I don’t think what you said was hard to understand.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
A Political Thread pt. 2
- Thread starter ncurd
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2020
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 4,280
What makes you so certain Trump would’ve unilaterally withdrawn from NATO? Baring in mind we’re talking about Trump here (didn’t he row back on those comments anyway?)
Even if we agreed that Trump would’ve 100% done this what would make you think he’d get it past the Senate?
I suppose in the extremely unlikely event that Trump would actually go through with this perhaps Putin would’ve waited but even if I granted you all of the above even then I’m not sure it would’ve effected Putins timetable that much. As stated, a big part of the narrative justifying invasion is a Nazi regime committing genocide in Ukraine. You can conjure up ****** like that at a moments notice.
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2020
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 4,280
If anything I think it’s more likely it would’ve sped up his timetable. I think he genuinely believes the West is a declining force so a USA 100% withdrawing from NATO could’ve made Putin think sweet, let’s crack on with my dream of expanding and reinstating the Russian empire.
Well the rebuicans have the senate majority so that isn’t much of a leap.
granted it’s hard to predict trump, the guy did a slight u turn on withdrawing from Afghanistan as it might create a failed state, still did it like he did and it was a **** show.
And as I said in my last page if Trump was to withdrew from NATO he most likely would’ve done it so it completed in his final year (benefit of 2 terms is you can leave a nice mess to other regardless of which party wins).
granted it’s hard to predict trump, the guy did a slight u turn on withdrawing from Afghanistan as it might create a failed state, still did it like he did and it was a **** show.
And as I said in my last page if Trump was to withdrew from NATO he most likely would’ve done it so it completed in his final year (benefit of 2 terms is you can leave a nice mess to other regardless of which party wins).
Russia got five letters from the worst ooms and are running with it.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2013
- Messages
- 16,966
- Reaction score
- 4,334
- Location
- Propping up the bar in the Clubhouse
Don't go to Ukraine, military boss tells Britons
The head of the UK's armed forces also rejects Ukraine's call for a no-fly zone, saying it will not help.
www.bbc.co.uk
Again highlighting Truss’s reckless comments.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2016
- Messages
- 6,502
- Reaction score
- 1,830
Glacial response this. Apparently Ukrainians are only trained to fly Migs and the Polish ones would need refurbished etc etc. So even if Poland did gift them and relied on NATO allies for air support (doubtful since they'll be the front line soon), any offer may be too late.
www.aljazeera.com
Still no mention of tanks or helicopters. Latest maps showing a big lunge from the Kharkiv offensive towards the east of Kyiv.
US says working ‘actively’ with Poland to send jets to Ukraine
Top US diplomat says US working on deal after Kyiv asks allies to send warplanes to fight Russia.
Still no mention of tanks or helicopters. Latest maps showing a big lunge from the Kharkiv offensive towards the east of Kyiv.
Correct, thats why F-16s etc are a no-go.
A rushed conversion course is still measured in months.
Well, the Polish Fulcrums *are* scheduled to be replaced already with F-16s I believe.
I don't know how far along that process is in terms of standing up the supporting infrastructure or pilot training; if it were in a position to work at even a rudimentary level, then you'd imagine there would be a push on.
I'd say the yankees could easily deploy several squadrons* to Poland to at least the same numbers of aircraft as the Poles would lose.
*as they would have to anyway if the Russian's started dicking around near Latvia/Estonia
Now, on the refurbishment, no idea. But I hadn't heard they weren't flightworthy.
Still n'all.
I'd reckon the Ukrainians would be better served more drones from anywhere.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13,737
- Reaction score
- 10,597
Apparently the staff at the nuclear plant are now under Russian military orders and they have shut off connections with the outside world, in direct contravention of nuclear safety standards agreed worldwide. First Chernobyl now this... Russia are really ******* about with something extreme here. Neither of these are military objectives. The whole thing stinks of trying to provoke a NATO response.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2016
- Messages
- 6,502
- Reaction score
- 1,830
I think the latest nuclear station is about cutting off the electricity supply to hurt morale and slow down communications.
Zelensky to NATO:
"...if you don’t give us at least planes so we can protect ourselves, there’s only one thing to conclude: you want us to be killed very slowly.”
Pretty much. If you could just die slowly enough to dissuade Putin from setting foot on NATO soil, that'd be lovely thanks.
www.aljazeera.com
Zelensky to NATO:
"...if you don’t give us at least planes so we can protect ourselves, there’s only one thing to conclude: you want us to be killed very slowly.”
