Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Uwe Already]

I think not spending 50m on military equipment and instead using it to feed the poor and homeless does make a difference.

we should be doing both really?

 

[BlueAnorak]

I don't even think we should be supplying them but at least we're not in the fight.

We've got a stack of homeless, fuel prices through the roof (to the point where we've genuinely got people choosing between food and heat) , food banks being used in every city and were sending millions of pounds abroad.

There's a stack of bigger countries than ours doing a whole lot less. For once we should let others be on the front foot whilst we fund our own recovery programme.

4 countries in the world have a bigger economy than us. 4. USA, China, Japan, Germany. That's it. India too in a couple of years on current projections.

I detest the fact that you actually want to see Ukraine conquered by Russia. (The effect of not supplying Ukraine.)
I think that is a totally contemptable position to hold to be honest and you've been called out for it by others as well as myself.

 

[SWP's back]

I would have thought it was obvious why it is of strategic concern for everybody in the UK, never mind on top of the morality of sitting back and watching Putin invade another country and pummel Cities to the ground and his soldiers commit atrocities at every turn.

If we had an attitude of no concern in the past we would now be German...

Sprechen Sie Deutsch?

Sorry but that’s not true. Hitler would have happily had his European empire and left Britain well alone.

But I agree with your sentiment that it is of our concern.

 

[Slipper One]

Putin is full of shit and politically out on his arse with a dwindling support I’d wager.

He has nukes, we know and he also knows so to does the west. Far fucking more, far more powerful and probably guaranteed to actually work unlike most of his WW2 era military that is currently being torn to bits fighting to control small parts of Ukraine it’s been trying to take over since 2014.

Fuck him and his threats, it’s all he has and it’s his last chance of getting away with it in the hope we do stay out of his murderous campaign.

Cunts need dealing with, not pandered too.

If he uses a limited number of tactical nuclear warheads targeting military installations or infrastructure, what would be your response to that?

Nothing of any serious consequence to Ukraine's neigbours or the West in general, just localized to Ukraine.

 

[SWP's back]

And what if he's not bluffing? There seems to be a large majority that think Russia is full of shit with its threats, but not many are questioning what happens if they are not full of shit and have every intention of backing up their threats.

He is bluffing. This guy knows a thing or two about Putin and about game theory:

 

[SWP's back]

If he uses a limited number of tactical nuclear warheads targeting military installations or infrastructure, what would be your response to that?

Nothing of any serious consequence to Ukraine's neigbours or the West in general, just localized to Ukraine.

Use a limited number of tactical nukes on his forces.

 

[AliBobbyJ]

Just seen an article in the Guardian that's as depressing as it is realistic. Roxburgh (?) the author. Says that there are only two ways to end the war, one is for NATO to go to war and fight the Russians, the other to get Ukraine & Russia to hold talks and make a peace. The first will lead to a Third World War, so probably not going to happen. The second means Ukraine giving up territory and, yes, letting the aggressor get some of what he wants. But, the author argues, merely continuing the present course of giving arms to Ukraine will only prolong the war, lead to more of Ukraine's cities being destroyed, more lives lost, and make it that much harder for Ukrainians ever to return home and rebuild, because Putin/Russia isn't giving up. Most of us admire the Ukrainians' courage and are moved to tears daily by their suffering but, if you take the long view, it could be a choice between a war that would destroy much of Europe & produce a nuclear winter to last a thousand years, and on the other hand see Ukraine be enslaved & suffer for a decade till Putin drops dead (which I wish on him tomorrow.) So does it come to this, either the shameful appeasement of a brutal monster for the sake of survival for the rest of human kind, or an awful lot of us get to find out what Hiroshima was like?

 

[mosssideblue]

Just seen an article in the Guardian that's as depressing as it is realistic. Roxburgh (?) the author. Says that there are only two ways to end the war, one is for NATO to go to war and fight the Russians, the other to get Ukraine & Russia to hold talks and make a peace. The first will lead to a Third World War, so probably not going to happen. The second means Ukraine giving up territory and, yes, letting the aggressor get some of what he wants. But, the author argues, merely continuing the present course of giving arms to Ukraine will only prolong the war, lead to more of Ukraine's cities being destroyed, more lives lost, and make it that much harder for Ukrainians ever to return home and rebuild, because Putin/Russia isn't giving up. Most of us admire the Ukrainians' courage and are moved to tears daily by their suffering but, if you take the long view, it could be a choice between a war that would destroy much of Europe & produce a nuclear winter to last a thousand years, and on the other hand see Ukraine be enslaved & suffer for a decade till Putin drops dead (which I wish on him tomorrow.) So does it come to this, either the shameful appeasement of a brutal monster for the sake of survival for the rest of human kind, or an awful lot of us get to find out what Hiroshima was like?

Giving in to Putin's illegal and cowardly demands would be the worst thing to do.

 

[Slipper One]

Use a limited number of tactical nukes on his forces.

Not even in your wildest dreams is that going to happen SWP's back.

This will end in talks, with Putin getting control of the eastern areas he so desires.

Sanctions will remain afterwards for as long as the US can keep them upheld. Putin is not going anywhere, unless health dictates and after him will be much of the same.

 

[SWP's back]

Not even in your wildest dreams is that going to happen SWP's back.

This will end in talks, with Putin getting control of the eastern areas he so desires.

Sanctions will remain afterwards for as long as the US can keep them upheld. Putin is not going anywhere, unless health dictates and after him will be much of the same.

If you really think Putin could use nukes in Ukraine and NATO wouldn’t do anything then we aren’t gonna agree.

If you think Ukraine will give up it’s mineral rich eastern half, we aren’t gonna agree.

anyway, in lighter news: