# How's this for a conspiracy theory ?



## woodieallen (8 Oct 2022)

Elton Musk wants his millions of Twitter followers to lobby for Ukraine to cede the areas occupied by the Russians (not that it's any of his effing business..the bloody megalomaniac). Then just when the Ukrainians make rapid advances into those self-same areas, their front line troops who rely extensively on Starlink suddenly found it not working.

As I say...how's that for a conspiracy theory ?


----------



## Dibs-h (8 Oct 2022)

I think the cowpat should be put on the list of sanctioned individuals.


----------



## clogs (8 Oct 2022)

woodi
how do u find out about this stuff....?.....hahaha...
I'm in my own little world and hardly ever read or see the news......who can u trust anyway....?.
I guess if the above is true he prob wants more money for the service but the last I heard
Starlink was free for them.......
we'll never know what happened in the Ukraine I'm afraid but I support them in every way I can....


----------



## Vann (9 Oct 2022)

I think Musk should stick to his area of expertise.

Cheers, Vann.


----------



## thetyreman (10 Oct 2022)

I remain neutral on the war and refuse to take sides, we shouldn't be involved in any way, I honestly wish somebody would hack twitter and take it down forever, same thing with facebook so we can go back to normal life again.


----------



## Jameshow (10 Oct 2022)

thetyreman said:


> I remain neutral on the war and refuse to take sides, we shouldn't be involved in any way, I honestly wish somebody would hack twitter and take it down forever, same thing with facebook so we can go back to normal life again.


Which war Germany invading Poland???


----------



## Droogs (10 Oct 2022)

thetyreman said:


> I remain neutral on the war and refuse to take sides, we shouldn't be involved in any way, I honestly wish somebody would hack twitter and take it down forever, same thing with facebook so we can go back to normal life again.


State aggression against another is according to the UN a legally codified crime against humanity and as such all member states are both morally and dutifully bound to counter it. and to bring the offenders to account. Russia as a permanent member of the Security Council and a founding nation state (as is Ukraine) have signed that charter and are bound by it. So we along with every other member are legally obliged to do all we can to bring it to an end.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (10 Oct 2022)

The borders of Ukraine have not been properly agreed since 1918 after WW1 and the Russian revolution. Until the breakup of the Soviet Union it was relatively unimportant as the country was under the direct control of Moscow - bar some disruption during WW2.

Much of Crimea and eastern Ukraine was populated by people of Russian heritage - many would have looked east rather than west for leadership. 

Despite all (USSR, US, UK, UN) being fully aware of the fragility of the drawn borders they were never resolved. I am not suggesting this is easy - the very existence of Israel is still challenged by some in the region 75 years after it was created.

The west failed to respond with any vigour to the annexation of Crimea in 2014, reinforcing a Russian perception that they could act without regard for western reaction.

None of this excuses the disgusting behaviour on the part of Russia and its military - it is the product of several decades in which resolving the border issue was a far lower priority than cheap energy and the oligarch dollar.

Tweets by Elon Musk may be misreported - I suspect there will come a point where some territorial sacrifices are made by Ukraine to allow Putin (or his successors) to save a little face and end a conflict which may otherwise escalate in intensity.


----------



## woodieallen (10 Oct 2022)

The fact that those areas were populated by Russians was only as a direct result of Stalin's policies of Russification of those countries under Russian control. And don't forget the mandatory famine instigated by Stalin in Ukraine. Millions died as a result.

I agree that the West abrogated any responsibility when Pukin' invaded Crimea.


----------



## thetyreman (10 Oct 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Which war Germany invading Poland???


oh yes the war that my grandad almost died in fighting for england...


----------



## Dibs-h (10 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> The borders of Ukraine have not been properly agreed since 1918 after WW1 and the Russian revolution.
> 
> Despite all (USSR, US, UK, UN) being fully aware of the fragility of the drawn borders they were never resolved.


I was under the impression that Ukraine's territorial integrity & sovereignty were agreed upon (at least by Russia) and guaranteed by a few others when it gave up it's nuclear weapons arsenal?


----------



## Terry - Somerset (10 Oct 2022)

> I was under the impression that Ukraine's territorial integrity & sovereignty were agreed upon (at least by Russia) and guaranteed by a few others when it gave up it's nuclear weapons arsenal?


This is of course true, and a number of agreements (including a friendship agreement) were signed in the 1990s.

On annexation of Crimea in 2014 neither Russia nor the West were apparently intent, or even inclined, to have any regard for that which was signed. To judge from events, no effective agreement ever existed.


----------



## Spectric (10 Oct 2022)

This will only end when they sit round a table and talk, the west should be pushing for lensky to broker a peace deal and compromise because at the end of the day Russia will take everyone down with them if it comes to it and they have more than adequate firepower to accomplish this.


----------



## Dibs-h (10 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> This is of course true, and a number of agreements (including a friendship agreement) were signed in the 1990s.
> 
> On annexation of Crimea in 2014 neither Russia nor the West were apparently intent, or even inclined, to have any regard for that which was signed. To judge from events, no effective agreement ever existed.


I think there's a difference between there actually being agreements (legal) - which there are - and the guarantor countries either disregarding them or not enforcing them (discharging their obligations). Or both


----------



## Dibs-h (10 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> the west should be pushing for lensky to broker a peace deal and compromise because at the end of the day Russia will take everyone down with them if it comes to it and they have more than adequate firepower to accomplish this.


That has the "sound" of a group of kids (who are picked on) throwing the weakest\youngest\etc under the bus, i.e. leaving him for the bully to beat up. So they don't get beaten up.


----------



## selectortone (10 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> This will only end when they sit round a table and talk, the west should be pushing for lensky to broker a peace deal and compromise because at the end of the day Russia will take everyone down with them if it comes to it and they have more than adequate firepower to accomplish this.


That worked out well for Neville Chamberlain.


----------



## Spectric (10 Oct 2022)

No it is a very basic instinct of nature, survival of the fittest and knowing when you cannot win and need to throw in the towel. Lensky does not have the intelligence to see this and is on a power trip thinking he can win, and is more than happy to drag nato into the conflict but at what cost to the country and potentially to us all. There is nothing wrong with talking to resolve issues no mater how big they are and if talking fails then we are all looking at a potential extinction event that the west seems more than happy to pursue. Facts are facts, even if Russia does not win they will certainly not lose because they will take everyone down with them and have that capability in abundance. This is from an interview with a retired American colonel who can clearly see what is at stake with the current American policy regarding Ukraine and clearly does not see the point in sacrificing his country for Ukraine.

quote 

And if you think about just Virginia, where I happen to live, if there were a nuclear war—and keep in mind, they also have a very large and effective fleet of nuclear submarines that lie off the coast of the United States. They have a great number of nuclear-tipped missiles, and they can evade any defenses we have. So just in Virginia, if you look at it, all of Northern Virginia would be essentially annihilated. There would hardly be any human life remaining in Loudoun County, Prince William County, Fairfax County, Arlington, Alexandria. The Pentagon lies in in Arlington County: The Pentagon would simply be a glowing mass of molten sand. There would be no human life there. And there would be no human life for many miles around it. Just across the Potomac, the nation’s capital, there would be no life remaining in the nation’s capital. The Capitol building would disappear forever. All of the monuments, all of these glorious things—nothing would remain. 


If you go to the coast of Virginia, you have the Norfolk Naval Shipyard, you have the Port of Norfolk. you have the greatest accumulation of naval power on the face of the Earth. This is where we park all of our aircraft carriers, our nuclear submarines, all of those things. There would be nothing remaining. There would be _nothing remaining_ of any of those shipping industries there. 


And you can carry this on. You talk about New York City, probably New York City itself, not only would everybody be killed, but it would probably be impossible for people to inhabit New York City for hundreds of years afterwards. But not only would it cease to be a place of vibrant human life, but probably going out for maybe half a millennium, it would not recover any sort of civilization. 


