# They must be having a right laugh



## Spectric (18 Jan 2022)

Anyone seen that TV program called life at sea, about the crew onboard a navy ship that is on it's last legs and should have been called carry on navy because you expect Sid james, Barbara Windsor and the rest to appear if they were still around as it is such a farce. If the Russians are watching they must be having a great laugh at such antics and wondering why this crew believe that the UK is at war with Russia, I suppose it makes good reality tv. The sad thing is that we used to have a navy that was probably the envy of the world but like everything else it has long gone, in 1953 the Queen reviewed her fleet at Spithead and we had 193 vessels, six carriers, about fifteen submarines and so many other vessels with something in the region of 150,000 sailors, my old man was on the submarine HMS Aurochs at the time. This navy ship also highlights an issue that our government seems to overlook and that is that having something is just the initial cost, you then need to maintain and keep it in good condition and upto date so HS2 is costing a fortune just to build, but if you watch the program about the Japanese shinkansen trains then you see just how much is needed to keep them running.


----------



## doctor Bob (18 Jan 2022)

I find it very annoying that they keep saying the Russians are going to destroy UK coms, no they are not.
The captain seems a perfectly nice but dim chap, good rugby player I suspect and good school.
The ship has a major catastrophe every few hours, and the sonar equipment looks knackered.

Quite enjoying it  Rule Britannia and all that.


----------



## Spectric (18 Jan 2022)

doctor Bob said:


> I find it very annoying that they keep saying the Russians are going to destroy UK coms, no they are not.


Gives our goverment an excuse to waste taxpayers money on defence!


----------



## Jameshow (18 Jan 2022)

What ship is it? 

HMS Duncan looked quite modern and we'll run? 

Cheers James


----------



## Distinterior (18 Jan 2022)

Jameshow said:


> What ship is it?



HMS Northumberland.....A Frigate.


----------



## Jameshow (18 Jan 2022)

25yrs old. 

I once worked on the Canberra now that was an old ship!


----------



## Droogs (18 Jan 2022)

@Jacob apparently fixed a leak on the Mary Rose, once


----------



## Jacob (18 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> @Jacob apparently fixed a leak on the Mary Rose, once


Yef, forry about that chapf, it faid "Ye Olde guaranteed NeverLeak" on the tin. 
Ihfructionf faid 'apply generoufly to hole in bottom'
Muft have been paft itf buy-by date.


----------



## Jameshow (18 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> @Jacob apparently fixed a leak on the Mary Rose, once


I thought he was assistant to Noah!!


----------



## MARK.B. (18 Jan 2022)

Remember the Canberra James, was my first ship in 1975 ,lasted precisely two months before being told politely that perhaps A general Cargo ship would suit me better as i seemed a tad passenger unfriendly , apparently you were not allowed to threaten passengers even though one of them had thought it funny to shove me into the swimming pool fully clothed and on duty  . Spent the next 12 years on cargo ships and had a great time


----------



## baldkev (18 Jan 2022)

Its sad that the forces have been eroded so badly. It was the same before both ww1 and 2, we were dangerously underpowered and had to work hard to play catchup. Years before ww2 the admiralty were shouting for more ships.

If there were a ww3, the Russians would indeed cut the fibreoptics. They developed a submarine specifically for it. It wouldnt happen in peace time though


----------



## Glitch (19 Jan 2022)

I've watched it and it is interesting but embarrassing. I'm hoping it's a double bluff to lull the Russians into thinking we are incompetent.

They had fire, flood, power cuts and ran out of sonar buoys.


----------



## shed9 (19 Jan 2022)

There isn't a need for military might in terms of national defence anymore? In reality there hasn't been for quite some time now. There is no point having a flotilla of ships when the current threat is someone in their back bedroom on the internet or multiple semi-organised idealists prepared to die for their cause. Most recent defence has predominantly involved localised geopolitics typically based around protecting or removing access to certain resources such as oil. This is likely to shift to water in the short term as ironically, climate collapse may invoke the rebuilding of militaries around the world for this very same reason of resource access. There is a double irony here in that I'm also inclined to think that again, climate collapse may end up feeding those potential internet activists and idealists prepared to die. Only a matter of time before we see the rise of climate terrorism and indeed extra resource for counter terrorism.


----------



## Blackswanwood (19 Jan 2022)

I imagine the captain of the Russian submarine got a good shoeing when he got back to port for not checking his mirrors properly before changing direction and hitting Northumberland.


----------



## selectortone (19 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> I imagine the captain of the Russian submarine got a good shoeing when he got back to port for not checking his mirrors properly before changing direction and hitting Northumberland.


More likely a medal for deliberately knocking out Northumberland's sonar array!


----------



## Glitch (19 Jan 2022)

shed9 said:


> There isn't a need for military might in terms of national defence anymore? In reality there hasn't been for quite some time now. There is no point having a flotilla of ships when the current threat is someone in their back bedroom on the internet or multiple semi-organised idealists prepared to die for their cause. Most recent defence has predominantly involved localised geopolitics typically based around protecting or removing access to certain resources such as oil. This is likely to shift to water in the short term as ironically, climate collapse may invoke the rebuilding of militaries around the world for this very same reason of resource access. There is a double irony here in that I'm also inclined to think that again, climate collapse may end up feeding those potential internet activists and idealists prepared to die. Only a matter of time before we see the rise of climate terrorism and indeed extra resource for counter terrorism.


I'm all for having a small navy but let's make sure it's modern, effective and fit for purpose.


----------



## Spectric (19 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> I imagine the captain of the Russian submarine got a good shoeing when he got back to port for not checking his mirrors properly before changing direction and hitting Northumberland.


That could have been a deliberate manouvre to disable the sonar, had that been in a real conflict then I would say the Northumberland would have been sunk because even before that they lost sonar due to a malfunction.



shed9 said:


> There is no point having a flotilla of ships when the current threat is someone in their back bedroom on the internet


Very true, we are so reliant on the internet now that hacking can do so much damage, financial, ultilies and imagine if suddenly social media went down long term, all those screen staring phone zombies could go on the rampage as it would be like disconnecting them from a collective and they would be totally lost and out of control.

Another thing these days is a fleet of ships, an army of ground troops or an armoured division is no more than a sitting target for someone holding a joystick on the other side of the planet and to them would be no different to any other game except there would be real lives lost that they would be emotionally disconnected from, not like having to actualy do the deed face to face.


----------



## Jacob (19 Jan 2022)

shed9 said:


> There isn't a need for military might in terms of national defence anymore? In reality there hasn't been for quite some time now. There is no point having a flotilla of ships when the current threat is someone in their back bedroom on the internet or multiple semi-organised idealists prepared to die for their cause. Most recent defence has predominantly involved localised geopolitics typically based around protecting or removing access to certain resources such as oil. This is likely to shift to water in the short term as ironically, climate collapse may invoke the rebuilding of militaries around the world for this very same reason of resource access. There is a double irony here in that I'm also inclined to think that again, climate collapse may end up feeding those potential internet activists and idealists prepared to die. Only a matter of time before we see the rise of climate terrorism and indeed extra resource for counter terrorism.


Already happening.
Navy is supposedly being mobilised against boat people. 
Climate change is already a major factor in the refugee situation and is only going to get more severe.


----------



## Orraloon (19 Jan 2022)

What is a navy going to do in the modern age. It's whole reason to exist was to protect a merchant fleet that could supply the nation in time of need. As that merchant fleet is no more and has been contracted out to the main rivals the time of need is going to be very needy in deedy. A little bit if a sniffle has already caused supply chain problems around the world even without a war. 
Regards
John


----------



## Jacob (19 Jan 2022)

.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (19 Jan 2022)

A conventional military may have only a limited conventional role in the future:

future major conflicts will be fought mainly digitally and economically.
inability of military strength to dominate territory without resorting to oppressive action - eg: Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq. In fairness US military might prevailed in Grenada!
a willingness to actually deploy forces is limited by political will and public opinion.
Real clarity is needed over that which UK defence capability is intended to deliver, or contribute collaboratively - eg: role of NATO. We no longer have an empire on which the sun never sets. 

We should also consider whether the military with their strengths in discipline, logistics, training etc should be more integrated and operate in support of civil emergencies - eg: flooding, extreme weather events, border controls, etc. 

Regret at the reduction in ships, tanks, aircraft over the years is pointless. China has demonstrated softer forms of power and control - providing cheap infrastructure (road, rail, air), education, healthcare, etc may be a far more effective way to spend money than aircraft carriers etc.


----------



## Droogs (19 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Regret at the reduction in ships, tanks, aircraft over the years is pointless. China has demonstrated softer forms of power and control - providing cheap infrastructure (road, rail, air), education, healthcare, etc may be a far more effective way to spend money than aircraft carriers etc.


Until someone comes knocking at the door and then you wish you still had all the bits you got rid of. We have done that everytime,not long after we have won a war. Then when it comes push to shove we get our fat backsides kicked until we can sort ourselves out, now though, with modern weapon systems we wont get that time, not without a lot of help and those that are the ones to give us help are no better off. China might not shout about it but it has more modern combat ships of the line than the USN. Ships that are on average less than a decade old and filled with the same kit as ours as they for the most part made all the bits in ours. She might not have 28 aircraft carriers each with more crew than the population of The City of London (7K~) but then they haven't been trying to project too far and are building permanent bases instead.


----------



## Just4Fun (19 Jan 2022)

If the real threats are hackers in their bedrooms, how do we explain Russia's build-up of troops near Ukraine and the widespread hand-wringing about that?


----------



## Jacob (19 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> ....
> 
> Regret at the reduction in ships, tanks, aircraft over the years is pointless. China has demonstrated softer forms of power and control - providing cheap infrastructure (road, rail, air), education, healthcare, etc may be a far more effective way to spend money than aircraft carriers etc.


Absolutely. Imagine dropping $2 trillion in the form of aid, on Afghanistan, instead of bombs and dead allied soldiers!
There is a point however - unfortunately the arms industry is immensely profitable.


----------



## baldkev (19 Jan 2022)

We will always need armed forces. The internet / comms is just another front.....
Without a strong military, other powers would definitely push their luck more..... look at russia, everyone threatens economic sanctions and putin doesnt give a whotsit, because the russian people are the ones who'll suffer, and the ruski media will spin it as the west who have done it to them, which increases putins popularity ( short term )

There will always be armies etc


----------



## baldkev (19 Jan 2022)

Orraloon said:


> What is a navy going to do in the modern age. It's whole reason to exist was to protect a merchant fleet that could supply the nation in time of need. As that merchant fleet is no more



The Navy have lots of uses.... moving personnel, hardware, planes, fire support, recon, area denial etc. For the most part, any large scale conflict requires superiority in the land, sea and air ( and now internet, although that may well end in wartime )
Hopefully our infrastructure/ systems have started to be segregated from the internet. A while back there was a real fear that hackers could control sewerage systems and more.


----------



## shed9 (19 Jan 2022)

Just4Fun said:


> If the real threats are hackers in their bedrooms, how do we explain Russia's build-up of troops near Ukraine and the widespread hand-wringing about that?


Because we aren't the Ukraine bordering Russia???


----------



## TRITON (19 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Already happening.
> Navy is supposedly being mobilised against boat people.
> Climate change is already a major factor in the refugee situation and is only going to get more severe.


No I think theres been a refusal by the navy, and they would rescue rather than repulse. 
*Rules of the sea and all that.

*Not 'Rule of the sea'


----------



## Terry - Somerset (19 Jan 2022)

Europe is bereft of a common defence policy and spends below the minimum on NATO obligations. The UK is no longer part of Europe - but takes its NATO obligations a little more seriously. 

The US under Trump adopted an America first policy, and the evidence of Afghanistan is that little has changed with the new president.

The political will to use military power to support other nations threatened by the more powerful (China, Russia?) no longer to exists, replaced with unconvincing sanctions rhetoric (Ukraine?).

There is no public appetite for involvement in conflicts beyond those immediately threatening. Whether the money saved is better pent on lower taxes or more NHS is another debate. 

If the "defence" budget included de-risking a pandemic contingency, the Covid outcomes may have been very different - adequate PPE, working test and trace, furlough and business support plans etc etc. This may have minimised a largely shambolic catch up for six months 

A defence solution should reflect these realities - an effective deterrent against a direct threat, not an ineffectual effort to project UK power to conflicts around the rest of the world.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (20 Jan 2022)

Just4Fun said:


> If the real threats are hackers in their bedrooms, how do we explain Russia's build-up of troops near Ukraine and the widespread hand-wringing about that?


Nato exists in order to "defend" against the USSR. Unfortunately the USSR no longer exists, so NATO no longer has a reason to exist. They are currently desperately trying to make reasons to exists - hence attempts at regime change in all the countries bordering Russia (because Russia _is_ the USSR if you are still living in the 1950s). Russia has actually given up negotiating with the warmongering muppets and just explained in short words and easy to understand diagrams what the consequences of more destabilising lunacy will be. 

If you want to see why surface navy ships are obsolete Warning! Propaganda video)


----------



## Jameshow (20 Jan 2022)

Wow the number of Russian apologists who are woodworkers!


----------



## Droogs (20 Jan 2022)

The Russians just like the Brits have not yet realised that since the fall of their respective empires they are now, in the modern world only relevant as tier 2 powers along with most of the rest of the 1st world. They, like us have been surpassed by the PRC who have been much more successful in sublte soft power projection than the rest of us. Russia has always been an expansionist autocracy and never had "democracy" in it's entire history. Putin is their version of a gammon but one with a bit more in the bangstick department. Any nation that meets the criteria for joining NATO has the sovereign right to do so regardless of previous affiliation if they choose to do so. Russia has no right to say otherwise.


----------



## doctor Bob (20 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> The Russians just like the Brits have not yet realised that since the fall of their respective empires they are now, in the modern world only relevant as tier 2 powers along with most of the rest of the 1st world. They, like us have been surpassed by the PRC who have been much more successful in sublte soft power projection than the rest of us. Russia has always been an expansionist autocracy and never had "democracy" in it's entire history. Putin is their version of a gammon but one with a bit more in the bangstick department. Any nation that meets the criteria for joining NATO has the sovereign right to do so regardless of previous affiliation if they choose to do so. Russia has no right to say otherwise.


Indeed, but the bully tends to ignore the whimpy kids telling him he's nasty, whilst beating up the latest victim, he tends to come back later and deal with them.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (20 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> Any nation that meets the criteria for joining NATO has the sovereign right to do so regardless of previous affiliation if they choose to do so.


Does that include Russia? They did ask to join in the 1990s but obviously it never came to anything, because Russia _must_ be the enemy. 

The whole thrust of not wanting the Ukraine to join NATO is because the Americans want to put nuclear missiles 300 miles from Moscow. There are people in the USA who think that a debilitating first strike is a winnable war. I am sure that an educated military man such as yourself will remember the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Russians know it as the Turkish Missile Crisis, because the USA put nuclear weapons (missiles) in Turkey on the Russian border, so the Russians reciprocated by putting missiles in Cuba. Remember how close to all out nuclear war that was? We are in the same position, again, with the same lunatics running the asylum. Hands up who wants to volunteer to die in a nuclear holocaust - anyone? Anyone?


Jameshow said:


> Wow the number of Russian apologists who are woodworkers!


The evil Russians! They went and put their country right on the border of NATO, just to be belligerent and warmongering. Evil dogs deserve everything they get! They even have their own soldiers inside their own country! Something must be done!


----------



## Jacob (20 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> .....
> 
> The evil Russians! They went and put their country right on the border of NATO, just to be belligerent and warmongering. Evil dogs deserve everything they get! They even have their own soldiers inside their own country! Something must be done!


And they expect to be invaded from the west - Napoleon, Hitler, and an on-going general threat from USA.
Also they have given up large parts of their "Empire" - much of which was gained incidentally in self defence during WW2.


----------



## Spectric (20 Jan 2022)

When will all these idiots wake up and realise that we have enough problems saving our planet as it is without adding a nuclear holocaust. The very simple fact that they cannot get into their thick skulls is the fact no one can win a nuclear war, it is ok to have a first strike but it is no good having a dead planet afterwards that cannot sustain life. Someone needs to find out why Russia is the big bad enemy, it will only take one simple action in a moment of not thinking to start WW3, look back at Cuba and that Russian submarine comander who almost took out the Americans with a nuclear torpedo.









