Explosions In Ukraine.....

[Poolie]

56 minutes ago, Santa said:

We were led to believe 3-4 days ago that Russia was definitely going to invade last Wednesday. So why haven't they?

US intelligence!!

[Mudshark]

 

NATO has been on Russia's doorstep for 20 years. It is the thing Putin hates. At almost 70, his time is running out. If he used a false flag operation to grab the reins of power, ‘catch lightening in a jar' once, why not again?! Go with what you know.

Sept 9 99 AN apartment in Moscow is blown up. Over 100 dead. A couple weeks later repeat with same body count. This is blamed on Chechen terrorists and hysteria is ramped up

Ryazan Russia. Police find sacks of explosives being brought into another apartment building. While the government first blames Chechen terrorists, two days later they’re caught. It is FSB agents, former KGB; Putin’s boys. The state media does a sudden about face and claims it was all a training exercise. You have to love the audacity of those bald face lies.

With over 200 dead Russians, hysteria fanned, Putin leads them into another round of the Chechnya  war, all while getting his hands firmly on the state gonads.

False flag operations are talked about like they’re common. Maybe in the 3^rd world but rarely in the first. Still this is Russia so.  An invasion of Ukraine would be huge headache, painful in both Russia and the west. It will be interesting to see if it is a price Putin is willing to pay.
 

 

[butterfly]

5 hours ago, JohninDublin said:

You only get one chance to make a first impression. You wasted yours.

well, I am not impressed, and definitely not need your validation

[butterfly]

3 hours ago, Santa said:

We were led to believe 3-4 days ago that Russia was definitely going to invade last Wednesday. So why haven't they?

it's all about Biden wonderful insight and great military intelligence

Putin is exposing the western leaders for what they are, weak and indecisive

[JohninDublin]

40 minutes ago, butterfly said:

well, I am not impressed, and definitely not need your validation

And I don't need your silliness either.

[Fester]

4 hours ago, Santa said:

We were led to believe 3-4 days ago that Russia was definitely going to invade last Wednesday. So why haven't they?

Because the US said.

[butterfly]

2 hours ago, JohninDublin said:

And I don't need your silliness either.

I don't think you need any more help on that front :)

[JohninDublin]

59 minutes ago, butterfly said:

I don't think you need any more help on that front :)

Well stop volunteering your unwanted services then.

[Faraday]

C'mon you two, calm down a bit please.

 

[AussieBob]

20 hours ago, Mudshark said:

150 American B-61 nuclear gravity bombs are stationed in five countries; Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey. No mention about ballistic missiles. If Russia invades and destroys them. It is not far fetched to assume a wider war will result. I thought this was about Putin wanting to control the Ukraine & putting the screws to Euro land during the winter with his gas exports.

How little did I know. 

Not there mate - get real.  Putin has been on about the missiles in Poland, Romania, Ukraine etc - ballistic, hypersonic - not nuclear bombs that go on planes. As you said - you know very little - try Google. 

[AussieBob]

18 hours ago, JohninDublin said:

Thanks for that. Just to make one vey important point. The missiles in Turkey are nukes.

I can see your point, but in all the circumstances, I think Ukraine are quite right to want to join NATO. In 2004, there was the "mysterious poisoning", of the then Ukrainian Pres, Yushchenko, who was pro-West. That has all the hallmarks of Putin. I think if Putin is ordering the assassination of a country's Pres, they have every right to want to join NATO. 

In 2008, Russia invades Georgia in a Sudetenland land excused raid to protect Ethnic Russians from two autonomous regions of the country. Same excuse for Crimea. And though they have denied any involvement in "Donbass" including supplying the missile which brought down flight MH17, they express their "angst" over Russians being victimised. Wherever I look, I see Russian rapaciousness.

I don't say that's why NATO has changed it's stance on Ukraine, but since Putin came to power, he has persistently indulged in asymmetric warfare against the west and that includes interfering in elections. Neither NATO or Russia are the problem: The problem is Putin.

I see your points - and yes it is Putin that has been publicly aggressive about the matter - but the Russian people overall (as far as we know) are in support of his actions. The Govt of Ukraine has just slowly slowly moved towards being a part of NATO and EU - they even changed their Constitution so they could do that.

One side has been loud and noisy - the other has been moving with stealth and ignoring the other side's protests.  Moving on - I wonder which side China will support if Russia invades.   

Biden and Putin have just agreed to meet to 'negotiate' things after Macron spoke to Putin. Maybe a peaceful resolution will suddenly break out. 

