Ukraine

[Bristol Red Rover]

The thing I said about the Poles is different to what I said before, I raised it as it is a potential issue.

Serving Poles can easily be dropped from their military and be free to go to Ukraine. Fudgy red line. And I am talking of them entering direct conflict with Russia. If they set foot in the regions Russia has claimed, they are fighting on Russian territory as far as Russia is concerned. Another fudgy red line. Practically speaking, there has not been enough time for training on the new NATO countries equipment for Ukraine to be effective with it, so the chances of ex military mercenaries from outside Ukraine who are familiar with that equipment hopping on board is more than probable.

Would NATO be concerned? Given NATO is made up of countries desperate to harm Russians, I think they would fudge any red lines there too, especially the US. A flat out denial of there being their soldiers involved, when they would be, and have been, soldiers till very recently, even if prematurely released.

Back to my original question. Whether or not you think any country bordering Russia would initiate one of those actions I said, if they did and there was a Russian retaliation, does NATO get triggered?

[wilts rover]

Only just noticed this. According to the Ukraine papers leak there are at least 50 UK Special Forces troops operating in Ukraine.

Is it legal for the government to deploy UK troops in a war zone without the consent of Parliament?

https://declassifieduk.org/u-s-intel-leak-reveals-50-elite-british-troops-in-ukraine/

[selby]

  Wilts, the only question to answer is, is it legal for a neighbouring country to invade a sovereign country's territory, if not, and it clearly is not, then I would say it should be open house to repel the invader who is in the wrong.
   Or would you expect someone to come into your house in the middle of the night and have a right to do so without you taking some form of action.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Only just noticed this. According to the Ukraine papers leak there are at least 50 UK Special Forces troops operating in Ukraine.

Is it legal for the government to deploy UK troops in a war zone without the consent of Parliament?

https://declassifieduk.org/u-s-intel-leak-reveals-50-elite-british-troops-in-ukraine/

I think that very much depends on how you define "war zone". If they were fighting at the front line without Parliament being aware, this would be exceptionally serious.

If they are involved in security for senior British politicians (and Boris Johnson) visiting Kyiv, I think that's pretty much standard operations.

[wilts rover]

Only just noticed this. According to the Ukraine papers leak there are at least 50 UK Special Forces troops operating in Ukraine.

Is it legal for the government to deploy UK troops in a war zone without the consent of Parliament?

https://declassifieduk.org/u-s-intel-leak-reveals-50-elite-british-troops-in-ukraine/

I think that very much depends on how you define "war zone". If they were fighting at the front line without Parliament being aware, this would be exceptionally serious.

If they are involved in security for senior British politicians (and Boris Johnson) visiting Kyiv, I think that's pretty much standard operations.

Special Forces don't provide security. These are active troops, according to the leaks (just been on Channel 4 News too - very briefly).

[wilts rover]

  Wilts, the only question to answer is, is it legal for a neighbouring country to invade a sovereign country's territory, if not, and it clearly is not, then I would say it should be open house to repel the invader who is in the wrong.
   Or would you expect someone to come into your house in the middle of the night and have a right to do so without you taking some form of action.

What's that got to do with the government sending UK troops to enter combat operations overseas without the consent of Parliament? The UK has not declared war on Russia?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Only just noticed this. According to the Ukraine papers leak there are at least 50 UK Special Forces troops operating in Ukraine.

Is it legal for the government to deploy UK troops in a war zone without the consent of Parliament?

https://declassifieduk.org/u-s-intel-leak-reveals-50-elite-british-troops-in-ukraine/

I think that very much depends on how you define "war zone". If they were fighting at the front line without Parliament being aware, this would be exceptionally serious.

If they are involved in security for senior British politicians (and Boris Johnson) visiting Kyiv, I think that's pretty much standard operations.

Special Forces don't provide security. These are active troops, according to the leaks (just been on Channel 4 News too - very briefly).

I wouldn't be so sure that SF wouldn't be involved in providing security for a PM visiting a capital city of a country at war. They could well be involved in route planning, assessment of protection afforded by Ukraine forces, being placed to pick off potential assassination attempts and probably most suitably, to get the PM out sharpish if anything kicked off during a visit. 