We need to understand the gravity of what we’re doing. Perhaps if it were a matter of life and death for the United States, what happens in Ukraine, that would be one thing. Certainly when the Soviet Union put missiles in Cuba, that targeted the United States, that was worth taking the risk, because it was right on our border and it threatened us. And it was it was a battle worth fighting for and a risk worth taking. The Russians are in this in exactly the mirror image of that situation, because for them, the life of Russia depends on stopping NATO from advancing further right into Ukraine, right to their borders. They cannot afford _not_ to fight this war. They cannot afford not to win this war. 

end quote 

Before we go gung ho trying to help Ukraine fight off the bullies perhaps we need to see the enormity of the gun barrel we are looking down, this unfortunately is not anything like a few bulies in a school playground and don't think of the little bombs the americans used in Japan because the new multiwarhead ones are destroyers countries. 

Look at the potential yields of who has what and then think about why talking is so extremely important to bring this conflict to an end by applying the brakes and notthe throttle.


----------



## Dibs-h (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> Before we go gung ho trying to help Ukraine fight off the bullies perhaps we need to see the enormity of the gun barrel we are looking down, this unfortunately is not anything like a few bulies in a school playground and don't think of the little bombs the americans used in Japan because the new multiwarhead ones are destroyers countries.



2 quotes sum it up for me:


----------



## Fergie 307 (11 Oct 2022)

thetyreman said:


> oh yes the war that my grandad almost died in fighting for england...


And which, until June 1941, was literally fuelled by the Soviet Union. The tanks that rolled across France, the planes that were bombing is in the Battle of Britain and the blitz, all fuelled by Soviet oil, provided to the Nazi regime under the terms of their non aggression pact. Later of course their eventual victory in the East would have been unlikely but for the tens of billions of dollars worth of military equipment, machine tools and raw materials supplied to them under lend lease. Thousands of tanks and aircraft, over 400,000 other vehicles etc etc. And not to mention the many ships and sailors lived that were lost on the arctic convoys delivering the stuff. The Soviet Union lost an estimated 20 million in the war, an horrific figure, but undoubtedly due in no small part to their leaders incompetence, and willingness to sacrifice men in huge numbers to make up for it, both of which now appear to be being repeated in Ukraine. No problem with the Russian people, but they have been blighted with some truly awful leaders over the years.


----------



## Blackswanwood (11 Oct 2022)

Everyone is entitled to their own view (as we don’t live in Russia) but I struggle to see any rationale to follow a path that involves appeasing Putin.

Not standing firm on Crimea was a mistake. If we don’t support Ukraine to secure their position and boundaries now we just kick the can down the road as Putin will create a pretence to cross the next border until the USSR is recreated. Add to that the inhumanity shown by the many atrocities committed by those firing missiles at hospitals and playgrounds plus those committed by the invading forces on the ground and the case to do all we can to help Ukraine is to my mind compelling.

Equally I think we should be taking a much firmer line with China and not funding their regime through trade (probably the only thing I think Trump was right on). By all accounts the Head of GCHQ will have some points to make on this in a speech today.


----------



## Jonm (11 Oct 2022)

woodieallen said:


> Then just when the Ukrainians make rapid advances into those self-same areas, their front line troops who rely extensively on Starlink suddenly found it not working.


There is another explanation

“Roman Sinicyn, a co-ordinator at a foundation that donates Starlink systems to the Ukrainian armed forces, told FT the issue could be caused by SpaceX representatives working to make sure Russian soldiers couldn't use the technology, as the liberation of some of the areas had not been made public yet at the time of the connectivity issues.”

So coverage does not extend to areas controlled by the Russians so they cannot use it. Ukraine goes rapidly in to those areas and find that the internet does not work. Not exactly a surprise.


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> Equally I think we should be taking a much firmer line with China and not funding their regime through trade


To late for that, if you think Putins oil and gas has caused ecomomic crisis then taking Chinese trade out of the equation would be on another level, there would be public outcry because no one could buy all there xmas decorations. To get an idea of the impact China has just take stock of the things around you, see how many are not made in China because it is amazing and these are just the obvious ones. Then you have all the other stuff that may not be made in China but will contain many component parts made in China so they are just an integral part of the economy. Again it comes down to acceptance where the west needs to accept that we are entering the time of the east, the west has had it's time at the top and now the east will be at the top.

Pastor Martin's speech is applicable but only in the right situation, with any problem you must look at the min / max / the end goal or potential end result and this is problem is like a logic AND gate with the output = 1 & X , where X is your contribution.


----------



## Jonm (11 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> The west failed to respond with any vigour to the annexation of Crimea in 2014, reinforcing a Russian perception that they could act without regard for western reaction.


Grozny, Aleppo, Crimea, Donbas, Ukraine 2022.

The western response to Crimea was 
1. continue building Nord stream 2
2. buy more Russian gas
3. go to the football World Cup
4. continue investing in Russia.

Complete lack of statesmanship on the part of the west. Crimea invasion in 2014 should have been a wake up call and the above items all stopped. Putin may then have got the message. Instead we have the current situation with huge loss of life, our economies disrupted, huge cost, Putin backed in to a corner and risk of nuclear war. 

Reminds me of Rhineland, Austria, Munich, Sudetenland, Czechoslovak, Poland.


----------



## Jonm (11 Oct 2022)

thetyreman said:


> I remain neutral on the war and refuse to take sides, we shouldn't be involved in any way, I honestly wish somebody would hack twitter and take it down forever, same thing with facebook so we can go back to normal life again.


I do not think Facebook and Twitter has any impact on Putin. Russia would continue with its war of conquest in Europe.


----------



## Blackswanwood (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> To late for that, if you think Putins oil and gas has caused ecomomic crisis then taking Chinese trade out of the equation would be on another level, there would be public outcry because no one could buy all there xmas decorations. To get an idea of the impact China has just take stock of the things around you, see how many are not made in China because it is amazing and these are just the obvious ones. Then you have all the other stuff that may not be made in China but will contain many component parts made in China so they are just an integral part of the economy. Again it comes down to acceptance where the west needs to accept that we are entering the time of the east, the west has had it's time at the top and now the east will be at the top.
> 
> Pastor Martin's speech is applicable but only in the right situation, with any problem you must look at the min / max / the end goal or potential end result and this is problem is like a logic AND gate with the output = 1 & X , where X is your contribution.


I disagree it is too late but agree that rowing back is much harder than if previous governments (of all political persuasions) had been more alert and savvy to the emerging risk of being beholden to a totalitarian regime. We need a concerted effort to back China out of being an integral part of our economy.

Here's one place we could start:

uk-dragging-its-heels-over-trade-links-to-forced-labour-in-china-as-one-survivor-prepares-to-sue-trade-secretary-12715275


----------



## Jonm (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> To late for that, if you think Putins oil and gas has caused ecomomic crisis then taking Chinese trade out of the equation would be on another level, there would be public outcry because no one could buy all there xmas decorations. To get an idea of the impact China has just take stock of the things around you, see how many are not made in China because it is amazing and these are just the obvious ones. Then you have all the other stuff that may not be made in China but will contain many component parts made in China so they are just an integral part of the economy. Again it comes down to acceptance where the west needs to accept that we are entering the time of the east, the west has had it's time at the top and now the east will be at the top.
> 
> Pastor Martin's speech is applicable but only in the right situation, with any problem you must look at the min / max / the end goal or potential end result and this is problem is like a logic AND gate with the output = 1 & X , where X is your contribution.


Basically agree with what you are saying. Issue with China is they are a dictatorship and have an unswerving aim of getting Taiwan to be part of China. We are dependant on certain items from Taiwan, mainly chips. Missiles firing over Taiwan and in to the seas around it could stop this chip supply, grinding our industries to a halt. They do not necessarily need to invade to get their way.

Other supplier of chips is South Korea, right next to nuclear armed North Korea. 

We need resilience in our supply chains, leaving it to “market forces” does not necessarily provide this.


