Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Sprotyrover on February 15, 2015, 09:32:29 pm
-
Top bloke! Sent Cameron scurrying back into his kennel with tail between legs.
Sent a couple of knackered old 1950's Bear bomber/recon planes on a couple of sorties around UK and muted in Press that Russia was supplying a dozen knackered old Sukhoi SU 24 Fighters to the Argies...result British Bulldog shites it's self and scurries back into its kennel.
-
What's this Sproty? Got any links?
I think even the RAF would recognise the value of a Bear and a few SU24's so what happened?
BobG
-
It was a few weeks ago, Bob. 2 Bears came close to UK airspace, but didnt transgress. I think a couple of Typhoons were scrambled just in case. Old Vlad testing our state of alert, no doubt.
-
Oh. Thanks Rob. I knew about that. Why oN earth all the fuss then Sproty? That's old news, and you've exaggerated its effect anyway.
BobG
-
Them rusty old hulks shouldn't be causing any concern but at no cost to himself he has caused us to scramble state of the art Aircraft which probably cost £10k an hour to keep in the air and to look over our shoulder at the Falkands, again the Sukhoi fighters are scrapers but they can constantly probe Falklands Airspace causing the 4 Typhoons stationed there to rapidly use up their airframe life and God knows how much the running cost are.
And of course he can keep on sending scrap down there, we have to respond with big bucks.
-
Sproty.
Where are the Sukhoi fighters flying from?
-
Cheeky t**t is selling em to the Argies for a couple of tons of corned beef!
-
Hmm. Interesting.
-
Someone would have questions to answer if typhoons weren't sent to intercept and they turned out out to be MIG-28s
-
Yes you are right the point is he put 2 piles of junk into the air and they flew around the periphery of the UK causing chaos to the Airspace and causing large numbers of flights to be affected, costing the UK Tens of £ millions and causing the RAF to scramble expensive aircraft. The point being that Putin has probably got 50 of these things mothballed and can cause chaos several times a week if the mood takes him.
In the war we used to send 2 Mosquittos to drop bombs on berlin most days,Hitler could do naff all and used to throw a right paddy.
Putin has shown the British Government that we are vulnerable and should keep our noses out of his backyard.
-
Just done a check on Wicki 55 combat ready!
-
Putin has shown the British Government that we are vulnerable and should keep our noses out of his backyard.
Well aye.
If we're going to play power politics with the Big Boys, this is the sort of response we have to be prepared for.
What do you want Putin to do? Just accept the West pushing NATO to the boundaries of Russia and say, "No problem Tovarisch! Put your tanks on my lawn and I'll do nowt back to you"?
-
Spot on billy we should keep out of this, it's the Yanks who are the villains and we should stop acting like their poodle and tell to wind their Neck in..
-
Just done a check on Wicki 55 combat ready!
Wiki's always right isn't it. Would you be happy for these aircraft to fly right over the centre of Donny and us do nowt?
-
Spoke to the Cornish coastguard today at Rame head and he was saying that last month the Russians had a ship sat right on the edge of free water about 20 miles out. The navy at Devonport sent out one of the big guys to sit right by it. They soon buggered off!!
-
Planes flying by our shores again yesterday.
We should escort them out when they are close to our airspace, when one crosses over, shoot it down... Russia knows the rules!
Is it only Putin who dare blow his chest out?
-
Trouble is, if push comes to shove, he's really quite likely to win.
BobG
-
Trouble is, if push comes to shove, he's really quite likely to win.
BobG
Trouble is if you don't, he will continue pushing until something does happen that none of us would like.
-
Someone would have questions to answer if typhoons weren't sent to intercept and they turned out out to be MIG-28s
Top gun aircraft
-
Someone would have questions to answer if typhoons weren't sent to intercept and they turned out out to be MIG-28s
Top gun aircraft
;-)
-
They're just testing us out. They do it with aircrafts and ships all the time for years but this time it's been blown out of proportion. They do it with other countries aswell.
At the end of the day, if they touch us or any other NATO country they'll have the rest of NATO on them which they don't want. It's basically a Cold War where everyone's waving their disks around again And very unlikely anything will happen to the West.
-
At the end of the day, if they touch us or any other NATO country they'll have the rest of NATO on them which they don't want.
This has been the think that has made me panic at 4am on sleepless nights for the past year. And I fear that we are on the edge of the most dangerous period in the past 30 years.
What happens when Putin does to the Baltic States (NATO members) what he's been doing in East Ukraine? Foment unrest among the Russian minorities. Send in troops and arms but claim that he's not doing.
Does NATO send the troops and tanks in and have a shooting war with Russian forces?
Anyone who does excrete seven shades of shite over that has no imagination. It scares me witless.
-
Why would anyone be happy that Russian planes are in our airspace and as they said cost the uk millions? Don't understand that 1 bit?
-
Bpool
I don't think anyone is saying they are "happy" about this. What I said was that it was inevitable that a militarily strong Russia would goad us as a response to our support for Ukraine. It's something g we have to expect and be prepared for. And it'd be pretty naive to imagine that NATO jets are not testing out Russian air responses.
