Mandy Lifeboats

2 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

At some point in the next few years I think we might be selling our house to our kids and then renting it back from them.

That appears to be the safest way of attempting to get our major asset over to them rather than over to a care home for 8 months of school dinners or whatever you get for a few hundred thousand these days.

If you do this it has to be a legitimate transaction.  You'll need boiler checks, carbon monoxide detectors and tenancy agreements.  The rent you pay to your kids will be taxed.  They will need to make tax returns.  Its not as easy as it seems. 

Name the movie - 

Malfunctioning batteries almost destoy the machine they power. 

Name the movie - 

A girl steals the opportunity to appear on reality TV from her sister. 

Name the movie -  

Moody teen can't decide between necrophilia or beastiality.  

22 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Back To The Future, Fight Club and Titanic.

2/3 

Titanic wasn't what I had in mind.  

Name the movie -  

It takes far too long to return some unwanted jewellery. 

Name the movie -  

Meatloaf is lumpier than normal.  

Name the movie - 

An old man and young boy desperately want the boy's parents to have sex. 

Name the movie.  

Only the woman and the cat survive.  

4 minutes ago, Genie said:

Quiz question, what is this a list of?

Spurs - 59

Chelsea - 33

Man City - 28

Man United - 24

Arsenal - 18

Liverpool - 14

Villa & Portsmouth - 7

Leicester, Southampton, Watford - 6

- —————

Accrington, Colchester, Crawley, Ipswich, Blackburn - 0

????

 

I was reading this a few days ago.  

Clue >>

Here's a nice clip of Putin dismissing the warnings of the US and UK

This sums it up

6 hours ago, regular_john said:

Why would IS attack Russia?

To prevent Russia joining NATO

To remove Russian Nazis from power

To protect Muslims in Dombass

Moscow was part of ISIS in the 11th century

Poland and Finland have capable armies and long memories. 

23 minutes ago, Genie said:

Given how shit we are at most things this last 10+ years I am terrified at the thought of the British army having to properly going into battle alone.

Without the US holding our hands we’d be **** I expect.

But who are we likely battle alone against?  

One could say we battled Argentina alone.  But we didn't really.  We utilised NATO ammunition and intelligence.  Our NATO allies also backfilled our military commitments elsewhere.  

If we did go to war with Russia without help from them USA  it would conclude well before Russian boots hit UK soil.   We like to ridicule the French military.  But they are one of the most powerful armies in the world.  

1 minute ago, Panto_Villan said:

Ukraine has a far larger (and arguably more capable) army than most European countries do. We shouldn't fall into the trap of thinking that our military is far superior to theirs, and we would just be able to steamroll the Russians where they've failed. European armies are more elite and sophisticated, but a lot smaller and generally optimised for fighting insurgents rather than a high-intensity war against a major opponent. The British army only has 150 servicable tanks, and our artillery is in a terrible state. I'm not actually sure our army would have fared better against the Russians than the Ukrainian army did, and quite possibly would have fared a lot worse.

To win a war you need men and equipment.  Our forces are tiny but the equipment we have is amazing.  We are a tiny country with stealth fighters, attack helicopters, cruise missiles, nukes, aircraft carriers, submarines and nukes. 

We are equipped to defend the UK. 

Our forces are more than capable of doing that with the equipment we have, the allies we have and our geographical position. 

Just now, sidcow said:

An ongoing war in Europe is not suiting anyone.

Its hurting Europe a lot.

Allowing Russia to take Ukraine would hurt more.  

Lesson from history- Chamberlain 

31 minutes ago, villa89 said:

All 20 of them isn't really making a difference. NATO might be ignoring his red lines but they aren't actually doing anything other than the bare minimum. 

Russia would have seized Ukraine without them. 

1 hour ago, villa89 said:

That was his whole plan all along invading Ukraine, invade a country that you are vastly superior to and then use the threat of nukes to keep anyone from helping them.

And look how it's failed.  He's hinted at nuclear war if:  

• Any country interfers with the SMO
• NATO allows its citizens to join the Ukrainian Army
• NATO arms Ukraine
• NATO provides targetting data to Ukraine
• NATO arms Ukraine with long range weapons
• NATO arms Ukraine with tanks
• NATO arms Ukraine with jet fighters
• NATO troops enter Ukraine

Every red line he's drawn NATO has jumped across. 

7 hours ago, villa89 said:

If European countries overpower Russia so much why don't they just enter the war on the Ukrainian side and obliterate all Russian soldiers in Ukraine? 

Putin would portray it as an invasion of Russia by NATO.  That's a large step towards a nuclear war. 

5 hours ago, BOF said:

Here's one. Did you know, it is possible to sail in a straight line from England to France!

Nope. 

The earth is curved.  That line is not straight. 

The expansion of NATO has dealt a huge blow to Russia.  Their main naval bases against NATO are Murmansk, St Petersburg and Crimea. 

Murmansk is supplied by a single road and single railway that run parallel to the Finish border.  It runs through several hundred miles of snowy forests and mountains.  Finland's armed forces could destroy both with relative ease. That's why Putin needs a huge force to protect the border. Without the supply lines Murmansk would need to be supplied by air and/or sea.  Its iced up during the winter and transport planes are sitting ducks for NATO.  

St Petersburg is at the eastern end of the Baltic. The Baltic is now completely surrounded by NATO.  Even if Russia ships/subs reached the western end of the Baltic they still have to navigate the narrow exit through the Danish islands.  St Petersburg is also within artillery range of NATO.  

The Black Sea fleet based in Crimea was once a fearsome force.  Its now hiding in ports to avoid the mighty Ukrainian navy of zero warships.  Even if it recovered, the Black Sea is almost surrounded by NATO and Ukraine.  Its access is also completely controlled by Turkey.  

Putin has effectively killed his own navy.  Its great to see. (pardon the pun)

NATO v Russia. 

This is before Sweden joined.  

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293174/nato-russia-military-comparison/

1 hour ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

Feels like watching a car crash in slow motion. Russia are all in. We are not.

We don't need to be "all in".  

NATO is vastly superior in numbers and ability.  We also have non-NATO allies who we can rely upon. 

Russia is surrounded, outnumbered and outgunned.  

That's the whole crux of the problem.  Russia thinks its a superpower but it's not.