|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 30, 2022 18:39:06 GMT
But still 900 / 1800 more than Germany is proposing to send? Is that because we are sending super soldiers who each have two heads ? They do say two heads are better than one, so sending extra helmets to help protect them is good sense. This has all gone a bit surreal.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677 
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 1, 2022 16:48:36 GMT
No doubt some writing on this board believe that Putin is in a similar club to Hitler and so it is interesting to see the BBC almost compare the two. I still don't believe that but you never know and certainly worrying it is apparently becoming a more mainstream thought.
The former Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain has long been criticised for describing Germany's attempted annexation of Czechoslovakia in 1938 as "a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing".
But his remark lives on as a challenge to all policymakers thinking about whether to engage diplomatically - and even militarily - in a potential conflict between two foreign countries. The consequences can be far-reaching.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60159622 |
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 1,214
|
Post by travolta on Feb 1, 2022 18:45:12 GMT
For 'BBC Comment' read 'Muppet'.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 1, 2022 19:23:59 GMT
And to hear what the Russian position is what better outlet than RT - the mouthpiece of the russian government. www.rt.com/russia/547997-putin-us-security-deal-response/Certainly more interesting than to read about Johnson running around Kyiv making various pointless comments to deflect from partygate and no-more-Johnson-gate. |
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,506
Likes: 1,214
|
Post by travolta on Feb 1, 2022 19:58:21 GMT
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,618
Likes: 6,432
|
Post by registerme on Feb 1, 2022 20:02:38 GMT
And to hear what the Russian position is what better outlet than RT - the mouthpiece of the russian government. www.rt.com/russia/547997-putin-us-security-deal-response/Certainly more interesting than to read about Johnson running around Kyiv making various pointless comments to deflect from partygate and no-more-Johnson-gate. That article is pretty incoherent, whether due to actual Russian policy, poor journalism, or bad translation I can't answer to. For example:- 1. "However, he argued that the US disregards another key principle of European security, which says that no state should be allowed to enhance its own security at the expense of another". So what, exactly, are we to make of Russian occupation of Eastern Ukraine and Crimea? Or, indeed, to the threat of invasion of Ukraine (if, in fact, that is what it is)? Or Moldova? Or the invasion of Georgia? Or the continued occupation of Trans-Dniester? 2. NATO forces deployed in Eastern Europe are a trip wire. We're talking hundreds / low thousands. Hardly enough to march on Moscow. 3. Tomahawks are offensive weapons. I don't think there are any land based launched systems deployed anywhere at the moment. If they were land based they'd be truck mounted, and you wouldn't need a "base" to launch them from. The mooted "missile defense bases" in Eastern Europe are to protect against Iranian ballistic missiles. It's somewhere between possible and very likely that Russia has plenty of its own intermediate ranged land based missiles deployed (which is apparently why the US withdrew from the INF Treaty). Other than that, agreed re Johnson in Kyiv.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 1, 2022 20:35:25 GMT
And to hear what the Russian position is what better outlet than RT - the mouthpiece of the russian government. www.rt.com/russia/547997-putin-us-security-deal-response/Certainly more interesting than to read about Johnson running around Kyiv making various pointless comments to deflect from partygate and no-more-Johnson-gate. That article is pretty incoherent, whether due to actual Russian policy, poor journalism, or bad translation I can't answer to. For example:- 1. "However, he argued that the US disregards another key principle of European security, which says that no state should be allowed to enhance its own security at the expense of another". So what, exactly, are we to make of Russian occupation of Eastern Ukraine and Crimea? Or, indeed, to the threat of invasion of Ukraine (if, in fact, that is what it is)? Or Moldova? Or the invasion of Georgia? Or the continued occupation of Trans-Dniester? 2. NATO forces deployed in Eastern Europe are a trip wire. We're talking hundreds / low thousands. Hardly enough to march on Moscow. 