You (and Almost Everyone You Know) Owe Your Life to This Man.


Temperament matters. Especially when nuclear weapons are involved.




www.nationalgeographic.com


----------



## Glitch (20 Jan 2022)

My perception of Russia and Russians has swung back and forth.
I've seen them on holiday in the past where them seem to be the most miserable people on Earth.

I saw their organised football hooligans up close at the Euros in France, smashing their way through families on the terraces. That was scary.

I went to Moscow and St Petersburg for WC2018, half expecting a repeat of the intimidation but found the locals to be generally warm, friendly and enjoying their country being open to a large influx of foreign visitors. Felt no different to other East European cities and full of the usual global food and fashion franchises. They extended the visas for football fans to stay longer in the country, or return for another visit.

No doubt the hooligans were under orders to keep away.

It's governments that start wars with other countries, the citizens usually just want a safe and peaceful life.


----------



## Droogs (20 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> *Does that include Russia? They did ask to join in the 1990s but obviously it never came to anything, because Russia must be the enemy.*
> 
> _Yes it does_*, if *_they meet the membership criteria. Russia has never done so - the main one being *Free *and *democratic *representive government_
> 
> ...



Ukraine has never been part of Russia - not even administratively, even during Tsarist times. Each part of the old Russian Empire and then CCCP were regarded as autonomous administrative regions, seperate to Russia.


----------



## Noel (20 Jan 2022)

Glitch said:


> My perception of Russia and Russians has swung back and forth.
> I've seen them on holiday in the past where them seem to be the most miserable people on Earth.
> 
> I saw their organised football hooligans up close at the Euros in France, smashing their way through families on the terraces. That was scary.
> ...



Most of the Ultras were offered free B & B for the duration of WC18. Others were threatened with free B & B.
Seemed to work.


----------



## Jameshow (20 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> Ukraine has never been part of Russia - not even administratively, even during Tsarist times. Each part of the old Russian Empire and then CCCP were regarded as autonomous administrative regions, seperate to Russia.


Putin doesn't like that though.....
It's an affront to him that they are western looking...


----------



## Trainee neophyte (20 Jan 2022)

For anyone who gets their news from the BBC, this 5 minute video currently doing the rounds might make interesting viewing: 

It's made by a Ukrainian living right on the front line in Donetsk, and his opinions on what he is seeing regarding buildup, and the likely start of the coming battle are interesting. It may not jell with what you have seen from the more "normal" media. Also, when he talks about Nazis running Ukraine that isn't hyperbole - they really are proper, german style nazis harking back to the third reich. You can find lots of info on that if you go looking for it (Azof battalion, for eg.), but did anyone tell you that your government is supporting, funding and arming self-identifying Nazis? Ukraine's Nazis: Who are they, why are they so influential — and why have media ignored them? 

Note that I don't endorse the views of the video, but _he_ thinks his views and predictions are rational, and he is closer to the start line than I am. We will know in the next month or so if there will be a world war, and who was right.


----------



## Droogs (20 Jan 2022)

Just remember war is just an accronym for arrogance
We
Are
Right


----------



## Spectric (20 Jan 2022)

Who can blame Putin, the west continously antagonises him and accuses Russia of many things but it is ok for the west to go into Iraq and Afganistan to sort out a supposed threat, this seems like one set of rules for the west and another for the rest just like how Borris thinks. Then you have the west looking to supply Australia with nuclear powered submarines and Borris thinking we need more nukes in our stockpile so if you were Putin would you not be peed off and saying enough is enough and it's time to make a stand and show we are not having anymore of this nonsense.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (20 Jan 2022)

A quick ride around Google throws up a huge diversity of information on the history of Russia Ukraine relationships going as far back as far as the 10th Century, through the soviet era, and on to the current day.

It would take considerable time to identify a truth and reality separated from rumour, partial truths, skewed analysis, political ideology, economic impacts, gas supplies, ethnic realities etc. Even with unlimited time it would likely still be unclear.

The leadership is dominated by a cold war ethos and memory- an octogenarian and a senior ex-KGB director. They create a narrative to support their own case, and neither (IMHO) is to be relied upon.

All rather sad for the average civilian who most likely wants security, food, education, medical care - basically a functioning society. The UK should stay well away from any involvement!


----------



## Spectric (20 Jan 2022)

If it goes pear shape then our energy crisis would be solved for a short duration as we would have plenty of thermal units to keep us very warm, all our hairdressers would be out of work because no one would have any hair, no one would be that worried about Covid any more and it might take the heat out of Borris's predicament !


----------



## baldkev (20 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Also they have given up large parts of their "Empire" - much of which was gained incidentally in self defence during WW2.



Can you explain this to me?
From my limilted memory of the news in the late 80s/ early 99s, didnt boris yeltsin negotiate to give it back and dismantle the ussr?
Putin seems to want it back.....

And as far as gaining countries through self defence, not sure i understand that either. After all, the Russians were allies of germany and if fact i believe, joined in at the start invading poland. They just didnt realise the germans wanted russia to..... they sent the 8th on a rolling start even as ribbentropp promised the russians they were best buddies.

Its not widely reported in our history, but the Russians arguably had the worst time of all during the war ( china suffered badly at the hands of the japanese )

The Russians really suffered and i guess there was a reluctance to help them after poland and other countries they 'annexed' whilst definitely not in self defence


----------



## Jameshow (20 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> If it goes pear shape then our energy crisis would be solved for a short duration as we would have plenty of thermal units to keep us very warm, all our hairdressers would be out of work because no one would have any hair, no one would be that worried about Covid any more and it might take the heat out of Borris's predicament !


Think a new boy on here has built a bunker....do you think we would all fit and talk sharpening?!!


----------



## selectortone (20 Jan 2022)

Post WWII Europe was defined (or carved up if you want to be cynical) at the three conferences attended by Churchill, Roosevelt/Truman and Stalin at Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam. Jacob's claim that the USSR satellite states were 'gained incidentally in self-defence' is stretching the facts a bit. 

This is not to say the USSR didn't play a huge part in the outcome of WWII, arguably the pivotal part. You only have to look at the numbers Hitler lost on the Russian front, in men and materiel and the resources he had to withdraw from the Atlantic defences, to see that. The satellite states, along with puppet regimes in Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, the Baltic States and the other countries that vanished behind the Iron Curtain were Stalin's price.


----------



## heimlaga (20 Jan 2022)

Some 20 years ago the Finnish army got rid of the last coastal defence guns taken from the russians in 1918. They were fully operational and an integral part of the defence system right to the end. When they could no longer be maintained to high standards they were taken out of use.
The Finnish army still use sniper riffles with bolt mechanisms scavenged from first world war suplus Nagant riffles. The same riffles that the second world war was fought with.

Old military equipment doesn't necsessarily have to be obsolete or useless as long as it is well maintained and properly upgraded. 
Could the problem be that the British navy are accustomed to be and sticking to practises from an era when it was a large navy with a huge budget and could order new ships often and did not need to bother with old stuff.
While small poor man's navies have routines for keeping vessels in fighting order for a long time and determining exactly when it is time to quit.


----------



## Jacob (20 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Can you explain this to me?
> From my limilted memory of the news in the late 80s/ early 99s, didnt boris yeltsin negotiate to give it back and dismantle the ussr?
> [Putin seems to want it back.....


What East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania? I doubt it


> And as far as gaining countries through self defence, not sure i understand that either.


Simple enough. The above were largely taken over in the process of repelling the Germans.


----------



## Jacob (20 Jan 2022)

selectortone said:


> Post WWII Europe was defined (or carved up if you want to be cynical) at the three conferences attended by Churchill, Roosevelt/Truman and Stalin at Tehran, Yalta and Potsdam. Jacob's claim that the USSR satellite states were 'gained incidentally in self-defence' is stretching the facts a bit.


Rightly or wrongly, they were gained by agreement and negotiation because they were already there.


> ..... The satellite states, along with puppet regimes in Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, the Baltic States and the other countries that vanished behind the Iron Curtain were Stalin's price.


After the event yes, if you can call it "a price". The main Soviet issue was to repel the German invasion.


----------



## Blackswanwood (20 Jan 2022)

This thread definitely gets a prize for the over-simplification of history


----------



## baldkev (20 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> What East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania? I doubt itSimple enough. The above were largely taken over in the process of repelling the Germans.



Whats wrong with albania? 
Putin would definitely want to regain the old ussr areas.... good as a buffer.

As for repelling the germans, that would have been whilst persuing the germans back to germany. The repelling bit was deep within russia, right to lenningrad.


----------



## Jacob (20 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Whats wrong with albania?
> Putin would definitely want to regain the old ussr areas.... good as a buffer.
> 
> As for repelling the germans, that would have been whilst persuing the germans back to germany. The repelling bit was deep within russia, right to lenningrad.


Would you have expected them to stop at their own borders and set up some sort of Maginot line? The Allies didn't - they went to Berlin too, and worldwide.


----------



## selectortone (20 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Rightly or wrongly, they were gained by agreement and negotiation because they were already there. After the event yes, if you can call it "a price". The main Soviet issue was to repel the German invasion.


Hardly 'gained incidentally'. You make it sound like Uncle Joe's benevolent society for homeless countries.


----------



## JobandKnock (20 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> And they expect to be invaded from the west - Napoleon, Hitler, and an on-going general threat from USA.
> Also they have given up large parts of their "Empire" - much of which was gained incidentally in self defence during WW2.


I'm sure that the many Poles, Czechoslovakians, Romanians, Latvians and Lithuanians I've worked alongside over a fair part of the last 20 years would regard the loss of freedom and human rights in their respective countries as being a necessary part of life to preserve the rights of the peace-loving USSR. After all didn't they regard it as a pleasure to have hosted the Russian military for half a century? No? Well there's a surprise. Russian "self-defence" was nothing more than a land grab. The oppressive regimes they forced onto many other countries were brutal and regressive.

To get an idea about what people from these buffer states think about Russia, and Putin, you really need to talk to the people from there. Many of the ones I worked with were far from positive about Russia, including some of the Ukranians we had on my last big job (I had daily dealings with another foreman who was Ukranian). It was from those guys that I learned about the Holodomor


----------



## artie (20 Jan 2022)

History is a strange animal with many faces.

A number of years ago I got acquainted with a Lithuanian guy in Krakow Poland.

He shook my hand and hugged me expressing his gratitude that we, in Ireland were no longer oppressed by the evil British and that he had sympathy because of his experience with the Russians.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (21 Jan 2022)

As the Germans retreated in 1944, the US and UK (mainly) advanced from the west and south (Italy). The Russians advanced from the east. 

Although there were conferences amongst the allied leaders, they effectively endorsed the reality on the ground - after 6 years of war there was zero appetite for further hostilities, particularly between the victors, to carve up territory.

The USSR collapsed in 1991 due to ethnic, economic and political pressures. Eastern European states were only too happy to grasp the new democratic freedoms.

Neither the creation of the USSR, nor its dissolution, were the product of an enlightened Russian political plan - although Gorbachov may have lit the fuse.

I can, however, understand why Russia feels naked and threatened in the absence of a buffer previously provided by their satellite states. More enlightened attitudes probably await the retirement of Biden and Putin!


----------



## Ozi (21 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> This thread definitely gets a prize for the over-simplification of history


"In the beginning was the word"... there now put the prize back where it belongs


----------



## Ozi (21 Jan 2022)

Ozi said:


> "In the beginning was the word"... there now put the prize back where it belongs


Or the scientific version "Suddenly there was nothing - which exploded"


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> I'm sure that the many Poles, Czechoslovakians, Romanians, Latvians and Lithuanians I've worked alongside over a fair part of the last 20 years would regard the loss of freedom and human rights in their respective countries as being a necessary part of life to preserve the rights of the peace-loving USSR. After all didn't they regard it as a pleasure to have hosted the Russian military for half a century? No? Well there's a surprise.


They were even less happy hosting the Nazis, even if it was only for a few years


> Russian "self-defence" was nothing more than a land grab.


It's that what the Russians were doing at the siege of Leningrad, just gearing up for a land grab?
_"This resulted in the deaths of up to 1,500,000 soldiers and civilians and the evacuation of 1,400,000 more (mainly women and children), many of whom died during evacuation due to starvation and bombardment. Piskaryovskoye Memorial Cemetery in Leningrad holds half a million civilian victims of the siege alone."_


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> .....
> 
> Neither the creation of the USSR, nor its dissolution, were the product of an enlightened Russian political plan - .....


The creation was most certainly the product of an enlightened political plan, though we all know it didn't work out perfectly; over-idealistic, one form of serfdom replaced by another, the arrival of Stalin as dictator etc. Tragically interrupted by WW2, who knows what might have happened otherwise?
The dissolution was fairly enlightened too, in the circumstances. 
Politics is a messy business and there's much more to it than just deciding who are the goodies and the baddies!


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Read all about it! 


baldkev said:


> ....... After all, the Russians were allies of germany and if fact i believe, joined in at the start invading poland. .......


_"On 23 August 1939, after unsuccessful efforts to form an anti-fascist alliance with Western powers, the Soviets signed a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany."_








Soviet Union - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org












Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org




.


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> They were even less happy hosting the Nazis, even if it was only for a few years


Oh, so that's why in the early stages of the invasion of Russia the German army had so many problems recruiting _volunteeers_ from the Baltic states and the Ukraine - nbecause the Russians had treated them so well?



Jacob said:


> It's that what the Russians were doing at the siege of Leningrad, just gearing up for a land grab?


No, but what they did at Warsaw, where they halted their advance and allowed the German army to wipe-out the Polish Home Front was - it is much easier to install a puppet government if the opposition is dead


----------



## Blackswanwood (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> _"On 23 August 1939, after unsuccessful efforts to form an anti-fascist alliance with Western powers, the Soviets signed a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany."_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think it's the next sentence that really highlights the expansionist policy of the USSR that was of course interrupted by WWII, delivered by the post WWII settlement, reversed with the end of the Cold War and Putin now seems to be resurrecting ...

"After the start of World War II, the formally neutral Soviets invaded and annexed territories of several Eastern European states, including eastern Poland and the Baltic states."


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> .
> 
> 
> No, but what they did at Warsaw, where they halted their advance and allowed the German army to wipe-out the Polish Home Front was - it is much easier to install a puppet government if the opposition is dead


Germans had invaded Poland 16 days previous to the Soviet invasion. With hindsight the west should have formed a strong alliance with the USSR when it was on offer. Soviets trusted nobody.
Interesting stuff all this - I'm having to look things up as I eat my porage! Computer is amazing - in the old days it would have to be the complete Encyclopaedia Brittanica on the kitchen table, getting covered in marmalade!








8 things you (probably) didn't know about Scott's Porage Oats | Scotsman Food and Drink


But how much do you really know about this famous brand? 1. The Hound from the Game of Thrones grew big and strong on Scott's Porage Oats Before he went onto become famous in Game of Thrones, the Hound (aka Rory McCann) was the face of Scott's Porage Oats. We are guessing it's the ...




foodanddrink.scotsman.com


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

And what makes you think the West could ever trust the USSR of the 1930s? The Russians were happy to form alliances with the Germans after WWI which allowed German manufacturers to construct aircraft, etc inside the Soviet Union away from prying eyes in contravention of the Armistice, something the west eventually became aware of in the early 1930s. Also remember the duplicitous behavior of the USSR towards, for example, the Ford workers who went there in the late 1920s/early 1930s to build a truck industry - many of whom were never allowed out of the country again and ended up in the gulags of Siberia. What about the show trials, such as the Metro-Vick affair of the 1930s? Another example of Soviet "openness". This is in addition to the cover-up of the Holodomor, where the Soviets attempted to discredit journalists such as Gareth Jones (probably subsequently murdered in Japanese-occupied Mongolia in 1935 by NKVD agents), Malcolm Muggeridge and Rhea Klyman (amongst others), by the manipulation of international notables including George Bernard Shaw and Edouard Herriot who were hoodwinked into publishing positive articles about the Ukraine, and in some cases by coercion of American journalists such as Walter Duranty (Pullitzer prize winner) and Eugene Lyons, both of whom toed the (Communist) party line to publish denouncements of Jones' work in particular. In the case of Lyons it was because he was enamoured of the Communist regime (he subsequently left the USSR and became a vehement opponent of Stalin's regime), whilst in Duranty's case because he was allegedly being blackmailed by them

Yes, all very innocent, so why wouldn't we trust Russia?

