Russian invasion of Ukraine

From "The Analyst":

NO CHANCE OF TAURUS NOW

The Russians knew what they were doing when they leaked the Luftwaffe commander discussing Taurus deployment to Ukraine. Stupidly discussing secret information over an unencrypted WebEx channel, the German communications services should be ashamed of themselves for letting this happen.
Yet the leak, letting everyone know the Russians listened in and how they did it is unusual. They gave away their source and revealed it because the value of doing so totally outweighed the value of keeping quiet.
The Russians called in the German Ambassador to dress him down over the comments. They have painted themselves as they alyways do, as the victim of NATO aggression. The revelations that British servicemen may be on the ground in Ukraine are probably no surprise to the Russians at all. In their place I would have assumed it was so. They would do the same thing and have in the past, so their outrage is entirely contrived.
However it has sent left wing news sites like the Guardian into a panic and outraged right wing pro Russian sources as irresponsibly moving towards war.
For Chancellor Sholz however, it’s made his decision not to supply the missiles even more solidified. Everything he wrings his hands over - the possibility of adding to the crisis, the fake outrage of the Russians, the dangers of ‘direct’ involvement, have all been confirmed - if you want to believe that theory as he does.
But Russia scored big with this, because they were terrified of Taurus. It’s the one thing that could have wrecked the Kerch bridge and any number of deeper command and control centres, ammo dumps and the like. Keeping it out of the war is a victory and worth the price of revealing a few fleeting comms intercept secrets. There are plenty more.
 
Looks like Russian planing working. EU rumoured to have said no weapons to UK if war kicks off to Russia. So much for NATO
NATO membership means supporting other NATO members with all things military and logistics in a time of crisis or war.
- so bollox really.
- Sure they can stop supplies to 3rd party's outside NATO but that doesn't include non EU Nato states (UK. Norway, Albania, Canada, Iceland, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Turkey and the United States).
Comments by Anti EU media outlets are just hot air on the EU proposals.
 
Last edited:
NATO membership means supporting other NATO members with all things military and logistics in a time of crisis or war.
- so bollox really.
- Sure they can stop supplies to 3rd party's outside NATO but that doesn't include non EU Nato states (UK. Norway, Albania, Canada, Iceland, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Turkey and the United States).
Comments by Anti EU media outlets are just hot air on the EU proposals.
Why do you think the NATO membership articles will take precedence over the EU ones?
 
Why do you think the NATO membership articles will take precedence over the EU ones?
Simples.
Because you evebtually get kicked out of NATO if you dont provide kit, logistics and support to other NATO members.
Article 3 if you want to read it.
The other way to get kicked out is taking what Hungary does a little bit further.
Article 3 support can be limited by:
- Intelligence showing copoperation with a hostile 3rd party
- Current Hungarian action to block support to Ukraine.
- Buying Kit supported by a 3rd party (e.g. Turkey buying S-400 AAMs
 
Last edited:
Its basically saying that if Russia invades Europe then the priorities are that Europe get the weapons Europe produces which is fair as the EU is a group that we are not part of. so protecting there own.

But,
If Russia invaded Europe NATO Article 5 would be invoked anyways.
If Russia Invaded the UK, NATO Article 5 would be invoked anyways.

So this comment seems to be a hypothetical of either NATO not existing or being beaten and then Russia rolling over the EU.

 
1 year to the day.........Oleksandr Matsiyevsky.
20240306_162625.jpg
From Moldova,but his heart lay with Ukraine.
The cigarette he smoked,was given to him by his Russian captors.
This was his chance whilst he smoked,to beg for mercy.
Not a chance...you probably seen it.
1 last drag,composed himself and spoke the words.....SLAVA UKRAINI.
What a fuckin man.....RIP Sir.

Slava Ukraini.
 
Earlier today, a Russian missile landed within 150m of motorcade carrying Zelensky and the Greek PM in Odesa.
 
Its basically saying that if Russia invades Europe then the priorities are that Europe get the weapons Europe produces which is fair as the EU is a group that we are not part of. so protecting there own.

But,
If Russia invaded Europe NATO Article 5 would be invoked anyways.
If Russia Invaded the UK, NATO Article 5 would be invoked anyways.

So this comment seems to be a hypothetical of either NATO not existing or being beaten and then Russia rolling over the EU.

Also note how much stuff we supply to Europe.Aircrft and aviation parts (Typhoon, Airbus mikitary transport aircraft, helicopters etc), missiles, NLAWs, other weapons parts, etc.
Only an Orange haired Muppet would think that is not vital to EU members.
 
Last edited:
From "The Analyst":

NO CHANCE OF TAURUS NOW

The Russians knew what they were doing when they leaked the Luftwaffe commander discussing Taurus deployment to Ukraine. Stupidly discussing secret information over an unencrypted WebEx channel, the German communications services should be ashamed of themselves for letting this happen.
Yet the leak, letting everyone know the Russians listened in and how they did it is unusual. They gave away their source and revealed it because the value of doing so totally outweighed the value of keeping quiet.
The Russians called in the German Ambassador to dress him down over the comments. They have painted themselves as they alyways do, as the victim of NATO aggression. The revelations that British servicemen may be on the ground in Ukraine are probably no surprise to the Russians at all. In their place I would have assumed it was so. They would do the same thing and have in the past, so their outrage is entirely contrived.
However it has sent left wing news sites like the Guardian into a panic and outraged right wing pro Russian sources as irresponsibly moving towards war.
For Chancellor Sholz however, it’s made his decision not to supply the missiles even more solidified. Everything he wrings his hands over - the possibility of adding to the crisis, the fake outrage of the Russians, the dangers of ‘direct’ involvement, have all been confirmed - if you want to believe that theory as he does.
But Russia scored big with this, because they were terrified of Taurus. It’s the one thing that could have wrecked the Kerch bridge and any number of deeper command and control centres, ammo dumps and the like. Keeping it out of the war is a victory and worth the price of revealing a few fleeting comms intercept secrets. There are plenty more.
Give the, Taurus just to bring the bridge down, that would be enough.
 
Simples.
Because you evebtually get kicked out of NATO if you dont provide kit, logistics and support to other NATO members.
Article 3 if you want to read it.
The other way to get kicked out is taking what Hungary does a little bit further.
Article 3 support can be limited by:
- Intelligence showing copoperation with a hostile 3rd party
- Current Hungarian action to block support to Ukraine.
- Buying Kit supported by a 3rd party (e.g. Turkey buying S-400 AAMs
It isn't any different to EU membership in reality and if this was brought in then a country has a choice to make, which bloc membership do I want to put at risk. If the gibbon gets back in then it maybe becomes an easier decision for them, given his statements about NATO.

I don't see the EU bringing it in due to the conflicts with NATO articles, but maybe sentiment is swinging against relying on NATO given wavering US support recently. Would the gibbon act on Article 5 invocation? I wouldn't bank on it...

I agree it is more likely not to happen, but I don't think it's as clear cut as you imply.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top