3. Tomahawks are offensive weapons. I don't think there are any land based launched systems deployed anywhere at the moment. If they were land based they'd be truck mounted, and you wouldn't need a "base" to launch them from. The mooted "missile defense bases" in Eastern Europe are to protect against Iranian ballistic missiles. It's somewhere between possible and very likely that Russia has plenty of its own intermediate ranged land based missiles deployed (which is apparently why the US withdrew from the INF Treaty). Other than that, agreed re Johnson in Kyiv. 1 - I agree with you. 2,3 - I'm not qualified to answer although I do recall at the time the stated intention was to protect against Iranian missiles being questioned by some. I can't see how it wouldn't help to protect against russian missles too (I'm not military expert) and could be seen by them as threatening. As for their own missiles, you're talking about on Russian territory ? In general I didn't say I agreed with the article. Just that it is good that unlike the old days it is now very easy to see what the other side are saying.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,618
Likes: 6,432
|
Post by registerme on Feb 1, 2022 20:54:35 GMT
Re 3, I'm not qualified to answer that, but yes, I suspect it would, even were that not to be the aim. But there are ways round that, and confidence building measures short of war that could be taken. Also Russia has supplied Iran with the S-300, and Turkey (to much NATO consternation) with the S-400. As for Russian missiles being based on Russian soil, so what? That's what allies are. And we shouldn't ignore the tens of thousands of Russian troops currently stationed on the Belorussian border with Ukraine...
Agreed re it being good that we can read what "the other side" is saying, even if it is largely specious.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 1, 2022 22:10:21 GMT
Re 3, I'm not qualified to answer that, but yes, I suspect it would, even were that not to be the aim. But there are ways round that, and confidence building measures short of war that could be taken. Also Russia has supplied Iran with the S-300, and Turkey (to much NATO consternation) with the S-400. As for Russian missiles being based on Russian soil, so what? That's what allies are. And we shouldn't ignore the tens of thousands of Russian troops currently stationed on the Belorussian border with Ukraine...Agreed re it being good that we can read what "the other side" is saying, even if it is largely specious. Tell me about it. Family is being evacuated as a precautionary measure.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 2, 2022 2:01:14 GMT
And to hear what the Russian position is what better outlet than RT - the mouthpiece of the russian government. www.rt.com/russia/547997-putin-us-security-deal-response/Certainly more interesting than to read about Johnson running around Kyiv making various pointless comments to deflect from partygate and no-more-Johnson-gate. That article is pretty incoherent, whether due to actual Russian policy, poor journalism, or bad translation I can't answer to. For example:- 1. "However, he argued that the US disregards another key principle of European security, which says that no state should be allowed to enhance its own security at the expense of another". So what, exactly, are we to make of Russian occupation of Eastern Ukraine and Crimea? Or, indeed, to the threat of invasion of Ukraine (if, in fact, that is what it is)? Or Moldova? Or the invasion of Georgia? Or the continued occupation of Trans-Dniester? 2. NATO forces deployed in Eastern Europe are a trip wire. We're talking hundreds / low thousands. Hardly enough to march on Moscow.
3. Tomahawks are offensive weapons. I don't think there are any land based launched systems deployed anywhere at the moment. If they were land based they'd be truck mounted, and you wouldn't need a "base" to launch them from. The mooted "missile defense bases" in Eastern Europe are to protect against Iranian ballistic missiles. It's somewhere between possible and very likely that Russia has plenty of its own intermediate ranged land based missiles deployed (which is apparently why the US withdrew from the INF Treaty). Other than that, agreed re Johnson in Kyiv. Not listened to the broadcast. On 2), well yes. Laughable to think that NATO forces in the Baltic states are even remotely offensive capable or have an offensive posture. A point effectively made by michaelc when in essence 'mocking' elsewhere in this thread the proposed doubling of UK troops in Estonia from 900 to 1800. On 3) agreed. I'm only aware of ship and submarine launched systems deployed today, but I see that the US Army is acquiring a land based version for deployment in 2023. The original land based version was withdrawn from deployment in Europe in 1987 as part of the INF treaty.