Of course the USSR's subsequent behaviour at Katyn in April and May 1940 where NKVD executioners shot dead 22,000 Polish officers and intelligentsia in a sort of production line had nothing to do with wanting to take over Poland without opposition, had it?


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> And what makes you think the West could ever trust the USSR of the 1930s? The Russians were happy to form alliances with the Germans after WWI which allowed German manufacturers to construct aircraft, etc inside the Soviet Union away from prying eyes in contravention of the Armistice, something the west eventually became aware of in the early 1930s. Also remember the duplicitous behavior of the USSR towards, for example, the Ford workers who went there in the late 1920s/early 1930s to build a truck industry - many of whom were never allowed out of the country again and ended up in the gulags of Siberia. Whjat about the show trials, such as the Metro-Vick affair of the 1930s, another example of Soviet "openness". This is in addition to the cover-up of the Holodomor, where the Soviets attempted to discredit journalists such as Gareth Jones (probably subsequently murdered in Japanese-occupied Mongolia in 1935 by NKVD agents), Malcolm Muggeridge and Rhea Klyman (amongst others), by the manipulation of international notables including George Bernard Shaw and Edouard Herriot who were hoodwinked into publishing positive articles about the Ukraine, and in some cases by coercion of American journalists such as Walter Duranty (Pullitzer prize winner) and Eugene Lyons, both of whom toed the (Communist) party line to publish denouncements of Jones' work in particular. In the case of Lyons it was because he was enamoured of the Communist regime (he subsequently left the USSR and became a vehement opponent of Stalin's regime), whilst in Duranty's case because he was allegedly being blackmailed by them
> 
> Yes, all very innocent, so why wouldn't we trust Russia?
> 
> Of course the USSR's subsequent behaviour at Katyn in April and May 1940 where NKVD executioners shot dead 22,000 Polish officers and intelligentsia in a sort of production line had nothing to do with wanting to take over Poland without opposition, had it?


It's all tit for tat. The west tried to stop the revolution itself, the establishment being firmly behind the Tsarist dictatorship, as they would be today. The revolution in its early days was naive, idealistic, democratic but probably viable. Lenin moved towards a modern mixed economy but all went s shaped under Stalin. Yes it took some time for western communist supporters to catch up but they did.
Neo fascist supporters are still with us loud and strong, just take a look at the Daily Mail. Pre-war and along with parts of the royal family and the establishment, big supporters of fascism
The west has it own appallingly brutal history too, which includes colonialism, the empire, slavery, Hitler himself.
To get back to reality - Putin doesn't really bear comparison with his predecessors. This is interesting: Vladimir Putin reveals family’s WWII ordeals in magazine article


----------



## Blackswanwood (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> To get back to reality - Putin doesn't really bear comparison with his predecessors. This is interesting: Vladimir Putin reveals family’s WWII ordeals in magazine article



I'm sure we can rely on Russia Beyond to give an accurate portrayal of the Putin family  Just off to check there's nothing smeared on my door handles ...


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> I'm sure we can rely on Russia Beyond to give an accurate portrayal of the Putin family  Just off to check there's nothing smeared on my door handles ...


Haven't you heard of the CIA, Mossad, The Daily Mail et al? Do you think there is something radically different about Russian diplomacy and propaganda as compared to the west and USA activities - or other allies Rise and Kill First - Wikipedia


----------



## Trainee neophyte (21 Jan 2022)

This may help: United States involvement in regime change - Wikipedia


----------



## Blackswanwood (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Haven't you heard of the CIA, Mossad, The Daily Mail et al? Do you think there is something radically different about Russian diplomacy and propaganda as compared to the west and USA activities - or other allies Rise and Kill First - Wikipedia


While I've little time for the Daily Mail I'd struggle to put them in the same grouping as CIA and Mossad.

I don't doubt that many of the intelligence agencies across the world are deeply flawed. That doesn't negate the rather toxic aspects of the current Russian regime.

Eastern Europe is a very complex mixture of ethnicity, loyalties and attitudes which it suits both ends of the spectrum to ignore.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> This may help: United States involvement in regime change - Wikipedia


Yup. The yanks could certainly teach the poor old Russkies a trick or two!


----------



## Spectric (21 Jan 2022)

This quote is what the Americans need to read, and then ask themselves is Ukraine worth the risk of sacrificing everyone else by getting involved in another oversea's conflict, I would have thought their last fiasco in Afganistan would have made them think twice, it did last too long and with proper management could have ended in an orderly fashion but now is it a case of Biden looking to get his moment of fame. 

The first rule of international relations is that the strong do what they will and the weak suffer what they must. The second rule is that, most of the time, not even superpowers can change the first rule. Unfortunately, advocates of a strong U.S. security commitment to Ukraine seem not to understand these rules. They believe instead that Washington can somehow prevent strong Russia from doing what it will with weak Ukraine. But this is a fantasy. The harsh reality is that Washington can’t deter a Russian invasion of Ukraine — and shouldn’t even try.


----------



## Droogs (21 Jan 2022)

ah, the apeasement strategy of abandoning the very basics of the ethics and morals you claim your nation is built on. That's worked out well in the past.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> ah, the apeasement strategy of abandoning the very basics of the ethics and morals you claim your nation is built on. That's worked out well in the past.


  
UK and USA foreign policy has hardly ever been based on ethics and morals, in the whole of history!


----------



## Terry - Somerset (21 Jan 2022)

The record of western involvement in the Middle East has been completely unconvincing .

A few "almost successes" - eg: Kuwait where a successful campaign to eject Iraq was followed by a strategic failure to finish the job.

The war in Iraq 2003-2011 directly lead to the deaths of over 250,000 (mainly Iraqis) and ended only because Obama wanted to claim it was over. It wasn't - but they did have a ceremony.

Invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 suppressed, not eliminated, Islamic State. The war ended in 2021, the West withdrew troops, economic and social chaos followed. Deaths estimated at 200,000+.

The US largely stayed out of Syria - I assume concluding that deploying ground troops increased US casualties (not a vote winner). They did send in military jets with and interfered a bit.

They embraced the "Arab Spring", and dropped bombs on Libya in the naive belief that the Middle East would be transformed by peaceful democracy. History has proved them wrong - no Middle East state has got remotely close to the original aspirations.

Russia has done no better in the Middle East - one could easily be drawn to the conclusion that the actions of both the West and the East have been a play for political dominance in the region, with limited regard for the welfare of citizenry.

Despite the experiences of the last 25 years, they are at it again over Ukraine - stupidity is often defined as "trying again what has already been proven to fail. 

The UK is a bit player on the world stage (the empire went decades ago), should remain firmly on the touchline, and Liz Truss should do likewise instead of inconsequential sound bite politics ahead of a leadership contest.


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> UK and USA foreign policy has hardly ever been based on ethics and morals, in the whole of history!


Neither has Russian


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Exactly - not that two wrongs make a right!
In terms of world peace though, things are currently better than they have been since WW2 then ever before.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> ......
> 
> Russia has done no better in the Middle East - .....


Hmm dunno in recent years since Glasnost the Russians have been responsible for far less death and destruction than the USA, possibly even than the UK.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> Anyone seen that TV program called life at sea, about the crew onboard a navy ship that is on it's last legs and should have been called carry on navy because you expect Sid james, Barbara Windsor and the rest to appear if they were still around as it is such a farce. If the Russians are watching they must be having a great laugh at such antics and wondering why this crew believe that the UK is at war with Russia, I suppose it makes good reality tv. The sad thing is that we used to have a navy that was probably the envy of the world but like everything else it has long gone, in 1953 the Queen reviewed her fleet at Spithead and we had 193 vessels, six carriers, about fifteen submarines and so many other vessels with something in the region of 150,000 sailors, my old man was on the submarine HMS Aurochs at the time. This navy ship also highlights an issue that our government seems to overlook and that is that having something is just the initial cost, you then need to maintain and keep it in good condition and upto date so HS2 is costing a fortune just to build, but if you watch the program about the Japanese shinkansen trains then you see just how much is needed to keep them running.



Yup. I'm watching it and thoroughly enjoying it. I'm more interested in watching the interpersonal behavioural aspects but also enjoying the actual hardware. Dunno what you're moaning about.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> ..... and he is closer to the start line than I am. ....



That's irrelevant as far as deciding whether or not his views have any credibility. David Icke is closer to us and he's a nutter.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> This thread definitely gets a prize for the over-simplification of history


Yup. I'm afraid Jacob does have that effect on threads.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Hmm dunno in recent years since Glasnost the Russians have been responsible for far less death and destruction than the USA, possibly even than the UK.



Carefully ignoring the support they have given to Assad in Syria and all the civilian deaths and genocide there.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> Carefully ignoring the support they have given to Assad in Syria and all the civilian deaths and genocide there.


Well yes but how would the figures pan out compared to USA action in all those other places?


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> Yup. I'm afraid Jacob does have that effect on threads.


I strongly believe that much of history is simpler than they would have you believe. Ditto economics, politics, possibly woodwork too!
I put a lot of time into trying to translate things into terms which even I can understand.
Have been reading Utopia for Realists - The case for a universal basic income, open borders and a 15-hour workweek possibly the most interesting book I've read for years.
Highly recommended!


----------



## baldkev (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Would you have expected them to stop at their own borders and set up some sort of Maginot line? The Allies didn't - they went to Berlin too, and worldwide.



No, but the pointvwasnt that they oersued the germans, it was that the persuit and land grabs were not self defence. 

Youd make an excellent politician if you get bored with wood 



Jacob said:


> They were even less happy hosting the Nazis, even if it was only for a few yearsIt's that what the Russians were doing at the siege of Leningrad, just gearing up for a land grab?
> _"This resulted in the deaths of up to 1,500,000 soldiers and civilians and the evacuation of 1,400,000 more (mainly women and children), many of whom died during evacuation due to starvation and bombardment. Piskaryovskoye Memorial Cemetery in Leningrad holds half a million civilian victims of the siege alone."_



The attempted land grabs started before the germans turned on them..... there was the winter war and other russian offensives first.



JobandKnock said:


> after WWI which allowed German manufacturers to construct aircraft, etc inside the Soviet Union away from prying eyes



And they trained their tank crews heavily in russia whilst still banned from building up their forces, and russia knowing the likely meaning of all the activity and extra armies, geared up for their part.


----------



## baldkev (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Well yes but how would the figures pan out compared to USA action in all those other places?



Russia trade heavily on destabilising and then sending troops to 'help'
A few years ago they were spread all over the place. They lost a lot of 'private contractors' when they attacked a u.s position. Russian social media went nuts as their families tried to work out how their loved ones died as 'private contractors' when they were enlisted as soldiers and sent out to fight......


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Russia trade heavily on destabilising and then sending troops to 'help'


 A very well known and excessively used American tactic, particularly in S America and the Caribbean.








Latin America–United States relations - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## baldkev (21 Jan 2022)

Rumour has it vlad put up ad advert in the job centre looking for a political advisor..... i think he needs a spin doctor to help rig the next election so nobody notices ( again )
Oh yeah, and to lock up all political oponents just in case. They cant win if they dissapear


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Rumour has it vlad put up ad advert in the job centre looking for a political advisor..... i think he needs a spin doctor to help rig the next election so nobody notices ( again )


Er - you mean Starmer? He's got Mandy on the case. 


> Oh yeah, and to lock up all political oponents just in case. They cant win if they dissapear


Nowadays they just write them out of history. It's more effective than whacking them and it's not illegal! 
Requires a docile and subservient main stream media.


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Well yes but how would the figures pan out compared to USA action in all those other places?


Lord knows I am not a supporter of the USA, but there is simply no comparison between what even the USA have done and what Stalin did. 

A very small, partial list of Koba's works:

1936 - more than 35,000 Poles living alongside the Ukrainian frontier and some 20,000 Finnish peasants deported to Kazakhstan "to secure the Soviet frontiers"
1937 - about 175,000 Koreans living along the Chinese and Korean borders relocated by force to Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan "to secure the Soviet frontiers"
1940 - about 250,000 Poles and thousands of Ukrainians and Byelorussians deported in three major waves to Siberia and to Central and Far Eastern Asia in order to remove the most active populations from the annexed territories. Dispatched to labour camps or executed. 
1941 - about 40,000 Estonians, Latvians, Lithuanians - and also ethnic Poles, Finns, and Germans – deported to the Soviet Far East

Note the timeline - much of this was before the invasion by Germany

And that list goes on. In addition there are those who were rounded up and deported, more or less on a whim, to the labour camps across Russia and in particular to the gulags in the Soviet Far East to extract minerals (gold, silver, nickel, tin, zinc, copper, diamonds, etc). It is estimated that as many as *20 million people* died in the labour camp system, as the result of forced collectivization, or famine or were simply executions by Beria's goons under Stalin's regime. 

Even after the death of probably the greatest mass murderer of all time, the Soviet regime continued to be very harsh, although Kruschev was a great improvement. It is hardly something to regard as aspirational, though. 

So I ask you the question, " In the last century has any other nation killed or imprisoned as many people?"


----------



## Terry - Somerset (21 Jan 2022)

> I put a lot of time into trying to translate things into terms which even I can understand.
> Have been reading Utopia for Realists - The case for a universal basic income, open borders and a 15-hour workweek possibly the most interesting book I've read for years.
> Highly recommended!



Even the Guardian, a paper which at least does decent journalism, and tends to socialist bias think it is a nonsense Guardian view of utopia ....

It should probably be renamed "Utopia for idealists and fantasists". But we are all free to interpret that which we want to believe. It is entirely plausible I am mistaken!


----------



## doctor Bob (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> I strongly believe that much of history is simpler than they would have you believe. Ditto economics, politics,



your simplification of politics certainly showed them when you stood as a Labour candidate. Do you think you over simplified it?


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

doctor Bob said:


> Yes your simplification of politics certainly showed them when you stood as a Labour candidate. Do you think you over simplified it?


Obviously not - you didn't seem to get it at all!
Explainer - I stood as a "paper" candidate, i.e. no hoper, but just to make sure we had a candidate in every constituency in Derbyshire Dales. Interesting - had to get out there and canvas, not least because I needed 6 nominations (? can't remember the figure). Had lots of interesting chats, cups of tea, a gin and tonic, and picked up more votes than expected (the Corbyn effect).


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> Lord knows I am not a supporter of the USA, but there is simply no comparison between what even the USA have done and what Stalin did.


I said "since Glasnost" (1965) Glasnost - Wikipedia.


> ........
> 
> So I ask you the question, " In the last century has any other nation killed or imprisoned as many people?"


Well the USA currently has the highest prison population of any nation - approx 25% of the worlds incarcerated.
In the last HALF century the Russians have been relatively peaceful compared to USA and have released their hold on the communist bloc.


----------



## doctor Bob (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Obviously not - you didn't seem to get it at all!
> Explainer - I stood as a "paper" candidate, i.e. no hoper, but just to make sure we had a candidate in every constituency in Derbyshire Dales. Interesting - had to get out there and canvas, not least because I needed 6 nominations (? can't remember the figure). Had lots of interesting chats, cups of tea, a gin and tonic, and picked up more votes than expected (the Corbyn effect).



What you could have got fewer?
I've said it before but I think I could have dressed as a flower pot and blown raspberries at every door and I would have got more votes. Still I expect some of the old dears were please to have company.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Even the Guardian, a paper which at least does decent journalism, and tends to socialist bias think it is a nonsense Guardian view of utopia ....
> 
> It should probably be renamed "Utopia for idealists and fantasists". But we are all free to interpret that which we want to believe. It is entirely plausible I am mistaken!


That was Will Hutton reviewing. A very old fashioned Guardian style "centrist". They think it's cool not joining the Lib dems - their natural home.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> So I ask you the question, " In the last century has any other nation killed or imprisoned as many people?"



Mao was very successful in China. Jung Chang's Wild Swans and Mao, The Unknown Story are excellent eye openers.


----------



## Jake (21 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> If there were a ww3, the Russians would indeed cut the fibreoptics. They developed a submarine specifically for it. It wouldnt happen in peace time though



Norway has had a couple of incidents.