Donny Osmond
You say that there will be no effect on the West and this is just Cold War redux. Maybe. But in the Cold War, there weren't NATO countries on the very border of Russia, with substantial Russian minorities living in them. If Putin starts gee-ing up the Russians in Latvia and Estonia and if a Ukraine-esque war breaks out, then in principle, NATO is duty bound to send in American, Canadian, British and other troops to shoot bullets against an enemy that has nuclear weapons. And we have never, ever done that. It scares the living shite out of me.
-
I don't disagree with you. I just don't seem them doing anything because they'll be worried of retaliation. They also might have nuclear weapons but so do USA, UK and France, I'm sure Putin won't want any heading to Moscow.
Bpoolrover, like BST says, nobodies happy about is but as you said it's costing millions, which will be the same for Russia aswell, a country heading into recession this year. Probably not a smart move and one which will make a war for them less realistic.
So for me, it's worrying but I feel it'd be dumb and suicide for them to do anything, so I'm hoping they'll keep themselves to themselves for now.
-
Donny
I worry greatly about Putin though. Economically, the wheels have come off. But he's still phenomenally popular because he's restored some macho respect to Russia. From Grozny to South Ossetia to the Crimea and Donbass, he's shown that Russia can rein in its neighbours and bend them to its will.
My big worry is that as their economy collapses, he's under pressure to up the ante and continue with his military adventures. And the Baltics are the obvious next step. And he might just consider that he can stare NATO out and make them blink. Or that he can do a quiet subversion job and not give NATO sufficient grounds to intervene.
And he might get it wrong...
-
Masses of Russians out in Moskow today in support of Putin,they weren't crowbarred out onto the street and the poor Beeb reporter couldn't find one who wasn't anti USA .
We don't have to worry about the Baltic States the Russian minorities don't feel intimated by a neo nazi regime.
The Ukraine is Russia's back yard,the shenanigans pulled by the U.S. Tosspots last year didn't help matters.
I take my hat off the Angie Merkel and Hollande for standing up to the Yanks who by the way were spying on her private calls last summer.
We as a nation need to wind our neck in.what did the Crimea war have to do with the UK.
We we used to prop up an oppressive regime ,we are being suckered into a similar sittuation now.
-
Glsterred: you are dead right. I should have made that point. Thank you.
Sproty: we DO have to worry about the Baltic states. We are bound by treaty to provide urgent and sufficient military support if any one or more of them is ever attacked. The definition if 'attack' is the interesting bit there. Now, Putin's economy is going down the tubes. So how is he going to maintain his position when half his people are hungry, cold and unemployed? Same as every other bugger does in that situation. Just think of General Galtieri for one obvious example. And that then puts us right in the shit. if he goes for the 'stir up the minority and deny everything' approach again, then we have a choice of either
a) sitting on our hands thus allowing Russia to immediately destroy NATO's credibility for ever more, and, begin its dismantling, or
b) start shooting
Which option do you fancy?
And don't say 'sanctions'. We've already tried that. We could do more, but unless it gets him out of office pdq, the evidence suggests it's going to just inflame things even more. Desparate despots can be relied upon to do desparate things. That is something we should all fear.
Even flying planes around a bit to show the flag is going to be desperately dangerous. What would we do if one happened to be hit by a SAM battery and the Russians said the plane was 300 yards inside their territory?
What we need is a rational and sensible POTUS with some balls but also some flexibility. You seen any sign of one anywhere at all?
BobG
-
The whole situation is a lethal dick-waving competition. We need strong leaders to act like adults on both sides of the fence to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement. It comes down to the old "power corrupts" adage again. FFS can't we all just agree to live and let live?!
-
Sort of agree Mike - but it will only ever be on one side of the fence. Putin has both proved his value and behaviour systems now, and, worse, has gone far enough along the road that to back down will be political suicide for him. He is not going to be reasonable. He cannot afford it politically at home, and, why should he given the behaviour of the West and its level of military readiness? He's got all 4 aces and he's going to keep them for some time yet. The question is how long can he survive sanctions before they force him into another overseas adventure to keep the domestic wolves away from his door? I'd be tempted to think about relaxing sanctions right now simply so he can survive without needing to start another foreign adventure. Once he does that, we really are in for a tough time.
Bob
-
Yeah, I get that Bob. It's a very difficult one to sort out. Putin could, even now, be persuaded to put in place a plan to step aside with his reputation amongst the Russian populace as a strong and successful leader intact. He's effectively at the top of his game right now. The trouble is, he evidently wants more. It's the addictive power and ego cycle in full flow. He's on the fast track to a dictatorship and they never end well. It's largely up to him how he wants history to remember him. If I was a senior UK politician or diplomat I would be trying my damnedest to massage his ego into a position of accomplishment to encourage him that the time is right to move on with a respectable legacy in the eyes of the Russian people.
-
It's about the only half way sensible plan I've heard Mike. But will it work? We have an example right in front of our own eyes of how difficult it is to give up even a little power. How much harder when you are the idol of an entire country? This has been coming for quite a while. Think back to Ingushetia & Georgia for example. He's not had even a set back so far. Instead he's had unbroken success. Would you leave now for a 'legacy'? I know I wouldn't.
I can't makemy mindu p whether my plan would be to shun him, and Russia, in every single sphere I could think of, or, to withdraw a lot of the current sanctions in the hope that he doesn't then need another foreign adventure. Probably go with the first I guess though as the second only postpones the problem. Mind you, postponement now is a bit like 1938 again isn't it? It's a tough one all right.