[butterfly]

3 hours ago, AussieBob said:

Biden and Putin have just agreed to meet to 'negotiate' things after Macron spoke to Putin. Maybe a peaceful resolution will suddenly break out. 

they are all buying time, there is no way the west will stop NATO expansion,

Putin should invade ASAP or just before the summit while he still have the upper hand, and take NATO allies by surprise

[JohninDublin]

4 hours ago, AussieBob said:

I see your points - and yes it is Putin that has been publicly aggressive about the matter - but the Russian people overall (as far as we know) are in support of his actions. The Govt of Ukraine has just slowly slowly moved towards being a part of NATO and EU - they even changed their Constitution so they could do that.

One side has been loud and noisy - the other has been moving with stealth and ignoring the other side's protests.  Moving on - I wonder which side China will support if Russia invades.   

Biden and Putin have just agreed to meet to 'negotiate' things after Macron spoke to Putin. Maybe a peaceful resolution will suddenly break out. 

I'm inclined to believe that there will be no invasion, but only because Putin's biggest gamble is the personal outcome for him if it all goes wrong. If they go down that road, he won't just be replaced. He will be seriously and systematically investigated regarding the accumulation of his wealth.

As far as the support of the Russian people are concerned, this should not surprise us when the bulk of the media is either cowed or controlled by Putin. Much of what we are seeing here, was from the same playbook as 1938/9

[Rookiescot]

19 minutes ago, JohninDublin said:

I'm inclined to believe that there will be no invasion, but only because Putin's biggest gamble is the personal outcome for him if it all goes wrong. If they go down that road, he won't just be replaced. He will be seriously and systematically investigated regarding the accumulation of his wealth.

And I suspect any money/assets he has managed to get out of Russia will be subject to sanctions as well.

[JohninDublin]

1 hour ago, butterfly said:

they are all buying time, there is no way the west will stop NATO expansion,

Putin should invade ASAP or just before the summit while he still have the upper hand, and take NATO allies by surprise

Wow! That's some surprise. Do you mean to tell me that Putin can't be trusted? Who'd a thunk it?

[JohninDublin]

1 minute ago, Rookiescot said:

And I suspect any money/assets he has managed to get out of Russia will be subject to sanctions as well.

He's 70 years old. I don't see him being given the opportunity to flee the country if they do decide to replace him in order to enjoy that wealth.

[butterfly]

14 minutes ago, JohninDublin said:

Wow! That's some surprise. Do you mean to tell me that Putin can't be trusted? Who'd a thunk it?

au contraire, he can be trusted that he will act in the best interests of Russian people and Ukraine

it's the west that can't be trusted, in particular the US, they are playing dangerous games with their NATO expansion

maybe you should go for an upgrade on your moral compass and cognitive bias, it seems to be a bit off, I am sure a quick update will take care of that

Edited February 21, 2022 by butterfly

[JohninDublin]

I think your support for the man who supplied the missiles that brought down MH17, tells me how seriously I need to take your advice about my moral compass. Given that, you are totally unqualified to allege cognitive bias against anyone.

You are blocked!

[butterfly]

2 hours ago, JohninDublin said:

I think your support for the man who supplied the missiles that brought down MH17, tells me how seriously I need to take your advice about my moral compass. Given that, you are totally unqualified to allege cognitive bias against anyone.

You are blocked!

well, glad you are showing yourself with your true colors, princess :)

it's not like the US or the west has never supplied missiles that killed innocent people in the last 20 years, because we are so perfect and "white" clean :)

jesus, the self-righteous attitude of the west is exactly why we are creating wars out of nowhere. Let's not forget how WW1 started, it was all self-righteous posture and a Baltics "alliance" cooperation that started that war, and consequently WW2. Funny how things repeat themselves :)

Edited February 21, 2022 by butterfly

[AussieBob]

21 minutes ago, butterfly said:

well, glad you are showing yourself with your true colors, princess :)

it's not like the US or the west has never supplied missiles that killed innocent people in the last 20 years, because we are so perfect and "white" clean :)

jesus, the self-righteous attitude of the west is exactly why we are creating wars out of nowhere. Let's not forget how WW1 started, it was all self-righteous posture and a Baltics "alliance" cooperation that started that war, and consequently WW2. Funny how things repeat themselves :)

As I have said, I blame NATO more than Russia/Putin for matter reaching this position.  But I have also said that if a war happens I would support NATO over Russia.  No way I want Russia to invade, but I do want NATO to back down.  There has been a civil war in Ukraine since they ousted the President in 2014. It is totally erroneous for western media to claim that the 'rebels' are Russia backed terrorists, and yet ignore the fact that the Ukraine current Govt took power in a NATO backed coup.  If there is an invasion I hope that Russia just annexes those parts of Ukraine who are at war with the Ukraine Govt. But better than that would be if NATO backs down. Your point, and that of John's, about the media on both sides being biased is true - if there is a compromise the western media will report at length on Putin's 'capitulations', while the Russian media will do the opposite and same.

