villa89 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 (edited) 5 hours ago, Mandy Lifeboats said: I have written about this before. NATO has a long-standing and well developed plan to beat a Russian invasion. There won't be any Russian invasion. Ever. Under any circumstances. Russia invaded Ukraine because they thought they would over run Ukraine and face little resistance. An invasion of a NATO country would be David vs. Goliath. Russian's aren't stupid enough to ever attempt that. People don't pick fights they know they are going to lose. Russia invading Georgia on the other hand is much more likely and they won't get any support from the western world. Edited February 13 by villa89 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted February 13 VT Supporter Share Posted February 13 Russia has already invaded Georgia. 2008. Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Technically still ongoing but essentially the same playbook as Ukraine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 13 Moderator Share Posted February 13 Georgia is chock full of Russians now, all avoiding being sent to war Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 21 minutes ago, bickster said: Georgia is chock full of Russians now, all avoiding being sent to war Putin could kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Invade with a truck full of uniforms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 Hopefully there’s enough republicans who will vote to bypass Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozzavfc Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 7 hours ago, stuart_75 said: Does anyone know when the F-16's go online?? Are they a game changer? Training usually takes 6 months, and Ukraine were only promised them autumn last year, so I wouldn't expect to see them over Ukraine until the summer. The training pilots are spread out over Denmark, UK, and USA, although I'd be surprised if over 50 were being trained, and they'll be very careful using them similar to the tanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 It seems like they don’t do irony in Russia. On the topic of the US and Europe potentially seizing Russian assets Quote "This is theft: It's the appropriation of something that doesn't belong to you," Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told Sputnik radio, TASS reported. link 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 10 minutes ago, Mozzavfc said: Training usually takes 6 months, and Ukraine were only promised them autumn last year, so I wouldn't expect to see them over Ukraine until the summer. The training pilots are spread out over Denmark, UK, and USA, although I'd be surprised if over 50 were being trained, and they'll be very careful using them similar to the tanks They are also quite problematic logistically apparently and very finicky to operate and maintain. I read the giant air intake under the front sucks up debris into the engine so they need long pristine runways to launch from and Ukraine currently doesn’t have any. Furthermore any preparation works to bring the runway up to the required standards and to build the required maintenance sheds they need would become an easy target for the Russians who only need to damage the runway with debris. One military analyst even went so far as suggesting they will never actually fly during wartime and the Ukrainians might in fact be trying to get them donated now rather than buying them post war. I guess we’ll have to see how it plays out and whether they arrive and can be used effectively. Quote Should Ukraine ever receive F-16 fighters from the US, the jets might not last very long. The F-16 is so fragile that it requires specially prepared airbases — and those bases can be identified and targeted by Russia, one expert says. The F-16 has a large air intake under the nose that "sucks everything from the ground directly into it," Justin Bronk, an air-warfare analyst for Britain's Royal United Service Institute (RUSI) think tank said during a recent episode of the Geopolitics Decanted podcast. "So F-16s typically require very clean, very well-maintained air bases." https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-may-spot-ukrainian-bases-preparing-for-f16s-expert-says-2023-4?amp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 2 hours ago, villa89 said: There won't be any Russian invasion. Ever. Under any circumstances. Russia invaded Ukraine because they thought they would over run Ukraine and face little resistance. An invasion of a NATO country would be David vs. Goliath. Russian's are stupid enough to ever attempt that. People don't pick fights they know they are going to lose. Russia invading Georgia on the other hand is much more likely and they won't get any support from the western world. I couldn't disagree more. Russia won't be stupid enough to launch a massive attack on NATO. But that's not how they work. Russia might try to snatch a small piece of a NATO country and test NATO's willingness to go to war over 20 square miles of Estonia. There's many examples of this tactics being used during my lifetime. Most notably Russia's original invasion of Crimea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 45 minutes ago, Mandy Lifeboats said: Russia might try to snatch a small piece of a NATO country and test NATO's willingness to go to war over 20 square miles of Estonia. Again no chance that happens. NATO wouldn't turn to diplomatic relations if a small piece of a member country was invaded by Russia, it would be retreat or die. There's a reason Russia is anti more countries joining NATO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panto_Villan Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 2 hours ago, magnkarl said: Hopefully there’s enough republicans who will vote to bypass Johnson. They can’t bypass him. It’ll definitely pass if there’s a vote, but if he chooses not to bring the bill to the floor then nobody can vote on it. What they could do is threaten to launch a vote of no confidence and then vote with the democrats to remove him and then vote for a democrat speaker to replace