Muckaway:
Have to be honest and say I don’t what it’s all about. I’ve waited for the news to come on, admired Martine Croxhalls fantastic cleavage, heard “Ukraine” and switched the news off.
No doubt if it doesn’t concern us, British troops will be involved.
We won’t do anything (even though I think we should), Europe and the UK are far too scared of Mr Putin turning off the pipes to fight with the Russians!
It’s all about energy and who has it, Lybia has oil we were straight in there! Yet a country who is on our doorstep (and we’re promised protection of their boarders when they handed over their nukes) are left to rot because there not worth it and the risks of being cut off by Russia is too big!
When you say “we” do you mean the British Armed Forces? Those that can’t tie a shoelace without being told?. Funny how they seem to be quite useful sometimes though eh.
As for the trouble I couldn’t care less, never been & never wanted to go. The reason the Russians will be kicking off is because, like all these regimes, they don’t want their own people seeing how a bunch of committed people can overthrow a government, especially on their own doorstep. Put it down hard & fast to stop any ideas of ousting the current incumbent of the kremlin.
As for us, why would we be fighting to have even more eastern “Europeans” landing here?
How can we say putin is wrong when we decide to invade iraq afghanistan etc
The US and Britain done it for purely financial gain putin has done it to protect russian access to the black sea port.
The rebels want to get on the EU gravy train which will please our elite as theu will have another source of cheap labour.
The russians are not scared of the west and Britain in paticular as we have prostituted our selves to become a russian billonares playground and there money is a big boost to our economy and to top it off they could switch the gas off.
Every story I read and conversation I hear about the Crimea overlooks the fact the Russia has an interest there, which is the major shipping harbour there, and its access to the Black Sea. Without this port Russia will have limited access to shipping routes south. Which is why I understand it wants to protect its interests there.
switchlogic:
This isn’t our fight. We are a small island off the coast of Europe and the sooner we stop this silly world policeman game and start looking after our own country and people the better. We don’t need a big military and lots of hardware, we don’t need to get involved in these issues. The world has plenty of countries with a lot more clout and military muscle happy to intervene in world affairs so we don’t have to. The sooner people in this country started having a more realistic world view of our own importance the better. The Empire is long gone, we are no longer a world straddling super power so lets just stop trying to pretend we are.
In that regard I’d agree with new lad in the sense that the best way to keep the peace in a world with powers like Russia and China is to get back to the idea of defence based on the idea of mutually assured destruction at least in the case of those two threats.Or strategic destruction in the case of threats that don’t have similar powers of retaliation.Rather than the present bs idea of trying to police the world through troops on the ground.Or ‘economic sanctions’.It’s equally obvious in that case that we’d need to choose our arguments wisely and Russia trying to reclaim any,or even all,of it’s old Soviet cold war turf wouldn’t be one of those arguments.
While it’s equally obvious that tying the previously western european countries into stupid alliances with the old eastern bloc,to extend the EU’s borders eastwards and provide cheap labour opportunities for those at the top,is an even more dangerous idea than getting involved with Serbia and Russia was in WW1.Especially with Russia showing signs of wanting to backtrack on the break up of the old Soviet Union and by implication having allowed it’s old East European buffer zones in the Warsaw Pact to join NATO.IE we’re heading back into the world which we knew,and in which everyone knew where they stood,in the Cold War.It’s just that our leaders are too stupid ( and greedy for cheap labour ) to realise it.
peirre:
Every story I read and conversation I hear about the Crimea overlooks the fact the Russia has an interest there, which is the major shipping harbour there, and its access to the Black Sea. Without this port Russia will have limited access to shipping routes south. Which is why I understand it wants to protect its interests there.
The surprising thing is that the Russian side hasn’t pointed out to that ■■■■■■ Hague that it’s doing nothing much different than Britain has done in Northern Ireland,Gibralter or the Falklands.
Carryfast:
In that regard I’d agree with new lad in the sense that the best way to keep the peace in a world with powers like Russia and China is to get back to the idea of defence based on the idea of mutually assured destruction at least in the case of those two threats.
Lets leave that to the ‘superpowers’, not us. As for getting back to it? It never left, Russia and the US have more than enough weapons to wipe us all out.
Carryfast:
In that regard I’d agree with new lad in the sense that the best way to keep the peace in a world with powers like Russia and China is to get back to the idea of defence based on the idea of mutually assured destruction at least in the case of those two threats.
Lets leave that to the ‘superpowers’, not us. As for getting back to it? It never left, Russia and the US have more than enough weapons to wipe us all out.