[AussieBob]

4 hours ago, JohninDublin said:

I'm inclined to believe that there will be no invasion, but only because Putin's biggest gamble is the personal outcome for him if it all goes wrong. If they go down that road, he won't just be replaced. He will be seriously and systematically investigated regarding the accumulation of his wealth.

As far as the support of the Russian people are concerned, this should not surprise us when the bulk of the media is either cowed or controlled by Putin. Much of what we are seeing here, was from the same playbook as 1938/9

Yes - Putin is putting it all on the line.  But maybe he has nothing to lose - this could be his 'last hurrah' before he retires to Rublevka and spend all that money surrounded by bodyguards. 

[JohninDublin]

42 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

As I have said, I blame NATO more than Russia/Putin for matter reaching this position.  But I have also said that if a war happens I would support NATO over Russia.  No way I want Russia to invade, but I do want NATO to back down.  There has been a civil war in Ukraine since they ousted the President in 2014. It is totally erroneous for western media to claim that the 'rebels' are Russia backed terrorists, and yet ignore the fact that the Ukraine current Govt took power in a NATO backed coup.  If there is an invasion I hope that Russia just annexes those parts of Ukraine who are at war with the Ukraine Govt. But better than that would be if NATO backs down. Your point, and that of John's, about the media on both sides being biased is true - if there is a compromise the western media will report at length on Putin's 'capitulations', while the Russian media will do the opposite and same.

I think you can ignore butterfly as either  troll or a bot.

His putative position is that just because Russia tried to assassinate the Ukrainian pro-West Pres, that is no reason why Ukraine should want to join Nato. And of course, if mention Putin I am obsessed by him. Of course when we are talking about a Russian Invasion of another country, we should not be talking about Putin, but Frank Sinatra instead. We must not mention anyone who is relevant to the story.

Then there is the question of my moral compass. I am not the one who is cheerleading an alliance of the two most corrupt leaders west of the Urals whose combined population is 5 times that of Ukraine. I am not the one supporting a man who is indulging in asymmetric warfare against the west, or interfering in Western Elections and Referenda. I am not the one cheerleading for the man who supplied the missiles that brought down MH17. I am not the one supporting the Kleptocrats Kleptocrat.

I can see where you are coming from regarding NATO, but I think the actions taken by Russia over the past 20 years against Ukraine, do not bode well for the latter. Whatever agreement that NATO may have had with Russians, I would have thought might be based on the good faith idea of Russia saying "We have no bad intentions towards Ukraine". That clearly is not true. If NATO gave any undertaking about Ukraine not being allowed to join the alliance, should that be set in stone, or reviewed as developments take place.

[JohninDublin]

58 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

Yes - Putin is putting it all on the line.  But maybe he has nothing to lose - this could be his 'last hurrah' before he retires to Rublevka and spend all that money surrounded by bodyguards. 

I don't see him retiring. He has to worry about the state indicting him once he gives up power.

[Rookiescot]

1 hour ago, butterfly said:

well, glad you are showing yourself with your true colors, princess :)

it's not like the US or the west has never supplied missiles that killed innocent people in the last 20 years, because we are so perfect and "white" clean :)

jesus, the self-righteous attitude of the west is exactly why we are creating wars out of nowhere. Let's not forget how WW1 started, it was all self-righteous posture and a Baltics "alliance" cooperation that started that war, and consequently WW2. Funny how things repeat themselves :)

So who shot down MH17?

The west?

None of this would be happening if Putin had not amassed troops on the border of Ukraine. Did the west do that? No its Putin.

Thing is Putin is stuffed here. If he invades he loses. If he backs down he loses.

Western forces will be massed in Poland within a month. Forces he knows he cant take on. 

Bring it on Putin.

[Fluke]

15 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

So who shot down MH17?

The west?

None of this would be happening if Putin had not amassed troops on the border of Ukraine. Did the west do that? No its Putin.

Thing is Putin is stuffed here. If he invades he loses. If he backs down he loses.

Western forces will be massed in Poland within a month. Forces he knows he cant take on. 

Bring it on Putin.

The West wanted to put missiles in the Ukraine , which was rather close to Russia's borders for Putins liking , rather similar to Russia putting missiles in Cuba