----------



## Jake (21 Jan 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Wow the number of Russian apologists who are woodworkers!



Putinist shills, as they used to be known.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (21 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> The record of western involvement in the Middle East has been completely unconvincing .
> 
> A few "almost successes" - eg: Kuwait where a successful campaign to eject Iraq was followed by a strategic failure to finish the job.


 Don't forget that before Iraq invaded Kuwait, the US ambassador was asked if the USA would have a problem with Iraq taking military action against Kuwait stealing Iraqi oil, and the ambassador said words to the effect of, "Go for it - we won't mind at all".


> The war in Iraq 2003-2011 directly lead to the deaths of over 250,000 (mainly Iraqis) and ended only because Obama wanted to claim it was over. It wasn't - but they did have a ceremony.


 Not forgetting the half a million dead children due to sanctions - Madeline Albright said it was worth it, so that's OK.


> Invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 suppressed, not eliminated, Islamic State. The war ended in 2021, the West withdrew troops, economic and social chaos followed. Deaths estimated at 200,000+.


 Perhaps you mean Taliban? ISIS came out of iraqi military prisons.


> The US largely stayed out of Syria - I assume concluding that deploying ground troops increased US casualties (not a vote winner). They did send in military jets with and interfered a bit.


 This is where the narrative and the truth really started to diverge. The usa (and uk) trained, armed, supported and directed ISIS. They even provided close air support on occasion: (from wikipedia )
On 17 September 2016, a series of 37 U.S.-led Coalition airstrikes near the Deir ez-Zor Airport,[76] lasting from 3:55 to 4:56 p.m. (Damascus time),[77] killed 90 Syrian Army soldiers and wounded 110 more. The attack triggered "a diplomatic firestorm" with Russia calling a (then rare) emergency United Nations Security Council meeting[78] as well as leading to the Syrian government calling off a nationwide ceasefire that had been the result of months of intense diplomatic efforts by the U.S. and Russian governments.[79] The Syrian Army positions that were struck were on the Tharda Mountain and at a nearby artillery base.[80] The airstrikes led to ISIL capturing the Tharda Mountain.[81] Initially, the US Armed Forces did not outright admit that Coalition planes hit Syrian troops,[82] but later the Coalition admitted their planes and drones carried out the attack. The US stated that they halted the strikes as soon as they became aware of the Syrian Army's presence and regretted the unintentional loss of life.[83][84]​


> They embraced the "Arab Spring", and dropped bombs on Libya in the naive belief that the Middle East would be transformed by peaceful democracy. History has proved them wrong - no Middle East state has got remotely close to the original aspirations.


 Or Gaddafi had plans to create a pan - African gold backed currency and had to be cut off at the knees - everyone took the hint. Hillary Emails Reveal True Motive for Libya Intervention


> Russia has done no better in the Middle East - one could easily be drawn to the conclusion that the actions of both the West and the East have been a play for political dominance in the region, with limited regard for the welfare of citizenry.


 Russia stopped the western backed " moderate terrorists" in their tracks in Syria, about 9 months, with 40 aircraft. The usa with its huge resources and vast reach failed to stop ISIS for years and in fact materially assisted with their procuring weapons. It is assumed by many that ISIS were and still area plausibly deniable force used to attack whoever wasn't welcome. Two policemen were beheaded in Kazakhstan in the recent troubles there - international head choppers incorporated?


> Despite the experiences of the last 25 years, they are at it again over Ukraine - stupidity is often defined as "trying again what has already been proven to fail.


 If by "they" you mean the west, and USA/UK in particular, then I agree. The Maidan chaos and regime change in the Ukraine was fully orchestrated by the west, and the Ukraine has been stripped of assets by lots of people, including Joe Biden. The Biden Ukraine Bribe Tapes Don't forget "Fork the EU", Victoria Nuland - Wikipedia


> The UK is a bit player on the world stage (the empire went decades ago), should remain firmly on the touchline, and Liz Truss should do likewise instead of inconsequential sound bite politics ahead of a leadership contest.


 The UK is roughly equivalent to Portugal, but they just haven't noticed yet. The good news is that Russia has no interest in invading the Ukraine, so they won't. Any military buildup is to stop the Ukraine doing anything suicidal in the Donbass. Probably. 

Maybe.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (21 Jan 2022)

Jake said:


> Putinist shills, as they used to be known.


I've only just put away my _Putin eating popcorn_ avatar - do I need to bring him out again?


----------



## Jake (21 Jan 2022)

Go for it. You are almost devoted enough to do this for a living TN like a proper Macedonian.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Well yes but how would the figures pan out compared to USA action in all those other places?


The point is, Jacob, as I am sure that you are aware, is that Russians are not as SnowWhite as you were trying to imply. Of course, you will deny that that was your intention.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Rumour has it vlad put up ad advert in the job centre looking for a political advisor..... i think he needs a spin doctor to help rig the next election so nobody notices .....



I believe that he ran for Govt in Derbyshire or close by at the last election.....Jacob someone-or-other


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> Lord knows I am not a supporter of the USA, but there is simply no comparison between what even the USA have done and what Stalin did.
> 
> A very small, partial list of Koba's works:
> 
> ...


You forgot the compulsory famine in Ukraine where millions died.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> ...i.e. no hoper, but just to make sure we had a candidate in every constituency in Derbyshire Dales. ....



Why? What was the point other than, perhaps, an ego trip ?


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> What East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania? I doubt itSimple enough. The above were largely taken over in the process of repelling the Germans.


True but they forgot to leave, as you conveniently forgot, I think !


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> .... the arrival of Stalin as dictator etc. Tragically interrupted by WW2, ....



Wow...I hadn't realised that you supported dictators that much. Even ignoring the mass deaths that Stalin caused. And there I was thinking that you were a humanitarian socialist. Showing your true colours, methinks, Comrade.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> I think it's the next sentence that really highlights the expansionist policy of the USSR that was of course interrupted by WWII, delivered by the post WWII settlement, reversed with the end of the Cold War and Putin now seems to be resurrecting ...
> 
> "After the start of World War II, the formally neutral Soviets invaded and annexed territories of several Eastern European states, including eastern Poland and the Baltic states."


And don't forget that a huge number of men from the USSR and who had fought against the Nazis, and USSR displaced people taken back to Germany as slave labour , were at the end of the war, forcibly repatriated back to the USSR thanks to Churchill and Eisenhower wanting to brown nose old Joe.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> I said "since Glasnost" (1965) Glasnost - Wikipedia.
> Well the USA currently has the highest prison population of any nation - approx 25% of the worlds incarcerated.
> In the last HALF century the Russians have been relatively peaceful compared to USA and have released their hold on the communist bloc.


You have got to be joking, Jacob. Are you really that facile that you think there are no hidden gulags left in Russia. That is simply naive.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> The point is, Jacob, as I am sure that you are aware, is that Russians are not as SnowWhite as you were trying to imply. Of course, you will deny that that was your intention.


Certainly will deny that yes. Well spotted.
What worries me is that chats like this one always seem to reduce to identifying the baddies and reasons to hate, fear, them.
Or to "other' them as the expression goes.
It shuts down the dialogue and people seem to get quite agitated. 
You have actually sent eight very agitated posts - one after the other!
Don't worry - you have nothing to fear from a woodwork forum.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Certainly will deny that yes. Well spotted.
> What worries me is that chats like this one always seem to reduce to identifying the baddies and reasons to hate, fear, them.
> Or to "other' them as the expression goes.
> It shuts down the dialogue and people seem to get quite agitated. You have actually sent eight very agitated posts - one after the other!


Very well observed. Perhaps it didnt occur to you that some of us have lives to live, rather than stay glued to the computer screen perhaps as much as you do. So, of course there will be several replies in a row. Commonsense. Would have thought you'd have noticed that.

Returning to the topic...I see that, like all your other threads, we're back to wriggling. Fair enough...I've said my piece. As you were.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> Very well observed. Perhaps it didnt occur to you that some of us have lives to live, rather than stay glued to the computer screen perhaps as much as you do. So, of course there will be several replies in a row. Commonsense. Would have thought you'd have noticed that.
> 
> Returning to the topic...I see that, like all your other threads, we're back to wriggling. Fair enough...I've said my piece. As you were.


9


----------



## bansobaby (21 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> You have got to be joking, Jacob. Are you really that facile that you think there are no hidden gulags left in Russia. That is simply naive.


Until I read this one I was quite happily observing the tennis.
Now I really don’t know what to believe
All I would add is that it seems strange that the US have just pulled out of the one place that really does need help just to stick their nose right back in where they are simply not welcome or needed.


----------



## woodieallen (21 Jan 2022)

LOL..you crack me up, Jacob, you really do. I've needed a good laugh.

Here you go. I will save you the trouble of posting.

*10*

Bye for now. Enjoy the thread.


----------



## Fergie 307 (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> And they expect to be invaded from the west - Napoleon, Hitler, and an on-going general threat from USA.
> Also they have given up large parts of their "Empire" - much of which was gained incidentally in self defence during WW2.


The first expansion of the USSR in the second world war was into Poland, as a result of an agreement with the Nazis to carve up the country between them. They then proceeded to murder the Polish intelligentsia, Jews and army officers on a scale only bettered by the Nazis themselves. Have you not heard of the Katyn forest massacre for example? If you classify this as self defence then I can only say that we have a very different understanding of that expression. Another part of the agreement was that they provided enormous resources to Germany, most notably oil. The fuel that powered German tanks into the low countries and France, and fuelled the bombers dropping bombs on us through the battle of Britain and the blitz was mostly derived from Soviet oil. The USSR remained by far the largest source of oil for the Nazis right up until Barbarossa, the irony being that the German forces that poured across the border at the outset of that invasion were powered by oil provided by the Soviets themselves.


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> You forgot the compulsory famine in Ukraine where millions died.


No, I'd already mentioned the Holodomor - that last lot was to illustrate it wasn't Stalin's only bit of nastiness. At least Mr Blair got a good book out of it...


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> The first expansion of the USSR in the second world war was into Poland, as a result of an agreement with the Nazis to carve up the country between them. They then proceeded to murder the Polish intelligentsia, Jews and army officers on a scale only bettered by the Nazis themselves. Have you not heard of the Katyn forest massacre for example? If you classify this as self defence then I can only say that we have a very different understanding of that expression. Another part of the agreement was that they provided enormous resources to Germany, most notably oil. The fuel that powered German tanks into the low countries and France, and fuelled the bombers dropping bombs on us through the battle of Britain and the blitz was mostly derived from Soviet oil. The USSR remained by far the largest source of oil for the Nazis right up until Barbarossa, the irony being that the German forces that poured across the border at the outset of that invasion were powered by oil provided by the Soviets themselves.


Of course I don't classify Katyn as self defence. 
The Germans invaded in Poland 16 days before the Russians.
WW2 was not caused by the Soviets and their short lived alliance with the Nazis followed failure of moves to alliance with the west.


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

Yes, but the Soviets did use it as an excuse to grab a large part of eastern Europe after WWII.... Which is a point we've already covered, surely?


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> No, I'd already mentioned the Holodomor - that last lot was to illustrate it wasn't Stalin's only bit of nastiness. At least Mr Blair got a good book out of it...


You may have forgotten the Bengal famine, 1943 largely blamed on Churchill._ An estimated 2.1–3 million, died of starvation, malaria, and other diseases aggravated by malnutrition, population displacement, unsanitary conditions and lack of health care._


----------



## JobandKnock (21 Jan 2022)

Not at all. But 20 million under Stalin alone?


----------



## Fergie 307 (21 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Can you explain this to me?
> From my limilted memory of the news in the late 80s/ early 99s, didnt boris yeltsin negotiate to give it back and dismantle the ussr?
> Putin seems to want it back.....
> 
> ...


I don't think either Stalin or Hitler regarded the agreement as being worth the paper it was written on. For Hitler it was a good way to secure his eastern flank while he turned his attention to the west. For Stalin it bought some time to prepare for what I am sure he saw as the inevitability of an eventual Nazi invasion. And let's not forget that the reason the Soviet military performed so badly initially was largely due to Stalin having had most of the Soviet officer class murdered, on the basis that they might prove a threat.to him. Later The Soviets incurred incredible casualties largely due to inept leadership, and the use of human wave tactics. They lost some 20 million, an incredible figure. But it is very true that their sacrifice paved the way for eventual victory. Remember it was Stalin who said "a single human death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic" sums up his attitude rather well I think.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

JobandKnock said:


> Not at all. But 20 million under Stalin alone?


Appalling. Nobody is saying it was not. 
But what's it got to do with the Ukraine and Putin in 2022?


----------



## Fergie 307 (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> You may have forgotten the Bengal famine, 1943 largely blamed on Churchill._ An estimated 2.1–3 million, died of starvation, malaria, and other diseases aggravated by malnutrition, population displacement, unsanitary conditions and lack of health care._


Which, although tragic is nothing compared to the numbers of his own people Stalin starved to death in the years following his ascent to.power, lower estimates run to over 5 million, oh and not to forget the hundreds of thousands murdered by the NKVD in various purges to safeguard his own position. Once again Jacob I am left wondering what you were doing during history lessons at school.


----------



## Fergie 307 (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Of course I don't classify Katyn as self defence.
> The Germans invaded in Poland 16 days before the Russians.
> WW2 was not caused by the Soviets and their short lived alliance with the Nazis followed failure of moves to alliance with the west.


For goodness sake Jacob get a grip of your history. The Germans were training troops, aircrew and collaborating with the Soviets in the design of tanks from the mid 30's long before any discussion of alliance with anyone else. Where do you think German tanks and aircraft were developed and tested.


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> Which, although tragic is nothing compared to the numbers of his own people Stalin starved to death in the years following his ascent to.power, lower estimates run to over 5 million, oh and not to forget the hundreds of thousands murdered by the NKVD in various purges to safeguard his own position. Once again Jacob I am left wondering what you were doing during history lessons at school.


Nobody is defending Stalin or anything he did. He was a tyrant and dictator.
What has all this got to do with Putin and the Ukraine in 2022


----------



## Jacob (21 Jan 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> For goodness sake Jacob get a grip of your history. The Germans were training troops, aircrew and collaborating with the Soviets in the design of tanks from the mid 30's long before any discussion of alliance with anyone else. Where do you think German tanks and aircraft were developed and tested.


Yes it is well known.
And what has that got to do with Putin and the Ukraine in 2022?


----------



## baldkev (21 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Of course I don't classify Katyn as self defence.
> The Germans invaded in Poland 16 days before the Russians.
> WW2 was not caused by the Soviets and their short lived alliance with the Nazis followed failure of moves to alliance with the west.



No one was saying ww2 was a russian endeavour, but i did clearly say they knew what was about to happen, got ready to join in. 
The russians suffered badly, but they were not innocent, that is the point


----------



## baldkev (21 Jan 2022)

And before you say 


Jacob said:


> And what has that got to do with Putin and the Ukraine in 2022?



No1 can remember because we've all been trying to cope with your deflections


----------



## Fergie 307 (22 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> You may have forgotten the Bengal famine, 1943 largely blamed on Churchill._ An estimated 2.1–3 million, died of starvation, malaria, and other diseases aggravated by malnutrition, population displacement, unsanitary conditions and lack of health care._


I think it fair to say that this was more the result of staggering ineptitude on the part of officials, as distinct from a deliberate policy. That is the difference. Stalin embarked on measures that he KNEW would kill huge numbers of his own people, but considered them expendable in pursuit of political ideology. If course if you rely on propaganda vehicles of the Russian state for your knowledge of history then you will not know this. Perhaps if you tried taking the socialist filter off your reading material you might get a more accurate view of history. It strikes me than you appear to be the sort of person who only searches for information from sources that you know are pre disposed to echo your own, rather naive, view of the world.


----------



## Fergie 307 (22 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Appalling. Nobody is saying it was not.
> But what's it got to do with the Ukraine and Putin in 2022?


Jacob, back against the wall, can't answer difficult questions about the nonsense you are talking? Let's change the subject. Very like Boris, who'd have thought you two would have anything in common? There's a wonderful saying you might want to think about. "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt".


----------



## Blackswanwood (22 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Yes it is well known.
> And what has that got to do with Putin and the Ukraine in 2022?


