Current Affairs Ukraine

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

→ Log in 🔑 Register
Status
Not open for further replies.
BlueToff said:
No it doesn't. If Putin had really wanted to take Kyiv back by force he'd have done it two years ago.

Ofc Ukraine has a right to defend itself. But the reason its having to defend itself in the first place is as much on the West as it is Putin.

The only way this war stops is some form of concession and sadly the ones who have to concede are Ukraine. But the West has pinned itself into such a corner that it is the only way out. But we had Boris, on behalf of the US, telling Ukraine to pull out of negotiations back in 2022.

How exactly does this end other than concessions or Russia winning? There is no other way out - other than WW3.
Click to expand...
Genuinely, how? Dig down through the dogma and rhetoric, and the invasion of Ukraine stems from Russia's pride and belief that it can dominate the region.

As I said to someone else, the concern of NATO expansion is overstated - it is not a threat to Russia in the sense of military ambition, land grabs or whatnot.

Now, I can appreciate the Russian view of the west, based from a fair few historic nations - namely the French and Germans; that has a long-lasting legacy.

What it is, is it's a threat to Russian pride, a self-perpetuating view of superiority in the region and that it can slip its tendrils into its neighbours and influence.

It invaded Ukraine because it believed it could, and it did want to take the country. Unfortunately for Putin and co., they were inept and were unable to fulfil their aim.

They attacked a sovereign nation, and now they're complaining that Ukraine is giving them a bloody nose. Why should the oppressed be those to give up?

Why should the aggressor not face the consequences of its actions? Russia is a bully. I've said it before, but some of the nonsense is akin to blaming a rape victim.

It's like sympathising for the family of killers, rather than those being killed.
 
This clown wont even face his own people at an election. An oligarch's oily rag determined to drag the world into a war to end all wars.

He'll face the consequences one day. And probably (hopefully) at the hands of his own people.

Screen Shot 2024-11-21 at 22.10.15.webp
 
Spadge Vernacular said:
Click to expand...

I got looking into this a couple of days ago and the parallels with Czechoslovakia in 1939.
450px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-R69173%2C_M%C3%BCnchener_Abkommen%2C_Staatschefs.jpg

filth dirt coward tory slime chamberlain, similar daladier, the fuhrer, mussolini, ciano.

Winston Churchill declared, “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour and you will have war.”

The Czech's never trusted the west again.
 
PhilM said:
Regardless of what some may want us to believe, the likelihood of Russia using any form of nuclear weapon is slim or miniscule, to none. Sorry, it ain't happening.

Did they use them during the Cold War? No. Now, they're in a weaker position militarily, financially and in power, so to use them would be akin to suicide.

Some may talk about the caged tiger, but there'll be cronies in power (military and political) who'd want to save their own skin rather than follow Putin down the road.
Click to expand...

Was Russian territory ever fire fly struck by NATO (the US during the cold war) - what do you think the response would have been should it have been?

Phil, is a country more or less likely to use an all or nothing solution if it's in a position of weakness or strength?

An existential threat means the ceasing of existence, at that point why would suicide matter?

Even the fact you are stating a likelihood should be alarming. I can guarantee that should Russia be struck by any attack which threatens it to a great extent then yes it would respond in a nuclear fashion. The only caveat to the end of the world is the chances are it would be against a US proxy, not much comfort to family and friends I have in Britain though.
 
PhilM said:
Regardless of what some may want us to believe, the likelihood of Russia using any form of nuclear weapon is slim or miniscule, to none. Sorry, it ain't happening.

Did they use them during the Cold War? No. Now, they're in a weaker position militarily, financially and in power, so to use them would be akin to suicide.

Some may talk about the caged tiger, but there'll be cronies in power (military and political) who'd want to save their own skin rather than follow Putin down the road.
Click to expand...

In the matter of other figures preventing it, I'll illustrate one thing, if it was not for Kennedy we would not exist, all of his advisors advised a strike upon Moscow during the missile crisis. He went on gut instinct and rang Brezhnev, thus we lived.

Do you see a Kennedy figure in the US or Russia presently?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top