Russia and its “Special Operation” in Ukraine

[choffer]

16 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Why are all nations rich in oil so **** up? 

See you jimmy! That’s fighting talk!

[tonyh29]

37 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Wow, I had no idea just how much Oil Venezuela has. They could easily replace Russia. 

Does it ALWAYS follow that where there is Oil there is Gas? 

I know they're a other nation ruled by a Dictator but at least they're not literally invading their neighbours currently. 

Why are all nations rich in oil so **** up? 

Anyway they could buy the world some time whilst we transition to green power. 

£3.5 billion a week going to Russia from the West for oil and gas , so currently the high prices are boosting Putins coffers .. not sure that not being able to buy a McFlurry will impact him just yet 
 

sooner we can get other sources of oil and gas on board the better 

Edited March 8, 2022 by tonyh29

[El Zen]

35 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Why are all nations rich in oil so **** up? 

The kingdom of Norway would like to kindly ask you to reconsider this statement. Yørs sincerely, Norge.

[bickster]

8 minutes ago, El Zen said:

The kingdom of Norway would like to kindly ask you to reconsider this statement. Yørs sincerely, Norge.

Vikings were just ahead of the curve 

[Lichfield Dean]

44 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Wow, I had no idea just how much Oil Venezuela has. They could easily replace Russia. 

Does it ALWAYS follow that where there is Oil there is Gas? 

I know they're a other nation ruled by a Dictator but at least they're not literally invading their neighbours currently. 

Why are all nations rich in oil so **** up? 

Anyway they could buy the world some time whilst we transition to green power. 

There are those who point to a certain western country for continually interfering and instigating regime change in these nations. Presumably totally coincidentally.

[KentVillan]

 

Sounds like this wasn't meant to be announced ahead of time, but everyone got carried away... one of the problems with democracies I guess is that every country has its Liz Truss types

[il_serpente]

5 hours ago, GarethRDR said:

There it is.  We've finally found it. The weirdest flex in VillaTalk history. Bravo sir. 

In scanning it quickly, I read the word "scientist" as "polisher" and thought, "That sounds about right."

[KentVillan]

 

Worth a read - insight into Putin's possible thinking

[Genie]

It’s pretty mental that we’re still wondering why Putin invaded Ukraine.

[sharkyvilla]

2 minutes ago, Genie said:

It’s pretty mental that we’re still wondering why Putin invaded Ukraine.

Exactly, he is a dictator, a psychopath and a criminal.  You can't really try and rationalise it or try any kind of negotiation, just hope there isn't too much damage done until he is dragged out dead or alive.

[KentVillan]

3 minutes ago, Genie said:

It’s pretty mental that we’re still wondering why Putin invaded Ukraine.

The thing is, there are a bunch of plausible explanations, and picking the right one involves having really high-level intelligence from Russia and China, which are hardly the most transparent systems of government.

I've heard:

• Putin's gone somewhat mad because he's terminally ill
• Putin feels cornered by Nato and we've poked the bear
• Putin thinks this is his last opportunity to solidify his presence in Ukraine, and shore up his previous victories in Crimea / Donbas
• Putin is conspiring with Xi Jinping to completely reset the global order, and this is phase one, to test how US / Nato respond
• Putin isn't conspiring with Xi, but does see weakness post-Covid, post-Trump, EU energy dependency, post-Merkel, French election coming up, etc. and miscalculated

None of them is completely impossible or inconsistent with the facts... Maybe combinations of explanations are true. Maybe we'll never know. Hard to get inside the head of one man.

[foreveryoung]

Not sure if it's been discussed and I can't find the link. But Liz Truss was answering questions today would not agree the war on Ukraine was a act of aggression by Putin? Even when the guy continually asked the question. She said on the lines of, "it's something for our legal team to handle".

 

 

 

"?

[lapal_fan]

I've seen messages saying the reason this is all happening is because NATO lied to Putin, whereby NATO moved military equipment closer to the East than they agreed to.

Now from my knowledge, this is nonsense and NATO can move their shit anywhere they see fit, provided its on NATO territory.

Also, in my opinion, this war isn't about that either, it's because Russia want to take away the Ukrainian coast line (14th largest reserve of shale gas), plus Ukraine are beginning to exert price pressure on selling oil to Europe.

 

But just wondering if there's ANY truth to that rumour.

[sidcow]

2 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

Not sure if it's been discussed and I can't find the link. But Liz Truss was answering questions today would not agree the war on Ukraine was a act of aggression by Putin? Even when the guy continually asked the question. She said on the lines of, "it's something for our legal team to handle".

 

 

 

"?

War is a technical definition,  not least it actually has to be declared.  The Falklands for example is officially termed The Falklands Conflict, not The Falklands war. Neither The UK or Argentina ever declared War. 

Certainly Russia hasn't declared war as we know. I'm not sure Ukraine has either? 