Quite a lot actually. These events led to the USSR being created which in turn has shaped the politics, attitudes, loyalties and beliefs in Eastern Europe/Russia today. 

It really seems all you are wanting to do is over simplify history and turn the thread into a pointless Top Trumps of atrocities and the bad behaviour of despots and governments around the world. Is arguing and your view of the world being the only right one rather than finding common areas of agreement important to you?


----------



## RobinBHM (22 Jan 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> Jacob, back against the wall, can't answer difficult questions about the nonsense you are talking? Let's change the subject. Very like Boris, who'd have thought you two would have anything in common? There's a wonderful saying you might want to think about. "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt".


Mr Two Pushsticks never ever ever ever admits he is wrong or backs down 


Sadly I know nothing about the subject of this thread so will have to read up on it before commenting.


----------



## Jameshow (22 Jan 2022)

HMS Northumberland is a frigate I believe......


----------



## Trainee neophyte (22 Jan 2022)

Fergie 307 said:


> I think it fair to say that this was more the result of staggering ineptitude on the part of officials, as distinct from a deliberate policy


That's very orwellian: when _they_ do it they commit intentional genocide, but when _we_ do it, it is just an unfortunate and regrettable mistake. Dead is still dead.

From wikipedia re the Holodomor "Whether the Holodomor was genocide is still the subject of academic debate, as are the causes of the famine and intentionality of the deaths.[19][20][21] Some scholars believe that the famine was planned by Joseph Stalin to eliminate a Ukrainian independence movement.. Others suggest that the man-made famine was a consequence of Soviet industrialisation".

The pre-soviet history of Russia is one of constant famines, for what it's worth. The Holodomor seems to have been the last one, so we could perhaps give the USSR some credit for fixing the problem after that? Either way, the USSR is not modern Russia, in the same way that 1920s empire Britain is not the same as the current Bojo economic miracle. Conflating the two seems a fairly unnecessary thing to do, other than continue 60 years of cold war propaganda.

Here's the BBC confirming that the Bengal famine was entirely intentional, even if the goal wasn't direct murder of 3 -5 million: BBC - WW2 People's War - 3 Million Dead in Artificial Famine in Bengal

None of this has any relevance regarding a Russian military incursion (or invasion if you go with Biden's correction). I'm coming around to the idea that this is an entirely western propaganda effort, so that when Russia doesn't invade, Nato can declare victory, and then pull nuclear capable missiles out of Poland, Hungary etc. Declare victory and run away is a well practiced policy used on a regular basis.

Does anyone have any good reasons as to why Russia would want to take over the failed state of the Ukraine? They already have the best bits - the rest of it is just bankrupt chaos.


----------



## Jacob (22 Jan 2022)

RobinBHM said:


> Mr Two Pushsticks never ever ever ever admits he is wrong or backs down
> 
> 
> Sadly I know nothing about the subject of this thread so will have to read up on it before commenting.


It was about tub thumping more than anything.


----------



## Jacob (22 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> Quite a lot actually. These events led to the USSR being created which in turn has shaped the politics, attitudes, loyalties and beliefs in Eastern Europe/Russia today.


As is true of every nation in the world, for better or worse, one way or another.


----------



## selectortone (22 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> Does anyone have any good reasons as to why Russia would want to take over the failed state of the Ukraine? They already have the best bits - the rest of it is just bankrupt chaos.


Well, there is the small matter of the security of the gas pipeline to Europe that is currently worth around net £5bn to Gazprom per quarter. (Made more crucial since Germany's refusal to allow Nordstream II)









Russia’s Gazprom reports record earnings amid global gas crisis


Company expects higher profits for final months of 2021 as customers in Europe face soaring energy costs




www.theguardian.com


----------



## Jacob (22 Jan 2022)

selectortone said:


> Well, there is the small matter of the security of the gas pipeline to Europe that is currently worth around net £5bn to Gazprom per quarter. (Made more crucial since Germany's refusal to allow Nordstream II)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Seems to be a battle between oil/gas profiteers more than anything.








Russia's new pipeline bypasses Ukraine in pumping gas to Europe: Kyiv


Kyiv has condemned the Russian gas company Gazprom for halting the transit of natural gas to Hungary via Ukraine.




www.euronews.com


----------



## selectortone (22 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Seems to be a battle between oil/gas profiteers more than anything.


It's always about oil and gas.

The reason the mayhem and misery in Syria has gone on for so long, and the reason why Russia is there, is because of plans to build a gas pipeline from Qatar to Turkey which would threaten Russia's monopoly of gas supply to Eastern Europe.

It's always about oil and gas.





__





Qatar–Turkey pipeline - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## doctor Bob (22 Jan 2022)

It's a game / hobby for him, you're all playing his game and he loves it.
He's like a human bot:

It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with. 

It doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear 

and it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.


----------



## Spectric (22 Jan 2022)

selectortone said:


> It's always about oil and gas.


They are just a comodity, it is the wealth and power they can bring which is what causes problems and can be used as a bargaining tool when it comes to any diplomacy. Looks like nuclear power may not be that bad, with oil & gas it is war and conflict that kills you and with Nuclear it is ionising radiation that dismantles your cells when it goes wrong, either way you are dead but I suppose with war there is a chance of recovery unlike a nuclear holocaust.

The solution to all these problems we have involving Russia cannot be fixed by force or conflict, that is a no win outcome and so lets start open and frank talks with all parties and leave any airs & graces or pre conconceptions out of it. The Americans need to accept that the cold war is over, it can no longer be used as an excuse to justify the american defence budget and we need to see the huge benefits for everyone if we stop fighting and work together. 

If we go out of our way to understand the Russians and accept that maybe they are not as portrayed by the Americans and actually look at things from their perspective we may see why Putin thinks like he does, if everyone keeps saying you are this and that then eventually he may just decide to be just that.

So Russia, would a very mild dose of communism not be a bad thing, just select the good bits and that could put the brakes on the out of control materialistic west where freedom of choice is way out of control, people buy an item of clothing and only wear it once and you have the few owning everything at the expense of the majority and it is planet earth that is really coping everything.


----------



## Spectric (22 Jan 2022)

Another aspect is

"
*Bruce Gagnon, 21 Jan 22,* Russia did not invade Crimea. They had a long-term lease with Ukraine that allowed over 20,000 military personnel at the Russian navy and air bases there.
The Russian-ethnic people of Crimea self-organized a referendum and voted 96% to seek to rejoin Russia. They saw the 2014 Nazi-led take over in Kiev during the US orchestrated coup and wanted nothing to do with the ‘new Ukraine’ regime. 

"

So looks like the Americans started the problems in Ukraine, so why not give the people of Ukraine a vote on their future and let them decide, apparently this is what happened in Crimea. If the vote is split or very close then why not split the country, it is how we now have India and Pakistan is it not.


Here is something to watch about Ukraine, not seen it yet but was told it could be interesting:


----------



## Blackswanwood (22 Jan 2022)

doctor Bob said:


> It's a game / hobby for him, you're all playing his game and he loves it.
> He's like a human bot:
> 
> It can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with.
> ...



Putin or Jacob


----------



## doctor Bob (22 Jan 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> Putin or Jacob



Oh I think folks on here know who I'm referring to.


----------



## baldkev (22 Jan 2022)

has anyone met jacob?  maybe 'jacob' has a kremlin i.p address 

Love you jacob


----------



## Spectric (22 Jan 2022)

Another page worth reading.





__





Organizing Notes: Washington pumping up war fever







space4peace.blogspot.com


----------



## Jacob (22 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> Another page worth reading.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good for armaments and fuel industries; basically they control USA.
Ditto USSR via "state" capitalism, free market capitalism and a mish mash mafia of gangsters and oligarchs with offshore accounts (i.e. City of London)
Twas ever thus - similar groups were the only beneficiaries of our lost Empire.
Our role in all this is to pay for the stuff because we need it, or die for it if we happen to be in the forces at the wrong time.


----------



## RobinBHM (22 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> we may see why Putin thinks like he does


Well Putin is a violent gangster who has his opponents killed.

I bet Trump would do the same if the system allowed it


----------



## Terry - Somerset (22 Jan 2022)

It still does - Guantanamo Bay still has 39 prisoners despite Obamas declared intention to close it.

Wikipedia tells us the 780 have been processed through there - mostly held without trial.

Although I accept they were judged to be a real threat, it does demonstrate that the West is is prepared to adopt the same tactics and behaviours as the "enemy" - albeit somewhat lower numbers.


----------



## Jacob (22 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> That was Will Hutton reviewing. A very old fashioned Guardian style "centrist". They think it's cool not joining the Lib dems - their natural home.


Is it true that "lefty" centrists still wear flares?
Could be just a rumour I suppose.


----------



## woodieallen (22 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> ....
> 
> So Russia, would a very mild dose of communism not be a bad thing, just select the good bits .....



Oh wow, Comrade Spectric ! Who decides the good bits and who decides who gets them ? 

I do agree with you, however, in the broadest sense. Remove Russia, China, USA and one particular death cult from their aims of world domination then we'd all sleep easier and the world would be a better place.


----------



## woodieallen (22 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> ....
> 
> Here is something to watch about Ukraine, not seen it yet but was told it could be interesting:




So you're posting a link to something that you've not seen but you've been told it could be interesting ?

OK....on the Ignore list you go.


----------



## Jake (23 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> *Bruce Gagnon, 21 Jan 22,* Russia did not invade Crimea. They had a long-term lease with Ukraine that allowed over 20,000 military personnel at the Russian navy and air bases there. The Russian-ethnic people of Crimea self-organized a referendum and voted 96% to seek to rejoin Russia. They saw the 2014 Nazi-led take over in Kiev during the US orchestrated coup and wanted nothing to do with the ‘new Ukraine’ regime.



I count 4 Russian propaganda tropes.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (23 Jan 2022)

RobinBHM said:


> Well Putin is a violent gangster who has his opponents killed.
> 
> I bet Trump would do the same if the system allowed it


"His name was Seth Rich".

Also check out the term "Arkancide".


----------



## Trainee neophyte (23 Jan 2022)

Jake said:


> I count 4 Russian propaganda tropes.


It's always nice to have 77 Brigade turn up and explain what we ought to be thinking. Could you expand a little, please? Russia _didn't_ have a naval and air base in Crimea?


----------



## Blackswanwood (23 Jan 2022)

Jake said:


> I count 4 Russian propaganda tropes.



Indeed - Russia itself actually made Crimea part of Ukraine in 1954.

Jacob has asked a couple of times why Stalin’s actions have anything to do with the issues today. Here is a good example.

After WWII Stalin purged Crimea of (among others) the Tatars. They were moved East and even though the subsequent regimes said Stalin had been wrong not allowed to move back.

When the USSR disintegrated a big thing was made by Russia of them being able to now move back. Not living under Russian rule was reversed when Crimea was annexed.


----------



## Blackswanwood (23 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> It's always nice to have 77 Brigade turn up and explain what we ought to be thinking. Could you expand a little, please? Russia _didn't_ have a naval and air base in Crimea?



I don’t know about the airbase but they had a lease to operate the Black Sea fleet until 2042 out of Sebastopol. 

The lease of course didn’t extend to say Russia had a right to take Crimea back by force.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (23 Jan 2022)

Here's a good game: the US state department released a document explaining how Russian disinformation was all lies and propaganda, and everything is the fault of the Putin Regime. The Russian foreign ministry then released a document refuting the US document. The game is to be able to prove factually which side is lying the most.

For example: the US state the following:

FICTION: Ukraine and Ukrainian government officials are the aggressor in the Russia-Ukraine relationship.https://www.state.gov/fact-vs-fiction-russian-disinformation-on-ukraine/#_edn1​_
​*FACT: False statements from the Putin regime blame the victim, Ukraine, for Russia’s aggression. *Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, occupies Crimea, controls armed forces in the Donbas, and has now amassed more than 100,000 troops on the border with Ukraine while President Putin threatens “retaliatory military-technical” measures if his demands are not met.​​And the the Russian rebuttal:
​The blame for destabilising the situation in Ukraine lies entirely with the United States and other NATO countries, which supported the coup in February 2014, resulting in the toppling of the duly elected president and nationalists coming to power. Fearing for their own safety, residents of Crimea and Donbass chose not to live under the government of the followers of Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych. As a result, Crimea reunited with Russia, the Donetsk and Lugansk regions declared independence, and Kiev unleashed a civil war against Donbass, which continues to this day.​_


----------



## WillM (23 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> No one was saying ww2 was a russian endeavour, but i did clearly say they knew what was about to happen, got ready to join in.
> The russians suffered badly, but they were not innocent, that is the point


They did more than their share winning the war. As for trying to stay out of it, there is a far more egregious example.


----------



## Blackswanwood (23 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> Here's a good game: the US state department released a document explaining how Russian disinformation was all lies and propaganda, and everything is the fault of the Putin Regime. The Russian foreign ministry then released a document refuting the US document. The game is to be able to prove factually which side is lying the most.
> 
> For example: the US state the following:
> 
> ...



It’s also worth noting that when the “west” helped pave a way for the dismantling of the eastern bloc assurances were given to Russia that NATO would not extend beyond unified Germany. 

I guess the view was that it would be a non-issue as everything would be harmonious. It’s not been quite as simple as that and Russia can rightly say that this promise was broken. It’s not and easy one to square though as democratically elected governments across Eastern Europe seem to favour being part of NATO and the EU as opposed to part of a new eastern bloc.


----------



## WillM (23 Jan 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> Here's a good game: the US state department released a document explaining how Russian disinformation was all lies and propaganda, and everything is the fault of the Putin Regime. The Russian foreign ministry then released a document refuting the US document. The game is to be able to prove factually which side is lying the most.
> 
> For example: the US state the following:
> 
> ...


Plus, why hasn’t the UN approved Minsk peace agreement been implemented? Instead the US (and minions) are trying to work up Ukrainian neo-Nazi militias to conduct a suicide mission on Donbass and Lugansk. If Russia intervenes to protect the ethnic Russians, it will be an “attack on Ukraine”.

The US has stated it won’t intervene militarily, but respond with sanctions. Europe relies on Russia for 40% of its gas, and the Germans are desperate to get Nordstream2 going.

Ultimately the US wants to prevent a trading zone forming between the EU, Russia and China - the BRI initiative. They don’t care in the least if your gas costs double and the EU sinks into a recession (which is what think tanks are suggesting will result from sanctions).

Or, if a hundred thousand die, or Europe is swamped with a million refugees. They did the same in Iraq, Libya and Syria.


----------



## Spectric (23 Jan 2022)

WillM said:


> The US has stated it won’t intervene militarily,


But will Putin think that supplying military hardware is a military intervention. It is ok for the Americans to provoke a conflict because they have their own gas and oil reserves but here in the UK and Europe we are on the end of a pipe controlled by the Russians so we need some measure of self preservation.

It all comes down to survival of the fittest, if you were a weedy little kid in the playground would you make freinds with other weedy little kids or with the big and strong? We have paid our debt to America and when they were the big boys in the playground it was good to be close to them but now the balance of power has changed, China is soon to become number one and the east is getting ever stronger so is it not time to start making freinds with the new big boys in the playground! At the moment the biggest threat to us all is not Putin, it is Biden with his engrained cold war thinking and Borris who wants to make a name for himself on the world stage and at least do something comparable to Thatcher.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (23 Jan 2022)

U.S.A. and Ukraine?








The Biden Ukraine Bribe Tapes


Leaked phone recordings corroborate Joe Biden's involvement in international corruption.




swprs.org


----------



## Jacob (23 Jan 2022)

Phil Pascoe said:


> U.S.A. and Ukraine?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quite happy to accept that Biden is as bent as a nine bob note but that website is very dubious, although entertaining!. Swiss Policy Research - Wikipedia


----------



## D_W (23 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Read all about it!  _"On 23 August 1939, after unsuccessful efforts to form an anti-fascist alliance with Western powers, the Soviets signed a non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany."_
> 
> 
> 
> ...


comical - as if they were hoping for western help to be generous and charitable and work for the greater good. 

They saw fascist governments as problematic only because the fascists squashed the communists in the battle of western european ideals. 

They both had one thing in common - they hated capitalists and the change that capitalism and economic development (faster than their own) brought.