[BillyStubbsTears]

I'd be absolutely astonished if they were on front line duties. That would be risking WWII.

[ravenrover]

I think we've already had that one Billy :-]]

[BillyStubbsTears]

Ha! Aye, I'm behind the times.

[Bristol Red Rover]

  Wilts, the only question to answer is, is it legal for a neighbouring country to invade a sovereign country's territory, if not, and it clearly is not, then I would say it should be open house to repel the invader who is in the wrong.
   Or would you expect someone to come into your house in the middle of the night and have a right to do so without you taking some form of action.

To be pedantic,  that's not quite the same parallel there. I think you mean if person 1 had gone into their neighbours, person 2, house a few streets away from person 3 claiming that they'd been bullying a friend of theirs who lived there, and claiming they were getting several mates from other streets with bulldozers to sit outside person 1's house. And then person 3 sent his son (UK special forces) over to help kick person 1 out of their neighbours house, but hadn't told all the others who lived in the house with person 3 about that, knowing that person 1 had the mother of all bulldozer companies.

I think that's nearer to the picture. But nowt wrong with a bit of simplifying to justify a foolish action.

[ravenrover]

And again, but in English this time please

[BillyStubbsTears]

I think it translates as "It's the fault of NATO and the EU."

[drfchound]

First time I have been on this thread for a few weeks but I have just heard on the evening news that a video has emerged of a Ukraine soldier being beheaded by a Russian soldier.
They said that the video isn’t yet confirmed as authentic but it is likely to be true.
Apologies if this has been reported already on here.

[normal rules]

Only just noticed this. According to the Ukraine papers leak there are at least 50 UK Special Forces troops operating in Ukraine.

Is it legal for the government to deploy UK troops in a war zone without the consent of Parliament?

https://declassifieduk.org/u-s-intel-leak-reveals-50-elite-british-troops-in-ukraine/

I’d be more surprised and a little disappointed if UKSF were not in Ukraine.
Something the UK govt would never ever confirm of course.
You only have to look at some of the more successful targetted strikes.
The story of Ukrainian special forces who destroyed as many as 20 Russian aircraft at Saki air base in Crimea. Classic SAS tactic. Get in behind enemy lines, at a time and place where the enemy least expects you. Cause the most damage in as little time as possible and disappear back into the night. I have little doubt this was at least directed and instructed by UKSF, and possibly even involved them. Backed by remote UK based Intel support.

[Filo]

First time I have been on this thread for a few weeks but I have just heard on the evening news that a video has emerged of a Ukraine soldier being beheaded by a Russian soldier.
They said that the video isn’t yet confirmed as authentic but it is likely to be true.
Apologies if this has been reported already on here.

Treason in the USA can carry the death penalty

[selby]

  They get to be the leader of the Labour Party and SNP here Filo.

[BillyStubbsTears]

A thread about war in Europe. Posts about torture and summary executions.  And all you can contribute is stale shite like that Selby.

Toddle off back to Talk Radio.

[Filo]

  They get to be the leader of the Labour Party and SNP here Filo.

You’re just a nasty old man

[Bristol Red Rover]

Killing prisoners of war is wrong, and counter productive. Certainly good propaganda/news to use to dissuade the thousands of Ukraines currently trapped in Artemivsk/Bakhmut from surrendering. Also handy to demonise Russians. Maybe it's true,  maybe not, I haven't seen it, don't wish to see it, don't know the exact circumstances around it.

Cutting off of heads has been used across the whole world from pre history to current times to promote fear. It's not uncommon. I personally don't like it, but rather than react as the perpetrators and publicists of all levels intend for us to react, think about it. Is it worst than being shot, shot and dying slowly over days, getting an infection from shrapnel and eventually dying, being burnt alive,  etc etc. And for that matter is hanging any better?

[Filo]

Killing prisoners of war is wrong, and counter productive. Certainly good propaganda/news to use to dissuade the thousands of Ukraines currently trapped in Artemivsk/Bakhmut from surrendering. Also handy to demonise Russians. Maybe it's true,  maybe not, I haven't seen it, don't wish to see it, don't know the exact circumstances around it.