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

The rise of China should come as no surprise because they were at the top thousands of years ago and were one of the great empires, was it not Napolean who said " Let China Sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world " . Well China is well and truly awake and shaking the world which is not all bad, they have the resources and wealth to progress technology and knowledge to levels we have only dreamed of and there is nothing to be frightened of.

A good article is






The Great Power Shift From West To East


My book Breaking the Code of History published in 2009, highlighted that America was the last empire in a long series comprising what I called, the Super Western Christian Empire (SWCE), dating back to the 1400s, starting with the Portuguese. Based on my Five Phases of Empire model, I determined...




www.davidmurrin.co.uk





And then it is only a mater of time before we trade in the yuan and not dollars









China's Plan to Replace the U.S. Dollar With the Yuan


China wants the yuan to replace the U.S. dollar as a global currency. The IMF designated it as a reserve currency. That's the first step.




www.thebalancemoney.com


----------



## cerro (11 Oct 2022)

Don't people realise, Russier dare not start a nuclear war, we have as many warheads pointing at them as they have at us. Submarines in the Arctic, Australia and Canada have them two. They would be obliterated two minutes after sending one. And we must back Ukraine by sending longer range weapons


----------



## Jonm (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> because for them, the life of Russia depends on stopping NATO from advancing further right into Ukraine, right to their borders. They cannot afford _not_ to fight this war. They cannot afford not to win this war.


Prior to Crimean invasion keeping Ukraine out of NATO was perfectly negotiable. Even after Crimean invasion Ukraine was not allowed to join NATO. Look at Sweden and Finlands reaction. Sweden has been neutral for 200 years, back to Napoleon times, stayed out of ww1 and ww2, not neutral now.

I think the Russian invasion is an attempt to re establish the USSR. It’s a land grab pure and simple dressed up as something else.


----------



## selectortone (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> there is nothing to be frightened of.


Only the simmering resentment of centuries of conquest and meddling in their affairs by the West - principally but not exclusively the British Empire.

I have lived in the Far East and the Chinese have a very poor opinion of 'the gweilo'. They play a very very long game and to them revenge is a dish best served cold.


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

Cerro you are still in the Cuban era with Kennedy and Kresnov because things have moved on, the only thing that has not changed is that no one can win.

Russia now has not only the largest number of nukes but also they have higher yields and with hypersonic capability so in theory they can hit us faster than we can retaliate. They also have more of these tactical battlefield nukes which are raising so many questions. 

This is why I believe the only way to de escalate this is by talking and compromise, it is not like a war between Germany and Poland but more akin to Lancashire and Yorkshire because Ukraine has Russian history.


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

@Jonm , that is not my quote and was from an interview given by a retired American colonel, Richard Black I believe.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> Lensky does not have the intelligence to see this and is on a power trip thinking he can win, and is more than happy to drag nato into the conflict but at what cost to the country and potentially to us all ...



He hasn't anything to win - all he has to do is not lose.


----------



## Jonm (11 Oct 2022)

cerro said:


> Don't people realise, Russier dare not start a nuclear war, we have as many warheads pointing at them as they have at us. Submarines in the Arctic, Australia and Canada have them two. They would be obliterated two minutes after sending one. And we must back Ukraine by sending longer range weapons


That is the logical answer. No one is threatening Russian territory, other than the illegally annexed parts. Problem is whether Putin will be logical.

Concern is Russia using a small tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine. Poland will see that as an attack on them due to the radiation. Russia has been told what the nato conventional weapon response will be. Let us hope that Putin does not go down this route and if he does that the Russian military do not carry it out.


----------



## thetyreman (11 Oct 2022)

personally I think putin actually has the balls to drop a nuke and we should not under estimate him, I really do think he might do it if pushed too far, that's why we need to be careful.


----------



## Blackswanwood (11 Oct 2022)

thetyreman said:


> personally I think putin actually has the balls to drop a nuke and we should not under estimate him, I really do think he might do it if pushed too far, that's why we need to be careful.


I agree that we need to be careful but we also need (in my opinion) to be prepared to show that we are not going to let Ukraine's borders be changed just because Putin wants the USSR back. 

Putin also needs to be careful. There may be those around him that would prefer to be without him than live with what could follow if he were to press the button.


----------



## thetyreman (11 Oct 2022)

putting this on ignore now to prevent myself from getting banned with a rant, I've been thinking about leaving this place permanently for a while now


----------



## Dibs-h (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> Pastor Martin's speech is applicable but only in the right situation,


I completely disagree - there is only one context for Pastor Martin's speech - aptly described by another:

"The only thing necessary for the _triumph_ of _evil_ is for _good men_ to _do nothing._"


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

You are missing the point, what can the good men actually do. There has to be a potential successful outcome for the good men otherwise it becomes a pointless exercise in just delaying the inevitable and ending up with more deaths than there would have been. We have reached the point where doing something far outweighs the consequences of doing nothing and perhaps we will stop wasting money on the nuclear option.


----------



## Yorkieguy (11 Oct 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> Equally I think we should be taking a much firmer line with China and not funding their regime through trade (probably the only thing I think Trump was right on). By all accounts the Head of GCHQ will have some points to make on this in a speech today.


The West seems to have become too dependent on China, it's true, but here's something on which to ponder:

‘Make America Great again’ - 'America First' - ‘America jobs for American People’ said former President Trump.​Like most of his simplistic sound bites, that statement might chime well with his fan base, (70 million Americans voted for him), but it has all the intellectual depth of a Kleenex tissue.

Reducing America's dependence on China is not quite as simple as might be imagined. Take that quintessential American company Apple. Most people believe that Apple manufacture their own products, but they don’t make anything – they’re basically a design and marketing company, and a rather successful one too.

No wonder the Apple logo is an apple with a bit taken out of it. It's evocative of the 'Big Apple' but the bite taken out if it is rather larger that the logo suggests, and the country that took the bite in China. 

China assembles most of Apple's iPhones in factories in Shenzen, China, (500,000 a day), though Foxconn maintains factories in countries across the world, including Thailand, Malaysia, the Czech Republic, South Korea, Singapore, and the Philippines.

Take a look at the back of an iPhone, iPad, or any Apple product and in minuscule text you’ll see: "Designed by Apple in California - Assembled in China" Many may wonder why Apple chose to outsource all of its production overseas, specifically to China. They might believe that Apple are just out to make tons of money and that’s the sole reason for the relocation, but that's a mistaken assumption.

So why can’t Apple’s gadgets be assembled in the USA? Or in general terms, why can’t most international consumer electronics and computer businesses in the Western World do their manufacturing work internally to create local jobs and boost their economy?

The reason is quite simple - iPhones aren’t manufactured in America because they can’t be - there’s not enough manpower to support the scale of manufacturing of Apple’s products. The factory in China where Apple products, specifically iPhones, undergo final assembly has approximately 230,000 workers. In the USA, there are only 83 cities that have populations as high this one factory’s number of employees. Hence, the number of possible workers in the US is just not enough to cover Apple’s needs.

In China, an estimated 25% of their workforce lives in company-owned dormitories located on the factory property. Many people live and work at the factory. Such jobs are in high demand in China, and they can hire as many people as they need overnight. The speed and efficiency of Chinese manufacturing surpasses anything the US is presently capable of.

In addition to the manpower that China offers, most of the raw materials used to make Apple products are also manufactured overseas rather than in America - a lot are within a short distance of the final assembly plant. Shipping those components to any US-based factories would mean higher costs and potentially, possible manufacturing delays. It would also cost more money to manufacture in America because workers are paid more. There are also expenses on worker benefits, health insurance, and higher taxes. Since companies want to generate revenue, added costs inevitably result in increased prices for goods. This would mean that American-manufactured Apple products would cost more, would become uncompetitive and unaffordable.

Apple’s decision to outsource its manufacturing to China is about who can build the greatest number of Apple products in the shortest time. China is able to remain flexible and immediately adaptable to the needs of Apple. In a report, an Apple executive also stated that the US no longer has the people with the skills that they need. One example is the release of the iPhone. There is a huge demand for it, and Apple knew it needed to come to market as fast as possible. Apple was aware that it wasn’t attainable in US manufacturing and would result in delays. With this, they sought out the service of Chinese factories, and were able to quickly get the iPhone to market.