It did leave in the sense that theoretically we’re now tied to the old Eastern Bloc states in the type of alliance which we had with Russia and Serbia at the start of WW1 and which got us involved with it.My question to Hague would be exactly ‘what’ is the plan now that Poland etc are part of NATO and the EU ‘if’ Russia decides that it wants those countries back under it’s influence again.
As for ‘superpowers’ holding all the cards it might be possible to foresee a few scenarios whereby we could be facing a larger threat than the US.Which probably explains why successive UK governments have ( rightly ) seen the need for an independent British nuclear deterrent.But the important thing is that Russia deciding to walk back into Poland or Latvia,let alone Crimea/Ukraine,isn’t one of those scenarios to anyone who hasn’t got a suicidal death wish.
God you make everything so complicated. You talked of two states posing a threat and mutually assured destruction. I merely pointed out Russia and the US are more than capable of mutually destroying each other.
You guys have posted some good points. Its a situation that can be cooled down. I disagree that we have no responsibility towards our fellow Europeans. I for one possibly in the minority, that can see the benefit of this situation. Guys we are not the power we once were so it makes sense to align our islands to Europe.
The problem is Mr Putin who is a loose cannon. Even when the cold war existed it was more balanced.
Lets face it Russia’s hardware is old and the USA and Europe i.e. British, French, German is modern. The only real weapon he has is nuclear and would he be that stupid. No
miketaurus:
You guys have posted some good points. Its a situation that can be cooled down. I disagree that we have no responsibility towards our fellow Europeans. I for one possibly in the minority, that can see the benefit of this situation. Guys we are not the power we once were so it makes sense to align our islands to Europe.
The problem is Mr Putin who is a loose cannon. Even when the cold war existed it was more balanced.
Lets face it Russia’s hardware is old and the USA and Europe i.e. British, French, German is modern. The only real weapon he has is nuclear and would he be that stupid. No
The slavs aren’t and never were ‘our fellow europeans’ they are a totally different ethnic group who think differently.Which if you have a basic knowledge of history is what started WW1.IE the slavs want to be amongst their own when it suits them,such as in the case of fighting a slavic war against the Austrian Union.But not when it doesn’t such as in the case of being bribed with EU or American subsidies and access to European job market to provide cheap labour for European employers.
As for Putin being a ‘loose cannon’ he’s actually one of the brightest leaders that Russia has ever had and certainly in a different league to Obama.
While it was a case of the opposite when Kruschev went up against Kennedy.IE a not very bright loose cannon who met more than his match in the form of one of the brightest US presidents there’s ever been.
As for thinking that Europe’s so called ‘modern’ equipped forces would stand a chance against the numbers of Russia’s I wouldn’t want to bet on it.While that issue of Russia’s equipment being old and obsolete I wouldn’t want to bet on that either.Also considering that it’s much more difficult to fight a defensive war and there’s no way that Europe’s forces could sustain an offensive war over the distances of Russia.Although Napoleon and Hitler tried it.Which is why all previous West v Russian combat scenarios have all resulted in the fact that it would go nuclear,from our side not Russia,long before either side were even close to winning.
It appears that David Cameron has asked President Putin to hold off the invasion for several years while the British put together a counter invasion force & build a couple of aircraft carriers, buy the aircraft to land on them, and re-recruit the soldiers he put on the dole.
But the irony is that Putin having banned gays, has now decided to invade another country by the back door, now all we need now is either Justin Timberlake or Micheal Buble to re-release “crimea a river”
Hold on to your hats people, only a handful of posts away from Carryfast invoking segregation in the USA. A few more past that and we will probably be debating military vehicles and 6x4s
peirre:
It appears that David Cameron has asked President Putin to hold off the invasion for several years while the British put together a counter invasion force & build a couple of aircraft carriers, buy the aircraft to land on them, and re-recruit the soldiers he put on the dole.
An aircraft carrier isn’t going to be much use in a land based war and it’s going to need to be a big invasion force and long supply lines to cover the distance involved in the invasion of Russia.
While even if we could afford resources like a Nimitz class carrier and battle group even the Americans can’t afford the right planes to put on it like F14 Tomcats nor even enough of the cheap replacement since both governments decided that it’s better to turn the respective countries into low wage economies.In our case helped by the use of cheap east european labour.
In which case getting rid of those East European states and lumbering the Western european economies with them has actually helped to make Russia’s military stronger and ours weaker.
