Current Affairs Ukraine

Status
Not open for further replies.
If they involve Belarus and Syria isn't this the start of a world war, terrified saying this like .nato can't get involved but they can scary.
 

Good. It's obscene how imbalanced global wealth is. Usmanov spending $800,000,000US on a boat needing 90+ people to operate it while people die everyday of poverty, famine and disease. Nobody should have that level of wealth.

My fear with Ukraine holding their ground is it will force putins hand to escalate further. I'm not saying they should fly the white flag by any means but Putin is clearly off his rocker going in there in the first place. The initial invasion hasn't gone to plan, now he's resorted to flattening places. What if that doesn't work? What next. He's already talking about the Ukraine having chem weapons, another false flag as he prepares the world for himself to use one? I honestly don't see how this ends with anything other than ww3?
 
We are being frightened by the thought that two or three UK squaddies may be fighting there. Meanwhile the Russians are bringing in thousands from the Middle East and Belarus is joining in. NATO needs to get off its knees and tell Putin to do one. Meanwhile if Belarus sets one foot over the border, we should bomb the crap out of them and invade, purely to remove weapons and residual NAZI’s…..obviously taking care not to hit any Russians….as we don’t want to upset Putin……
I could be wrong, but it seems like you are actually quite keen for an escalation of the war, and that you probably haven't thought that the consequences of NATO getting involved militarily would most likely lead to the use of nuclear weapons.
 
I could be wrong, but it seems like you are actually quite keen for an escalation of the war, and that you probably haven't thought that the consequences of NATO getting involved militarily would most likely lead to the use of nuclear weapons.
I see this used a lot, but why is that the case? I mean across NATO the collective armed forces and nuclear arsenal are far larger than that of Russia. If a NATO member was invaded would we be using the same language, that we can't fight back because Putin might use a nuclear weapon?
 
I see this used a lot, but why is that the case? I mean across NATO the collective armed forces and nuclear arsenal are far larger than that of Russia. If a NATO member was invaded would we be using the same language, that we can't fight back because Putin might use a nuclear weapon?
Well, yes. I agree that a lot of people make this assumption, when it's unlikely that even Putin would resort to strategic nuckear weapons in the event of NATO involvement. On the other hand, the consequences would be so horrific that 'unlikely' is still too much of a risk, really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

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

🛒 Visit Shop

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