This is because in China, manufacturers can ask a large number of engineers to work on the required manufacturing overnight. As they have an abundant supply of labour force, this allows them to finish a large capacity of workload quickly. The US simply cannot employ 250,000 workers overnight. This makes China a flexible and capable supplier.

Yes, Apple is reaping the financial rewards, but that’s because China has an abundance of hard-working people with the right skills, which America does not. They are willing to accept demanding jobs which are the norm to millions of Chinese, including workers who have technical skills.

The Chinese are also consumers of course. Greater China (which includes mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan) is the third-largest market for Apple by revenue, behind the Americas and Europe.

As to "Designed by Apple in California", well yes Apple products are – but by an English designer. 

Sir Jonathan Paul "Jony" Ive - Apple’s Chief Design Officer joined Apple in September 1992, where he remained for 27 years until his departure in November 2019. Sir Jony Ive's first design assignment was the iMAC’ G3’ desktop computer in 1998. It helped to pave the way for many other designs such as the Macbook laptop PC range, iPod, iPhone and iPad.

An ironic twist to the Covid pandemic (or as Trump calls it "The China Virus"), is that not only did they export the virus to us, they also supply the disposable blue mask that now litter the streets, and the LFT/PCR testing kits.

Why Apple is Manufacturing Products in China? Read to Know More!

Apple diversifies supply chain but keeps China at the center

David.


----------



## Dibs-h (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> You are missing the point, what can the good men actually do. There has to be a potential successful outcome for the good men otherwise it becomes a pointless exercise in just delaying the inevitable and ending up with more deaths than there would have been. We have reached the point where doing something far outweighs the consequences of doing nothing and perhaps we will stop wasting money on the nuclear option.


You quoted a retired american colonel. I prefer the quote from Retired General Petraeus:

_ “Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a Nato – a collective – effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black Sea.”_

As for men - when someone has been invaded, the responses have been on a sliding scale:

From armed resistance (to the death)....trying to "live" some kind of normality...right up to active collaboration.

As for the point I was making - in such and other times, folk have to decide where in the spectrum they are and what they wish their legacy to be.


----------



## Dibs-h (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> because Ukraine has Russian history.



I think you'll find Russia actually has Ukrainian history.


----------



## Blackswanwood (11 Oct 2022)

Yorkieguy said:


> The West seems to have become too dependent on China, it's true, but here's something on which to ponder:
> 
> ‘Make America Great again’ - 'America First' - ‘America jobs for American People’ said former President Trump.​Like most of his simplistic sound bites, that statement might chime well with his fan base, (70 million Americans voted for him), but it has all the intellectual depth of a Kleenex tissue.
> 
> ...


I agree it's a challenge David but just accepting it as being how it has to be is not in my opinion the right answer (and for clarity I'm not saying that you are advocating that it is the right answer!)


----------



## danst96 (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> This will only end when they sit round a table and talk, the west should be pushing for lensky to broker a peace deal and compromise because at the end of the day Russia will take everyone down with them if it comes to it and they have more than adequate firepower to accomplish this.


You sound like a communist


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

So are you saying there is no point in trying to achieve peace through talking? Once you remove the diplomatic links then you are only left with a synario where the war continues and escalation leads to higher and higher casualties, but this is not just a war between two opponents because one has the ability to remove Ukraine off the map, if any of the power plants gets hit then Europe will be in trouble as well. Too many people think denial and burying their heads will make the potential outcome go away but it will not and this is why we must engage in communication and dialogue to bring this to an end before it gets out of control. We should have learnt from the past, Cuba should have been a huge warning to everyone and we are only here today in a large part due to Kennedy but rather than learn we choose to have the cold war and here we are today.


----------



## Fergie 307 (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> So are you saying there is no point in trying to achieve peace through talking? Once you remove the diplomatic links then you are only left with a synario where the war continues and escalation leads to higher and higher casualties, but this is not just a war between two opponents because one has the ability to remove Ukraine off the map, if any of the power plants gets hit then Europe will be in trouble as well. Too many people think denial and burying their heads will make the potential outcome go away but it will not and this is why we must engage in communication and dialogue to bring this to an end before it gets out of control. We should have learnt from the past, Cuba should have been a huge warning to everyone and we are only here today in a large part due to Kennedy but rather than learn we choose to have the cold war and here we are today.


Im obviously missing something, please explain how we "chose" to have the cold war.
If you just cave in to Putin over Ukraine, then where next, Moldova, Poland, the Baltic states? Perhaps you can tell us how far he would have to go before you would consider it appropriate to stop him, Germany, France?
Hitler did much the same, learning by experience that he could get away with invading his neighbours, and the world would talk a lot but do nothing. Only difference is that his was the most powerful military machine in the world at the time, so he was able to conquer most of europe before we were able to stop him. Putin has revealed in Ukraine that his conventional forces are a joke. I doubt he will look to use nuclear weapons, even if he wanted to I cant see the military actually doing it. They no doubt tell comrade Vlad whatever he wants to hear, if only to keep their heads. " Invade Ukraine, sure comrade president should be no problem". But they must know that if Nato becomes involved, which they would in the event of a tactical nuclear weapon being deployed, then the Russian Army, Navy and Air Force would be obliterated in very short order. As to your retired colonels comments I would suggest he knows damn all about submarines. Even the Soviets recognised that their technology was way behind our own and the Americans. Given the way their military has been run down since, that situation is unlikely to have improved. I would be very surprised if any Russian missile submarine at sea wasnt being shadowed 24/7 by a RN or USN attack submarine whose raison d'etre is to kill the Russian boat immediately if necessary, and certainly before it could launch. I mean look at the state of their kit, the flagship carrier in their fleet cant go to sea without a flotilla of tugs in attendance, it breaks down so often it has to be towed most of the time.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (11 Oct 2022)

There are scenarios:

Putin is deposed. He is has clearly failed - destroyed the reputation of Russia for military capability. He only has nuclear left. Outside the control of the west. * Plausible.*
Putin seeks a ceasefire. A turkey voting for Xmas would have more chance of survival. He would find the loss of face (and possibly his life) unacceptable. *Unlikely*
Zelensky seeks a ceasefire. Rare for a winning side to seek ceasefire when on a roll and wanting to finish the job. May be perceived by Russia as indicating weakness. *Unlikely.*
West withdraws support (weapons, sanctions etc) from Ukraine - impact on energy shortages and inflation is just too high. Messages Putin that ultimately we give in. * Unwise*
A third (neutral) party initiates dialogue to find a solution which saves face on both sides - eg: Russia keeps Crimea, withdraws from Eastern Ukraine, Ukraine joins Nato and EU. *Plausible *
West continues to support Ukraine advance retaking Crimea and East Ukraine. Leaves Putin with only a nuclear option for survival. *Unwise*
(1) and (2) are beyond the control of the west. (3), (4) and (6) are unlikely or unwise. A neutral negotiator (5) has some chance of success. Could be Turkey, UN, Switzerland etc.

I would expect negotiations to be underway within 4-8 weeks any longer and either:

there may be little which Putin could retain to save face if the Ukraine advance continues
hostilities may stall due to winter weather until next spring. Intense war would resume with both sides resupplied, retrained, remotivated, rested etc.


----------



## Spectric (11 Oct 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> Im obviously missing something, please explain how we "chose" to have the cold war.
> If you just cave in to Putin over Ukraine, then where next, Moldova, Poland, the Baltic states? Perhaps you can tell us how far he would have to go before you would consider it appropriate to stop him, Germany, France?


Because rather than going out of our way to understand the problems we just decided they were the big bad communist and we had to ensure they did not get the upper hand, history tells us to keep freinds close but potential enemies even closer. The Americans took this to extreme paranoia because they could see huge financial gains to be had in the race for military supremacy and this is clearly shown by there huge defence budget.

