Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Options
1121212131215121712183691

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,258 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Listening to Ukrainecast and there is big internal debate within NATO about wether to give “big” anti ship missiles because it might provoke the Russians… they think small anti ship missiles should only be given…… crimes against humanity happening a few miles away and they are worried about giving the Ukraine missiles that are too big and effective



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Hopefully it means offensive weapons they can use. Although, I would consider Anti ship missiles as offensive as you can get which they seem to be supplying. But, can you imagine what would happen if Ukraine knocked out a Kirov-class battlecruiser or the like !



  • Registered Users Posts: 45 tigerbalm_eu


    "all options are on the table" when uttered by a nuclear power – is diplomatic speak for: "the potential for a nuclear response". It is a nuclear threat.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    They didn't arm the Taliban and no the Taliban didn't exist during and after the Russian invasion and occupation of Afghanistan,

    They gave them AKs because they were cheap and the easy to aquire through Pakistan and the ak has superior range to the m16 which suits the afghans and terrority better ,



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Yeah - lots of news outlets running with it in the last half hour or so. It can be taken as you say - Putin will have to respond to that with his own bellicose rhetoric.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,995 ✭✭✭rogber


    Me too. Grim. Especially with the UK supplying weapons to Ukraine



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,995 ✭✭✭rogber


    In theory it means what the other posters have said. In reality means a few more sanctions, a few more defensive weapons, and a few more thoughts and prayers



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    IF chemical weapons have been used. The defenders of Mariupol are fighting from a massive industrial steel plant with all sorts of chemicals laying around with shells flying. I wouldn't put it past the Russians using chemical weapons, but it seems a bit late in the day when at this stage it's just a waiting game until the cut off defenders run out of supplies. Russian propaganda is obvious because they're used to dealing with a gullible population, but Ukraine is fighting for her life and they're using propaganda too. They'd be stupid not to and they're not stupid. They want/need the West to up our game and supply more weapons and an escalation like chemical warfare would surely up the ante.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The odds would be bleak given the geography/position, but I think I'd rather do a, 'it's every chap for themselves' and make a run for it rather than surrender to the Russians.



  • Registered Users Posts: 665 ✭✭✭goldenmick


    I'm not knowledgeable on the technical side of weapons of war but it's fairly obvious that the game changers for Ukraine would be long range missile systems, of the kind or better than Russia are currently pounding them with, and attack aircraft - any kind at all that they could operate, and plenty of them.

    For the life of me I simply cannot understand the reluctance of the West to provide the exact weapons that could reduce this war from being bloody, drawn out and potentially millions losing their lives. It's not for monetary or technical reasons so you have to put it solely down to fear of what Putin may do. But then even that makes no sense as he already knows we are arming Ukraine to the teeth. There is no real cohesion or impetus within Nato which is a cobbled together mishmash of nations that clearly lacks any worthwhile or definitive central guidance and leadership. It's a sort of dog's already up the road situation before you remember to bolt your garden gate.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Looks like the jig is up for the marines in Mariupol, out of food and ammo so no choice but to surrender



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,635 ✭✭✭Nermal


    If you insist on viewing the conflict as a morality play, you're never going to understand.

    https://twitter.com/ClarkeMicah/status/1513465634511761410



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,382 ✭✭✭sjb25


    Means we will give them as little as possible so we dont piss putin of to much but enough not to let putin win either



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That's a good analysis. I think Zelensky would give up the breakaway regions to stop the horrors Putin is inflicting on Ukraine. The problem is that Putin has his own hideous agenda. Putin is swaying between thinking 'the breakaway republics are enough to consider victory' to thinking, 'maybe the Ukraine is at breaking point and will cave and I can have it all as my legacy'.

    Zelensky knows Ukraine is facing an existential crisis, but knows he cannot rely on any in the West to allow him to bring it to a swiftish end. In the mean time his citizens are being treated barbarically.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭firemansam4


    Yes I agree it will mean they will unleash their next set of almighty sanctions that may irratate the Russians a tiny bit more...

    All this talk of threat of nuclear weapons is utter nonsense.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,146 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    There is no real cohesion or impetus within Nato which is a cobbled together mishmash of nations that clearly lacks any worthwhile or definitive central guidance and leadership. It's a sort of dog's already up the road situation before you remember to bolt your garden gate.

    NATO's job is to be a defensive partnership, that if required can prosecute a war mostly overseas and with maximmum impact on potential enemies. If putin had no nukes how long do you think Russia would last against NATO going in? If such a war lasted a month before Russia surrendered I'd be shocked.

    NATO is not in the business of indirectly supplying portable weaponry and Soviet era weaponry into an active war zone. The Americans have some experience in this alright and Ukraine has been getting weapons and intel.

