Russian invasion of Ukraine

True, but I don’t think that was his point
Sure, but the point goes without saying - if Russia ever escalated to such a level that nato declared war of course they’d back down within minutes, but that scenario will never happen, especially as nato are quietly putting more and more troops on the ground and Russia havent stopped yet.
 
Johnson has failed to block aid to Ukraine and he is now desperately back peddling to keep Republican Representatives onside and trying to force through aid as lend lease instead of straight aid - all a delay strategy of course

A good number of house republicans are willing to sign the discharge petition immediately though. In addition, a Republican pressure group is ramping up the pressure to get the aid through:
 
Last edited:
Sure, but the point goes without saying - if Russia ever escalated to such a level that nato declared war of course they’d back down within minutes, but that scenario will never happen, especially as nato are quietly putting more and more troops on the ground and Russia havent stopped yet.
i'd argue NATO (without the USA) would still kick Putin's ass
 
Sure, but the point goes without saying - if Russia ever escalated to such a level that nato declared war of course they’d back down within minutes, but that scenario will never happen, especially as nato are quietly putting more and more troops on the ground and Russia havent stopped yet.

Where is your proof of this?

Or as usual your biased bullshit/opinion, stated as facts.
 
Where is your proof of this?

Or as usual your biased bullshit/opinion, stated as facts.
The facts of nato troops being on the ground was confirmed by the Germans a few weeks back….

The rest as said is my opinion - namely that it’s phenomenally naive to believe that as the weapons being provided become more and more sophisticated, increased numbers of western troops are on the ground in support and maintenance roles.

As posted on her months ago, the feasibility study on Gripen for example is not only on training and usage but also on ability to provide maintenance.
 
The facts of nato troops being on the ground was confirmed by the Germans a few weeks back….

The rest as said is my opinion - namely that it’s phenomenally naive to believe that as the weapons being provided become more and more sophisticated, increased numbers of western troops are on the ground in support and maintenance roles.

As posted on her months ago, the feasibility study on Gripen for example is not only on training and usage but also on ability to provide maintenance.
Gripen training etc is boxed off.
Just a case of if and when they get sent,and as i posted last week,i think....."if" Ukraine get Gripen....Taurus will follow very quickly.

Slava Ukraini.
 
Gripen training etc is boxed off.
Just a case of if and when they get sent,and as i posted last week,i think....."if" Ukraine get Gripen....Taurus will follow very quickly.

Slava Ukraini.
I know they’re coming - I posted as much months ago, my point is that Sweden will be sending support staff to assist operations on the ground. None of this is news to Russia, they’re staggeringly incompetent at most times but not *that* incompetent.

I think the term used was "advisors" not troops, they could easily be civilian advisors, as civilian companies build the kit for the military to use, nothing to stop civilian advisors being in Ukraine.
Sure, we can say ‘advisors’, ‘representatives’ and many other names, but the underlying point is the same - western countries have official representation on the ground and have for a long time now.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.