That is an assumption that he will carry on into Moldova and the rest, but that would be the end for everyone because Nato would get involved and it would go nuclear very fast. So rather than make an assumption let's take a more hopeful stance and stop fueling the war in Ukraine and get both parties round the table to talk because otherwise we could end up with an extinction event which you just have to accept as a potential outcome.

If it goes nuclear no one will win, there can only be losers because it might be comforting to think of Russian nuclear capabilies as being old and outdated but the reality is, like it or not Russia has embraced Chinese technology and they have some really awsome weapons to guarantee that if they are in a hopeless position they can take out everyone else, you cannot use european thinking when dealing with Russia or China because they are culturally very different. What is so difficult about accepting the side of diplomacy rather than war mongering because to achieve peace does not require war and conflict ?


----------



## Blackswanwood (11 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> Because rather than going out of our way to understand the problems we just decided they were the big bad communist and we had to ensure they did not get the upper hand, history tells us to keep freinds close but potential enemies even closer. The Americans took this to extreme paranoia because they could see huge financial gains to be had in the race for military supremacy and this is clearly shown by there huge defence budget.
> 
> That is an assumption that he will carry on into Moldova and the rest, but that would be the end for everyone because Nato would get involved and it would go nuclear very fast. So rather than make an assumption let's take a more hopeful stance and stop fueling the war in Ukraine and get both parties round the table to talk because otherwise we could end up with an extinction event which you just have to accept as a potential outcome.
> 
> If it goes nuclear no one will win, there can only be losers because it might be comforting to think of Russian nuclear capabilies as being old and outdated but the reality is, like it or not Russia has embraced Chinese technology and they have some really awsome weapons to guarantee that if they are in a hopeless position they can take out everyone else, you cannot use european thinking when dealing with Russia or China because they are culturally very different. What is so difficult about accepting the side of diplomacy rather than war mongering because to achieve peace does not require war and conflict ?


I think the difference of opinion is that your version of diplomacy rewards aggression/the indiscriminate use of high explosives against civilians and is unlikely to bring about a lasting peace whereas I would prefer to see the rule of international law enforced and the population of Ukraine able to live their lives the way they want to.

It may be better for us to discuss sharpening!


----------



## Fergie 307 (12 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> Because rather than going out of our way to understand the problems we just decided they were the big bad communist and we had to ensure they did not get the upper hand, history tells us to keep freinds close but potential enemies even closer. The Americans took this to extreme paranoia because they could see huge financial gains to be had in the race for military supremacy and this is clearly shown by there huge defence budget.
> 
> That is an assumption that he will carry on into Moldova and the rest, but that would be the end for everyone because Nato would get involved and it would go nuclear very fast. So rather than make an assumption let's take a more hopeful stance and stop fueling the war in Ukraine and get both parties round the table to talk because otherwise we could end up with an extinction event which you just have to accept as a potential outcome.
> 
> If it goes nuclear no one will win, there can only be losers because it might be comforting to think of Russian nuclear capabilies as being old and outdated but the reality is, like it or not Russia has embraced Chinese technology and they have some really awsome weapons to guarantee that if they are in a hopeless position they can take out everyone else, you cannot use european thinking when dealing with Russia or China because they are culturally very different. What is so difficult about accepting the side of diplomacy rather than war mongering because to achieve peace does not require war and conflict ?


I think the paranoia started with Stalin. You only have to look at the fate of most of the POW returned to the Soviets after the war, they were either shot or sent to the Gulag. Those that survived were marked for life as being ideologically suspect, why? Simply because they had experienced what things were really like on the outside, and so knew that the communists had lied to them about how great things were in the Soviet Union. This was a cancer that could not be allowed to spread. so I think you will find it was the communists who were largely the ones who chose to isolate themselves. I think the most likely outcome in Ukraine is that Putin will be overthrown, either by the military, and the ordering of any form of nuclear attack might just be what tips them against him, or by a popular uprising. They are lying to their own people about casualties, this cannot be concealed forever. When you have tens of thousands of Russians wanting to know where their brother, father, son or husband has got to, sooner or later the truth will come out. The casualty figures in Afghanistan are often said to have been a major factor in the downfall of the old regime. By any reckoning they have surpassed those figures in Ukraine, and in a matter of months rather than years. We have seen recently how many Russian men are leaving the country rather than be called up. How long before Putin starts emulating "Uncle Joe" by shooting his own troops for retreating. He is increasingly looking like a loser, who is seeing events spiralling out of his control. He has been used to bullying his way to what he wants for years, now that isn't working anymore he doesn't seem to have a plan B.


----------



## niemeyjt (12 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> Grozny, Aleppo, Crimea, Donbas, Ukraine 2022.
> 
> The western response to Crimea was
> 1. continue building Nord stream 2
> ...


You forgot South Ossetia and Transnistria


----------



## Jonm (12 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> This is why I believe the only way to de escalate this is by talking and compromise


If you are talking about a ceasefire and talks then Russia is very unlikely to leave the land they currently occupy and the talks would go on for years. No lasting peace is possible with Russian troops west of the Dnipro. At some future date they could and probably would strike westwards to take Odessa and make Ukraine land locked.

For a lasting peace I can see no other way at the moment, other than forcing Russia out of all the land on the right bank of the Dnipro, including Kherson City.


----------



## clogs (12 Oct 2022)

How can u have dialogue with a MADMAN......


----------



## Jonm (12 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> Prior to Crimean invasion keeping Ukraine out of NATO was perfectly negotiable. Even after Crimean invasion Ukraine was not allowed to join NATO. Look at Sweden and Finlands reaction. Sweden has been neutral for 200 years, back to Napoleon times, stayed out of ww1 and ww2, not neutral now.
> 
> I think the Russian invasion is an attempt to re establish the USSR. It’s a land grab pure and simple dressed up as something else.


To add to this
I the Baltic region of NATO there had previously been only a few thousand alliance forces in the region, intended to serve as a tripwire which would be overrun in the event of a Russian attack. The presence of US and western European soldiers among them, however, was intended to leave Moscow in no doubt that those countries would send in large reinforcements. Ie no large NATO forces on Russias borders which could be seen by Russia as a threat to them.

Here is an article giving the Estonian PM‘s view on this








Estonian PM says Baltic states would be ‘wiped off the map’ under current NATO plans


Current NATO defence plans would not prevent Estonia from being wiped off the map and the capital Tallinn from being raz...




www.lrt.lt





Here are some quotes from it
- “She said the alliance’s current plans envisage that the Baltic states would be overrun, but then be retaken 180 days later.”
- “Noting that the invasion of Ukraine has been going on for over (about) 100 days, Kallas said: “If you compare the sizes of Ukraine and the Baltic countries, it would mean the complete destruction of countries and our culture.”
- ”Commenting on the current plan to “lose [territory] and liberate it afterwards”, Kallas pointed out that atrocities in Bucha near Kyiv were committed by Russian troops within 80 of the invasion. “Now everyone sees that this tripwire concept doesn’t really work,” the Estonian prime minister stressed.”

To me this is a very valid point and NATO is taking it seriously.

So another impact of this invasion is likely to be long term more NATO troops stationed close to Russian borders. Bad outcome for us all, including Russia.

Unfortunately dictators like Putin only respect strength and exploit weakness. The West failed in 2014 with the pathetic response to the Crimean invasion. Appeasement did not work with Hitler and it has not worked with Putin.

Edit- I have been feeling and saying for some time prior to February this year that “this Putin guy worries me”. Did not follow it up, look in to it further, email my MP or do anything else. Did not see this coming. But the West politicians should have seen the dangers, particularly Germany and its reliance on Russian gas.


----------



## Jonm (12 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> A third (neutral) party initiates dialogue to find a solution which saves face on both sides - eg: Russia keeps Crimea, withdraws from Eastern Ukraine, Ukraine joins Nato and EU. *Plausible*


Overall a very good analysis. Your example would be a reasonable outcome but Russia would have gained nothing by the invasion, I cannot see it being accepted by Putin. He will want to retain all he holds and as I said before “No lasting peace is possible with Russian troops west of the Dnipro. At some future date they could and probably would strike westwards to take Odessa and make Ukraine land locked.”