OK,I’m trying to catch up on this.I think I’m fairly up to date with the present situation,although cutting through the propaganda and diplo speak from both sides is difficult.Yanukovych was elected President in 2010 in what was cited by international observers as a free and fair election.He was also congratulated on his win by International leaders.Why the U turn by the electorate and his International ‘friends’?. Oh,and the Russian forces that we’ve been told are drunken and poorly equipped seem to be anything but! (well apart from the Commer vans )
Can see why Putin feels threatened when what was in effect a power grab by right wing groups backed by the west and the oligarchs . Russia feels it has to protect its Black Sea fleet as it allows them access to the Med. and all its interests in the Middle East . They have also heavily invested in the potential oil/gas bonanza that Cyprus is about to exploit .If people start to protest against Putin in Russia as a response to international financial constraints being imposed things could quickly go down the pan . If the shooting starts and Ukranian people begin to flee it looks like Poland could potentially be overran by refugees but lets hope it gets resolved .
peirre:
It appears that David Cameron has asked President Putin to hold off the invasion for several years while the British put together a counter invasion force & build a couple of aircraft carriers, buy the aircraft to land on them, and re-recruit the soldiers he put on the dole.
An aircraft carrier isn’t going to be much use in a land based war and it’s going to need to be a big invasion force and long supply lines to cover the distance involved in the invasion of Russia.
While even if we could afford resources like a Nimitz class carrier and battle group even the Americans can’t afford the right planes to put on it like F14 Tomcats nor even enough of the cheap replacement since both governments decided that it’s better to turn the respective countries into low wage economies.In our case helped by the use of cheap east european labour.
In which case getting rid of those East European states and lumbering the Western european economies with them has actually helped to make Russia’s military stronger and ours weaker.
Why in the hell would they use f14 tomcats when they were taken out of service more tpgan ten years ago. Want a formidable battlefield weapon? Then the answer is the apache ah 64d, fast, agile, packs a punch and when you hear it then you know it to late
Sir +:
OK,I’m trying to catch up on this.I think I’m fairly up to date with the present situation,although cutting through the propaganda and diplo speak from both sides is difficult.Yanukovych was elected President in 2010 in what was cited by international observers as a free and fair election.He was also congratulated on his win by International leaders.Why the U turn by the electorate and his International ‘friends’?. Oh,and the Russian forces that we’ve been told are drunken and poorly equipped seem to be anything but! (well apart from the Commer vans )
It’s all about that issue of the slavs being all for keeping to their own until/unless they get offered a large enough ‘offer’ they can’t refuse in the form of EU/US subsidies and access to it’s job market in which case they’re suddenly happy to join the Germans and dump their Russian ‘brothers’.In this case Yanakovych seems to have wanted to stay under the Russian sphere of influence which brought him into conflict with those freeloaders who can see a better deal from the EU and America than from Russia.The end result being that US and EU cash is sent into yet another ex Soviet bloc country in exchange for yet more cheap labour.So much for the slavic nationalism that started WW1.
All of which seems to be a stupid plan by the US and the German run EU and the even more stupid Brits for not seeing through the scam,to gradually erode Russia’s influence until,in their ( deluded ) view,it becomes a less powerful influential force in the region.Obviously Putin is bright enough to realise the plan while the Americans are too stupid to see that the slavs are just shifting their allegiance around to whoever offers them the most cash.You can bet if/when the cash stops flowing it’ll be the slavs calling for the help of their Russian ‘brothers’ against the European Imperialists just like at the start of WW1 all over again.Although possibly with the exception of the Ukrainian Nazis who probably still see Germany as it was in 1939 not 2014.
peirre:
It appears that David Cameron has asked President Putin to hold off the invasion for several years while the British put together a counter invasion force & build a couple of aircraft carriers, buy the aircraft to land on them, and re-recruit the soldiers he put on the dole.
An aircraft carrier isn’t going to be much use in a land based war and it’s going to need to be a big invasion force and long supply lines to cover the distance involved in the invasion of Russia.
While even if we could afford resources like a Nimitz class carrier and battle group even the Americans can’t afford the right planes to put on it like F14 Tomcats nor even enough of the cheap replacement since both governments decided that it’s better to turn the respective countries into low wage economies.In our case helped by the use of cheap east european labour.
In which case getting rid of those East European states and lumbering the Western european economies with them has actually helped to make Russia’s military stronger and ours weaker.
Why in the hell would they use f14 tomcats when they were taken out of service more tpgan ten years ago. Want a formidable battlefield weapon? Then the answer is the apache ah 64d, fast, agile, packs a punch and when you hear it then you know it to late
But an Apache isn’t exactly an air superiority fighter jet.