Bob
-
The Baltic States are tiny little nothing's to the Russians, their land was wrestled from out the hands of great world powers and mighty military empires,the Swedes,the Tartars, the Crimea Tartars,the Ottomans.
The history of their conflict with the latter two explains the current thinking of the Russian People.
Look at a time map of the expansion of Russia! They weren't faced with Stone Age natives armed with spears and leather shields.
Peters Russia had 4 million souls, the Ottomans 25 million, the Ottomans could field a dozen armies of a 100 thousand men at any one time.
The Crimea Tartars used to raid en masse into the Geographical area know as the Ukraine,every year they would capture tens of thousands of Slav people and sell them into slavery via the Slave port of Caffa.
The Ukrainians didn't free themselves of the Tartar slave Yoke, the Russians did that.
Putin will always have 100% backing of the Russian people with regards to supporting Orthodox Slavs living in the Ukraine.
Once folks get a grasp of that concept we can leave em to it!
-
this is worth a read to see other pieces in the world jigsaw
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-04/guest-post-us-going-war-syria-over-natural-gas-pipeline
it was posted in April 2013
funny how they never shelled Donest on the wednesday when they played Bayern Munich waited til thursday .... now what job has that middle aged woman from former East Germany got ????
-
Problem is sproty if you just leave them to it what next,if someone tries takeover France do we just leave them 2? Where does it end?
-
Vlad Putin is not an enemy of the British people,If we want a war lets get into one that is doing us harm and which we can win,in Syria!
-
Vlad Putin is not an enemy of the British people,If we want a war lets get into one that is doing us harm and which we can win,in Syria!
If you think that we can win the ongoing war in Syria, your deluded, that is a no win for anyone, least of all the Syrians
-
Pretty deluded about Putin too tbh. I don't think any of the likely parties that will form the next Government have expressed an interest in reverting to 'splendid isolation' as a sensible foreign policy.
You're on the wrong bearing Sproty.
BobG
-
They did that when they slashed the defence budget.
As for nor doing anything about ISIS I am afraid it is you who is deluded,they ain't gonna go away with a good arse kicking.
How many british subjects has Putin had beheaded?
How many POW's has he immolated?.
-
Sproty
Whatever you think about his politics[1] Putin is very likely to play dangerous games with members of NATO over the next year or so. You may think he is no DIRECT threat to us in the UK, but if he starts covert military action against the Baltics, then by definition, he is our enemy and we will be bound by treaty to take military action.
And at that point, ISIS will feel like an ant bite on your back compared to sticking your genitalia in a hornets' nest.
Or, NATO turns a blind eye. In which case we're in for a VERY interesting 21st century
-
Article V is the cornerstone of NATO - always has been and always will be. It is the main reason new members want to join. Unfortunately Russia sees the countries it used to own either directly or as puppeteers join the hated enemy. A crucial time ahead of us and as in the depths of the Cold War we are potentially a single mistake or error away from something catastrophic.
Jut to add a facetious but factual note to this thread - Article V was set up at the creation of NATO in 1949 with the main aim of guaranteeing that the US (and Canada) would come to the aid of Europe in the event of an attack from the East, and to let the USSR and Warsaw Pact know this was a certainty. Article V has actually been invoked twice in NATO's history. Any idea of how and when? Well with supreme irony the only instances so far have been a NATO political reponse to 9/11 (US did not request any military assistance) and in 2005 in order to get the NATO Response Force using European military transport aircraft and other equipment to support the US with humanitarian aid in the wake of Hurricane Katrina!
-
Dutch
Was that when Dubya declared War on Climate and announced that you are either on our side or the side of the millibars.
-
I see the loathed one is reported as saying today that 'war with Ukraine is unlikely'.
Cute. Whether he means that or not is anybody's guess. Yet, without saying anything that anybody can object to, he's ratcheted up the stakes yet again. Now he's pretty clearly increasing the pressure on Kiev, and even worse, he's telling NATO loud and clear, that he will fight over Ukraine if he has to. He may be bluffing - but when the fighting intensifies again and the 'insurgents' tanks roll again, would you bet on that?
He has become the most dangerous man in the world today. And we have no publicly known credible response and will not have for quite a long time. He can force the West into making all kinds of unpleasant choices if he wants to - and he is very likely to come out ahead in all of them.
If the news ever contains anything about unrest in any of the Baltic states then we will all then be very close to the precipice whatever subsequently happens. When you're thinking about who to vote for in May, my suggestion is vote for the one most likely to be a statesman and war leader - just in case. The West needs stonkingly good leadership today more desparately than at almost any other time in my life.
BobG
PS I'll give you one other thing to ponder: who has been 'the enemy' this last 15 years? That's easy: terrorists. Al Quaeda and everyone that followed them. So where have many of the West's resources been focussed then? That's easy too. Who has been a 'friend' for 14 of the last 15 years? Also easy peasy. Russia. In a climate of cost cutting and economy, what has happened to the Wests' intelligence and surveillance capability and capacity of Russia and its allies? That's pretty easy as well. We all know the fighting forces have been decimated. There is nothing intrinsic to intelligence that makes it exempt from that. So where does that leave us today?