I hope something can be agreed to give a lasting peace but cannot see a route to it at the moment.


----------



## Jonm (12 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> Because rather than going out of our way to understand the problems we just decided they were the big bad communist and we had to ensure they did not get the upper hand


That may well have been the case then
but since 1991 Russia has not been communist, we have the oligarchs. I thought the emphasis since then was closeness through trade. Germany and others dependant on Russian gas, lots of western companies investing in Russia.

We had the “peace dividend” and reduced military spending. Removed troops from the continent eg BAOR. 

The whole idea was trade not war, Russia joined the G7/G8 in 1998 and the WTO in 2012. This policy has now failed.


----------



## bansobaby (12 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> hostilities may stall due to winter weather until next spring. Intense war would resume with both sides resupplied, retrained, remotivated, rested etc.


From what little I know of the area I think conditions for fighting are actually better in the winter in the sense that stuff doesn't sink into the mud so easily.
It may be that the Russian tank superiority in numerical terms would come to the fore....


----------



## Fergie 307 (12 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> Overall a very good analysis. Your example would be a reasonable outcome but Russia would have gained nothing by the invasion, I cannot see it being accepted by Putin. He will want to retain all he holds and as I said before “No lasting peace is possible with Russian troops west of the Dnipro. At some future date they could and probably would strike westwards to take Odessa and make Ukraine land locked.”
> 
> I hope something can be agreed to give a lasting peace but cannot see a route to it at the moment.


Sadly I don't think there is a route to leave whilst Putin remains in place. The outcome of the war is too closely linked to his own future, If they lose the war then he will fall, so he doesn't have much option but to carry on. The only hope is for someone, the military or the Russian people, possibly his oligarch former mates, to decide that the cost in men, money and Russia's reputation is such that it is just not viable to continue, and remove him. His successor can withdraw, blaming the whole escapade on Mad Vlad, and the world can return to something approaching normality.


----------



## Jameshow (12 Oct 2022)

bansobaby said:


> From what little I know of the area I think conditions for fighting are actually better in the winter in the sense that stuff doesn't sink into the mud so easily.
> It may be that the Russian tank superiority in numerical terms would come to the fore....


Or the freezing conditions will harm the poor conscripts that they will give up?


----------



## Dibs-h (12 Oct 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Or the freezing conditions will harm the poor conscripts that they will give up?


Yep - from the early part of the invasion the cold weather was a home team advantage. The away team thought they were on exercises in Belarus and were woefully under-prepared food\gear wise.

I think the current analysis from a few quarters is that winter will favour Ukraine again.


----------



## Spectric (12 Oct 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> to decide that the cost in men, money and Russia's reputation is such that it is just not viable to continue, and remove him


But if you know that you do have a wining hand that you have not yet played then the game is not over.


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

But a hand that results in your own inevitable destruction is hardly a winner is it. Putin may have the attitude of Hitler, that if he is going down then everyone else can go with him, I suspect others will not be so keen. And Putin cannot fire a missile himself, there will be a whole host of people involved, any one of whom can sabotage the process. There is, and never has been, any real threat to the Russian homeland. I have faith that those responsible for launching a nuclear strike are not going to start WW3 to save Putin's pride. If you let him do what he likes on the basis that if you don't he might nuke you, then where does that end? And we need to be aware that China in particular will be following these events with great interest, they would love to bring Taiwan back into the fold, hopefully our actions in support of Ukraine will make them think twice. So far the Chinese support for Russian has been lukewarm at best. They are wise enough to sit back and see how things develop before committing themselves. More recently they appear increasingly unenthusiastic in support of Russia's actions. This suggests to me anyway they are not convinced that he is going to win, and don't want to damage their image backing a potential loser when there is really no upside for them. The only country backing him unequivocally is N Korea, which says it all.


----------



## Oldman (13 Oct 2022)

On a slight tangent to the main thread direction, can anyone explain to me why POW's are being exchanged on it seems a regular basis? I thought the idea of keeping them as pow's was so they could no longer fight you. Returning them back home after a few months seems counter productive.


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> But a hand that results in your own inevitable destruction is hardly a winner is it.


My understanding is that if Putin launches a tactical nuclear weapon then Russia has been told what the NATO conventional response will be.

An indication of what that could be is


Dibs-h said:


> You quoted a retired american colonel. I prefer the quote from Retired General Petraeus:
> 
> _ “Just to give you a hypothetical, we would respond by leading a Nato – a collective – effort that would take out every Russian conventional force that we can see and identify on the battlefield in Ukraine and also in Crimea and every ship in the Black Sea.”_


That looks like a Russian losing hand.

Russia would then have a choice of further nuclear escalation which could then easily result in complete nuclear destruction. 

It is a dangerous game we are all players/spectators in. Hitler could have easily been stopped at the Rhineland military occupation. Putin could have been deterred after 2014 Crimean invasion if we (the West) had responded robustly but we put money first.


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

Oldman said:


> On a slight tangent to the main thread direction, can anyone explain to me why POW's are being exchanged on it seems a regular basis? I thought the idea of keeping them as pow's was so they could no longer fight you. Returning them back home after a few months seems counter productive.


If the numbers/skills are about the same then it balances out. Where, for example, uk nationals enrolled in the Ukrainian army are returned then Ukraine would see this as goodwill towards a major supporter.


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

The old convention was always that if you were released in these circumstances it was on the understanding that you would not take up arms again.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (13 Oct 2022)

Were the west to back down now in the face of a nuclear threat, it would send a message to Putin and every other rogue nuclear state they could get what they want through nuclear threat.

N.Korea is a good example - Kim Jong-un is probably certifiable but has a nuclear capability. Iran is close. Pakistan is not the most stable of states and a potential threat.

That nuclear (and biological and chemical) capability would "trickle down" to madmen was inevitable and would need resolution. That time is now.


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Were the west to back down now in the face of a nuclear threat, it would send a message to Putin and every other rogue nuclear state they could get what they want through nuclear threat.
> 
> N.Korea is a good example - Kim Jong-un is probably certifiable but has a nuclear capability. Iran is close. Pakistan is not the most stable of states and a potential threat.
> 
> That nuclear (and biological and chemical) capability would "trickle down" to madmen was inevitable and would need resolution. That time is now.


Hear hear. If we had put Putin firmly back in his box years ago we wouldn't be having this conversation. Now we need to deal with him firmly, as much to send a clear message to others with similar ambitions as to help Ukraine.


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> My understanding is that if Putin launches a tactical nuclear weapon then Russia has been told what the NATO conventional response will be.


But NATO has been told what the response would be if they set foot in Ukraine, Russia uses small Nuke in Ukraine so NATO joins in and then full retaliation by Russia. What is playing out is a very dangerous game of Poker / Bluff in which the stakes are far to high to continue playing. We are thinking like europeans and not the likes of Russia, N Korea or China and that makes it even more high risk. Lets forget a nuclear retaliation, just think of what happens if we get Novichoked, that could put us out of action for an awful long time with an NHS and emergency services that could not cope.

Escalation has to be avoided at all cost, even if Russia retreated completely out of Ukraine they could still bomb and shell them at will so as I have already said there needs to be an outcome that keeps both sides happy.


----------



## david.tamlaght (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> But NATO has been told what the response would be if they set foot in Ukraine, Russia uses small Nuke in Ukraine so NATO joins in and then full retaliation by Russia. What is playing out is a very dangerous game of Poker / Bluff in which the stakes are far to high to continue playing. We are thinking like europeans and not the likes of Russia, N Korea or China and that makes it even more high risk. Lets forget a nuclear retaliation, just think of what happens if we get Novichoked, that could put us out of action for an awful long time with an NHS and emergency services that could not cope.
> 
> Escalation has to be avoided at all cost, even if Russia retreated completely out of Ukraine they could still bomb and shell them at will so as I have already said there needs to be an outcome that keeps both sides happy.