    If we take the tragedy out of it, it would suit NATO and the West to bankrupt putin and Russia with sanctions and the funding of a long unwinnable war, rather than one that's over next week. The Soviet screwup in Afghanistan was one of the main reasons for the fall of that empire. A period putin has talked about which seems to show he may have read about it but hasn't learned from it.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Of course it's possible they are doing things without announcing them; but the language out of NATO as a whole and Germany in particular suggests they're just not willing to transfer what they keep calling "offensive" weapons.

    Individual nations seem to have leeway to make transfers unilaterally but it also seems that NATO is making it very clear that those transfers should only be of equipment Ukraine currently operates. Or at the very least must be equivalent to capabilities Ukraine already has.

    I also believe a large part of supplying these weapons will be as political pressure on Russia and as political support for Ukraine; both things which are best served by being fairly open about equipment that might be sent.

    And the other thing is that NATO absolutely does not want some piece of NATO equipment being spotted in Ukraine out of the blue and for Russia to assess it as a direct NATO involvement or to use it for propaganda purposes; so I would expect any NATO equipment transfers to be announced widely before they make their way into Ukraine.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    My feeling is that NATO is afraid of it supplying weapons which could hit Russian infrastructure outside Ukraine; and which Russia can then leverage as more anti-NATO propaganda domestically which might soften the blow of widespread conscription efforts.

    And they're also worried about Russian military escalation as a direct response to NATO military supplies; but also things like reducing gas supplies which we know Germany in particular just will not accept.

    I suspect their strategy is to maximise the amount that Russia will be weakened militarily, economically, and politically whilst avoiding further escalation which might impact the West and/or global economy. Which, it has to be said, is perfectly consistent with NATO's stated purpose and charter; whilst also being not very satisfactory for people who support Ukraine.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,895 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Well spoken sir. From the country whose economy is based on being a safe haven for war loot and other ill-gotten gains.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,424 ✭✭✭Dubh Geannain


    Outside of the West how the likes of India and China in particular covering/not covering the findings coming out of Bucha?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 665 ✭✭✭goldenmick



    Morality play? You're never going to understand?

    What a pathetic statement. I simply said they need to be given weapons that will make a difference.

    Who voted you as the analytical genius of Boards? Obviously just yourself.

    Your kind represent all that's worst about Boards... you cant post a decent response without including sarcastic, barbed comments and implying others are not at your mastermind level of understanding. Pretty sad really.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,059 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    One of the problems at the moment is that with the UK and USA prominently announcing the supply of heavier military equipment to Ukraine, that it encourages the PR that this is really just another proxy war between the USA/UK and Russia. If Europe and the EU are really as exercised as the rhetoric suggests, then Europe & the EU need to be more proactive in order to avoid this narrative developing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 665 ✭✭✭goldenmick


    I think we've gone past that stage as I'm sure that Putin and his Kremlin cronies already view this as a proxy war, and it's already being portrayed as such to the Russian populace.

    I can see nothing but serious escalation from hereon in.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,059 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Well if serious escalation is on the cards, the EU would be better getting stuck in sooner rather than later.



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,924 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Unfortunately these things happen in war. Russian soldiers are quite brutal, and sadly this wasn't unexpected.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,062 ✭✭✭Hobgoblin11


    Putin on sky news-the soviet union landed probes on venus, no other country has managed to do this, seems to have other things on his mind this morning

    Dundalk, Co. Louth



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,491 ✭✭✭swiwi_


    I’m not defending Switzerland. I’m saying people on this forum keep going on about the impotent west. Meanwhile Ireland offers nothing. Would the Irish population accept a 10% Ukraine tax to help fund western military intervention? Because war is not cheap unlike posting on a forum. It’s easy to give out about France, Germany, NATO etc when Ireland had nothing to lose but more expensive petrol prices etc.

    you’re poorly educated if you think that is how the Swiss economy is funded by the way.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,574 ✭✭✭✭Francie Barrett


    Ukraine performing raids into Russia on their railway network.

    Balls of steel these lads have.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,916 ✭✭✭ronivek


    Yes but nobody is prescient; nobody knows what the end result of any decision is likely to be.

    And even worse the so-called intelligence apparatuses badly misread Putin and Russia on this conflict and at multiple points in the past: why would the politicians let alone Johnny Public trust their assessments now?

    I can only see escalation happening after clear verification of some concrete change on the ground rather than the other way around; and those escalations from the West are likely to be the same as they have been until this point: economic sanctions, political rebukes, and additional military aid which keeps Ukraine fighting but doesn’t give them the ability to reach into Russia or threaten their air or sea assets in a meaningful way.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,009 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    They already claimed Venus as a "Russian planet" last year. They seem to have a thing for inhospitable hell-holes.




This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement