Current Affairs Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
tsubaki said:
Sorry Kev but I don't think you understand how oligarchy works.

The US position in the world is based on its military and economic might. Reduce that and their position goes away - meaning less for the oligarchs.
Click to expand...
Sorry can’t be bothered with continuing this.

you believe that the usa will literally die on a hill for Poland.
 
PhilM said:
Within Russia yes. Even the poisonings in London were of Russians, and ex-KGB/FSB too, so it’s within his sphere of influence so to speak.

That’s not excusing his behaviour, far from it, but rather considering why he acted so blatantly, and perhaps why our response was mute.

Would it have been the same if it was a UK national? I suspect not. His actions with Wanter are again within Russia, where he appears safe.

Nevertheless, I still sincerely believe that nuclear weapons is a step too far for the reasons stated, and he and his cronies know that.

You could justly reply that the sham elections in the Donbas may make him believe it’s Russian territory, so he can freely act like I stated above.

But I would say that’s ignoring that the west are unlikely to play that tune, and would respond. So unless it truly warrants it, nuclear weapons are a no.
Click to expand...
I'd hope that is the case. I'm not a fan of Macron but I remember him saying early on in the invasion that Putin should be left a way out. I just fear that if he is painted into a corner he may lose it.
 
Kev The Rat said:
Interesting you raise the point of article 5.

If you read what it says it does not commit any of the member states to any kind of war if invoked. What it actually says is that each member state may assist/participate in whatever way they choose.

This might be along the lines of sending a telegram conveying their best wishes and good luck to the affected member state for example.

From the nato website :

The principle of providing assistance​

With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances
Click to expand...

What Article 5 actually says:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .

In terms of support, yes it is up to the individual country to determine what help it is going to give. The one time it was invoked (after 9/11), every NATO member sent either military, logistical or medical support into Afghanistan to support the US (as did Russia, ironically enough).
 
tsubaki said:
What Article 5 actually says:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .

In terms of support, yes it is up to the individual country to determine what help it is going to give. The one time it was invoked (after 9/11), every NATO member sent either military, logistical or medical support into Afghanistan to support the US (as did Russia, ironically enough).
Click to expand...
Afghanistan is not a nuclear armed power the comparison is irrelevant
 
Kev The Rat said:
Sorry can’t be bothered with continuing this.

you believe that the usa will literally die on a hill for Poland.
Click to expand...

No, and you can see that by reading what I actually said.

One nuke on a close ally of a nuclear armed state would almost certainly result in one nuke in return. Whether it resulted in a further nuclear exchange would be up to whoever launched first.
 
tsubaki said:
No, and you can see that by reading what I actually said.

One nuke on a close ally of a nuclear armed state would almost certainly result in one nuke in return. Whether it resulted in a further nuclear exchange would be up to whoever launched first.
Click to expand...
A nuke where? Against Russia? Don’t be ridiculous

The response would be the end of days
 
Kev The Rat said:
If MAD exists - and although I agree countries may well pay lip service to it - but I’m not sure it does in reality - then it’s likely the reason why Russia will actually never be ejected from Ukraine.

As for US assassinations on foreign soil - here you go:

List of assassinations by the United States - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

Note the large number of attempts to assassinate heads of state

Again you won’t hear about them because the media is subservient
Click to expand...
The thing is that the US would play the terrorist card whereas Putin just doesn't care.
 
Kev The Rat said:
I disagree with your second paragraph if the target nation was Poland for example. Not a chance the USA would authorise the use of a nuke on Russia in response. Or any kind of attack on it in fact. Sorry just not having it.

Your fourth paragraph isn’t really relevant to the point of Russia leaving. There’s always been a large percentage of Ukrainians that hate Russia and a large percentage of Ukrainians that support them. Russia will stay regardless of hostility. They understand the problems they will face which is why they’ve got an army there.
Click to expand...
There’s over 10,000 US troops based in
Poland. Do you really think the US would not respond in kind to a nuclear attack on Poland? Poland is also part of the US global ballistic missile defence network - its vital to the security of the US.
 
Mutzo Nutzo said:
There’s over 10,000 US troops based in
Poland. Do you really think the US would not respond in kind to a nuclear attack on Poland? Poland is also part of the US global ballistic missile defence network - it’s vital to the security of the US.
Click to expand...
you think they’d nuke Russia in response…..for 10,000 yanks?

I don’t and I don’t think they’re that stupid either

Tbf I think MAD - the real MAD - in fact the only MAD - which is a nuke on the USA - is the reason why you’ll never see Ukraine regain its territory now
 
Kev The Rat said:
A nuke where? Against Russia? Don’t be ridiculous
Click to expand...

You seem to have painted yourself into a corner.

To make it clear as possible for you - if someone lets off a nuke against an ally of a nuclear armed power where there is clear agreement to assist in the event of an armed attack, there is almost certainly going to be a nuclear response. It would almost certainly be a limited response - one for one, and with clear messaging beforehand announcing that it was a limited response - but it would happen.

That would apply to the US responding to an attack on Poland, or Russia responding to an attack on Belarus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top