ChatterBank1 min ago
The War In Ukraine
116 Answers
'Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will cost the global economy $2.8 trillion in lost output by the end of next year—and even more if a severe winter leads to energy rationing in Europe.'
With the outlook to be a continued process of slaughter for months, maybe years to come of life (human & animal) & destruction of habitation & infrastructure at a rate not seen since WW2. Is the loss of a small region of the extreme west Donbass regions of Ukraine (plus the Crimea, which has been Russian for 300 years) worth the prolongation, & possible risks of the use of nuclear & chemical weapons ?
With the outlook to be a continued process of slaughter for months, maybe years to come of life (human & animal) & destruction of habitation & infrastructure at a rate not seen since WW2. Is the loss of a small region of the extreme west Donbass regions of Ukraine (plus the Crimea, which has been Russian for 300 years) worth the prolongation, & possible risks of the use of nuclear & chemical weapons ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.We aren't "close to nuclear war"
What we do have is the largest country in the world waging a war of destruction on largest country in Europe.
It's a war of ethnic cleansing and genocide just as surely as Hitler's
The only difference that I can see in scale is that Putin is not gassing Ukrainian children, merely raping them and having them deported and adopted by russians.
In the Russian press today, in relation to proposed measures which would finally kill off what little free speech remains in the country, a deputy even says" We don't necessarily need to appoint our own Goebbels" ... As I said above, they were probably wise to drop the "denazification" propaganda in favour of satan :-)
What we do have is the largest country in the world waging a war of destruction on largest country in Europe.
It's a war of ethnic cleansing and genocide just as surely as Hitler's
The only difference that I can see in scale is that Putin is not gassing Ukrainian children, merely raping them and having them deported and adopted by russians.
In the Russian press today, in relation to proposed measures which would finally kill off what little free speech remains in the country, a deputy even says" We don't necessarily need to appoint our own Goebbels" ... As I said above, they were probably wise to drop the "denazification" propaganda in favour of satan :-)
ichkeria
Putin even sent the president of Guinea-Bissau to Kyiv with a message: "I want to talk"
If he's using the time-honoured diplomatic skills of Guinea-Bissau then he really is in shtuck.
You can talk to terrorists, but you can't negotiate with them.
He could send Fred Flinstone to Kyiv with a message saying let's talk. It's as if you people don't want to end this awful frightening war. Hell's bell's what could we lose by talking can't make it any worse surely.
Putin even sent the president of Guinea-Bissau to Kyiv with a message: "I want to talk"
If he's using the time-honoured diplomatic skills of Guinea-Bissau then he really is in shtuck.
You can talk to terrorists, but you can't negotiate with them.
He could send Fred Flinstone to Kyiv with a message saying let's talk. It's as if you people don't want to end this awful frightening war. Hell's bell's what could we lose by talking can't make it any worse surely.
Have you forgotten the history of appeasement?
First the Rhineland
Then Austria
Next Sudetenland.
I thought of that when Merkel mourned " I have been wrong for twenty years" - trade with Russia a good thing and instead a bad thing as it allowed Russian to re-arm
or chamberlain 1939 - and so ay hev to tell you that we at war with Germany
or Tsar Nicholas II 1918 - Have I been wrong for 25 y ( since 1894 when he ascended the throne that is!) and the collected ambassadors said " Yes your majesty"
First the Rhineland
Then Austria
Next Sudetenland.
I thought of that when Merkel mourned " I have been wrong for twenty years" - trade with Russia a good thing and instead a bad thing as it allowed Russian to re-arm
or chamberlain 1939 - and so ay hev to tell you that we at war with Germany
or Tsar Nicholas II 1918 - Have I been wrong for 25 y ( since 1894 when he ascended the throne that is!) and the collected ambassadors said " Yes your majesty"
would putin rather order a nuclear strike or lose power?
i have no idea... but the chances are not zero that it's the first one.
would the russian military carry out a nuclear attack if it was ordered to do so?
nobody can possibly know.... but the chances are not zero.
would the bleedin missile actually work once it was fired?
the experts seem to completely disagree.
i have no idea... but the chances are not zero that it's the first one.
would the russian military carry out a nuclear attack if it was ordered to do so?
nobody can possibly know.... but the chances are not zero.
would the bleedin missile actually work once it was fired?
the experts seem to completely disagree.