So how do you keep a madman happy ?
The west and nato's collective response to russia's past aggression of its neighbours is the seed that sowed todays shocking scenes in Ukraine,
Germany and France in particular.The former who had an East German ruler and russian speaker who gladly signed up to giving the russians an energy noose with which to strangle their own country. Soholz did his best to obstruct any meanful assisance in the early months of this war too

The later,well Macron was so far up the jacksie of putin with his cosy chats early in the conflict that i had to pinch myself at times and wonder exactly what pies his fingers were in .One day we may get answers but unlikely.Time has moved on and both countries have got it into their heads that putin is infact crazy .
The problem with those 2 countries is that without the disenting voice of the UK now in the EU ,the rest of Europe have to just tow the line .
Is it any wonder our nation voted to leave that taking shop.
I honestly can't see any way out for putin to save face .
As long as the supplies keep rolling from the west ,he is on a loser.No way out except to keep feeding the meat grinder on the front line and hope no one in Moscow notices .  Too late for a settlement now other than the full reinstatement of Ukraines international borders.
The USA are rubbing their hands,fighting a proxy war which will leave their arch enemy in the gutter ,both financially and militarily and not having to put feet on the ground.
They will also be coining it in due to increased oil and gas trade with europe at high prices .
No one wants to see suffering but the US don't have too many incentives just now to see this ending before the destruction of russia as a force .


----------



## Phil Pascoe (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> We are thinking like europeans and not the likes of Russia, N Korea or China ...


David Starkey summed that up - we tend to believe the Russians and Chinese think like us ..... they don't.


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

david.tamlaght said:


> I honestly can't see any way out for putin to save face .


That is why we are in such a grave situation, nothing more dangerous than a wounded animal. I agree America has been throwing europe under the bus just to see Russia brought down and is willing to let us all freeze this winter, some special freind!



david.tamlaght said:


> The USA are rubbing their hands,fighting a proxy war which will leave their arch enemy in the gutter ,both financially and militarily and not having to put feet on the ground.


That was fine in places like Korea, Iraq and Vietnam but none of those countries had the ability to take the destruction back onto your own soil and wipe out your own people. Another issue is that Putin strikes a deal with North Korean or such in exchange for an arms deal, suddenly we are facing trouble from other directions and there are a lot of places and people who really dislike America. Long term it will be China that topples the Americans off the top spot.


----------



## mikej460 (13 Oct 2022)

david.tamlaght said:


> So how do you keep a madman happy ?
> The west and nato's collective response to russia's past aggression of its neighbours is the seed that sowed todays shocking scenes in Ukraine,
> Germany and France in particular.The former who had an East German ruler and russian speaker who gladly signed up to giving the russians an energy noose with which to strangle their own country. Soholz did his best to obstruct any meanful assisance in the early months of this war too
> 
> ...


You won't ever make him happy, he grieves the downfall of the Soviet Union as much as Hitler grieved Germany's loss of WW1. The best way to beat him is to let him burn himself out and the Russians will remove him.


----------



## Blackswanwood (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> But NATO has been told what the response would be if they set foot in Ukraine, Russia uses small Nuke in Ukraine so NATO joins in and then full retaliation by Russia. What is playing out is a very dangerous game of Poker / Bluff in which the stakes are far to high to continue playing. We are thinking like europeans and not the likes of Russia, N Korea or China and that makes it even more high risk. Lets forget a nuclear retaliation, just think of what happens if we get Novichoked, that could put us out of action for an awful long time with an NHS and emergency services that could not cope.
> 
> Escalation has to be avoided at all cost, even if Russia retreated completely out of Ukraine they could still bomb and shell them at will so as I have already said there needs to be an outcome that keeps both sides happy.


I don't think any of us know how NATO will respond if Russia were to use a tactical nuclear weapon. The reported position is that the US is being deliberately vague. I do think that if that happened those that have been prepared to tolerate Russia's actions (China/India etc) will quickly rethink their position.

Escalation should be avoided wherever possible as opposed to at all cost. "At all cost" was the stance Neville Chamberlain took. Being prepared to respond firmly to Russia upping the ante is the only viable option in my opinion.


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> I don't think any of us know how NATO will respond if Russia were to use a tactical nuclear weapon.


But Russia knows how the USA would respond









Russia faces 'catastrophic' consequences if it uses nuclear weapons, U.S. warns


Russian President Vladimir Putin renewed his nuclear threats last week as he escalated his war in Ukraine by calling up reservists and moving to annex occupied areas.




www.nbcnews.com





National security adviser Jake Sullivan told NBC News' "Meet the Press" on Sunday that the consequences "would be catastrophic if Russia went down the dark road of nuclear weapons use."

Pressed by host Chuck Todd about what those countermeasures would be, Sullivan would only say, "In private channels we have spelled out in greater detail exactly what that would mean."

Anthony Blinken said something similar here


----------



## Blackswanwood (13 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> But Russia knows how the USA would respond
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good!


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

This is looking like one hell of a big mistake on the part of the USA, they are assuming Putin would not escalute the war if they got involved when he uses a tactical batlefield nuke but with 

" According to the Federation of American Scientists, Russia has a total nuclear warhead inventory of 5,977 - this is the biggest in the world. "

Lets say that 75% don't reach target, don't exist or are dud so around 1500 will hit something, each wiping out around 100 square miles, even if they all miss a target the radioactive fall out on our planet will cause massive loss of life over many decades to come, I suppose that is why they called the game with just one round in the chamber Russian roulette.


----------



## Stan (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> I suppose that is why they called the game with just one round in the chamber Russian roulette.



Nuclear war is playing Russian Roulette with an automatic pistol instead of a revolver.


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> and is willing to let us all freeze this winter, some special freind!


I think that is very unfair to the USA, they have been warning Germany about Nord stream 2 and the dependance of some European nations on Russian gas. Much as I dislike Trump, here is a video of German diplomats reaction to Trumps warning about this issue. Laughing and smirking, openly mocking him.


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

The Americans are using Europeans as pawns in there proxy war. China must be happy that the Russians are keeping them occupied whilst they line up Taiwan.


----------



## Stan (13 Oct 2022)

I have no doubt China is watching the West's reaction to the Ukraine war, and will factor that into their plans to invade Taiwan.


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

I think the only positive things to have come out of the whole situation are , firstly, that the nations that have previously been prepared to tolerate Putin's behaviour have finally woken up. Secondly that it has brought into sharp focus how unwise it is to become overly reliant on countries that do not view us in a particularly friendly light. We need to urgently address this in realtion to China. Hopefully this can be accomplished in the long term by bringing us closer together. Quite how we do that given the attitude of the present leaders im not sure. In any case we need to try and reduce our appetite for their products. Never healthy to have so many eggs in the one basket.


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

There is of course another issue, namely that the Russian military machine has proved to be more bark than bite. Very bad for Putin and his bullying tactics, we now know that although his nuclear arsenal remains a concern, his conventional forces are nothing like as effective as he would have had us believe.


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> The Americans are using Europeans as pawns in there proxy war. China must be happy that the Russians are keeping them occupied whilst they line up Taiwan.


Do you think the USA caused the war in Ukraine?


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

In the second world war the USA and Britain provided enormous quantities of weapons and other war materials to the USSR, to help them defeat a vicious invader. Was that a proxy war?


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> Do you think the USA caused the war in Ukraine


They have not directly caused it through there actions but have contributed through there lack of actions over the years and previous interventions. 



Fergie 307 said:


> provided enormous quantities of weapons and other war materials to the USSR, to help them defeat a vicious invader. Was that a proxy war?


A big difference because then the cold war had not started and the tensions and mistrust was not on the agenda, now with the hostility between Russia and america this is just an arena for the americans to see there enemy at war, to weigh up the opponent.