[Genie]

21 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

The thing is, there are a bunch of plausible explanations, and picking the right one involves having really high-level intelligence from Russia and China, which are hardly the most transparent systems of government.

I've heard:

• Putin's gone somewhat mad because he's terminally ill
• Putin feels cornered by Nato and we've poked the bear
• Putin thinks this is his last opportunity to solidify his presence in Ukraine, and shore up his previous victories in Crimea / Donbas
• Putin is conspiring with Xi Jinping to completely reset the global order, and this is phase one, to test how US / Nato respond
• Putin isn't conspiring with Xi, but does see weakness post-Covid, post-Trump, EU energy dependency, post-Merkel, French election coming up, etc. and miscalculated

None of them is completely impossible or inconsistent with the facts... Maybe combinations of explanations are true. Maybe we'll never know. Hard to get inside the head of one man.

The thing about the Nazi’s is complete bollocks of course, so if it is that NATO is closer than some unofficial agreement then why don’t Russia say that?

At least there would be some logic.

Russia: we repeatedly said that if there was any NATO encroachment past a certain point we would react to defend ourselves, so we have.

At least then it’s clear and pushes the blame a bit.

What there doing just doesn’t make any sense on any level.

[avfc1982am]

I think Putin's major problem is ego. Trying to look powerful to his mate Xi and to the US and Europe, De Nazification. and all the other shit are just excuses to create just cause for his actions. I listened to one of his previous ministers earlier(cannot remember who). All he did was get aggressive and talk about 40-50k Russians that had been killed by Ukraine in Donbass and that they wanted liberation in Ukraine. The idea of being an aggressor in this action and causing the deaths of untold numbers whether Russian or Ukrainian wasn't enough for him to admit any kind of understanding that what they were doing was wrong. It was all the US and Nato's fault. Quite startling tbh

Anyway I've decided tomorrow I driving to London and I'm going to do a big shit at the gates of the Russian Embassy. When my collar gets felt by the law then I'm going to blame the missus for giving me too many weetabix for my breakfast.  

 

[KentVillan]

5 minutes ago, Genie said:

The thing about the Nazi’s is complete bollocks of course, so if it is that NATO is closer than some unofficial agreement then why don’t Russia say that?

At least there would be some logic.

Russia: we repeatedly said that if there was any NATO encroachment past a certain point we would react to defend ourselves, so we have.

At least then it’s clear and pushes the blame a bit.

What there doing just doesn’t make any sense on any level.

Yes, but part of Putin's modus operandi as an ex-KGB guy, paranoid autocrat and probable sociopath is to mislead, distract, and provoke.

Also he has to think about his domestic justification for waging war, which is arguably more important to him than whether his remarks make any sense on the world stage.

In effect, many non-Nato nations have gone down the "Nato overreached" line of argument anyway, so he doesn't need to help them with that. He's talking to his home audience, and firing shots at his enemies.

So I can understand in Putin's mind why he needs to portray the Ukrainians as a non-country of Russian brothers in need of Denazification. It has some kind of internal logic, even if to us it is clearly ludicrous.

[a m ole]

I’ve seen videos of tanks firing on, and blowing up civilians trying to escape. At what point does this become unacceptable (to anyone who matters) and further actions are taken?

I appreciate a lot of you know a lot more about this than I do - these are clear war crimes, when do NATO step in, realistically?

[KentVillan]

This is a very hawkish thread, which I'm not sure I entirely agree with (even if I agree with the fundamental point that you give Putin an inch and he'll always take a mile).

As someone else said in the replies, all these "mistakes" have also prevented nuclear war.

But the guy Tweeting is relatively legit - ex-Nato and works for European security think tanks.

But I do think that the whole, "give an inch and he'll take a mile" rationale is equally valid, and over time we've allowed Putin to become an increasingly pernicious influence. Is the strategy just to wait for him to die, and hope his successor is a bit nicer?

[KentVillan]

Just now, a m ole said:

I’ve seen videos of tanks firing on, and blowing up civilians trying to escape. At what point does this become unacceptable (to anyone who matters) and further actions are taken?

I appreciate a lot of you know a lot more about this than I do - these are clear war crimes, when do NATO step in, realistically?

It's already unacceptable, but no chance will we intervene because a car got shot up by a tank.

Bear in mind all the global superpowers have been guilty of war crimes like this in places like Vietnam, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Georgia, etc. and this has never factored into the other great powers' calculations of whether they should intervene.

It's tragic, but risking global nuclear war (100s of millions, maybe billions of deaths) because a few hundred civilians died is never going to be a serious consideration for the top level decision makers.

Think the current approach is the only way, really - severe economic sanctions, supply weapons, aid, and intelligence support to Ukraine, allow volunteers to travel freely to fight... I hope it works, but guess it's only going to get worse before it gets better.