----------



## D_W (23 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> In terms of world peace though, things are currently better than they have been since WW2 then ever before.



That much is true. It's too bad peace is views as problematic by factions on both sides (communists and former communists as well as western governments). Putin needs someone to work against or his popularity drops. long term constant popularity is more important to him than it is to a US president as the office is lifetime for him and if opposition gets in, he'll probably be jailed and outed.


----------



## Jameshow (23 Jan 2022)

Bid


Spectric said:


> But will Putin think that supplying military hardware is a military intervention. It is ok for the Americans to provoke a conflict because they have their own gas and oil reserves but here in the UK and Europe we are on the end of a pipe controlled by the Russians so we need some measure of self preservation.
> 
> It all comes down to survival of the fittest, if you were a weedy little kid in the playground would you make freinds with other weedy little kids or with the big and strong? We have paid our debt to America and when they were the big boys in the playground it was good to be close to them but now the balance of power has changed, China is soon to become number one and the east is getting ever stronger so is it not time to start making freinds with the new big boys in the playground! At the moment the biggest threat to us all is not Putin, it is Biden with his engrained cold war thinking and Borris who wants to make a name for himself on the world stage and at least do something comparable to Thatcher.


Biden and Boris a danger?

Biden isn't sure what day it is! 

Boris is on the ropes from his own party and public at large and is too interesting in procuring the next baby....!


----------



## Spectric (23 Jan 2022)

Jameshow said:


> Biden isn't sure what day it is!


Exactly, not the sort of person you want in this sort of situation, at his age he also only has a few remaining years to lose.


----------



## Droogs (23 Jan 2022)

D_W said:


> That much is true. It's too bad peace is views as problematic by factions on both sides (communists and former communists as well as western governments). Putin needs someone to work against or his popularity drops. long term constant popularity is more important to him than it is to a US president as the office is lifetime for him and if opposition gets in, he'll probably be jailed and outed.


In the last 3400 years there have been a total of less than 270 days of full peace on earth where no war of any kind was being fought. since WW2 there have actually been 2 days


----------



## Spectric (23 Jan 2022)

That really says it all, this planet is just to small for all of us to live on peacefully and get on with each other.


----------



## Droogs (23 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> That really says it all, this planet is just to small for all of us to live on peacefully and get on with each other.


That's why I endorse the Iluminati Partei for global population control. The sooner I get my own continent the better


----------



## baldkev (23 Jan 2022)

WillM said:


> They did more than their share winning the war. As for trying to stay out of it, there is a far more egregious example.



They did, but mostly because they were nearly wiped out and needed revenge for the atrocities etc. If germany hadnt attacked them, they wouldnt have gone against the germans. In fact, if germany hadnt attacked them, things would have turned out differently.


----------



## artie (23 Jan 2022)

"They" reckon the population of the world in the 12th century was one sixteenth of what it is now.
It wasn't very peaceful then either.

I wonder what today's population would be if we had all just got along and helped each other out.


----------



## Spectric (23 Jan 2022)

artie said:


> I wonder what today's population would be if we had all just got along and helped each other out.


We really cannot win either way, well not all of us anyway. If there were no wars then instead of military technology getting the investment it could have been medical and health. Now you have even more people surviving and an even bigger population and global warming would be even worse so looks like wars and conflicts are nothing more than population control.


----------



## Pallet Fancier (23 Jan 2022)

Jameshow said:


> What ship is it?
> 
> HMS Duncan looked quite modern and we'll run?
> 
> Cheers James


 Duncan was a Type 45 destroyer, about a decade old. The current frigates were all designed before the Falklands, redesigned in a hurry as a result of Falklands war experience, and were only ever intended to last for 25 years. That they're showing their age is not surprising. That their replacements have been slowed down to save money is criminal.


----------



## Pallet Fancier (23 Jan 2022)

doctor Bob said:


> I find it very annoying that they keep saying the Russians are going to destroy UK coms, no they are not.



It's edited, and the interviews are structured, so as to increase the drama.

Russia may not "destroy" UK or European or trans Atlantic cable links, but they will definitely attach devices to them to hack into, read, and perhaps even disrupt, the signals. They have before. So has everyone with a sufficiently advanced submarine capability. They can do everything from steal intelligence to game the international stock market. I think this is worthy of the effort to try to stop them.

I know a couple of guys who work in places like RUSI. It's been common knowledge in diplomatic circles ever since Putin came to power that Russia regards itself as at war with the West, but simply doesn't come out and say it. If you reconsider everything that's happened over the last decades in that light, it makes much more sense. The West, meanwhile, has been spending a "peace dividend"... which is more like maxing out your credit card and having no ability to pay it back.


----------



## Pallet Fancier (23 Jan 2022)

shed9 said:


> There is no point having a flotilla of ships when the current threat is someone in their back bedroom on the internet or multiple semi-organised idealists prepared to die for their cause.



Keyword here is internet. It's used by good guys, bad guys and the grey middle ground, alike. It travels, primarily, through deep sea cables (satellites can't match that bandwidth and never will). How will you protect those cables from being hacked for information theft, from being disrupted intentionally, or even outright cut, without a "flotilla of ships"?

Cyber is all the fashion, sure, but it's just like trying to fight a war with air power alone: can't do it. At some point, you have to put boots on the ground, or in this case, anti-submarine frigates in the same water as the other guy's cable-cutting sub.

Two weeks ago Norway reported that the deep sea cable that it uses for secure comms with its satellite receiver station in the Arctic had gone down. Gosh, I wonder why? Why would someone want to reduce the ability of parts of NATO to get information from surveillance satellites that were monitoring places like Ukraine? Who has the ability to do that? Who has submarine bases with easy access to the Arctic, and whose submarines routinely pass through those waters on their way into the Atlantic? Answers on a postcard...


----------



## MARK.B. (23 Jan 2022)

Having a laugh , there will have been a few of them from all Navies around the world of that I am sure, but each will have also seen a snapshot of their daily lives. Few if any ships even new ones and in some cases especially new ones, run without a hitch year on year and as they get older just like a car the faults get more frequent . 
Being a little cynical in my old age I think the producer and the MOD were rather hoping that the average viewer would think how well our lad's n lassie's did in overcoming all those obstacles on a Top Secret mission .


----------



## baldkev (23 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> instead of military technology getting the investment it could have been medical and health


I fully understand that view...... equally war pushes on medical advancement, through both incidental tech advancement due to new weapons, but largrly due to dealing with the consequent injuries.


----------



## shed9 (23 Jan 2022)

Pallet Fancier said:


> Keyword here is internet. It's used by good guys, bad guys and the grey middle ground, alike. It travels, primarily, through deep sea cables (satellites can't match that bandwidth and never will). How will you protect those cables from being hacked for information theft, from being disrupted intentionally, or even outright cut, without a "flotilla of ships"?
> 
> Cyber is all the fashion, sure, but it's just like trying to fight a war with air power alone: can't do it. At some point, you have to put boots on the ground, or in this case, anti-submarine frigates in the same water as the other guy's cable-cutting sub.


Your perception of who 'The good, the bad and the grey' is is dependent on which viewpoint you have.



Pallet Fancier said:


> Two weeks ago Norway reported that the deep sea cable that it uses for secure comms with its satellite receiver station in the Arctic had gone down. Gosh, I wonder why? Why would someone want to reduce the ability of parts of NATO to get information from surveillance satellites that were monitoring places like Ukraine? Who has the ability to do that? Who has submarine bases with easy access to the Arctic, and whose submarines routinely pass through those waters on their way into the Atlantic? Answers on a postcard...



The SvalSat facility is within a designated demilitarised zone in terms of NATO definitions. If it is been used militarily then see previous answer above. What would our 'good guys' do if Russia's demilitarised zones were used counter to agreed purpose.

PS: it hadn't gone done, it just lost one of two conduits thereby reducing redundancy capacity.

Will that fit on a postcard?


----------



## Jameshow (23 Jan 2022)

Pallet Fancier said:


> Duncan was a Type 45 destroyer, about a decade old. The current frigates were all designed before the Falklands, redesigned in a hurry as a result of Falklands war experience, and were only ever intended to last for 25 years. That they're showing their age is not surprising. That their replacements have been slowed down to save money is criminal.


I agree much older than Duncan etc. 

Due to be replaced iirk.


----------



## Jake (23 Jan 2022)

Jacob said:


> Quite happy to accept that Biden is as bent as a nine bob note but that website is very dubious, although entertaining!. Swiss Policy Research - Wikipedia



It's more bent than a 17 bob note, bung the word Swiss on the front and then parrot lines. Also, a TN favourite.


----------



## TominDales (23 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> Anyone seen that TV program called life at sea, about the crew onboard a navy ship that is on it's last legs and should have been called carry on navy because you expect Sid james, Barbara Windsor and the rest to appear if they were still around as it is such a farce. If the Russians are watching they must be having a great laugh at such antics and wondering why this crew believe that the UK is at war with Russia, I suppose it makes good reality tv. The sad thing is that we used to have a navy that was probably the envy of the world but like everything else it has long gone, in 1953 the Queen reviewed her fleet at Spithead and we had 193 vessels, six carriers, about fifteen submarines and so many other vessels with something in the region of 150,000 sailors, my old man was on the submarine HMS Aurochs at the time. This navy ship also highlights an issue that our government seems to overlook and that is that having something is just the initial cost, you then need to maintain and keep it in good condition and upto date so HS2 is costing a fortune just to build, but if you watch the program about the Japanese shinkansen trains then you see just how much is needed to keep them running.


True, but its a matter of priorities. 
UK defence spending is currently 2.5% of gdp, its was 12% in 1953 (were were at war), that is 5 times as much relatively speaking. In 1947 after ww2 it was 16% (25% during the war), it declined to 6% in 1950 but was back up 12% from 1950 to 1954 due to the Korean war.
Conversely spending on NHS has increased 4 fold sinece 1953, this is due to the aging population compared to 1953. Population in 1950s was consideraly younger and its the old that dominate Heath spending.
Spending on Health in UK 1949 to 2019







Basically you don't want to go to war with an aging population.




Same source IFS this is quite a stark comparison.
The peace dividend is not so much guns into ploughshares, but carriers into care-plans and bullets into books


----------



## Jake (23 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> Exactly, not the sort of person you want in this sort of situation, at his age he also only has a few remaining years to lose.



He's a more impressive human being than me or you. He's old, sure. He also was/is a stutterer, which doesn't help anyone seem impressive because of the speech faltering to avoid it (see Ed Balls), but the story that he is senile is a load of republican rubbish.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (23 Jan 2022)

The story that he is senile is a load of republican rubbish? Sorry, we've all seen videos of him.


----------



## Jake (24 Jan 2022)

He's a stutterer - they have to search for other words when the word will not come.


----------



## D_W (24 Jan 2022)

Jake said:


> He's a stutterer - they have to search for other words when the word will not come.



This is biden you're talking about? This is the first I've heard it. He's not that bright, and never was. He's in office for one reason - two, I guess. 
1) he's not trump
2) he's not hillary

The second may sound odd, but the whole reason he was added as a vice president is because he was seen as no threat to obama for popularity, but could attract the northeast vote (which obama had trouble getting due to being from the midwest - specifically chicago - which has the same problem as someone from the east coast or west coast - its residents think it's the only habitable place in the entire world). 

Having biden as a vice president (and getting the northeast vote that hillary was able to get due to relocating and being a NY senator) is less of a threat to life and limb than having a clinton as a vice president. 

But he's never been sharp, and he says idiotic things now - and not due to being a stutterer. Bill Clinton was sharp the same way Reagan was comfortable and disarming. What we've had since has not been impressive.


----------



## Jake (24 Jan 2022)

Hillary would have been better but Biden is underrated.


----------



## Jake (24 Jan 2022)

I think Blinken is unimpressive however.


----------



## D_W (24 Jan 2022)

Jake said:


> Hillary would have been better but Biden is underrated.



Biden is kind of like keeping a parking space with an inflatable car.


----------



## shed9 (24 Jan 2022)

D_W said:


> This is biden you're talking about? This is the first I've heard it.


I find that a little hard to believe, he has done countless interviews on the subject across many media platforms and it came up specifically during the election campaign. He has been used as a beacon for other sufferers worldwide and praised for his determination to overcome that situation in public speaking and his deflection of the derision of others who feel more comfortable describing those who stutter as;


D_W said:


> He's not that bright, and never was


----------



## Phil Pascoe (24 Jan 2022)

Jake said:


> He's a stutterer - they have to search for other words when the word will not come.


Does stuttering make him go to sleep in meetings?


----------



## D_W (24 Jan 2022)

shed9 said:


> I find that a little hard to believe, he has done countless interviews on the subject across many media platforms and it came up specifically during the election campaign. He has been used as a beacon for other sufferers worldwide and praised for his determination to overcome that situation in public speaking and his deflection of the derision of others who feel more comfortable describing those who stutter as;



Ok, you can not believe me if you want 
I've never heard the hero stutter story here, which shouldn't be that big of a surprise given the car accident and beau's early death on top of it. I think those are a little tougher to deal with than stuttering. 

Lack of cognitive ability is a whole lot more concerning than suffering. The gaffes I've seen from him have to do with slow processing. At least he's not the terrible person Hillary is, though. I think he's a decent individual compared to the idiotic trump and the fake and severely narcissistic Obama.


----------



## Spectric (24 Jan 2022)

D_W said:


> He's in office for one reason - two, I guess.


They must have thought him to be the best candidate out of the bunch, so what does that say! American politics are nothing more than a circus, huge sums of money wasted in order to become the president, I suppose that is the best thing about UK politics, the campaign expense is capped which makes it fair but does allow the likes of Corbyn through. Also what about Bidens speech where he said he would allow a slight Russian incursion into Ukraine but was soon retracted.


----------



## D_W (24 Jan 2022)

Here's the deal with Biden - he ran in a field that really didn't have much. If there was a bill clinton type of candidate, the election would've been a blowout. 

There was nothing from the republican side other than a trump who couldn't dig his own hole deeper fast enough, and if you told him the hole was getting deep, he'd dig faster to show you how big of a baby he is. 

On the democratic side, you had a somewhat odd socialist takeover attempt from progressives that never gathered steam. Everyone wanted a mild candidate, and they got that with Biden, but they were running away from something (Trump) and not toward something. Why did trump get elected? because Hillary and most of the democratic and most of the republican establishment were getting way into the globalist economic thing and the public here was getting tired of it. Half of the country can't stand Hillary, and even in that case, the alternative was (incompetent) Bernie. Biden rises to the top and the lukewarm desire to have him elected was displayed in the fact that he barely beat a terrible sitting president. Terrible as in the worst I've seen in my lifetime. 

So, we got the presidential version of white bread with no salt. It really bothers a lot of people that Biden is actually moderate, at least reasonably so. 

I don't have great hopes for the next election - people are voting against candidates rather than for. Maybe an even worse outcome would be another very charismatic candidate who really only has their own desires in mind - ego. 

If we look around the world at leaders, though, let's be honest. Do we want a Xi type instead? A strong leader propagandized and kept in by ideological force? No. Putin? No. Johnson? No. Bolsonaro - no. Trudeau? No. 

I like Merkel, but you don't find many of those. Maybe it's a statement of the practicality and sensibility of the Germans to have a Merkel and the rest of us have the above.


----------



## Spectric (24 Jan 2022)

D_W said:


> I don't have great hopes for the next election - people are voting against candidates rather than for.


I think it goes much deeper in the UK, here politics has become stagnant, stale, perceived as corrupt, outdated and tied to history. Yes people are now voting to stop someone rather than for a candidate which shows how PP the choice now is. There are so many issues and yet they call it a democratic system, how can that be when in elections the turnout often only represents a small percentage who bother to vote because the rest are probably so disillusioned with it all. Our next election in two years will more than likely end in a hung parliament, no one is going to want another Borris fiasco and if he hangs around much longer the rot will just eat through the tory party, as for labour well plenty of hot air and criticism of everyone else but not much else and the others have no real presence.