-
Hi Bob
Like you I am more concerned now than any time since the Cold War, and although I have no real knowledge I share your assessment of Putin. Among other things he seems very egocentric, not a good quality to have in excess in a powerful leader.
IMHO one problem that NATO has always had is that of image and poor Public Relations/Public face. Remember how Milosovic danced around NATO in the media when NATO was the obvious indisputable 'good guy' and Milosevic the war criminal he always was. Remember the face of NATO? Jamie Shea - a bright middle ranking official with little training for what he had to do. NATO just didn't see that it was important to put far more resources into that side of the house. And of course, until we actually get into the field, NATO is the ultimate 'decision by committee' organisation, with every member state having a veto. We desperately need NATO PR to do a much better job right now.
The only other time I was scared since the Cold War was when the Russians took an Airfield in Kosovo and the NATO supreme Commander Wesley Clark ordered the British General Sir Michael Jackson to take it by force. Jackson played the 'national' card and took his right to query the order with his national MOD, who ordered him to wait. two days later the Russians and Brits were having coffee together, and a real flashpoint was avoided. The incident has been talked about very well by James Blunt who was in one of Jackson's leading tanks, and I am very surprised it is not more famous and analysed in public.
Like all of us on here I have no answers, and all political strategies have the drawbacks you mention. NATO will always re-act as the Peace Protection organisation it was fundamentally created as, and Putin will have his fun. I just hope he believes sufficiently that there is a line he must not be seen to be close to crossing, I.e. Violating a NATO member state's territory.
-
"I just hope he believes sufficiently that there is a line he must not be seen to be close to crossing, I.e. Violating a NATO member state's territory."
That's one of the most scary sentences I think I have ever read Brian. It says so, so much. And it offers so, so little. We are now reduced to 'hoping'. Ye Gods.
BobG
-
When the wall came down the West made an Assurance to Russia that NATO would not be expanded,that is not the case and Russia has every right to be wary of western motives when they are openly supporting quasi Nazi States bordering Russia itself.
Who by the way has been supplying arms to Isis? Three letters starts wit C ends with A!
-
Back in the 1980's during the Iran-Iraq war there were 25 nations supplying arms. 22 of them supplied arms to both sides.
Also that was about the time the IRA were purported to be the only organisation in the world receiving funding from both the USSR and the USA.
-
Bob. Current Prime Ministerial candidates as potential statesmen and war leaders. Hmmm- there's a choice! I don't see any Lloyd-Georges or Churchills there. Not even a Thatcher. The fact that Cameron has been around the world stage, albeit not really a leading player, might stand him in some stead.
Though in Europe at least, the key decision makers seem to be Merkel and Hollande.
-
TRB
You could always vote UKIP. They seem happy enough to cosy up to Putin. There's a word for politicians who took that line in the 1930s.
-
Yes John. My suggestion was a cry of despair tbh. We seem to have very little leadership capability, or capacity don't we? Nor can we be confident of any from the next iteration in the USA either. What's the choices? Tub thumping, emotionally driven nationalism and jingoism from the right? Over sensitive, soft centred liberalism demonstrably afraid to take really tough decisions from the left? Putin would have to be an absolute idiot to give up any time in the next 2 years - and possibly quite a lot longer. Like I keep saying: he's got all the aces. All he has to worry about for a considerable time ahead is how, and when, to play them. And all we can do is sit, wait and hope.
If you don't believe waiting is our best and only option, just what have Merkel and Hollande, our two brightest hopes, leaders of the two most powerful nations in Europe acting in concert with the USA, achieved in almost 12 months of trying? One civilian airliner shot down with all hands dead but swept under the carpet with almost nothing said and absolutely nothing achieved. One cease fire that, like every previous cease fire, has struggled from birth. One huge length of Ukrainian border that continues to be under the control of an invading imperialist power - yet no one is batting an eyelid. One huge imperialist power, busy invading a smaller neighbour and leaving enough evidence to prove the point. Yet absolutely nothing effective being either said or done about it. One insurgent group being armed, trained and led by Russia with continuing impunity. How can all that be???? Oh yes. The West has been caught with its trousers down. All the way down. All we can do is wait for Putin's next move. It'll be interesting to see what happens to defence spending in the next series of budgets across Europe. That's the only hope long term - but even that could be countered pretty easily by Putin now.
BobG
-
TRB
You could always vote UKIP. They seem happy enough to cosy up to Putin. There's a word for politicians who took that line in the 1930s.
BST. I was looking at potential PMs following May's General Election. Maybe Farage believes in his wildest dreams that one day he'll be PM, but I doubt even that applies to May.
I think it may be unfair to describe UKIP as pro-Putin, but their foreign policy seems to be broadly isolationist. The point Farage made about Ukraine, which I thought was a valid one, was that the EU should not have been siding with the opposition against the elected government. By doing so they helped aggravate the situation.
-
Hi Bob my point is that we in Britain need to look at the wider picture.
Thee Germans have a different perspective to what is going on in the Ukraine.
They are a major trading partner with Russia ,they have little interest in entertaining a fascist regime in Kiev or even supporting it.
Let the Former Russian federation sort itself out,we are not in any position to take russia on and why should we.
Do we really need another 25 million mouths to feed in the Eurozone.
The Ukrainian Army showed its incompetence last weekend,there was an interesting article in the Times about the debacle.