While the F35 won’t be much better when they can eventually afford to put a few into service.The F14 being taken out of service had more to do with money than it still not being up to the job certainly if compared to the single engined F35 when it eventually arrives.The American view being that it’s just an expensive target.
Here is an article from a russian paper, for some of you military planners and know all steering wheel attendants:
“Russia unable to win possible war with either NATO or China”
Gen. Nikolai Makarov, the chief of the Russian General Staff, stated on December 14 that after two years of reforms the Russian army was fully prepared for showing appropriate reactions to any threats. It became possible owing to the creation of the absolutely new defense structure and the introduction of the new training system for the troops, the official said.
High-readiness forces have been thoroughly provided with weaponry and ammo, whereas the army was supposedly degenerating before, the official added.
Makarov also said that the majority of military schools were training officers on the base of outdated programs and techniques. Many of those programs, the official said, were based on combat experiences of the Great Patriotic War.
Judging upon the statements of the high-ranking defense officials, the previous problems of the Russian army have been solved. Is it really so? Will the Russian army be ready to stand up against a potential enemy? Will the results of the army reforms give Russia an opportunity to show appropriate reactions to possible aggression from NATO members or China?
Pravda.Ru asked expert opinion from military experts.
Konstantin Sivkov, the first vice president of the Academy for Geopolitical Problems:
"Statements claiming that Russian Armed Forces are ready to repulse any attack after the so-called reforms are nothing but nonsense. They are capable of settling a small conflict, in which not more than 100,000 men would need to participate. If there’s a larger, local conflict, which requires the participation of up to 500,000 people, then the Russian Armed Forces would not be able to deal with it, not to mention a large-scale war with NATO or China.
"In other words, without the use of nuclear arms, Russia is incapable of reacting to challenges from potential enemies. Those, who believe that the Russian army should be cut, say that we do not need such a large army at all because we have our nuclear weapons. The forces of nuclear containment need to be protected in the air and on the surface. If someone attacks Russia without the use of nuclear arms, Russia will not respond with a nuclear attack either. No country participating in WWII used chemical weapons during the war in spite of the fact that everyone had more than enough of those weapons. No one did that, not even the dying ■■■■ Germany.
"The same will happen to nuclear weapons. Everyone is very well aware of the fact that using nuclear weapons is similar to committing suicide. Both NATO and China know that Russia will not use its nukes if a non-nuclear war occurs.
"As for the so-called reforms, the combat effectiveness of the Russian army has considerably reduced during the years of those reforms. Many officers resigned not because of the outdated training - they were simply sacked. They tell us today that Stalin “beheaded the Red Army” when he repressed 30,000 out of 800,000 officers. But what is the right word to describe the sacking of 200,000 out of 300,000 officers within two years? No one of them received any apartments, by the way.
"The reforms are over, and what do we see? Officers still do not have the motivation to serve, because they do not have a place to live. The technological base of the army was cut considerably during these two years. Let’s take the support system, for example. This system has been handed over to entrepreneurs. This system can function normally only during time of peace. Will businessmen and their subordinates risk their lives to deliver all necessary goods to the battlefield?
"So what does Russia have? China and NATO can oppose Russia with huge armies - 2.5 million men each. Russia has only 85 instant readiness brigades, or 180,000 people deployed on such a vast territory as our country.
“Here is another important aspect - Russian reformers want to purchase foreign arms. One would only have to press a button to deactivate those arms in case an armed conflict with NATO occurs,” the expert said.
“For the time being, Russia is capable of showing resistance to such countries as Georgia. Russia will not be able to win a war with China or NATO,” Alexander Khramchikhin, deputy director of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis told Pravda.Ru. "As for nuclear weapons, NATO is much stronger than Russia, and China’s nuclear arsenal will soon be just as powerful as that of Russia. It will not be possible for Russia to conduct offensive operations against NATO members, because the strength of the Russian army has declined considerably.
"As for military hardware, which was supposedly fully provided to high-readiness forces, I have to say that all that hardware is of the Soviet origin. New weapons exist in meager quantities. There are only two divisions of S-400 anti-missile systems, for example, and they do not have long-range missiles, which would make them different from S-300 systems. Where are those highly acclaimed Su-35 fighters, which Russia exports?
“There is another important aspect here. It is an open secret that all recent wars started with massive air strikes against enemies. Russia’s air defense is absolutely not ready to face such a threat. It can only protect large centers in the country and that’s it. There is not even one single air defense regiment on a huge territory from Irkutsk to Khabarovsk, which is 2,500 kilometers,” Khramchikhin said.
)