With China and the Russian leaders hand in hand at the winter Olympics, is it going to kick off?
Sent from my SM-T976B using Tapatalk
It was always heading that way from the point when America lost the bottle, for a defence strategy based on mutually assured destruction and went for ’ containment ’ using conventional forces posturing on Russia’s borders instead.
Combined with laughable appeasement of China in which we’ve paid for their military build up in the knowledge that we would be China’s logical target.
My bet is it will be a joint Russian and Chinese ground invasion of western Europe and possibly a Chinese move on Australia.
Ukraine and Taiwan will be just a side show in that and it would probably be simpler to just take us out completely with tactical naval missile and air attacks.Bearing in mind our air defence is a joke compared to 1940.
By now I’d have expected NATO to have been warning Russia and China that the mutually assured destruction strategy is still on the table.
Without that clear warning the only question is why wouldn’t they both try to go for it and I’d put shorter odds on that scenario than them not.
The truth is we were never going to win a conventional war with Russia let alone combined with China.
The nuclear deterrent was our only option and for that to work the threat of using it has to be credible.
Signing up to the SALT treaties have scuppered that.
rearaxle:
With China and the Russian leaders hand in hand at the winter Olympics, is it going to kick off?Sent from my SM-T976B using Tapatalk
Nothing is impossible but I doubt it.
telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/02 … p-ukraine/
It’s like 1914 again.Then it was let’s join Russia v Germany now it’s let’s join Ukraine v Russia.They couldn’t make it up.
We need a good war.
Give people something to do.
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Putin has played a clever hand, he has caused mischief in the EU and NATO seen where the splits and weaknesses are without to much effort on his part.
The cost both financially and in terms of casualties will be high to Russia so is he really going to invade?, Maybe just make the annexation of eastern Ukraine more secure as well as a corridor to the Crimea but in the long term a full scale invasion would not be worth it.
Franglais:
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Can’t believe that anyone would think that the choice isn’t as always either Russia and now possibly China overruns Europe or mutually assured destruction.
But now Russia knows that NATO has lost its bottle for the MAD strategy.NATO really thinks that it can stop such an invasion in a conventional fight.
The truth is if NATO doesn’t back away from Russia’s borders and get back to a strategy based on the strategic nuke deterrent then Russia will move and it won’t stop until it reaches the Atlantic coast and if that doesn’t work they’ll just nuke us anyway.
Mazzer2:
Putin has played a clever hand, he has caused mischief in the EU and NATO seen where the splits and weaknesses are without to much effort on his part.
The cost both financially and in terms of casualties will be high to Russia so is he really going to invade?, Maybe just make the annexation of eastern Ukraine more secure as well as a corridor to the Crimea but in the long term a full scale invasion would not be worth it.
The flaw in that idea is that Russia sees NATO forces moving into its back yard as a threat and a line in the sand.
It has nothing to do with Ukraine.
It’s all about Russia v NATO and NATO has obviously changed strategy from MAD to a far more dangerous one of containment and Russia knows it.
Franglais:
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Wars, and their “support systems” by which I mean the military and the industries producing military equipment, have been part of the US political systems for a very long time. They rejuvenate business (both domestic and export-don’t forget how long it took to pay off the debts to the US for WW" supplies) and often most importantly generate a national patriotism that has often helped incumbent governments get a disgruntled population behind them.
Thus, I suspect, the “invasion will start on Wednesday” hype. The Russian government are no angels (which government is?) but the US are milking this tension to their ends.
Dipster:
Franglais:
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Wars, and their “support systems” by which I mean the military and the industries producing military equipment, have been part of the US political systems for a very long time. They rejuvenate business (both domestic and export-don’t forget how long it took to pay off the debts to the US for WW" supplies) and often most importantly generate a national patriotism that has often helped incumbent governments get a disgruntled population behind them.
Thus, I suspect, the “invasion will start on Wednesday” hype. The Russian government are no angels (which government is?) but the US are milking this tension to their ends.
I think Putin has read the same books as Orwell.
Doesn`t matter how badly you treat your own people. You can rob and mistreat them, but if you have an “enemy” you can keep them in a patriotic group behind you.