Cutting off of heads has been used across the whole world from pre history to current times to promote fear. It's not uncommon. I personally don't like it, but rather than react as the perpetrators and publicists of all levels intend for us to react, think about it. Is it worst than being shot, shot and dying slowly over days, getting an infection from shrapnel and eventually dying, being burnt alive,  etc etc. And for that matter is hanging any better?

What a strange explanation to justify someone being beheaded

[wilts rover]

Only just noticed this. According to the Ukraine papers leak there are at least 50 UK Special Forces troops operating in Ukraine.

Is it legal for the government to deploy UK troops in a war zone without the consent of Parliament?

https://declassifieduk.org/u-s-intel-leak-reveals-50-elite-british-troops-in-ukraine/

I’d be more surprised and a little disappointed if UKSF were not in Ukraine.
Something the UK govt would never ever confirm of course.
You only have to look at some of the more successful targetted strikes.
The story of Ukrainian special forces who destroyed as many as 20 Russian aircraft at Saki air base in Crimea. Classic SAS tactic. Get in behind enemy lines, at a time and place where the enemy least expects you. Cause the most damage in as little time as possible and disappear back into the night. I have little doubt this was at least directed and instructed by UKSF, and possibly even involved them. Backed by remote UK based Intel support.

If British troops are involved in combat or sabotage operations against Russian troops, especially IN Russia, either in or out of uniform, that is an act of war. Which requires assent by Parliament NOT the government.

And Johnson said explicity that British troops would not be deployed to Ukraine but would stay within NATO territory.

Doesn't matter whether you or anyone else think they should be there. You are playing with WW3 here - without Parliament getting a say in it.

https://inews.co.uk/news/world/uk-war-will-go-russia-nato-ukraine-where-british-troops-deployed-explained-1492266

[Bristol Red Rover]

Killing prisoners of war is wrong, and counter productive. Certainly good propaganda/news to use to dissuade the thousands of Ukraines currently trapped in Artemivsk/Bakhmut from surrendering. Also handy to demonise Russians. Maybe it's true,  maybe not, I haven't seen it, don't wish to see it, don't know the exact circumstances around it.

Cutting off of heads has been used across the whole world from pre history to current times to promote fear. It's not uncommon. I personally don't like it, but rather than react as the perpetrators and publicists of all levels intend for us to react, think about it. Is it worst than being shot, shot and dying slowly over days, getting an infection from shrapnel and eventually dying, being burnt alive,  etc etc. And for that matter is hanging any better?

What a strange explanation to justify someone being beheaded

It's called perspective, and understanding. No excusing.

For me, anyone shooting anyone, burning a human,  slicing a person up with shrapnel, cutting off a head, hanging someone, is all sick.

[ravenrover]

But it's OK for Russia to be the cause of making you sick
So if Ukraine stopped shooting at and killing people who have invaded their territory that would be fine with you because you wouldn't feel sick?

[Bristol Red Rover]

But it's OK for Russia to be the cause of making you sick
So if Ukraine stopped shooting at and killing people who have invaded their territory that would be fine with you because you wouldn't feel sick?

It all makes me sick. Killing was going on several years before Russia invaded. There was a power struggle, one arguably caused by NATO/US/EU interfering, most definitely subsequently fuelled by them, as well as Russia interfering. Russia, very predictably, reacted later on. There have been attempts at peace, it would seem the US particularly, and its lackie, scuppered those attempts.

It's a complex situation that is little to do with the welfare of Ukrainians, everything to do with global geopolitics.

[Filo]

But it's OK for Russia to be the cause of making you sick
So if Ukraine stopped shooting at and killing people who have invaded their territory that would be fine with you because you wouldn't feel sick?

It all makes me sick. Killing was going on several years before Russia invaded. There was a power struggle, one arguably caused by NATO/US/EU interfering, most definitely subsequently fuelled by them, as well as Russia interfering. Russia, very predictably, reacted later on. There have been attempts at peace, it would seem the US particularly, and its lackie, scuppered those attempts.

It's a complex situation that is little to do with the welfare of Ukrainians, everything to do with global geopolitics.

Ate you Putins speech writer?

[Bristol Red Rover]

But it's OK for Russia to be the cause of making you sick
So if Ukraine stopped shooting at and killing people who have invaded their territory that would be fine with you because you wouldn't feel sick?

It all makes me sick. Killing was going on several years before Russia invaded. There was a power struggle, one arguably caused by NATO/US/EU interfering, most definitely subsequently fuelled by them, as well as Russia interfering. Russia, very predictably, reacted later on. There have been attempts at peace, it would seem the US particularly, and its lackie, scuppered those attempts.

It's a complex situation that is little to do with the welfare of Ukrainians, everything to do with global geopolitics.

Ate you Putins speech writer?

Did you say something with content?

[BillyStubbsTears]

But it's OK for Russia to be the cause of making you sick
So if Ukraine stopped shooting at and killing people who have invaded their territory that would be fine with you because you wouldn't feel sick?

It all makes me sick. Killing was going on several years before Russia invaded. There was a power struggle, one arguably caused by NATO/US/EU interfering, most definitely subsequently fuelled by them, as well as Russia interfering. Russia, very predictably, reacted later on. There have been attempts at peace, it would seem the US particularly, and its lackie, scuppered those attempts.

It's a complex situation that is little to do with the welfare of Ukrainians, everything to do with global geopolitics.

It's this simplification into "Both sides are killing: All killing is reprehensible: Therefore, both sides are reprehensible: Therefore we shouldn't take a moral stance" that depresses me more that anything.

It's actually a highly amoral stance dressed up as pious morality. It's what happens when you take bothsidesism to it's logical conclusion. Everyone is flawed to some extent, therefore there's no difference between any sides.

BRR talks about the EU and NATO fomenting the problems in Ukraine. And about Russia "reacting". And then washes his hands of any moral criticism.

He talks about killings starting before Russia invaded, as though the killings came from nowhere.

That's the simplification of the schoolyard.

How this situation actually started is that Viktor Vanukovych was elected President of Ukraine on a ticket that included moves towards membership of the EU.

Democratically elected.

Nothing to do with NATO. He'd unambiguously ruled out NATO membership.

Nothing to do with "the EU" (whatever that is- BRR never seems to explain) forcing Ukraine.

Yanukovych then spent three years negotiating an initial agreement with the EU. Not for membership. That would be years away. But for closer alignment. As he'd been democratically elected to do.

On the eve of the signing of the agreement, Yanukovych visited Moscow.

When he attended the signing ceremony, he said the deal was off and Ukraine was going to economically align more closely to Russia.

He'd never given any indication of this coming. Make your own decisions on what he was told in Moscow. People at the signing ceremony said he was visibly shaken when he arrived.

In response to this blatant change of the policy that Yanukovych had been elected in, there were mass popular protests in many Ukrainian cities.

BRR calls this a "coup", in line with the official line from Moscow.

It was actually peacefully, if angry, until Yanukovych's riot squad started firing on protestors, eventually killing over 100.

THAT is how the killing started.

+++++++++++++++++++

And don't get me started on the moral obscenity of equating the killing on the battlefield of an armed member of a military invasion force, and the videoed decapitation of an unarmed prisoner of war. Nevermind the cold blooded rape and murder of civilians behind the line of hostilities.

What f**king moral hell do you come from to equate the two?

[i_ateallthepies]

Despite the clear facts being succinctly laid out there for him, BST, he will continue posting his disgraceful nonsense.  He has neither shame nor self-awareness of the person he shows himself to be.

[Bristol Red Rover]

BST, some of what you say is true, some conjecture, most over simplification, and you miss out a lot. Of course NATO/US/EU were involved in this from a long time back. I've described some of that,  but you are so evidently blinkered, and "depressed", that you will never see beyond what you're spoon-fed by your masters. This is just one of the many issues on this board that you exhibit the exact same style of dogmatic, and aggressive, rhetoric.