Current Affairs Ukraine

[peteblue]

That’ll be the purge Vlad was on about…..

 

[Davideeyore]

Let's hope he got the sh the runs

 

[bluebud]

Arnie telling Russians how it is, speaks well ?

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[summerisle]

Because they know they'll be next.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

The countries you mention are all members of NATO. Ukraine is not. If Ukraine were in NATO they would be getting military support. But they aren't. I'm sure you must realise this. It is not a difficult concept. NATO are worried that if they provide military support to Ukraine in the form of troops on the ground they will bring about an escalation in hostilities. I think this is true as I have said in earlier posts. Would you think it worthwhile for NATO to send in troops, have Putin respond with chemical and/or tactical nuclear weapons and see hundreds of thousands die and the risk of further escalation?

I fear I haven't communicated effectively as this missed my point entirely. I'm obviously well aware that Estonia is in NATO. As you say, it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

What I struggle to understand is that you are arguing that NATO engaging Russia will almost certainly result in further escalation and (in your words) hundreds of thousands of people dying. So what is it about NATO engaging after an attack on Estonia that makes that outcome acceptable that makes it unacceptable should NATO engage in Ukraine? Or are you trying to tell me that Putin would bow down to the power of NATO when he attacks a NATO country but doesn't give a hoot in Ukraine?

 

[PhilM]

Horrendous figures if true

I don't think the figures are that far off, when you consider it was nearly a 1,000 after only a few days. Add to that, the casualties which are likely to be 3:1.

Let's put it in context - they lost just over 14,000 in their entire period within Afghanistan, which was labelled 'the bleeding wound' by Gorbachev.

The US suffered just over 58,000 dead in Vietnam from '60 to '72. If Russia keep ploughing on with this, I don't think they'll be too far off that figure.

 

[peteblue]

Arnie telling Russians how it is, speaks well ?

Hope it gets through to the people….

 

[peteblue]

I fear I haven't communicated effectively as this missed my point entirely. I'm obviously well aware that Estonia is in NATO. As you say, it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

What I struggle to understand is that you are arguing that NATO engaging Russia will almost certainly result in further escalation and (in your words) hundreds of thousands of people dying. So what is it about NATO engaging after an attack on Estonia that makes that outcome acceptable that makes it unacceptable should NATO engage in Ukraine? Or are you trying to tell me that Putin would bow down to the power of NATO when he attacks a NATO country but doesn't give a hoot in Ukraine?

I agree with you Bruce. We should have been prepared, and shown Putin we would do so, to defend Ukraine against a Russian invasion……

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I agree with you Bruce. We should have been prepared, and shown Putin we would do so, to defend Ukraine against a Russian invasion……

I just don't really understand how the risk of escalation is supposedly what's deterring NATO from getting involved in Ukraine but that risk of escalation would evaporate should Estonia or Lithuania be invaded, even a tiny ammount.

And that's aside from the fact that the Ukrainians on their own seem to be giving more than a bloody nose to Russia and it seems like Russian progress is far below what they expected, yet if the collective might of NATO got involved then suddenly Russian forces would be such that hundreds of thousands would definitely die.

It just doesn't stack up.

 

[summerisle]

Horrendous figures if true

Close to the number of UK armed forces lost since 1945 (7190).

 

[davmaher]

I fear I haven't communicated effectively as this missed my point entirely. I'm obviously well aware that Estonia is in NATO. As you say, it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

What I struggle to understand is that you are arguing that NATO engaging Russia will almost certainly result in further escalation and (in your words) hundreds of thousands of people dying. So what is it about NATO engaging after an attack on Estonia that makes that outcome acceptable that makes it unacceptable should NATO engage in Ukraine? Or are you trying to tell me that Putin would bow down to the power of NATO when he attacks a NATO country but doesn't give a hoot in Ukraine?

Because Estonia are part of NATO. You seem to have no problem with NATO troops going into Ukraine. What do you think Putin's response to this would be?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Because Estonia are part of NATO. You seem to have no problem with NATO troops going into Ukraine. What do you think Putin's response to this would be?

So are you saying that Putin's response will be different if NATO defends against a Russian invasion of Estonia than it would be if NATO defends against a Russian invasion of Ukraine? Because I don't mind saying, if I were one of the Baltic states I'd be scared witless that when push comes to shove this lack of gumption would quite merrily extend to them as well and NATO's "obligation" would be fulfilled by sending a few guns and missiles and saying "good luck chaps", we can't defend your little tiddly country because it would automatically mean hundreds of thousands of casualties in our countries (apparently).

 

[Martin Alvito]

I fear I haven't communicated effectively as this missed my point entirely. I'm obviously well aware that Estonia is in NATO. As you say, it's not a difficult concept to grasp.

What I struggle to understand is that you are arguing that NATO engaging Russia will almost certainly result in further escalation and (in your words) hundreds of thousands of people dying. So what is it about NATO engaging after an attack on Estonia that makes that outcome acceptable that makes it unacceptable should NATO engage in Ukraine? Or are you trying to tell me that Putin would bow down to the power of NATO when he attacks a NATO country but doesn't give a hoot in Ukraine?

I don't think you're understanding the purpose of collective security and the alliance, from NATO's perspective. The point of the alliance is to deter an attack on the membership. The alliance goes to war collectively after an attack on an ally because, if it doesn't, it becomes extremely difficult to deter further aggression against its members. The situation then reverts to 1930s Europe with Hitler picking off neighbors one by one.

The objective of the alliance is to minimize the likelihood of those hundreds of thousands of deaths occurring by presenting the greatest combined threat possible. It is also trying to prevent the likelihood of tens of thousands of deaths occurring in its weaker member states in the absence of the alliance.

If we intervene in Ukraine, we more or less guarantee the hundreds of thousands of deaths. Fewer Ukrainians will die. Lots more citizens of NATO countries and Russians will. Is this a good trade?

And that's aside from the fact that the Ukrainians on their own seem to be giving more than a bloody nose to Russia and it seems like Russian progress is far below what they expected, yet if the collective might of NATO got involved then suddenly Russian forces would be such that hundreds of thousands would definitely die.

Do you think that, if we get involved, the political leadership of the NATO countries can withdraw the way Bush 41 did from Kuwait in 1991 and get away with it?

Do you think that Putin and his political leadership will not agree to, at a minimum, use WMDs against our troops if we push on Moscow? Everyone knows Saddam Hussein's fate.

 

[LinekersLegs]

I don't think the figures are that far off, when you consider it was nearly a 1,000 after only a few days. Add to that, the casualties which are likely to be 3:1.

Let's put it in context - they lost just over 14,000 in their entire period within Afghanistan, which was labelled 'the bleeding wound' by Gorbachev.

The US suffered just over 58,000 dead in Vietnam from '60 to '72. If Russia keep ploughing on with this, I don't think they'll be too far off that figure.

Still haven’t seen much logistical support by the Russians for casualties, they do have mobile crematoriums though which must be a great morale booster for their troops.