him (who would bring the bill to the floor)… but that’s a way more serious trangression against your party than just voting against the party line on one vote. Not sure I can see anyone threatening that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mandy Lifeboats Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 1 hour ago, villa89 said: Again no chance that happens. NATO wouldn't turn to diplomatic relations if a small piece of a member country was invaded by Russia, it would be retreat or die. There's a reason Russia is anti more countries joining NATO. So......let me pose some hypothetical questions to you. Russia stages a small chemical attack on UK citizens. Would NATO declare war? Russia stages another small chemical attack on UK citizens. Would NATO declare war? Russia shoots down a South Korean airliner filled with Dutch Citizens. Would NATO declare war? A Russian pilot lock's onto an unarmed RAF plane and fires. The missile fails. Would NATO declare war? A Russian pilot intentionally collides with a NATO surveillance drone International airspace. Would NATO declare war? Russia moves a border post on the Estonian border 2 mm towards the west. Should NATO declare war? 3mm? 2cm? 20cm? 2m? 3m? Before you answer, let me remind you of Trump's recent comments that he would encourage Putin to do as he wished to a NATO country if they weren't paying their way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnkarl Posted February 13 Share Posted February 13 1 hour ago, Panto_Villan said: They can’t bypass him. It’ll definitely pass if there’s a vote, but if he chooses not to bring the bill to the floor then nobody can vote on it. What they could do is threaten to launch a vote of no confidence and then vote with the democrats to remove him and then vote for a democrat speaker to replace him (who would bring the bill to the floor)… but that’s a way more serious trangression against your party than just voting against the party line on one vote. Not sure I can see anyone threatening that. That’s what I meant by bypassing him. They can threaten him with it and see if he budges and if not there are plenty of pro-Israel and Ukraine republicans who would vote yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 14 Moderator Share Posted February 14 Ukraine are claiming that they "destroyed" another large landing craft off the coast of Crimea. This time they claim it is the Caesar Kunikov a ship they've previously hit (but not sunk) If true, Russian logistics just got a little bit harder again and the black sea fleet shrinks some more 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 Imagine the tourism in years to come snorkelling around all these shipwrecks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 17 hours ago, Mandy Lifeboats said: Russia might try to snatch a small piece of a NATO country and test NATO's willingness to go to war over 20 square miles of Estonia. I think it was on the BBC a few years back , but it was a drama type documentary , whereby this indeed happens , events escalated and then we sunk one of Russias key ships by accident , resulting in Russia launching a nuclear strike on the UK .. I can't recall why the yanks or NATO were not involved with this part of it , but the drama bit was the British chain of command deciding whether or not to launch our nukes back at Russia , In the end the committee decided the UK was **** regardless and there was no point in firing them back purely out of revenge lets just hope Putin realises it was a fictional program !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 appreciate it was a Russian mouthpiece , but the sky news follow up article to Hakim's statement yesterday don't make good reading for Ukraine He claimed the frontline in Ukraine is moving steadily westwards and the country is struggling to fund and resource its war effort. Russia, on the other hand, has weathered the worst of Western sanctions and its military industrial complex is more than up to the challenge of supplying its war effort. That is broadly speaking true, give or take some hyperbole, and it highlights the perilous state of Ukraine's war machine given ongoing doubts about continued American financial support. But there is some truth in his assessment of the state of the war, or enough of it to worry the West. Ukraine has failed to dislodge the invaders. The West has failed to punish Russia for its unprovoked aggression. And now Russian diplomats are sounding increasingly confident as they mock and taunt the victims of their invasion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 It just tells you that these economic sanctions don't really work, especially in dictatorship countries like China, Iran and Russia. Russia is still selling oil, gas, diamonds etc. They might hurt economically in the long term but they don't stop wars. Europe/NATO use these sanctions as a way of avoiding the topic of entering in the war on Ukraine's side which is what they should have done in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted February 14 Moderator Share Posted February 14 7 minutes ago, villa89 said: Europe/NATO Two entirely different organisations with different aims and memberships, neither of which is compatible with getting involved on the ground Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted February 14 Share Posted February 14 8 minutes ago, villa89 said: It just tells you that these economic sanctions don't really work, especially in dictatorship countries like China, Iran and Russia. Russia is still selling oil, gas, diamonds etc. They might hurt economically in the long term but they don't stop wars. Europe/NATO use these sanctions as a way of avoiding the topic of entering in the war on Ukraine's side which is what they should have done in the first place. These sanctions. You’ll recall a few weeks ago the US Navy had to step in to protect a British owned cargo ship that was hit by a Houthi missile. The cargo on that ship was Russian oil, traded in Greece and sold to Singapore. I don’t know how you can say they aren’t working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts