What a surprise. The usual apologist rushes to defend the actions of the worst aggressor we have seen in Europe for 80 years. Someone we cannot be sure our nuclear deterrent will deter. Someone who once said that a world without Russia was not a world worth having. Someone whose true motives are undecipherable. Someone you simply cannot trust, so cannot deal with.

Going blindly into the future without preparing for a worst case scenario when you are dealing with Putin is beyond irresponsible. It’s crazy. We might not expect the worst, but we need to be ready. That ready cannot just rely on the nuclear option, when we know that’s not really a usable option.

Sure, just cede all the former Soviet countries back to Russia and let Putin have to deal with their resistance again. That will keep him busy. They are only Slavs after all. Not truly part of the “white” race so don’t matter. Somehow I don’t think they will agree to that, and nor should they.

There are no easy options available but showing weakness in the face of aggression isn’t one of them.

I will ignore the pathetic personal slurs and treat them with the contempt they deserve.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (29 Mar 2024 11.32pm)

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Nuclear deterrents do deter. They deter other nuclear powers in the first use of their nuclear weapons.

What they don’t do is deter the use of other military action. As we have seen. Will it stop with Ukraine? We all hope so. We hope the cost of it will deter further expansion. A cost that would not have been demanded had we just turned aside or appeased Putin in the early days. It’s the cost that deters, not the nukes.

Hope though is not enough. Especially with someone like Putin and the prospect of a second Trump presidency. No-one expects a direct attack on a NATO state. Yet! If there is an emasculated NATO, under resourced and unsure of its capabilities, who knows what might be attempted. Nibbling at the edges and undermining resolve would be enough to destabilise.

We cannot trust Putin or know what the ultimate ambitions are. That Russia has been covertly interfering with the political life of the western nations for years is an established reality. We have effectively been in another Cold War for many years. One not of our choosing. One that doesn’t cost lives but impacts us all. Now we have a hot war that is costing a lot of lives, but one which was again not of our choosing. Neither could simply be ignored and “territory ceded”! The territory isn’t ours to cede anymore than it’s Putin’s to take. We might have preferred a settlement but you can only settle if you trust your partner or can ensure their compliance, which with Putin is impossible.

By the way it was Putin who said that a world without Russia was not a world worth having. As was completely obvious from the context. Only a drunk could conclude differently!

At nearly 80 I am well past fighting age. Why though should that mean my analysis of any situation be invalid? My capacity to think is not impaired and a long life brings the benefit of experience whilst the lack of any likely personal involvement brings objectivity and a focus on outcomes. Sniping of this kind is probably as close to a gun that those who indulge in it will ever get.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Vladimir Putin, has been criticized for several actions and policies that can be seen as detrimental to various aspects of human rights, international relations, and democracy. Some of the terrible things he has been accused of include:

The Suppression of political opposition: Putin has been cracking down on political opponents, both within Russia and abroad, by using various tactics such as intimidation, arrests, and disqualification from elections. Several opposition leaders have faced imprisonment, exile, or even assassination attempts.

Suppression of freedom of expression: Under Putin's rule, Russia has witnessed a shrinking space for dissent, independent media, and civil society. Media outlets critical of the government have been shut down, journalists have faced threats and violence, and laws restricting online free speech and access to information have been passed.

Putin has faced allegations of human rights abuses, including suppression of LGBTQ+ rights, infringement on the freedom of assembly and association, and disregard for fair trial and due process. Cases of torture, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings have also been reported.

Also, the Support for authoritarian regimes: Russia under Putin has been known to support authoritarian regimes globally. It has backed regimes like Syria's Bashar al-Assad, accused of war crimes and human rights abuses, and has reportedly interfered in other countries' elections and democratic processes.

His Aggressive foreign policy: Putin's administration has been accused of pursuing an assertive and belligerent foreign policy, including alleged cyber-attacks, disinformation campaigns, and meddling in other countries' affairs. These actions have strained Russia's relations with several Western democracies.

To summarize he's not a very nice chap

The only country who has ever reached Moscow

The Polish Army advanced close to Moscow during the early 17th century and even captured the city in 1610 during the Polish-Muscovite War.

However, their control was indeed short-lived, as they were eventually expelled by Russian forces led by Dmitry Pozharsky in 1612.

As a first generation Pole and long time Palace fan. I am biased against Russia.

But the above is the reason why Russians hate the Polish so much.

Russians have also been defeated by the likes of Japan and Finland.

And with enough help Ukraine can defeat them as well

Aside from a couple of points I'd largely agree with that as well.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I will answer this post directly.

The reason for that? Well, though you phrased it poorly I can see how you could be referring to Putin and thus you have an apology for my misunderstanding.

No, I think to most people in the world it very clearly is nukes that deter....the cost is the reality of their use. People perhaps need to look at the photos of their former use in Japan...using a payload far far lower than what would be used today.

I think you don't understand Putin and the positions of the ruling elites in Russia. I regard that emulation in our own elites as far more dangerous than anything he currently plans.

However, words are one thing, actions are another as the lack of spending on war economies in Nato reflect the deeper truth of what will happen....which is an eventual negotiation with Russia.

Why is your view invalid?...well, don't get me wrong, none of what we say here amounts to a hill of beans. My position however is that people who aren't realistically going to suffer from a decision shouldn't be the ones making them...that relates to the insulation of wealth and loyalty amongst other aspects. Your age makes it easy to commit young men to die because you aren't going to be among them.

It wasn't a comment on your age impairing your capacity to think....while I largely regard most of your views as ridiculous and harmful to my country I largely think you retain your marbles.

Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Mar 2024 10.47am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)