|
|
|
|
Post by stan88 on Feb 2, 2022 14:19:26 GMT
I've no link to this but a retired US general said on a US radio show that one thing to look for is whether Russia move large scale medical, vehicle recovery and engineering units to the front. So far only the minimum, what you would need for training is in place. He said the alarm bells will really go of if the Russians started setting up large MASH units close to the border. I guess there are 80/90 year olds on both sides shaking their heads in disbelief.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Feb 2, 2022 14:59:48 GMT
I've no link to this but a retired US general said on a US radio show that one thing to look for is whether Russia move large scale medical, vehicle recovery and engineering units to the front. So far only the minimum, what you would need for training is in place. He said the alarm bells will really go of if the Russians started setting up large MASH units close to the border. I guess there are 80/90 year olds on both sides shaking their heads in disbelief.there are 50 year olds like me shaking their heads in disbelief. How did we get from glasnost / perestroika / end of cold war / fall of Berlin wall to this. A bit of me is still hoping this is Putin testing the will of the west. If too little robustness is shown, he'll assume that the Baltic states are up for grabs, NATO or no NATO. If enough is shown, he'll find an 'escape clause' and back down.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,677
Likes: 2,974
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 2, 2022 16:07:27 GMT
I've no link to this but a retired US general said on a US radio show that one thing to look for is whether Russia move large scale medical, vehicle recovery and engineering units to the front. So far only the minimum, what you would need for training is in place. He said the alarm bells will really go of if the Russians started setting up large MASH units close to the border. I guess there are 80/90 year olds on both sides shaking their heads in disbelief.there are 50 year olds like me shaking their heads in disbelief. How did we get from glasnost / perestroika / end of cold war / fall of Berlin wall to this. A bit of me is still hoping this is Putin testing the will of the west. If too little robustness is shown, he'll assume that the Baltic states are up for grabs, NATO or no NATO. If enough is shown, he'll find an 'escape clause' and back down. Entrenched miss-trust that goes back decades if not centuries. On both sides. They see "the west" (does that include Japan, S Korea, Singapore etc?) as historically against them and NATO specifically which for years turned its sights to the USSR but now has almost seamlessly put Russia and China as the enemy. Presumably they believe that the mere existence of an organisation like NATO of which they are not members in and of itself creates world military tension.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 2, 2022 19:32:24 GMT
there are 50 year olds like me shaking their heads in disbelief. How did we get from glasnost / perestroika / end of cold war / fall of Berlin wall to this. A bit of me is still hoping this is Putin testing the will of the west. If too little robustness is shown, he'll assume that the Baltic states are up for grabs, NATO or no NATO. If enough is shown, he'll find an 'escape clause' and back down. Entrenched miss-trust that goes back decades if not centuries. On both sides. They see "the west" (does that include Japan, S Korea, Singapore etc?) as historically against them and NATO specifically which for years turned its sights to the USSR but now has almost seamlessly put Russia and China as the enemy. Presumably they believe that the mere existence of an organisation like NATO of which they are not members in and of itself creates world military tension. By "They" though, do you mean the Russian politicians? The ordinary Russians I sometimes mix with are not remotely interested in war or NATO. They just want to get on with business and pleasures of modern life. Of course I don't know anything about the opinions of rural folk in some remote shtetl with only access to State TV, but the young brewing-people I meet are as liberal and informed as I am.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Feb 2, 2022 19:34:06 GMT
I've no link to this but a retired US general said on a US radio show that one thing to look for is whether Russia move large scale medical, vehicle recovery and engineering units to the front. So far only the minimum, what you would need for training is in place. He said the alarm bells will really go of if the Russians started setting up large MASH units close to the border. I guess there are 80/90 year olds on both sides shaking their heads in disbelief. There won't be many on the Russian side - they don't live long enough. Life expectancy 73, around ten years lower than much of Europe.
|
|