Thatcher was an unpopular leader until the Falklands. I`m not saying she engineered the conflict, but everyone united behind her then.
Trump used China and Iran/Iraq as bogey men.
He pointed to the real problems of the “rust belt” but offered false solutions to it…
Fara…
!! Warning !!
Ill be off on my hobby-horse soon. No, Ill shut up.
Franglais:
Dipster:
Franglais:
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Wars, and their “support systems” by which I mean the military and the industries producing military equipment, have been part of the US political systems for a very long time. They rejuvenate business (both domestic and export-don’t forget how long it took to pay off the debts to the US for WW" supplies) and often most importantly generate a national patriotism that has often helped incumbent governments get a disgruntled population behind them.
Thus, I suspect, the “invasion will start on Wednesday” hype. The Russian government are no angels (which government is?) but the US are milking this tension to their ends.
I think Putin has read the same books as Orwell.
Doesn`t matter how badly you treat your own people. You can rob and mistreat them, but if you have an “enemy” you can keep them in a patriotic group behind you.Thatcher was an unpopular leader until the Falklands. I`m not saying she engineered the conflict, but everyone united behind her then.
Trump used China and Iran/Iraq as bogey men.
He pointed to the real problems of the “rust belt” but offered false solutions to it…Fara…
!! Warning !!
Ill be off on my hobby-horse soon. No, Ill shut up.
The US were at this well before Orwell was even a twinkle in his father’s eye.
Dipster:
Franglais:
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Wars, and their “support systems” by which I mean the military and the industries producing military equipment, have been part of the US political systems for a very long time. They rejuvenate business (both domestic and export-don’t forget how long it took to pay off the debts to the US for WW" supplies) and often most importantly generate a national patriotism that has often helped incumbent governments get a disgruntled population behind them.
Thus, I suspect, the “invasion will start on Wednesday” hype. The Russian government are no angels (which government is?) but the US are milking this tension to their ends.
Ironically America isn’t flogging NATO F22’s at a discount and we could have shot a lot more Germans a lot quicker if we’d have had Garand rifles instead of Lee Enfield’s in WW2.
While the job would have been a lot more difficult without Spitfires and Lancasters and the Churchill and eventually Comet tank were relatively less of a death trap for their crews than Sherman’s.
But we also had an over reliance on .30 cal machine guns instead of a free supply of .50 and America also didn’t provide us with any of its best artillery guns.
So the arms sales angle is less of an issue.
As opposed to America having lost its bottle for the MAD strategy and now preferring the idea of encouraging/pushing Russia into a conventional war in Europe instead.
Big/massive mistake.
Dipster:
The US were at this well before Orwell was even a twinkle in his father’s eye.
Absolutely.
Orwell has Winston Smith changing the enemys name at the Ministry Of Truth. Animal Farm has Napoleon always citing Jones as the bogey. It doesnt matter who the enemy is, so long as you have one.
Keep the population united against someone “the other” and they won`t look too closely at you.
The McCarthy era was another… well, from here it is easier to see.
Franglais:
Evolved:
We need a good war.Give people something to do.
Get the population down too, then our pay rates will go up too, won`t they?
Beautiful !
Franglais:
I think Putin has read the same books as Orwell.
Doesn`t matter how badly you treat your own people. You can rob and mistreat them, but if you have an “enemy” you can keep them in a patriotic group behind you.Thatcher was an unpopular leader until the Falklands. I`m not saying she engineered the conflict, but everyone united behind her then.
Trump used China and Iran/Iraq as bogey men.
He pointed to the real problems of the “rust belt” but offered false solutions to it…
The same China which used it’s slave labour to take US jobs to then spend on its military build up aimed at guess who.
As for Putin nothing to do with Orwell.
The history told to him first hand from living memory regarding the amount of casualties sustained the last time the place was attacked from across its western border.
Nothing as dangerous as a cornered Commy with a legitimate paranoid case.
Especially when he’s backed by our even worse Chinese Commy ‘trading partners’.
Franglais:
The McCarthy era was another… well, from here it is easier to see.
As opposed to JFK who understood the difference between appeasement and diplomacy.