Leave the Warmongering to the U.S. it's got nowt to do with us.
-
I doubt you will find many informed sources agreeing with you that the ousted Premier of Ukraine was elected in a democratic election as we understand the term John. Even at a simple level, anyone who can make 6 billion quid go missing can hardly be playing by the rules can he?
BobG
PS Have you seen the videos of that bloke's 'palace'? A supposedly democratically elected leader - and he built himself the most appalling palace (and I use the word advisedly) it is possible to conceive. Kitsch crap. At a cost of yet more billions. The Ukrainians had days out, just after the revolution, to just go gawp at it. They didn't even know it was there most of them. He most definitely was not a democratic leader John. if he had been, why would there have been all that trouble on the Maidan?
-
TRB
You're being just a tad disingenuous there. Farage has been sucking up to Putin for a good while now (numerous positive comments about Putin and Russia, regular appearances on The Russia Today news channel) and it's pretty clear why. Farage and Putin share a comment interest in seeing the EU cut down.
By their friends shall ye know them...
And of course, Putin is providing direct funding to right-wing, anti-Europe parties across the continent, from the French NF to Hungary's Jobbik party. You don't suppose....? Nah, couldn't be.
-
I'd love to be the politician/journalist who broke that as a real story..... I'd even forgive them the abuse of privacy to get it. :)
BobG
-
Just a thought chaps. Not particularly thought through, but idly interesting - to me anyway.
The situation the west is in today:
- a mad dictator intent on bullying folk all around him
- the cult of personality focused almost entirely on the leader/bully in chief
- the development of the bullying from small beginnings to bigger and ever bigger targets over a relatively short period of time
- the growing threat to everyone
- the military weakness of the west
- the massive re-militarisation of the armed forces of the bully
- the feeble political leadership of the west
- the stream of 'plans' and discussions and negotiations with the dictator that actually deliver eff all
Now what does that little lot remind you of? It should greatly remind you actually. It's Europe in 1938 isn't it? So taking this parallel a little further, is the Ukraine Czechoslovakia? Or is it Poland? My suggestion is that the west has already delivered its verdict: Ukraine is Czechoslovakia. We have no treaty commitment and we have sold them down the river. Peace in our time! So who is going to play Poland? We do have treaty commitments with Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania......
Incidentally, I read yesterday that Lithuania has voted to re-introduce conscription. That's a sign in the wind that is. A telling sign.
Ah tell theee. These am bloody dangerous times.
BobG
PS Actually the parellel with the 1930's is even greater. What was it Hitler wanted above all else? Lebensraum. Putin might not have that as top of his agenda, but he's certainly not done a bad job in grabbing a shed load more of it has he? What's the score so far? A goodly sized chunk of Moldova. A even better sized chunk of Georgia. All of Chechyna. All of the Crimea. And now a fair chunk of the Ukraine. What's that lot if not more lebensraum? He's re-incorporating into his Reich all the irredenta from outside FFS! And all the native Russians he's so concerned about stand in a direct line to the native Germans that Hitler made such a furore about bringing back inside....
The bloke is a menace. He's been at this for half a dozen years now. Rather than showing any sign of stopping, of the west being able to even moderate his demands never mind stop them, his appetite has grown bigger every single time. This looks more and more as if it's going to end very badly indeed. If it's not this time, it will be next time. Now is the time for some proper leadership. Not tomorrow. Right NOW.
One last thought. Sorry. I wonder how loyal his senior military commanders will be in 18 months time if things look really, really bad by then? Maybe a coup is about the best we can hope for. Can't see one happening for a good while though. The population don't look as if they'd stand for it do they? But as a long term hope? Maybe.
And he's even just hosted the bloody Olympics too!!! Who played Jesse Owen?
-
Todays' News - and it ain't good
If you haven't seen the front page of this morning's copy of The Times, if you can get hold of one, have a read. Putin is raising the stakes again.
The headline is an obvious threat: to cut off gas to Ukraine - which, just by chance, don't you know, will screw Western Europe in collateral damage. Now, that could just be an empty threat. Bluster. But it might not be. Putin could, very easily, be warning the West, 'If you interfere in what I'm going to do, just look what I will do to you'. And it is easy to suppose that that is what he is doing. As a general statement, the West has no alternative to Russian gas. Degrees of dependance vary, but if he were to do that, there would an enormous number of very cold people next winter, and there would be huge economic damage. Jobs, production, capacity. The lot. They'd all be decimated.
So our leaders have to be deciding their response now for if that ever happens. How far do you reckon they will trust us to tough it out? Me? I think we will cave in.
But even worse, in my eyes, is the news, hidden in that Times article, that Gazprom, and potentially other Russian organisations, are repatriating the headquarters and offices of their overseas organisations. That's right. They are bringing them home. Why would they do that? Two reasons: firstly, to avoid seeing them being seized by the West. And secondly? To get their ducks all lined up nice and safe in preparation for potential hostilities.
I think Putin is going to do something really rather bad before very much longer; that he is telling us now, 'Keep out or else', and, that he is lining up his pawns just in case we don't keep out. (As an aside: did you know that Kalliningrad (quite a famous place in 20thC German history), now a Russian enclave set in Lithuania, has had tens of billions of military roubles poured into it this last 18 months? That around half a million Russian service men and ex servicermen are currently there, and that if a Russian attack across Lithuania were launched from there, in the direction of arch ally Belarus, then Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania will all be entirely cut off from NATO. So what price treaty commitments and NATO then? Invade from Poland? Yeah. Right.
