i know its all a diplomatic game, but at what point do we stop sending equipment to Ukraine, and start sending people to use it?
i mean, i get theres a difference diplomatically, suttlties of war, national alliances etc etc, but the lines have been drawn here, its not like we havent backed a corner…
at what point, and there has to be a moment in time if it keeps going you would assume, given at some point the civilian casualties will be too many to ignore, do governments move in militarily?
That will only happen if Russia crosses into, or bombs, a NATO state. If a NATO state acts alone (no one wants to), it is not protected by the treaty. The US really, really doesn’t want to, and no one else either. But if RU attacks Czechia or Poland, it is war.
lets just say China put the boot in and publically denounce Russia…put sanctions in place…that changes things, no?
at what point, on a human level, does the world come to Aid militarily.
how many Ukrainian civilians need to die before we put boots on the ground…are you saying just wont happen…even if casualties start climbing into the 10s of thousands?
China is their sugardaddy behind the scenes.
I think the world will watch Ukraine burn and be horrified. Aid Ukraine as much as possible with arms, some volunteers eventually, medical supplies and food and economic aid. But no war.
What he is trying to say is that the Russian MoD planned for a Short Victories War and for Ukraine to collapse politically quickly under pressure. He is warning against early takes on overall Russian capabilities.
There has to be special forces there already from numerous NATO countries, the Regiment will be there - I know for a fact when we said we were pulling out, transport planes were inserting (lots of) equipment. We plan to draw him into a long weakening civil war, not unlike how Syria played out. Problem is I think Putin is that shot-to-bits batshit, that once resistance gets really stubborn, he’ll veer toward atrocity, by that I mean gas, targeting civilians and using illegal weapons. That feasibly is where it could most likely escalate. However if what I am reading is correct, just now, if Belarus come on board…that could spark it, in fact fck it, its a powder keg.
Ignore tough guy words this source:
One question I have, if Putin were to launch nuclear weapons at Kiyv, what would the ramifications be for Chernobyl?
Probably the meager start of a future Volunteer Movement, where soldiers from other countries take on Ukrainian uniforms and fight under Ukrainian flags and laws. The French Foreign Legion has released all its Ukrainian soldiers, allowing them to go to Ukraine and fight with their kit.
Chernobyl would be the least of all of our problems if he use tactical nukes on Kyiv. He will not nuke the former capital of the Rus. Russians would hang him from telephone lines. He is not that crazy, no way.
Without control of the air and moving in daytime - these are sitting ducks.
21:41
‘Why do we need a world if Russia’s not in it?’
Dmitry Kiselyov, right, and Putin in 2016
During his evening programme tonight, Russian state TV presenter Dmitry Kiselyov delivered a monologue in which he posed the question: “why do we need a world if Russia’s not in it?”
He was considering President Putin’s announcement today that he is putting Russia’s nuclear forces on high alert.
“In total our submarines are capable of launching over 500 nuclear warheads, which guarantees the destruction of the US and all Nato countries to boot,” he said on his Vesti Nedeli show.
"That’s according to the principle ‘why do we need a world if Russia’s not in it?’
“Russia’s nuclear weapons are also delivered by the fastest strategic bombers in the world,” he said, adding that “we won’t even talk about our Strategic Rocket Forces”.
“In total, Russia’s nuclear capability is the most powerful in the world,” he said.
“Now Russia’s entire nuclear triad has been placed on special alert. Putin warned them. Don’t try to frighten Russia.”
Huh?