This has been said a zillion times, but one more time will do no harm: this is not a "dispute" that can be settled by "negotiation".
For all that, Ukraine agreed to talks a couple of days after the invasion on Feb 24. They were held on the border with Belarus.
Every so often Putin claims he wants "negotiations" and when you look more closely you see those terms are apparently based on Ukraine surrendering first ("dismantling its army for example"). Basically, put your head in my mouth and I promise I won't eat you.
Senid the president of Guinea-Bissau was a pretty desperate tactic, but laden with propaganda value: poor starving (because of Russia) Aftican nation pleads famine on Ukrainian TV with a distinctly uncomfortable looking Zelensky alongaide him. Zelensky swhould have slung him out.
For all that, Ukraine agreed to talks a couple of days after the invasion on Feb 24. They were held on the border with Belarus.
Every so often Putin claims he wants "negotiations" and when you look more closely you see those terms are apparently based on Ukraine surrendering first ("dismantling its army for example"). Basically, put your head in my mouth and I promise I won't eat you.
Senid the president of Guinea-Bissau was a pretty desperate tactic, but laden with propaganda value: poor starving (because of Russia) Aftican nation pleads famine on Ukrainian TV with a distinctly uncomfortable looking Zelensky alongaide him. Zelensky swhould have slung him out.
"Ukraine. Opposition Parties banned. Opposition media banned. Russian language banned (along with Yiddish, mmm)
Cradle of Democracy it ain't. "
Ah, speaking of Goebbels :-)
What nonsense.
Ukraine has more political parties than is good for it.
Put two Ukrainians in a room and they'll form three political parties, so the saying goes. 38 candiates stood for the presidency last time.
Put two russians in a room at the moment, and one will jump out of a window and the other will form an opposition party before myteriously falling down the stairs :-)
Cradle of Democracy it ain't. "
Ah, speaking of Goebbels :-)
What nonsense.
Ukraine has more political parties than is good for it.
Put two Ukrainians in a room and they'll form three political parties, so the saying goes. 38 candiates stood for the presidency last time.
Put two russians in a room at the moment, and one will jump out of a window and the other will form an opposition party before myteriously falling down the stairs :-)
Is he desperate to find a way out?
This all stems from people being scared of a nuclear war, persumably.
But you think Ukraine is going to talk to Putin?
What about? I've already told you what Putin's terms are: they are basically "surrender".
Even if god forbid the "west" got cold feet and said "we're not suporting Ukraine any more" Ukraine would fight on, with unpredicatable consequences. Given the state of Russia's army now there is no guarantee they would eventually win. Things would almost certainly get worse.
This all stems from people being scared of a nuclear war, persumably.
But you think Ukraine is going to talk to Putin?
What about? I've already told you what Putin's terms are: they are basically "surrender".
Even if god forbid the "west" got cold feet and said "we're not suporting Ukraine any more" Ukraine would fight on, with unpredicatable consequences. Given the state of Russia's army now there is no guarantee they would eventually win. Things would almost certainly get worse.
Putin will be happy when he has depopulated Ukraine and advanced to its current western borders.
He will know that he waved his nuclear willy and we backed off.
Next, some way down the line there'll be incursions into Moldova, Estonia and we'll have the same people saying "let's talk for the sake of humanity"
He will know that he waved his nuclear willy and we backed off.
Next, some way down the line there'll be incursions into Moldova, Estonia and we'll have the same people saying "let's talk for the sake of humanity"
Or guess what: Putin gets fed up of the pesky Ukrainians resisting all the time and decides to let off a few tactical nukes downwind of Moscow.
He knows no one now is going to stop him because we walked away.
Believe it or not political and military strategists do think about these things and weigh up the options and the likely outcomes.
He knows no one now is going to stop him because we walked away.
Believe it or not political and military strategists do think about these things and weigh up the options and the likely outcomes.
ichi : //Every so often Putin claims he wants "negotiations" and when you look more closely you see those terms are apparently based on Ukraine surrendering first ("dismantling its army for example").//
That's often how negotiations start: usually both parties asking for impossible demands, then you either childishly walk away or start talking, no one gets it all.
That's often how negotiations start: usually both parties asking for impossible demands, then you either childishly walk away or start talking, no one gets it all.