Putin is going to scare the shit out of the world before very much longer. I hope the west has some big, solid levers it can pull. If it has, it will probably be done privately and without publicity. But we will see the results of it even so. As Brian said yesterday, all we can do is hope. I think almost every single Western leader of the last 15 years should be shot. Bill Clinton is about the only one I would exempt. Other than him, they've all entirely gone for the populist solution every time. Tossers the lot of them. Any fool has been able to see, for the last 20 years, that Russia is a 19th Century imperialist power. It's inherent in their level of political development. They'll grow out of it. But not in time for us. And sadly, I am not aware of even one meaningful lever in the possession of the West that would have enough short term impact to make Vlad stop to think even a little bit.
Me? I'm looking for a cottage to buy as far out in the sticks as I can manage. I hope I'm wrong, but I have a horrid suspicion that our modern day Poland is now on the horizon.
BobG
-
Before my time, but don't the Ruski's have history of taking things to the brink and then backing down when push came to shove, Cuban Missile Crisis?
-
It's about time Putin put the boot in! By the way Bob only 15% of Europes gas has to travel via the Ukraine thNks to Nord Stream and the Belarus Pipelines.
-
It's about time Putin put the boot in! By the way Bob only 15% of Europes gas has to travel via the Ukraine thNks to Nord Stream and the Belarus Pipelines.
Are n't those two pipelines operated by Russian state owned Gazprom?
-
Kruschev backed down over the Cuban missiles Filo because JFK had a very senior level spy inside the Kremlin who fed back every single thing the Russkies were thinking and doing. So each time Kruschev tried something, the Yanks had already planned their mitigation and their next move too. Kruschev couldn't win. It cost him his career in the end. Maybe we have a spy there again. Not sure I'd care to rely on that though - especially given the Yanks ridiculous fascination this last 30 years with elint rather than the human variety.
As for the gas, well, that's fine then Sproty. I'll remind you when it comes to deciding who stays warm and who doesn't. And your figures are wrong incidentally. Finland, Sweden, all the Baltic states, Czech Republic and Bulgaria get 100% of their gas from Russia. Austria, Slovakia, Poland get 75%. Germany, Hungary, Croatia, Belgium get upto 50%. France, Rumania, Italy, Netherlands get upto 25%. Us, Ireland, Portugal and Spain are the lucky ones. But don't imagine, for even one second, that we would come away unscathed. We wouldn't. Not by a long chalk.
And moving on a bit, have you noticed just how little the press and the television are discussing the future of Ukraine and our relatinship with Russia? And how little the government is commenting on their discussions about the future of Ukraine and their plans for the next 5 years for Russia?
I wonder why that might be?!
I wouldn't mind a small bet the Govt are busy focussing disproportionate effort on how to control us lot if and when the crap really does start rather than focussing on the cause of the problem in the first place. And the press, as ever, won't want to rock the boat as soon as the magic words 'national security' are whispered.
BobG
-
If Putin stops selling gas to the west then doesn't that hurt the Russian economy as much as it does those in the west?
I don't disagree with the basic premise that Putin is a threat to global security, but I think his foreign policy actions are all about countering his weakening domestic position.
-
Filo yes they are,not having read the Times article I can only assume that the title is correct,Russia to cut off Gas to Ukraine,well the first time they did that it caused chaos in Europe,they then tried only sending enough gas for the other customers, the Ukraine just siphoned off what they needed, so additional pipelines have been built in Belarus and under the Baltic,hence 85% of Europes gas goes via other routes that skirt the Ukraine.I would be surprised if the Times hasn't reported that in its article.
-
Bob
That wasn't my understanding of what defused the Cuban Missile Crisis. There was a backdoor diplomacy channel between a senior member of staff at the Soviet Embassy in Washington and White House staff. The Soviet guy wasn't a spy. He was acting with the full knowledge of his managers. What this link did was to allow Bobby Kennedy and the Soviet Ambassador (I think - might be wrong about the Soviet politician) to kick around solutions off the radar and away from the hawks on both sides (like Curtis Le May who is one of the scariest men of the 20th century) who were angling for a showdown.
The backdoor diplomacy came up with the compromise solution. Khrushchev removed the Cuban missiles and Kennedy removed Jupiter missiles from Turkey that were equally dangerous to the USSR.
It was spun as a masterpiece of brinkmanship by Kennedy, but nothing could be further from the truth. Neither Kennedy not Khrushchev wanted a showdown. Both needed to save face. They found a compromise where both could do that.
Khrushchev was removed a couple of years later not because he had LOST the Cuban crisis, but because he had been mad to START it. People like Brezhnev and Gromyko were genuinely frightened by what he'd done and they decided to get rid of him.
-
Khrushchev was removed a couple of years later not because he had LOST the Cuban crisis, but because he had been mad to START it. People like Brezhnev and Gromyko were genuinely frightened by what he'd done and they decided to get rid of him.
