Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Yes the Veto right as a P5 member is the crucial issue, however if Russia is held to be the Successor State as opposed to the Continuing State of the USSR then it will automatically be a non UN member state, unless of course the UN are willing to accept Russia as a de facto non P5 member.

BS. Russia doesn't need to defend a border against NATO countries as not one of them had any intention of attacking or invading Russia, ever, no matter the considerable justifications they might have had for doing so. Russia frequently meddles in the affairs of neighbouring states and engages in violence against them. The opposite has never occurred in the time NATO has existed.

It's like a criminal living at the end of a street, A street where not so mysteriously, certain houses get burgled, from time to time, getting all hyper and aggressive about the number of houses on the street that have installed alarm systems, banging on the door of the one neighbour he has who hasn't yet had an alarm system installed, and threatening them that they better not be thinking about getting an alarm system.

The neighbour asks him to calm down and asks why would he object if he got an alarm system, surely he wasn't planning to burgle him again? Crickets.

Putins objection to NATO is solely to do with it frustrating his flexibility to meddle in the affairs of other countries with both threatened and real violence to blackmail them into doing as told or for punishing them when they don't. He knows none of his neighbours would ever attack the second tenth best army in the world which has more nuclear weapons than they have had birthdays, but he wants to always be able to do so to them.

People in the west who are apologists for Putins view and think it is legitimate, are filth, scum and warmongers. They are like that coterie of mental defectives who admire Anders Behring Breivik.

Putin will want to fight to the bitter end. His people, though? If his people were that gung-ho to fight, they'd be signing up in their droves. There would be no need to introduce this 'partial mobilisation' measure as Putin would have all the enthusiastic volunteers he could handle, and there would be no protests in the streets, only spontaneous rallies and parades. Putin may be heartened whenever he sees a car with a Z daubed on it (not that he goes outside much these days), but that doesn't do him much good if that doesn't translate into enthusiastic soldiers, ready to give it their all for a common cause. You cannot prosecute a war without the resources and that's a hard reality that no amount of Russian respect for its military history can overcome.

Vietnam wasn't on the USA's doorstep though. And that is a very crucial difference here.

The Russians are highly unlikely to tuck tail and scamper away like the yanks in Vietnam, because they will have to live with the consequences of that decision in their backyard for the rest of time.

Vietnam also wasn't ethnically or culturally significant to your average American, again another important difference here.

Russia stands to lose much more (from their perspective), if they walk away.

For this, and many other reasons, I could see Russia fighting on indefinitely. Even if it means very dire consequences for them. I fear the west may have seriously underestimated how determined they are not to lose this war.

You are the one purporting them as evidence not I. You don't even read them, you simple google a headline and post. You display no depth of knowledge in your points and have been shown to repeat long debunked arguments. This speaks to your credibility and you are pushing flawed opinion based on nothing in the hope that you are not challenged.

Tough luck I am not going to allow propaganda to go unchallenged.

As for NAZI propaganda, that's is a laughable assertion from someone incapable of debate and has nothing else to offer. If you wish to know my political persuasion it is as about dead center as it gets, I do however despise fools who fall for either the hard right or hard left.

You can sense the enthusiasm....

When you can't sell your most critical asset you can't really afford the upkeep then to keep your own infrastructure working, but it doesn't matter because when the economy tanks none of your people will have any money to buy and use that energy security waiting in abundance.

They don't regret giving the drones

So a documentary made by a French women is now considered Russian propaganda, Putin really is the bond villain /s

In reality it's an objective documentary with a honest narrative that you don't agree with

Please post proof of the above.

BTW Johnson isn't on the continet.