Current Affairs Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kev The Rat said:
No one is threatening their existence as part of Russia. Sorry but that’s the reality.

You only need to look at the lack of progress of the counter offensive to confirm that.
Click to expand...
Since the annexation massive areas have been taken... last November there was huge pushes into these areas... remember Russia had to flee Kherson.. Ukraine and NATO Routed Russian soldiers and took a large Russian city.
Kev where are the nukes.
kev where are the nukes.
Constant aggression on Russia from NATO and Ukraine, putin said aggression on Russia will result in Nukes
Let me remind you of your quote
The first is a counter blow, we respond to aggression. I want to assure you: the answer is absolutely unacceptable for any potential aggressor. In a retaliatory strike, so many hundreds of our missiles will appear in the air that no enemy will have a chance of survival. The second reason: the threat of the existence of the Russian state, even if conventional weapons are used against us.
The first reason is response to aggression
The second reason is a threat to the existence of Russia
If I was crazy and believed Russian BS like you do I would say the aggression currently from NATO and Ukraine in attacking legitimate Russian areas falls under the first reason.
Where's the nukes kev?
 
Tipp blue said:
Since the annexation massive areas have been taken... last November there was huge pushes into these areas... remember Russia had to flee Kherson.. Ukraine and NATO Routed Russian soldiers and took a large Russian city.
Kev where are the nukes.
kev where are the nukes.
Constant aggression on Russia from NATO and Ukraine, putin said aggression on Russia will result in Nukes
Let me remind you of your quote
The first is a counter blow, we respond to aggression. I want to assure you: the answer is absolutely unacceptable for any potential aggressor. In a retaliatory strike, so many hundreds of our missiles will appear in the air that no enemy will have a chance of survival. The second reason: the threat of the existence of the Russian state, even if conventional weapons are used against us.
The first reason is response to aggression
The second reason is a threat to the existence of Russia
If I was crazy and believed Russian BS like you do I would say the aggression currently from NATO and Ukraine in attacking legitimate Russian areas falls under the first reason.
Where's the nukes kev?
Click to expand...
I'd say NATO and the west understand a bit more about the real dangers of escalation than you do tbh. Withdrawing from Kherson CIty has clearly not proved to be a green light for NATO to move in to remove the rest of the shovel-equipped army from Ukraine. It's been a year since that occured now.

Have a think about why that might be.
 
Kev The Rat said:
I'd say NATO and the west understand a bit more about the real dangers of escalation than you do tbh. Withdrawing from Kherson CIty has clearly not proved to be a green light for NATO to move in to remove the rest of the shovel-equipped army from Ukraine. It's been a year since that occured now.

Have a think about why that might be.
Click to expand...

1. Russia says they will nuke aggression on Russia.
2. Russia says parts of Ukraine are now Russian.
3. Ukraine show aggression to these parts of Russia.
Russias military doctrine should be initiated... but it hasn't been so now we have to ask why?
Answer : Putin is chatting wham about Nukes..
There has even been aggression in Moscow with drones making it all the way there. Still no nukes...
In reality for Russia the threat of nukes is far more powerful than the nukes themselves..
 
Tipp blue said:
1. Russia says they will nuke aggression on Russia.
2. Russia says parts of Ukraine are now Russian.
3. Ukraine show aggression to these parts of Russia.
Russias military doctrine should be initiated... but it hasn't been so now we have to ask why?
Answer : Putin is chatting wham about Nukes..
There has even been aggression in Moscow with drones making it all the way there. Still no nukes...
In reality for Russia the threat of nukes is far more powerful than the nukes themselves..
Click to expand...
Or maybe they know the threats are effective (you’ve said they are) so there’s no need to go any further.
 
Kev The Rat said:
Or maybe they know the threats are effective (you’ve said they are) so there’s no need to go any further.
Click to expand...
Threats are all russia has left.. because they aren't going to use nukes... 🙄... and the reason NATO aren't going into Ukraine is because they are a defensive alliance which Ukraine aren't part of (unbelievably this still needs to be explained to the pro Russians)...
Russia are not at war with nato despite what the vodka swilling neanderthals in the Kremlin might say.
 
Tipp blue said:
Threats are all russia has left.. because they aren't going to use nukes... 🙄... and the reason NATO aren't going into Ukraine is because they are a defensive alliance which Ukraine aren't part of (unbelievably this still needs to be explained to the pro Russians)...
Russia are not at war with nato despite what the vodka swilling neanderthals in the Kremlin might say.
Click to expand...
But multiple examples exist of NATO going into battle when no attacks have been made on member states
 
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