Is that very clever pun intended BST? (STrategic Arms Reduction Talks)
-
DU. You give me far too much credit pal. I'm just too lazy to do italics
-
I'm aware of the Turkey based missiles Billy. I have not heard of the back door diplomacy. And I'm struggling to remember the name of the spy. One of the famous ones. So famous I can't remember!
Sproty: don't matter two hoots who owns a pipeline. if there's no gas, there's no gas. Of course it's unlikely to happen. But this is realpolitik. The threat is what counts: how people percieve its credibility. and how much of a chance politicians are willing to take both domestically and internationally.
Of course Russia will lose a lot of money if they cut off the gas. But if they really did take over a few places along the way, the assets they'd gain would be pretty good compensation, and Putin, of course, would have cemented his place in Russian history for ever more. He won't care what the cost is as long as he survives and the natives don't revolt.
Bob
-
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31669061
Dear God
-
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31669061
Dear God
There's one or two of Putin's opponants have died in mysterious circumstances, there appears to be a pattern emerging
-
There's a list on that BBC link.
Remember, this is a politician who Farage admires...
-
Be interesting to see what happens next,A vigorous pursuit of the slayers by the regime? Or maybe not.
-
Putin is "taking personal control" of the inquiry.
A Russian friend of mine has been saying for years that we're sleepwalking through a repeat of the rise of Hitler.
A superpower, defeated and humiliated by thoughtless Western powers. Economically crippled. Turning to a man who offers, through cult if personality, to restore their greatness.
He kills opponents. He bullies neighbours, upping the ante every time.
And the West hasn't the stomach to face him down. The people in the West are revulsed by the horror of previous wars and has no taste for standing up to the bully. The nations in the West have been hobbled by the near-collapse of their economic system, their idiotic response to this and the consequent enormous loss of income, meaning that they haven't the depth of pockets to take on the bully.
The parallels are genuinely terrifying. Except Hitler didn't have nukes...
-
And speaking of economic idiocy and mistakes with terrifying implications, this article really emphasises just how much we have f**ked up and called it "success".
http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/disaster.html?m=1
Only once before in the past 200 years have we experienced such a prolonged loss of growth in per capita GDP. That wa during the previous era when we chose to placate a dictator in Europe.
The third graph in particular highlights just how monumentally stupid our response to the great crash was. This isn't some minor debating point. We have chosen an economic approach that has hard wired into the system a very long term reduction in our living standards.
Everything going on in politics at the moment is explained by that graph. The hatred of conventional politicians. The rush of some to stick the boot into immigrants as the cause of our problems. Our insistence on rolling back our public services. Our inability to find the economic wherewithal to stand up to the likes of Putin.
And none of this needed to happen. We have known since the 1930s how to respond to an economic catastrophe like 2007-08. But we have refused to apply those lessons and we've called on voodoo economics that have utterly failed throughout the UK and Europe.
Deeply, deeply dispiriting. And Osborne is going into the Election telling us that Austerity has worked and we need more of it.
Look at those graphs and ask yourselves.
-
And of course AH was emboldened on his course of world domination through his covert support of the fascist side in a civil war in another country.
If you tolerate this - then your children will be next....
-
Wilts.
Aye.
Big problem is that the catastrophic mistakes were made in the 1990s. We sat back and watched the Soviet Union fall apart. We humiliated Russia by pulling the Eastern European States into the embrace of the West while making no effort to help out Russia. We sat and watched Russia's economy collapse and ignored the raping of the country by the evil thugs who stole the resources and turned themselves into fabulously wealthy men. In fact, we British didn't ignore them. We welcomed these gangsters into the upper echelons of British society. They bought our penthouses and our football clubs.
It was monumentally stupid to allow a country with the military strength of Russia to be crippled like that. We should have had the equivalent of a Marshall Plan in the 90s to bring Russia into the West. Instead we watched them descend into catastrophe. It was inevitable that a reversion to punch-throwing nationalism would happen. And now it is happening, Christ alone knows what we should do about it.
-
Much as I'm horrified, scared and depressed by all of this, I have to confess I'm grinning about the links to Hitler above.
Anyone heard Sir John Sawyer's interview? It was on Radio4 this morning. It's worth listening to - despite him trying to justify the use of torture to secure information on the grounds that it's gone on for thousands of years. The crucial point, of course, is his belief that Russia now represents a real threat to the nation states of the west, explicitly including the UK. His recommendation? That we re-arm, and, that we try to find a way to re-engage Putin in the world system. Very laudable. And utterly fatuous now - although attempting to ensure that Putin retains some semblance of reality and humanity is about all that Merkel and Hollande can do.
Anyone still want to go for splendid isolation? This is going to get worse yet. It could very, very easily indeed get a lot worse. I doubt anyone would want to be on their own then. It'd guarantee disaster.
Kind of a scary graph that you linked too BST. I'm sure Mick will tell us all that it's perfectly wonderful and helpful, but in reality, the costs of that are so scary that I'm not even going to write them down. Just one of them is scary enough: our inability this last 6 or 7 years to invest sensibly in the things we now need to counter Putin.
Did you see the information, some months back now, that the funding for the security services going forwards was going to actually increase? Good news eh? But when you read the detail, that increase is £150M, spread across 3 years, for all 3 agencies on an annual budget of £3BN. It won't even buy the bog paper needed by the increased staff they're clearly needing now.