What we need is a total overhaul of everything and not just a collection of politicians, it needs to be made of a more diverse group of people from engineering, sciences, etc etc so you get a realistic outcome when decisions are made. Lets have a new parliament building outside of london, leave all the historcal pomp and bshiete behind and put it in the middle of the country. On top of this let's get real and accept that we are no longer a world super power and need to play cat and mouse with the big boys and playing war games because we will only end up getting hurt. Put the people first and hit poverty, taking back our streets, addressing homelessness and looking after the old rather than just treating them as no further use burdens. This unfortunately needs a new type of political system and leadership. The British have never been good at people management and leadership, they have been responsable for many failures so how can we expect a successful government, perhaps it is time to do what others do and that is bring in leaders under contract like sport clubs do a lot of, must be a reason why they use so many foreign managers and less british.


----------



## Jake (24 Jan 2022)

Phil Pascoe said:


> Does stuttering make him go to sleep in meetings?



Johnson fell asleep in the same meeting. Biden had the excuse of jet lag and a hectic schedule the day before.


----------



## D_W (24 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> What we need is a total overhaul of everything and not just a collection of politicians, it needs to be made of a more diverse group of people from engineering, sciences, etc etc so you get a realistic outcome when decisions are made. Lets have a new parliament building outside of london, leave all the historcal pomp and bshiete behind and put it in the middle of the country. On top of this let's get real and accept that we are no longer a world super power and need to play cat and mouse with the big boys and playing war games because we will only end up getting hurt. Put the people first and hit poverty, taking back our streets, addressing homelessness and looking after the old rather than just treating them as no further use burdens. This unfortunately needs a new type of political system and leadership. The British have never been good at people management and leadership, they have been responsable for many failures so how can we expect a successful government, perhaps it is time to do what others do and that is bring in leaders under contract like sport clubs do a lot of, must be a reason why they use so many foreign managers and less british.



I think the ideals listed are what makes people a target for politicians. All of the poverty initiatives in the US have failed to address why people are on the streets here - they don't do anything to get the people on the streets involved in taking their egg and carrying it on their own. They're first steps out with no long-term plan, or just outright political handouts. 

100% agree on the war games, but don't know the right answer there (as in, you can't be completely publicly tied to peace, peace, peace as you'll be the object of aggression and constant testing at some point). but I fundamentally do not like the idea of war in any situation other than something like WWII, and I'm sure the lead up to war in the first place was not just "oh, look, pure evil is here and we're pure good". 

The issue here is no matter what the system or ideals, there is a group of people who is too lazy to do much of anything looking for a handout, and there is a small group of egotistical selfish and controlling sociopaths, hypomanics and psychopaths who will always look for control and actualization, and they will go to great distances to cover up what really gives them a buzz and front something less disturbing. 

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump (maybe not when he was younger, but there's something seriously wrong with him now - I think when he was younger, he was just trying to be popular and look unique at the same time) are examples of this. 

The reality is "good people" with good intentions will tire before the others tire.


----------



## clogs (24 Jan 2022)

Spectric
we also need to make our politions /leaders more responsible for the [email protected] job they are doing...like HR2, military waste, those in charge should be sacked immediatley with no pension....or put them on the front line under the thumb of a decent sargent, put a gun in their hand, it's them that should go over the top first.......
plus penalties for theft /expenses so extreme they wont want any more duck houses.....hahaha.....
Full disclosure of the previous 10 years earnings and tax....
also someone with [email protected]'s to stop this woke (Y) ness thats wrecking the country/world...
Anyway as for Russia and all those kinda places, given the chance the people wouldn't want the political system they have now....
Blood diamonds and putins mates / Oligarchs rings a bell....
our system may have it's faults but sooner ours than theirs I say.....


----------



## Phil Pascoe (24 Jan 2022)

Spectric said:


> Yes people are now voting to stop someone rather than for a candidate which shows how PP the choice now is ...



I like many people have spent decades voting for the least worst candidate. Any so called democratic system that allows a Party with 12.6% of the votes only one MP is a disgrace.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (24 Jan 2022)

NHS, social care, energy poverty, drugs, housing etc - issues some/most/all care about. If political inaction is a barrier to progress, politics may need to change. 

Better services cost money that needs to be raised through taxation. The only issue is who pays - which taxes raised or which other services are reduced. Current (generally futile) debate revolves around finger pointing - the wealthy, corrupt, amazon, etc. Realism should rule!

Changing the way politics works may give impetus to future progress. A few thoughts:

increase MP pay three fold, dismantle the expenses system. Removes expenses fraud, cheap to administer. May attract people with integrity and ability, rather than egos. 
reconfigure the HoL. On the agenda for 3 decades or more with little progress. Define role, authority, membership - that it is difficult is not a reason for continued prevarication
make senior civil service accountable for their deficiencies. Parliament sets strategy and direction. The civil service should be held accountable for delivery, not politicians who have neither specialist knowledge nor direct control over staff and resources.
The Times recently drew attention to the odd behaviours of the voters - political mould breakers (eg: Thatcher, Blair, Johnson) interspersed with the very conventional (Major, Brown, May). The former won multiple elections, the latter fell in their first race. Not sure what may suggest for the future?


----------



## Phil Pascoe (24 Jan 2022)

Increase MP pay three fold, dismantle the expenses system ...

Yes, I've said this for years - and cut their numbers by two thirds.


----------



## Droogs (24 Jan 2022)

Make politicians truely financially and criminally accountable for policies implemented that are harmful to the nation and full proportional representation by percentage of votes cast for each party. Oh and voting by all over 16s mandatory in all elections apart from convicted incarcerated persons, evasion of which is punishable by confiscation of 50% of net worth or prison for the length of that parliament. That should get things on a better keel. Also any politician found deliberately lying about policy or its effects to be punished with an automatic 5 year prison sentence.


----------



## Just4Fun (24 Jan 2022)

Droogs said:


> ... full proportional representation by percentage of votes cast for each party.


I do see the attraction of proportional representation but I also see some problems.
One is that a truly independent candidate would stand no real chance of getting elected.
Another is that I know someone who stood for the local council here, where proportional representation is used. Under a first-past-the-post system she would have been elected but due to proportional representation she was not elected but someone who got fewer votes did get a seat. I am not sure that is just. Did the people who voted for her get the representation they deserved?


> Oh and voting by all over 16s mandatory in all elections ...


An elderly relative in Australia, where voting is compulsory, went along to vote in the last election. Unfortunately he is senile and could not remember his address to identify himself, and had to return at a later time with his son to remind him who he is. I can't say I place a lot of faith in his vote.

Voting is not compulsory here in Finland but nevertheless I voted yesterday in a local election. I don't really speak a local language, had not looked at any material from any candidates or attended any hustings. I have no idea what any candidate stood for. How much faith should anyone have in my vote? Why should votes by people like me be compulsory? Would it make the system more fair in any way?


----------



## Spectric (24 Jan 2022)

clogs said:


> make our politions /leaders more responsible for the [email protected] job they are doing...like HR2, military waste,


Total transparency is needed, if you or I were not doing our jobs to a mimimum standard then we would expect to lose them so if our local MP is just not delivering the local message to the top and just licking arssse instead to improve their promotional chances then there needs to be a system to remove them rather than having to just put up with them until the next election. 



clogs said:


> also someone with [email protected]'s to stop this woke (Y) ness thats wrecking the country/world...



That is a real threat that could change the very essence of being human, it is a disease that is eating it's way through society and preventing many people from doing their job and cleansing characteristics from what makes someone who they are, eventually all humans will be like clones with no individual traits. 

Why do some people think they are a new version of Darwin who rather than just recording what they see want to actually interfere like some insane doctor and create new versions. Nature has been around for thousands of years and in that time created for most species the male and the female with the sole purpose of maintaining the species, it did not intentionally create anything else but now for some unknown reason some people cannot accept being normal.

Then what total muppet came up with these f----ing pro nouns, is our education system so shot that even addressing another person is now becoming a problem in case they get upset, social media and the lack of face to face contact has a lot to answer for. If you decide to go around in such a state as to cause confusion to others then wear a big badge but leave the rest alone as we already know who we are.



Droogs said:


> Also any politician found deliberately lying about policy or its effects to be punished with an automatic 5 year prison sentence.


Expand that to not answering questions openly and honestly, avoiding answering a question directly, answering a question with waffle or with another question and putting self interest first. The trouble is that deliberately lying about policy or its effects has become normal in politics, an election is won by the party that can con the public the most to win votes and we seem to always fall for it. 

The best election system would be one that it is mandatory for all to vote and it is done as the whole UK and not by counties, so the winner is simply the one who has the most people voting for them.


----------



## baldkev (24 Jan 2022)

TominDales said:


> Basically you don't want to go to war with an aging population.



Totally..... old people can be so cranky



Spectric said:


> What we need is a total overhaul of everything and not just a collection of politicians, it needs to be made of a more diverse group of people from engineering, sciences, etc etc so you get a realistic outcome when decisions are made



Yep, but sensible ideas are not welcome and will never be a reality because it'll lead to a curb on lucrative government contracts ( whichever party is in charge )



Jake said:


> Johnson fell asleep in the same meeting. Biden had the excuse of jet lag and a hectic schedule the day before.


Yeah but boris had a birthday party earlier in the day, plus a wine and biscuits lunch 


Has anyone noticed this thread has probably overtaken jacobs mft thread's post count? Mind you the one about guns seemed to go on a bit


----------



## D_W (24 Jan 2022)

baldkev said:


> Totally..... old people can be so cranky



 

They'll want to tell the other side to stop fighting at 3:30 in the afternoon because it's getting late, and then they'll get everyone up at 4 the next morning and start talking about what it was like to be in fighting shape in their day.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (25 Jan 2022)

The older I get the better I was.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (25 Jan 2022)

The compulsory vote argument is a strange one. On one hand I think yes, it's right so long as there's a "none of the above" box (iirc Australia has) ............. which in a way tends to negate any argument in its favour, and on the other its wrong - why should the vote of someone who has no real political leanings who hasn't a clue for whom or what they're voting for count the same as mine?


----------



## Terry - Somerset (25 Jan 2022)

A compulsory vote requiring all, no matter how ignorant, perverse, demented etc to cast a vote means we get the politicians best able to promote themselves, not the best or most capable leaders.

Voting should be a privilege given only to those who demonstrate the capacity to grasp basic concepts of economics, law, morality, social responsibility etc to make a rational judgement 

Aspiring politicians would then need to evidence their capacity for good judgement and decency, not their ability to perform for the media. Sound bite politics would disappear.


----------



## Spectric (25 Jan 2022)

Terry - Somerset said:


> Voting should be a privilege given only to those who demonstrate the capacity to grasp basic concepts of economics, law, morality, social responsibility etc to make a rational judgement


That is the wrong direction, if everyone had to vote then the politicians would have to talk to everyone and not a select few, this would also introduce them to the ignorant, perverse, demented etc voters who are currently not on the radar.

The downside I can see is that the ignorant, perverse, demented and gullable could be used as porns because they may be easily convinced to vote a certain way, but then it might encourage politicians to address these people and actually do some good for society as a whole and not only worry about a select few.


----------



## Terry - Somerset (25 Jan 2022)

> That is the wrong direction, if everyone had to vote then the politicians would have to talk to everyone and not a select few, this would also introduce them to the ignorant, perverse, demented etc voters who are currently not on the radar.



This is absolutely wrong. Current politicians are very aware of the ignorant, perverse etc - it is they who elect them. They believe and don't question half truths and implausible promises etc. They prefer to place their trust in Ant and Dec and social media. 

We get the politicians we vote for. More ill informed folk in a polling booth won't change politics. 

A tick in the exam box won't happen - those who fail the exam would still understandably protest their right to a vote. Education would make a difference - this also needs the active support of a media which too often creates stories in support circulation and audience numbers rather than informing.


----------



## woodieallen (25 Jan 2022)

I haven't got time to wade through the umpteen posts since I last visited but returning to the ship/programme in question (and apologies if it's already been discussed) but Northumberland was tasked to prevent the ussian spy ship from eavesdropping on the very secret US nuclear submarine.

Question...just how did the Russians know that that sub would be in that location and when ?


----------



## baldkev (25 Jan 2022)

Twitter


----------



## baldkev (25 Jan 2022)

Or maybe trackmysub.com


----------



## Jameshow (26 Jan 2022)

Subsonar.com


----------



## Blackswanwood (26 Jan 2022)

woodieallen said:


> I haven't got time to wade through the umpteen posts since I last visited but returning to the ship/programme in question (and apologies if it's already been discussed) but Northumberland was tasked to prevent the ussian spy ship from eavesdropping on the very secret US nuclear submarine.
> 
> Question...just how did the Russians know that that sub would be in that location and when ?



It's ironic that in a technologically advanced world the way they dealt with the problem was to simply make the Northumberland's engines noisy!


----------



## Jacob (15 Feb 2022)

Jacob said:


> And they expect to be invaded from the west - Napoleon, Hitler, and an on-going general threat from USA.
> Also they have given up large parts of their "Empire" - much of which was gained incidentally in self defence during WW2.


----------



## TominDales (15 Feb 2022)

Jacob said:


> View attachment 129462


I don't see it as that at all. The expansion of Nato was driven by small states fear of bigger aggressive states and 45 years of being under Sovient control. Putin does not see it that way either.
Putin is not a mad megalomaniac, he is not after a new Soviet empire by force, his is a cunning opportunist not an ideologue, is anti nato retoric is propaganda to support the current opportunity, its not based on any facts on the ground, its cynical and aimed at creating short term opportuities to maintain hsi prestige and power. 
In my view, he will avoid the risks of war with the new nato members. His anti-west threat rhetoric is purely propaganda to suit his short term aims and to bolster his position internally , its cynical and skilful propaganda and not based on a) megalomania or b) any credible threat form Nato militarily, h*e is far more concerned at the way those countries have prospered as democracies since the wall came down. *

His main concern is Ukraine has prospered since it became a democracy, western Ukraine is doing well, Belarus is fed up with its dictator as are many Russians, that is the true threat to his regime. He is an opportunist, sees the 'west'/Nato in disarray and focused on pandemic and re-building economies and domestic agendas - Nato's defence spending has shrunk to an all time low, it is no military threat to Russia. The US is quite inward focused at the moment. So he is flexing some muscles to see what he can get. He normally goes for low hanging fruit such as the Georgian campaign and Crimea. The language used is pure propaganda to suit the current situation. He needs to show the external threat to bolster his domestic position and justify the sabre rattling. His people will tolerate him taking a bite out of Ukraine but not a full blown war. If that happened I think it would be unintended, but accidents happen in high stakes situations. His idea outcome is to get something tangible from the situation without risking too many Russian lives or treasure. Its hard to predict what he is after, as an opportunist I suspect he will grab what is available; It could be more prestige at home or with the ex -Soviets states eg Kazakhstan, Belarus. Or get a stronger land position in Crimea/east Ukraine. Or wring concessions form Nato.
But to say he is threatened as with Napoleon, or Hitler or the disastrous Russian/Japanese conflict of 1905 is falling into his narrative. Who is the western dictator that want military conquest in the east?


----------



## Jacob (15 Feb 2022)

TominDales said:


> .......
> But to say he is threatened as with Napoleon, or Hitler or the disastrous Russian/Japanese conflict of 1905 is falling into his narrative. Who is the western dictator that want military conquest in the east?


USA desperately seeking world hegemony.


----------



## RobinBHM (15 Feb 2022)

TominDales said:


> His main concern is Ukraine has prospered since it became a democracy



Ukraine has a trade DCFTA trade deal with EU and is looking to become a full member.

A number of ex communist Eastern bloc countries are now full members of the EU and have benefitted massively from EU membership.

Russia is a pretty weak country really with a gdp no bigger than Spain and it’s extremely corrupt. Putin is acting tough because he is actually weak.


----------



## Spectric (15 Feb 2022)

The big risk in all of this is Ukraine joining NATO, the west knows the potential consequences this could unlease but is not saying no. Ukraine is not fully independant of Russia like so many others who joined NATO, it has historical roots and connections with Russia which means ongoing unrest and conflict, not a massive problem at the moment but if they were in NATO then you would have a major potential war on your hands because the NATO countries would have to step in and help, now what would Putin do, the potential outcome is just not worth any conflict, we really do not want a 40 megaton nuclear missile coming our way because it would be game over for all. What they need to do is stop the sabre rattling and accept that Russian society is different and talk, rather than impose sanctions start talking trade and acceptance to bring Russia on side. All of these problems are as much a result of the west continually looking upon Russia as a threat and trying to keep the cold war going as it is Putin.


