on the coast of Bengal it was the Soviet nuclear submarines who put a block to it.
If India didn't, then you should be ashamed of yourself.
 
Assuming the world doesn’t end over the course of this war, I think a condition for the lifting of sanctions on Russia needs to be some form of nuclear disarmament. You can’t have someone just threatening to launch nukes every time they don’t get their own way. Keep the sanctions on until they massively reduce (or completely dispose of) their nukes, with a guarantee of protection from probably China.
Achieving a Russian nuclear disarmament is going to be tough if not impossible. In my view this doesn’t (or, can’t) end without the absolute end of the Putin era in Russia.
 
Assuming the world doesn’t end over the course of this war, I think a condition for the lifting of sanctions on Russia needs to be some form of nuclear disarmament. You can’t have someone just threatening to launch nukes every time they don’t get their own way. Keep the sanctions on until they massively reduce (or completely dispose of) their nukes, with a guarantee of protection from probably China.
This would be suicide for Russia, there's literally no chance of this happening
 
Why should you? When the Indo Pakistan war was on and the Americans wanted to censure India, it was the Soviets who stopped it. When the 7th fleet was on the coast of Bengal it was the Soviet nuclear submarines who put a block to it.
If India didn't, then you should be ashamed of yourself.

That's rather condescending of you, implying to an Indian that he should let something that happened half a century ago define his foreign policy views today.
 
Even in Russia there must be a way to prevent him from just doing it though.
I would hope so. But, Russia is a complex political environment. Putin has literally for years developed an inner circle which is fiercely loyal and perhaps with a very similar mindset and outlook on the world. Unfortunately it’s not like the US, for example, which can withstand 4 years of a lunatic. Although see how much damage he did in 4 years. Putin has had decades to corrupt anyone in any position of power. That’s what causes me fear because he just has no checks and balances to what he does because anyone in any position to do so is already his lackey.
 
He is losing the war. Everything shows that he's miscalculated this or was misled by intelligence telling him what he wanted to hear.

Hopefully, the CIA has got some backchannel thing going on to ensure a bloodless Palace coup would happen and prevent him from going nuclear.

He's not loosing the war, he's loosing this battle. It seems he thought it would be far easier to take Kyiv so he sent his cheapest army. Now that it's not working, the only question is, what will he do? I don't see Putin considering for one second the idea of retreating defeated, so it's pretty likely it will escalate. For how long, how, I have no idea, but unless there's a coup in the making (we have no tangible evidence that it'll happen), it's likely it'll get dirtier. Less targeted attacks, more missiles/bombs, better/deadlier troops, more propaganda about Ukraine fighting dirty to justify civilian casualties etc.
 
Why should you? When the Indo Pakistan war was on and the Americans wanted to censure India, it was the Soviets who stopped it. When the 7th fleet was on the coast of Bengal it was the Soviet nuclear submarines who put a block to it.
If India didn't, then you should be ashamed of yourself.

So you think India should be promoting the subjugation of Ukrainians to Vladimir Putin? Interesting.
 
I know it seems laughable to some, but this is genuinely one of my major concerns. Not necessarily resulting in nuclear obliteration of the world, but this attitude in general resulting in escalation upon escalation. In other words, the hit to ego of defeat is more painful to bear for someone like Putin than the cost to humanity of doing something drastic.

I mean wasn't world war one just a series of smaller events that led to a huge war that no one saw coming? Alliances and escalations led to a full blown war.

Add in Putin who's had 20 years of getting what he wants with no rebuke, with no domestic pressure and surrounded by yes men and you have the tinderbox.