BobG
PS Billy: The spy I mentioned in connection with Cuba was Oleg Penkovsky. Although it's Wiki, this link 'confirms' the point I made:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleg_Penkovsky
His support of the West cost him his life.
-
I've refrained from posting on this thread until now. I tried to read all the posts but had to give up after about 4 minutes as it was so boring.
Anyone that thinks Putin is a serious threat needs their heads examining. Russia is a 3rd world country with nuclear weapons. So what.
Turn up the sanctions on the t**t and he'll soon be out on his arse.
Sorted.
-
Thus spake the oracle.
I wondered how long it would be before our resident idiot displayed his ignorance once more.
BobG
-
Thus spake the oracle.
I wondered how long it would be before our resident idiot displayed his ignorance once more.
BobG
I don't think silly Billy will appreciate you describing him in such a manner. He thinks he's very intelligent like you do. It's a shame that you both don't realise that spouting leftie b*llocks makes you both come across as very thick.
Let's get one thing straight. Putin is a bully (like you and silly Billy). Stand up to him and he'll soon back down (just like you and silly Billy do when I confront you).
Sanctions is the way to sort the clown out. The people will soon rise up against the idiot when they have a severe dose of hardship.
Sorted.
-
Tell you what Mick, if matters of mere world importance are too much for your Pleistocene era brain, you'll probably feel an awful lot better if you leave them alone. Let the more developed and superior human beings discuss them. I'm sure they'll do their best to look out for your welfare.
Bob
-
Tell you what Mick, if matters of mere world importance are too much for your Pleistocene era brain, you'll probably feel an awful lot better if you leave them alone. Let the more developed and superior human beings discuss them. I'm sure they'll do their best to look out for your welfare.
Bob
Look. I've already come up with the solution. Having an interminable discussion about the man is a complete waste of time. I've sorted the problem out. It just remains to be seen if the politicians will do what is necessary.
I'd advise other readers of the forum not to bother wading through all the boring posts and to just read mine. Take my advice. The voice of reason has spoken and got succinctly to the point. Time to move on. There is nothing more to see here.
The only reason to read all the boring long winded posts is if you need help getting off to sleep.
-
Well in that case Mick I'm sure we would all really appreciate it if you leave this thread to those able to discuss it with a degree of intelligence and insight. Thanks for offering to leave it to your betters.
By the way Mick, I see you are now claiming to be better informed, better advised and making better judgements than the very recent head of MI6, Sir John Sawyer. You said:
"Anyone that thinks Putin is a serious threat needs their heads examining"
He said "Russia is now a state to state threat to the west" He also recommended that the UK re-arm as a matter of urgency.
So on what basis do you claim to know more than the chap in charge of foreign intelligence for this country until a couple of months ago?
BobG
-
[quote author=BobG link=topic=251351.msg527101#msg527101 date=1425218618
By the way Mick, I see you are now claiming to be better informed, better advised and making better judgements than the very recent head of MI6, Sir John Sawyer who said:
"Anyone that thinks Putin is a serious threat needs their heads examining"
He said "Russia is now a state to state threat to the west" He also recommended that the UK re-arm as a matter of urgency.
So on what basis do you claim to know more than the chap in charge of foreign intelligence for this country until a couple of months ago?
BobG
[/quote]
Russia is not going to invade the UK. So no need to re-arm. The world has moved on. Wars with the likes of Russia should now be fought using economic sanctions.
The UK has more than punched above its weight in the world for as long as I can remember. Time for Germany etc. to take over responsibility for the defence of Europe. We've done our bit and it always ends up badly. Time for some self reflection and to exit stage west.
-
Who on Earth ever said anything about anybody invading anybody else? If that's the level of your
thinking then I really do feel sorry for you.
BobG
-
Who on Earth ever said anything about anybody invading anybody else? If that's the level of your
thinking then I really do feel sorry for you.
BobG
The main reason we should have armed services is to protect our homeland. Invasion is now such a remote possibility that we can afford to disarm considerably.
What do you want us to have armed services for? So we can get involved in other people's wars? That always ends well doesn't it.
If Russia is a state to state threat then let the affected states sort it out. We can help by imposing economic sanctions. That is a far more effective way of dealing with the likes of Putin than re-arming ever would be.
You've also forgotten we are virtually bankrupt. When money is tight I don't want it wasting on armed services to fight other people's wars. By all means have an armed services but it should only be on a scale that would deter invasion.
-
Like I said, the level at which you think Mick makes discussion with you utterly pointless.
You know what Mick? I have more intelligent, more reasoned, more rational and more evidenced conversations with my lad - and he's not even 14 yet. What prevented you from ever growing up? Was it congenital? Have they developed any treatment yet?
Bob
-
Like I said, the level at which you think Mick makes discussion with you utterly pointless.
You know what Mick? I have more intelligent, more reasoned, more rational and more evidenced conversations with my lad - and he's not even 14 yet. What prevented you from ever growing up? Was it congenital? Have they developed any treatment yet?
Bob
Look. I'd appreciate it if you stopped trying to play the man and tried to discuss the matter at hand in a more rational way.
IC1967
-
Govt has announced it is beefing up Falkands defences spending £180 million extra over the next 10 years.
-
Govt has announced it is beefing up Falkands defences spending £180 million extra over the next 10 years.
Excellent. A bit of barbed wire fencing and a gate?