World war 3....

How can the people of Crimea be given a vote by Russia when it is part of Ukraine? That would be like France saying they are giving the people in Cornwall a vote

 

It was an obvious tool to take control of a region Russia has always claimed was there's, As I said how reliable is a another matter as Russian elections are questionable at best

 

Your last sentence is the understatement of the century mate.

 

not for russia to do that in another sovereign country, regardless of the makeup of that region. i do worry a bit about where you get your info from sometimes trevor as it's almost always very pro-russia

 

It is not pro anyone but the mass pro Ukraine hysteria by the UK media and politicians who welcome the distraction from the home troubles they were in, ALJAZEERA is a much more balanced source of news with excellent documentaries and while Sky and the BBC have reporters in safe areas constantly regurgitating old reports and interviewing a constant flow of pro Ukraine people ALJAZEERA has reporters suited and booted actually on the ground in war zones, I do prefer my news to be balanced and fair and not to be led by the popular press especially when one like the one banned by the UK for been Russian is also owned by the UK state and has little freedom of reporting, Better information is out there if you look for it rather than been fed the government line they expect the masses to believe even if they do try their best to stop you seeing other views.
As for pro Russia comment if you read my posts I have said on them that Russia was wrong to invade and should have tried all peaceful ways to resolve it,

 

Talk today about Finland joining NATO, will Putins Russia invade Finland.

 

It will be tempting for Russia but they have been at war before and in the end Finland won so they will be cautious

 

So all the BS Russia spewed out about having NATO weapons on his doorstep which he used as an example to invade the Ukriane won't happen even though Russia & Finland have borders to each country.

 

Another round of money and 6000 missiles to be sent to Ukraine, Are we making ourselves a target for Putin to attack for supplying his enemy?, He would never attack the USA and other nations have done very little but an attack on the UK the main supplier of weapons would be a lesson to his enemies to stop supplying Ukraine with missiles and weapons that are killing Russian soldiers, A sure fire way of been dragged in to war is to support and supply weapons to one side against the other

 

Highly unlikely. An attack on Britain would trigger the full force of NATO in response. Putin doesn't want a war with NATO, because he'd lose it.

 

On this mornings news Zelensky is accusing Europe of being to slow in getting involved, why would we when he was telling everyone right up to the time they did invade "Russia will not invade Ukraine".

 

I would think the whole population of the world would be losers if that was the case, it might start with conventional weapons but if Putin saw he was losing which no doubt they would, could we trust him not to use biological, chemical or ultimately nuclear weapons,

 

He's well past the point of no return so no, he could not be trusted to not give the order but would his chiefs follow through...?

 

Say he launched a couple of cruise missiles to hit our main RAF base at Brize Norton or a midnight strike on the factory making the missiles we are sending to the Ukraine or even a night attack destroying Heathrow runways? Can we be sure NATO would send its troops against Russia in response bringing other countries population to fight for us with the implied mass casualties?
Boris is playing a very dangerous game he should make sure the nation supports the risk

 

Those are good questions Dave. I doubt we could trust him.
But the fact is that every country in NATO is pledged to defend any other NATO country that is attacked. The whole raison d'etre of NATO would collapse if it failed to counter a direct attack on a member state. A month ago Putin might have doubted that NATO would respond to a direct attack. He appears to have believed that the west was completely weak and divided - I doubt he does now.

 

Interesting article about oligarchs from a sociological perspective:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/03/russian-sanctions-oligarchs-offshore-wealth/623886/

 

Not a bad article but not good either, She fails to grasp the distinction between an Oligarch and a Russian billionaire, Not all Russian billionaires are Oligarchs as they are a small group who have extra powers in the Russian government power group, Lazy reporting often describe all Russian billionaires as Oligarchs but it is not so

 

As I posted a while ago Finland are wanting to be a member of NATO, as they also border Russia will Finland be next to be invaded before they can gain membership.

 

I can't see how that will happen. Putin has already bitten off way more than he can chew invading Ukraine. The Russian army is proving to be poorly led, under equipped and heavily filled with minority ethnic soldiers whose commitment to fight for the Russian motherland is questionable, to say the least.



In a months fighting the Russians have failed to fully capture and occupy a single major city. There are reports of their forces being pushed backwards outside Kiev by the Ukrainian army, which has spent the last eight years since the invasion of Crimea preparing for a full scale Russian invasion. Ukraine is clearly getting great intelligence reports, presumably from NATO, which has enable them to target and kill six Russian generals. Home advantage is a big factor here - it's much easier to defend a city than overrun it:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60860548.amp

Edit - now reported that seven Russian generals have been killed. Astonishing.

Military equipment is pouring in from the west, which will eventually allow Ukraine to target the long range missile capability that is currently causing so much damage to their towns and cities.

And Ukraine is huge. Capturing the whole of it is a massive task. Even if Russia does succeed in fully occupying Ukraine, which looks highly unlikely on current evidence, the Ukrainians won't just give up. They will retreat to country areas and wage guerilla warfare for as long as it takes, bottling up Russian troops indefinitely, just as the Afghans did.

Russia's ability to expand and rearm its military will be severely hit by reduced oil sales, severe economic recession and lack of previously-imported western components as the sanctions start to really bite.

Would Russia really take on a war on two fronts with all the odds stacked against them. I doubt it.

 

Russia stated aims of the war is destroy Ukraine's military and to make it a politically non aligned country, It has already said occupation is not a goal they want, Either way they are making a pigs ear of it