Putin's invasion of Ukraine

Seattle said:
It's all speculation of course but I would think any nuke would be at least as bad as the use of any chemical weapons (in terms of a NATO response). The response would probably vary as the effect varies but there would probably be some kind of response if any nuke was used at all.
Click to expand...
Sanctions, sanctions, and more sanctions? ;)
 
Evidence showed that it is US that blew the pipes of Nord Stream 1 & 2 to create deeper energy crisis in Europe and force Germany and other countries to move their production to USA.
USA is evil.
 
Saint said:
GT investigates: US war-mongering under guise of ‘democracy’ inflicts untold damage on the world - Global Times
Click to expand...
Would that be same "impartial" Global Times that is effectively the mouthpiece of the Chinese state? :rolleyes:
The question they're not answering is whether their involvement in wars has reduced/prevented the damage that would otherwise have been done. Perhaps the lesser of two evils is all that can be asked for.
US is a war monger, she will be self-destroyed one day.
Click to expand...
"Self-destroyed"? You mean civil war?
 
The post WWII order does not permit the annexing of one nation's territory by another. This has been an established international legal norm for the past 70 years.

Now Russia is claiming it is annexing about one third of Ukraine.

This is illegal under international law. So are wars of aggression.
 
Saint said:
US purposely blew the Nord Stream to contaminate seawater, and escalate conflict.
Click to expand...
You will need to explain to me how methane, which is a gas insoluble in water and rises rapidly to the surface, is going to "contaminate" it.
 
Saint said:
Evidence showed that it is US that blew the pipes of Nord Stream 1 & 2 to create deeper energy crisis in Europe and force Germany and other countries to move their production to USA.
USA is evil.
Click to expand...
lol um all evidence suggest its was russia
 
pjdude1219 said:
lol um all evidence suggest its was russia
Click to expand...
Of course. They are the ones who have been inventing spurious "maintenance" issues, to avoid fulfilling the terms of the supply contract to ship gas to Europe. This is just a further escalation of that. So they blow it up and blame unknown agencies: "Nothing to with us but, terribly sorry, we still can't supply you any gas, force majeure, niddle, naddle, noo..."

Utterly absurd to suggest the USA would do something so hostile to its own NATO allies, in the middle of a war in which NATO cohesion is vital.

As it happens, the EU has been assuming for months that no gas will come through those lines for the foreseeable future and all their planning for this winter has been based on that. So the impact is nil, actually. It's just another destructive and threatening gesture by this gangster regime, because, well, that's what they do. It's all they know how to do, in fact.
 
I understand they are having an annexation ceremony today after the "vote" to annex part of Ukraine. Putin is on a roll I guess :)
 
Seattle said:
I understand they are having an annexation ceremony today after the "vote" to annex part of Ukraine. Putin is on a roll I guess :)
Click to expand...
Another threatening gesture, which will be ignored. Nobody will take this seriously. His bluff is going to be called.

Meanwhile, back home, men of conscription age are fleeing the country or breaking arms and legs to avoid being called up. He will be fighting a rising tide of bitter resentment and his generals will be wondering what the point of it all is.
 
Someone has to take him out at some point but anyone that could do that (and survive) is probably not going to be much better than Putin. They probably wouldn't be worse however.
 
The last 30 years were complete PR nightmare. Who's to blame? - terrorist number 1, terrorist number 2, ... !?
Thank God the Russians are coming back.
 
Last edited:
At least James Bond won't have to look too far for his next Big Bad.
 
Seattle said:
Someone has to take him out at some point but anyone that could do that (and survive) is probably not going to be much better than Putin. They probably wouldn't be worse however.
Click to expand...

Not sure why a fake country like Russia would even need a new leader in the first place. After Putin’s downfall, with or without a nuclear war, the talk should be about how Russia is going to return the millions of square kilometres of territory it’s stolen over the last 1000 years and how it plans to pay back all the ethnic groups it’s suppressed in those territories.
 
According to one source: SOPREF Russia is spending more than 1.4 billion dollars per day*. This figure is set to increase once conscription is included. Of course these estimates do not include the human cost etc.
One can only wonder as to how Putin can justify the sort of expenditure given that what he has annexed has been virtually destroyed by war and will cost billions to restore ( if he even get's the chance and has the want to do so)

What a waste!!!

(*) https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10...e-russian-millionaires-dying-to-fun/101487158
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top