----------



## TRITON (15 Feb 2022)

> His main concern is Ukraine has prospered since it became a democracy, western Ukraine is doing well


No it isnt. And corruption in the Ukraine has been often described as 'legendary'


TominDales said:


> I don't see it as that at all. The expansion of Nato was driven by small states fear of bigger aggressive states and 45 years of being under Soviet control.


Er....


https://www.cato.org/commentary/americas-ukraine-hypocrisy#



You dont think they had other 'Conversations' about the other former Soviet era countries along the same vein. "Now, who do we want installed in government"

Try not to be so naive.


----------



## Pallet Fancier (15 Feb 2022)

shed9 said:


> Your perception of who 'The good, the bad and the grey' is is dependent on which viewpoint you have.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You're reading FAR more into my words than I actually said. I never mentioned who were the good guys, bad guys or grey guys. Never once. Every side in this who has owned and operated submarines has done things to other people's underwater infrastructure. 

If you think you've detected bias in what I wrote, you've only heard an echo of your own.


----------



## clogs (15 Feb 2022)

I'm sure that most of the Russian population would get rid of that nutter Putin if given the chance of doing so without reprisals....
Actually the same for most dictaor run countries N.Korea, China etc etc...


----------



## TominDales (15 Feb 2022)

Jacob said:


> USA desperately seeking world hegemony.


Not militarily, Biden has made that crystal clear, its why he is withdrawing US citizens from Ukraine so that there can be no hint of war between Russia and USA. The US is even more reluctant to sustain loss of service personnel than Putin. Especially after Iraq and the Afghan experience 
US military deployment is lowest since WW2. And in Europe and Asia its been at record low levels since 2004. 911 produced a spike. in the middle east from 2001 to 2014. Even US soft power and economy power has been focused internally for the past 14 years and I don't hear or see any moves to change that.

There is a high degree of ioslationism in US politics, it usually needs a bold or naked act of agression to rouse them.
If Russia did invade Ukraine that could change things. Just look what happened in 1917, 1941, 1950 North Korean invasion thorough to end of the cold war - lots of proxy wars with Russia/china, then Kuwait and 911 - Afganistan/Iraq. 







The irony is in 1945, Roosevelt was more concerned to give Stalin some breathing space and was suspicious of the old empires including the British and French, it was only in the late 1947 to 48s that US policy changed with the installation of puppet regimes in eastern Europe and the Berlin crisis.

The dimension that is often missed is the work of 3rd countries to pull the US into their affairs. Britain and France worked very hard to maintain US interest in Europe post '45 to face up to Russia. The same is true of the new members of Nato, they want a US stick in their pocket when negotiating with Russia, the same motivation for Ukraine. In my view this is the proxy war today, the countries on the border of Russia want allies to strengthen their hand. That requires some calm diplomacy by EU and US and to the same extent by Russia to keep a lid on things. There is probably a stable position where Ukraine enjoys autonomy from Russia but is not a threat. This does require measured diplomacy on all sides. 
However I just don't see the US having any appetite for world hegemony, too many casualties involved.


----------



## Jacob (15 Feb 2022)

TominDales said:


> ....... In my view this is the proxy war today, the countries on the border of Russia want allies to strengthen their hand. That requires some calm diplomacy by EU and US and to the same extent by Russia to keep a lid on things. There is probably a stable position where Ukraine enjoys autonomy from Russia but is not a threat. This does require measured diplomacy on all sides.


One would imagine that as Russia retreats, as they have been doing since Glasnost, then the need for NATO would diminish. The USA got the message after Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis


> However I just don't see the US having any appetite for world hegemony, too many casualties involved.


USA seems world leading belligerent currently, with massive expenditure on arms and numbers of lives lost 'War rarely goes as planned': New report tallies trillions US spent in Afghanistan, Iraq. Also massive under cover intrusion into foreign affairs, particularly in South America. They are currently presiding over the collapse of Afghanistan, where they should be dropping aid as enthusiastically as they dropped bombs.


----------



## Droogs (15 Feb 2022)

As long as Putin doesn't try to set up a Ukrainian NHS once he has taken over, he should get away with it, After all if you can't charge the victim $1k to get them from where they were wounded to the hospital whats the point of fighting there


----------



## shed9 (15 Feb 2022)

Pallet Fancier said:


> You're reading FAR more into my words than I actually said. I never mentioned who were the good guys, bad guys or grey guys. Never once. Every side in this who has owned and operated submarines has done things to other people's underwater infrastructure.
> 
> If you think you've detected bias in what I wrote, you've only heard an echo of your own.



Granted you 'Never once' mentioned who were the good or bad guys (despite suggesting nefarious activity by the boogey man of the cold war against the West) but then for clarity, I also didn't state that you had declared who was good or bad either? My retort was purely to point out that those terms of good and bad are meaningless being fully dependent upon your viewpoint, hence my comment on ‘good guys’ in the context of your slightly incorrect ‘whodunnit’ text. It would appear you now agree with me despite not understanding the original reply..... Go figure.....

No echo or bias here. As you were.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (15 Feb 2022)

TominDales said:


> His main concern is Ukraine has prospered since it became a democracy, western Ukraine is doing well,


From wikipedia:
"Ukraine's economy shrank by 6.8% in 2014,[42] and this continued with a 12% decline in GDP in 2015.[43] In April 2017, the World Bank stated that Ukraine's economic growth rate was 2.3% in 2016, thus ending the recession.[44] Despite these improvements, the IMF reported in 2018, that of all the countries in Europe, Ukraine had the lowest GDP per capita.[45][46][47]"




TominDales said:


> He is an opportunist, sees the 'west'/Nato in disarray and focused on pandemic and re-building economies and domestic agendas - Nato's defence spending has shrunk to an all time low, it is no military threat to Russia.


Ever since the West disembowelled Russia, Russia has been trying to get itself back to some semblance of normality, hampered at every turn by the West. As soon as Putin stopped the oligarchy theft - that would be the the ones who now live in London and own football clubs - the knives were out for him precisely because he stopped the theft. Hence the endless "Putin is evil" memes spread daily. You seem to have bought into all of them. What Russia wants (not just Putin, but Russians generally) is to not have nuclear missiles on their border, pointing at Moscow. That's what ALL of this is about. Russia is finally strong enough to object to NATO installing the Aegis Ashore dual use "anti - missile, only for defence against Iranian missiles, honest, guv" system. Why else do you think the USA pulled out of the INF treaty? If NATO didn't exist, would there be a threat of Russian invasion of Ukrain? NATO exists in order to deal with the fallout from NATO's existence. 

Anywho, as they say in Canada, USA seems willing to fight Russia to the last Ukranian, and possibly to the last European. They have accused Russia of wanting to invade a broken, bankrupt country which Russia has no interest in invading. It's straight out of Wag the Dog. If Russia invades, straightjacket sanctions stop Europe buying gas and oil from Russia (in euros, which is a huge petrodollar problem), so USA wins and Europe loses in a big way. If Russia doesn't invade, Biden wins by having stopped the invasion that was never going to happen anyway. He is a hero - peace in our time, and perhaps people will forget he is an incompetent failure. The fact that the whole threat of war is insane, made-up nonsense is irrelevant. 

(If Russia invades at 1:00am this evening as scheduled by The Sun, I am going to be slightly embarrassed).


----------



## Spectric (15 Feb 2022)

Who saw them sailors on the Northumberland reckon the russians were " Shieting it " when two RAF planes flew over the Russian ship, that is another problem because we think we are a match for the Russians and could just push it to far. If the Russians had perceived them planes as a threat they would have fired at them and at that range would not have missed.


----------



## woodieallen (15 Feb 2022)

Blackswanwood said:


> It's ironic that in a technologically advanced world the way they dealt with the problem was to simply make the Northumberland's engines noisy!


Bloody effective and simple. KISS every time works for me.


----------



## woodieallen (15 Feb 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> From wikipedia:
> "Ukraine's economy shrank by 6.8% in 2014,[42] and this continued with a 12% decline in GDP in 2015.[43] In April 2017, the World Bank stated that Ukraine's economic growth rate was 2.3% in 2016, thus ending the recession.[44] Despite these improvements, the IMF reported in 2018, that of all the countries in Europe, Ukraine had the lowest GDP per capita.[45][46][47]"
> 
> 
> ...



I have finally cottoned on, TN. You are Comrade Putin. It explains much of what you post. Either that or you're worried he'll send the Spetsnatz round to chop down your remaining olive trees.


----------



## woodieallen (15 Feb 2022)

Spectric said:


> Who saw them sailors on the Northumberland reckon the russians were " Shieting it " when two RAF planes flew over the Russian ship, that is another problem because we think we are a match for the Russians and could just push it to far. If the Russians had perceived them planes as a threat they would have fired at them and at that range would not have missed.


You really haven't got a clue, have you ? You just love knocking everything and everyone. Bet you're the life and soul of the pub, mate. I think I'll pop you on Ignore.


----------



## TominDales (15 Feb 2022)

Trainee neophyte said:


> From wikipedia:
> "Ukraine's economy shrank by 6.8% in 2014,[42] and this continued with a 12% decline in GDP in 2015.[43] In April 2017, the World Bank stated that Ukraine's economic growth rate was 2.3% in 2016, thus ending the recession.[44] Despite these improvements, the IMF reported in 2018, that of all the countries in Europe, Ukraine had the lowest GDP per capita.[45][46][47]"
> 
> Ever since the West disembowelled Russia, Russia has been trying to get itself back to some semblance of normality, hampered at every turn by the West. .


This quote from Wikipedia is quite misleading. The recession in 2014 to 2016 was due to the Russian invasion of Crimea and the Donbass, it cut off the harvest from Crimea and its important agricultural resources, while the eight year war in Donbass took a huge economic toll and still does in the East. However Western Ukraine which has always been more Europe facing has prospered very well in both democracy. freedom and economically since the calming of hostilities in the East. Its created a strong determination in Ukraine to resist Moscow and I'm sure that does not sit well with Putin. I'm pretty sure its the re-formation of a serous Ukrainian army that gives Putin pause before war, than a few Nato troops deployed to Poland.

I don't subscribe to the 'West disembowelled Russia' view, its was a classic fall of an ancient regime. The communist autocracy had run out of steam by the 1960s and inertia allowed it to run-on into a desperate economic state by 1990. I do agree however that the West and the USA in particular was arrogant and foolish to not aid the Russian economy in the 1990s, the US behaved like a smug victor and did not recognise the human cost to the Russian collapse or the complete change in politics in Russia during the 1990s. Some decent loans, and funds to restructure, would have made a huge difference and also allowed for leverage over the oligarchs - to my mind that is still ongoing, its just its Putin's friends who are the oligarchs today. Disembowel is too active a verb, it was more like arrogant disregard. A grievance was created which Putin uses. 

To my mind, the fundamental issue is that Russia is a dictatorship and the majority of Ukrainians (in the more populous western Ukraine) don't want Russia to impose an autocratic satrap on them. In that sense I think the USA and Nato are secondary players drawn in by the antagonists. All the frontline states boarding Russia, including the Baltic, Poland, Ukraine, Finland are existentially threatened. The rest of us in Europe and the US are at least once if not twice removed. The simalry is the of the hen and the pigs relationship to ham and eggs.

I too will feel a embarrassed is they invade at 1am tomorrow.


----------



## Trainee neophyte (16 Feb 2022)

TominDales said:


> The recession in 2014 to 2016 was due to the Russian invasion of Crimea and the Donbass,


Invasion? Are you sure? It wasn't a case of the ethnically Russian eastern areas not wanting to be ethnically cleansed by the neonazis in Kiev? It was just a random invasion by Putin his own self, riding on his bear - must be true, it was on the BBC. Do you know why they broke away from Kiev? 2014 Odessa clashes - Wikipedia The good guys (that will be the ones we in the west support) set fire to the building and shot anyone who wanted to get out. Very democratic. Someone sent fighter jets to strafe a town and kill civilians. I can't think why they held a vote to democratically separate themselves from Kyev. Did you know they held a vote? Or are only _our_ elections democratic, because all _their_ elections are rigged, obviously. Putin _must_ be all dictator, because why else would people keep voting for him? 

The rewriting of history in real time is astonishing. Did you know that last week Ms Truss went to Moscow and told the Russians that Britain does not, and never will recognise Russian sovereignty over the Rostov and Voronezh regions? (I had no idea where they were, either). That's akin to Russia claiming the UK has no sovereignty over Kent and Essex - complete twaddle, or contemptuous empirical idiocy. Or perhaps it was intentional - Russia must retreat from Russia. It isn't clear where they should retreat to, but they obviously don't have the right to live in their own country. I wonder why Russia feels slightly defensive? Could it be the 125,000 Ukrainian troops dug in, in trenches, waiting to go over the top? If 100,000 Russian troops means imminent invasion, what does 125,000 Ukrainian troops mean? They are just defensive, helpful peacekeeping soldiers, there to assist little old ladies to cross the road? 

Ukraine is one of the wealthiest areas in the world - natural resources, farm land, high tec industry - it ought to have one of the biggest economies in the world. Why doesn't it? Could it be that 10% has to go to the "Big Guy"? At this point the propaganda has been running for decades - NATO needs an enemy otherwise it has no purpose, and NATO's purpose is to "defend" against Russia. Therefore, NATO is defending as agressive as it can, in order to provide jobs and pensions for people like Stoltenberg. If a few million people get killed or displaced in the process, well... you can't make an omelet etc. I would prefer not to be made into an omelette just so some very rich people can get even richer.


----------



## Spectric (16 Feb 2022)

woodieallen said:


> You really haven't got a clue, have you ? You just love knocking everything and everyone. Bet you're the life and soul of the pub, mate. I think I'll pop you on Ignore.


Facts are facts and sticking your head in the sand with your rear in the air will not make anything that makes you feel uncomfortable go away, so wake up and realise we are all living in a world where there are some very bad potential outcomes hanging over our heads and it will only take one person to step over a line to trigger them.


----------



## Jacob (16 Feb 2022)

Jacob said:


> One would imagine that as Russia retreats, as they have been doing since Glasnost, then the need for NATO would diminish. The USA got the message after Cuba Cuban Missile CrisisUSA seems world leading belligerent currently, with massive expenditure on arms and numbers of lives lost 'War rarely goes as planned': New report tallies trillions US spent in Afghanistan, Iraq. Also massive under cover intrusion into foreign affairs, particularly in South America. They are currently presiding over the collapse of Afghanistan, where they should be dropping aid as enthusiastically as they dropped bombs.


PS








Why is the White House stealing $7bn from Afghans? | Moustafa Bayoumi


To take Afghan money to pay grieving Americans in order to punish the Taliban is nothing less than larceny as collective punishment




www.theguardian.com


----------



## Terry - Somerset (16 Feb 2022)

Normal folk in Ukraine and Afghanistan are minor players in a much larger game. They don't count.

Afghan funds the Taliban may have access to would be spent on that which the Taliban regard as a priority - likely to include arms, bribes and "sweeteners" for their senior leadership. 

Food supplies healthcare, power supplies, clean water are likely to be a lower priority and controlled by the Taliban to reinforce Taliban control.

The west (UK, US etc) protest they will do all they can to avert a humanitarian crisis. The reality is they can do close to nothing. They assumed the Afghans could hold the Taliban at bay as they left a sinking ship - they either anticipated the outcome and left anyway, or their intelligence was abysmal.

Ukraine - a cursory look at a map of Europe shows that the once Soviet controlled "buffer" states of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria are now NATO members. The major buffers are now just Belarus and Ukraine.

For Russians of a certain age this is a major threat. That we consider their concerns ill founded does not alter their perceptions. The West will not agree to exclude Ukraine from possible future membership of NATO - therefore the Russians cannot discount it as a risk.

The result - Russians threaten and know they could take Ukraine unopposed. The West will not put troops on the ground - it is a path to uncertain escalation. The West postures and threatens sanctions - although I struggle to think of a single instance where sanctions have been effective. 

Neither Ukraine or Afghanistan demonstrate the supremacy of decency over political and practical realities. Western leaders need to satisfy their electorate with a veneer of concern - it's good for votes and righteous. The Russians have no similar constraints - one could easily regard them as more honest.


----------