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Were the west to back down now in the face of a nuclear threat, it would send a message to Putin and every other rogue nuclear state they could get what they want through nuclear threat.
> 
> N.Korea is a good example - Kim Jong-un is probably certifiable but has a nuclear capability. Iran is close. Pakistan is not the most stable of states and a potential threat.
> 
> That nuclear (and biological and chemical) capability would "trickle down" to madmen was inevitable and would need resolution. That time is now.


I think the problem with Kim is that whilst his dad knew we'll enough that the propaganda was mostly b******t, Kim actually believes it.


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

Maybe that time is now but is it not like having let the camp fire become a huge forrest fire that could have easily been extinguished at the start but now left it to late. So far we have been very lucky, only Cuba got close but still we pursued an arms race and not a peaceful one or tried to resolve any of the trust issues.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (13 Oct 2022)

There is no good reason to spell out the response to the use by Russia of tactical nuclear weapons.

Putin would be unsure of the consequences; save they would be severe. Whether the West would respond with tactical nuclear weapons is debatable. Better to leave the outcome in doubt than promise and possibly not deliver.

There is no good reason for Nato troops to engage directly in the war. The Ukrainians are doing a great job using weaponry the west has provided. Any risk of escalation through western troops on the ground is to be avoided.

Putin has offered to switch the gas back on providing there is a deal. It would be unwise to accept his offer despite the obvious pain in the short term. His demands would no doubt include the EU ceasing weapons support to Ukraine. It is just energy blackmail.

All these events have crystallised issues which were previously ignored - Europe must look to its own defence needs, the US will soon be second to China as the global economic lead. Reliance on other regimes for critical infrastructure and extended logistics chains and defence needs is foolish.


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> but still we pursued an arms race and not a peaceful one or tried to resolve any of the trust issues.


This discussion is going in a circle


Jonm said:


> That may well have been the case then
> but since 1991 Russia has not been communist, we have the oligarchs. I thought the emphasis since then was closeness through trade. Germany and others dependant on Russian gas, lots of western companies investing in Russia.
> 
> We had the “peace dividend” and reduced military spending. Removed troops from the continent eg BAOR.
> ...


I think there was a serious attempt at addressing the “trust issue” after 1991. Germany “trusted“ the Russians to the extent that they put their strategic supply of gas in russian hands. More fool them, and we are paying the price.

edit - In the NATO Baltic states, the “NATO” presence comprised small numbers of troops from UK, France, Germany etc to act as a ”trip wire” in the event of a Russian attack, no threat to Russia.


----------



## mikej460 (13 Oct 2022)

This is a worrying turn of events, what does he intend to do to Kherson if it falls?








Ukraine war: Russia to move civilians from Kherson


Civilians in Russian-occupied Kherson are urged to "save themselves" from Ukrainian rockets.



www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

All this really cast a big shadow over humanity, what sort of race pursues making tools that have no other purpose than killing others and is willing to spend millions in doing so whilst knowing that the money would be of more benefit spent in medical science and in improving life for the living.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (13 Oct 2022)

The race that includes junior headbangers?


----------



## Fergie 307 (13 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> All this really cast a big shadow over humanity, what sort of race pursues making tools that have no other purpose than killing others and is willing to spend millions in doing so whilst knowing that the money would be of more benefit spent in medical science and in improving life for the living.


Can't argue with you there, unfortunately we have always been an aggressive lot us humans. Unless everyone puts their weapons aside at the same time, which is never going to happen, then sadly their will always be a need to have weapons to defend against a potential aggressor. Naturally the tendency is to want more and better weapons than the other guy, so it goes on.


----------



## Spectric (13 Oct 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> Naturally the tendency is to want more and better weapons than the other guy, so it goes on.


A race to the end, we are supposed to be inteligent yet there is no SI unit for inteligence because it is relative and therefore everyone is inteligent if they compare to the right thing. Makes you think UFO's are real because Earth could be a destination for alien species who want some entertainment.


----------



## mikej460 (13 Oct 2022)

From Wikipedia (abridged)


----------



## Jonm (13 Oct 2022)

mikej460 said:


> This is a worrying turn of events, what does he intend to do to Kherson if it falls?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well initially at least there will be a lot of POW’s in Kherson as there is little or no escape route. Any suspicion he is going to nuke it then keep them there.

I suspect there will be a lot of shelling of civilian ares from Russian artillery on the left bank. Then blame it on Ukraine.


----------



## Jester129 (14 Oct 2022)

What the hell is it with Macron? He's now told Putin that France will not be using their nuclear armaments if
Putin presses the button! Moron Macron!


----------



## Blackswanwood (14 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> All this really cast a big shadow over humanity, what sort of race pursues making tools that have no other purpose than killing others and is willing to spend millions in doing so whilst knowing that the money would be of more benefit spent in medical science and in improving life for the living.


I agree. The peace dividend from the end of the Cold War has been wazzed up the wall. It would be much better if we could find a way to stop having wars and military conflict. The role of the UN needs a rethink perhaps.


----------



## Fergie 307 (14 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> They have not directly caused it through there actions but have contributed through there lack of actions over the years and previous interventions.
> 
> 
> A big difference because then the cold war had not started and the tensions and mistrust was not on the agenda, now with the hostility between Russia and america this is just an arena for the americans to see there enemy at war, to weigh up the opponent.


No distrust and tensions during the war? There was enormous distust, mostly on the part of Stalin who was convinced that any issues that caused interruptions to the supply of arms and material to him were examples of bad faith on the part of the USA and Britain. Not to mention the ideological differences, which led to some very poor treatment of our own people working in the USSR, and trying to actually smooth the delivery of the stuff. The begginings of what would become the cold war started long before the war ended.


----------



## Jonm (14 Oct 2022)

Jester129 said:


> What the hell is it with Macron? He's now told Putin that France will not be using their nuclear armaments if
> Putin presses the button! Moron Macron!


I am not clear what sort of nuclear attack Macron was referring to. Assuming it is a tactical nuclear weapon then we have to be clear, privately to Russia what our response would be and it has to be credible ie would the west respond with an all out nuclear attack, I do not think that is credible and Putin would not believe it.

With reference to my post above


Jonm said:


> But Russia knows how the USA would respond


Presumably Macron knows what the USA’s response will be and it is not nuclear. Hopefully all NATO countries are singing off the same hymn sheet.

I cannot see that Macron has undermined anything but a non committal public response would have been better.


----------



## clogs (14 Oct 2022)

Macron like all other french leaders are covering their @RSE as per usual.......vyche frenc, ring any bells.....
they still adore that creep Degaulle.......


----------



## Stan (14 Oct 2022)

Jonm said:


> but since 1991 Russia has not been communist, we have the oligarchs.




The logo on the bonnet has changed and the colour of the interior seating, but the bodywork and chassis are unchanged. It still drives like it used to so I assume the engine is much the same as well.

I'm not buying this car!

Putin has forced himself into a corner. To save face ( and possibly his life ) he has to come out with more than he started with. Any negotiations he takes part in will, from his point of view, require this as part of the end result. How would you feel if your neighbour took over your entire garden, but agreed to withdraw from most of it as long as you let him keep the driveway? Why should Ukraine do the same? Sudetenland, anyone?


----------



## Phil Pascoe (14 Oct 2022)

Stan said:


> The logo on the bonnet has changed and the colour of the interior seating, but the bodywork and chassis are unchanged. It still drives like it used to so I assume the engine is much the same as well.


Same circus, different clowns.


----------



## Fergie 307 (14 Oct 2022)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Same circus, different clowns.


Very well put


----------



## Spectric (14 Oct 2022)

I see Ukraine has upset Mr Musk following his coments on bringing the war to an end, now it looks like they will lose starlink which is part of his spacex company. 









Elon Musk balks at funding Ukraine’s Starlink satellites, as envoy tells him to ‘fuck off’


Company asks US military to cough up for the critical satellite system.




www.politico.eu


----------



## Dibs-h (15 Oct 2022)

Spectric said:


> I see Ukraine has upset Mr Musk following his coments on bringing the war to an end, now it looks like they will lose starlink which is part of his spacex company.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He's just behaving like the petulant, entitled tw.t that he actually is.


----------