Pretty much. If you could just die slowly enough to dissuade Putin from setting foot on NATO soil, that'd be lovely thanks.
‘Russian attack destroys airport’ as Zelenskyy urges no-fly zone
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says eight rockets hit a civilian airport in Vinnytsia, central Ukraine.
The arguments haven't changed though.I think the latest nuclear station is about cutting off the electricity supply to hurt morale and slow down communications.
Zelensky to NATO:
"...if you don’t give us at least planes so we can protect ourselves, there’s only one thing to conclude: you want us to be killed very slowly.”
Pretty much. If you could just die slowly enough to dissuade Putin from setting foot on NATO soil, that'd be lovely thanks.
‘Russian attack destroys airport’ as Zelenskyy urges no-fly zone
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says eight rockets hit a civilian airport in Vinnytsia, central Ukraine.
NATO intelligence suggests that if NATO gets directly involved (or even directly enough for Putin to call it "direct") we risk nuclear holocaust. What level of risk is right for that?
If we hand over complicated military hardware, like planes, tanks etc - there's no-one who can operate them, so what's the point? (beyond increasing the risk of Russia launching nukes).
Now, there's an option for NATO's ex-Russian states to hand over ex-Russian hardware - which is, by definition old, as they've been switching over to Western hardware. That should be doable - but I'm not really going to blame Poland and Estonia (for example) saying "We think we're next, we really can't risk it".
This is the one we should be doing (and replacing their hardware with Western stuff - they've been in Nato long enough they really should have had enough training into enough people to switch fully across more quickly) - and even then I accept that it will be a little more complicated than painting a Ukrainian flag over the Polish flag - I don't know how much more complicated, and I suspect it's different for each piece of hardware - but we should certainly be pushing this option hard.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2013
- Messages
- 16,966
- Reaction score
- 4,334
- Location
- Propping up the bar in the Clubhouse
Trump doing what he does best from the sidelines: blaming the incumbent President and making outrageous claims he can’t prove and take zero responsibility for it.
Now he’s advising US planes should show China’s flags and bomb the **** out of Russia and then blame China. Yeh real smart to reveal your plan before you do it. You know the kind of nut job plans like Nuking hurricanes.
Now he’s advising US planes should show China’s flags and bomb the **** out of Russia and then blame China. Yeh real smart to reveal your plan before you do it. You know the kind of nut job plans like Nuking hurricanes.
As someone who designed military hardware at one stage in his career I'm unsure what we can handover in usefulness other than firearms of the point and lick variety and ammunition. Everything else requires a decent amount of training.
As someone who hasn't really been interested in military hardware since being a ten year old boy (so 35+ years ago)... that's the impression I get. Hence sending stingers, javelins and rifles; not iron domes, tanks and typhoons.
No-one expected Ukraine to still be in this after 4-5 days, so anything that requires more than 4-5 days training is just so metal for recycling. Quite honestly, anything that takes more than an hour or so of training would only really have been sent as Russian target practice and home-audience optics.
Ukraine are still in this, so the equation is changing, but I suspect not in terms of anything that requires actual training.
My guess would be that, even things like Polish Migs would have spent the last 22 years being tinkered with, with Western tech; which would need to be stripped out and replaced with Russian kit, that might not exist any more, before being viably handed over to the Ukrainians to actually fly and maintain.
I don't trust Putin or Russia on any of this but at least there appears to be a way that doesn't end with all of Ukraine taken over.
I wonder how bad the Russian supply situation is....
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13,737
- Reaction score
- 10,597
Makes you wonder, if Ukraine sign that then ignore it and join NATO, what are Russia going to do?
However this ends, the sanctions on Russia need to extend beyond the end of the conflict. There needs to be serious consequences and the west then make ultimatums to Putin, return things how they were or the sanctions will remain in place indefinitely. There are suggestions that the sanctions are hurting Russia and that pain must be kept up so Putin finally realises he can't keep playing silly buggers without consequence.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2013
- Messages
- 16,966
- Reaction score
- 4,334
- Location
- Propping up the bar in the Clubhouse
So destroy half the country and make most of the country’s population hate Russia, but then impose terms to stop. Yeh you couldn’t make up this ****.
Thats kinda how invasions work. I not condoning Putin but this is how this **** goes down, its that or he keeps advancing and takes the whole nation. you objective is to call his bluff or not do you give up some territory in the hope he'll stop permently or give time so you build adequate defences. Or do you hold out hope they don't have the stomach and will lose more than they are asking for.
Similar threads
