Meanwhile. On the Ukrainian border.

[Scaf]

Does Boris know there will be a few more Ukranians in London for a while

He will probably be hosting a party for them at No10

 

[Wattie]

I just watched a few, very experienced Russian analysts interviewed on US TV. One was Col. Alex Vindman (Rtd).
The same Alex Vindman who delivered damning testimony to Congress, that severely damaged Trump's credibility.

He was born in Ukraine. Before coming to the U.S. as child.

His assessment is, that once movements of Russian troops and support elements to the northern, eastern and southern borders of Ukraine stop and military exercises of those units stop; invasion is imminent. Based on the positioning of Russian troops, he believes that this is not about taking enclaves for Russian speakers in the east of Ukraine. The Russian agenda / plan is to take the whole country and install a puppet regime. Classic cold war Soviet doctrine.

His estimate was that Russia would be ready to invade (again) by the beginning of February, or very shortly thereafter.

It’s funny when the American economy starts to tank, talk of war abounds.
Distraction anyone?
A Us false flag operation is distinctly possible.

it wouldn’t be the first time.

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

It’s funny when the American economy starts to tank, talk of war abounds.
Distraction anyone?
A Us false flag operation is distinctly possible.

it wouldn’t be the first time.

Against a potential enemy that can turn every US city into ash?
I think that its much more likely that Russia has arranged such an operation.
After which Russian 'peace-keepers' will enter the country, for a 'limited time'
to secure the safety of ethnic Russians and then withdraw to Russia.
Except the occupation will drag on. Russia will try to install a proxy leader
and ....... gawd only knows where we end up.
The problem for us is that Putin is planning several steps ahead of current
events. With a timeline of years.
Putin grew up in post war Leningrad. A city that had been under siege for
approaching three years and was almost completely destroyed.
This experience and the general paranoia of Russians of that era regarding
future invasions and similar calamities, has influenced almost every strategic
decision by Russian leaders since Stalin.
However, longer term, I believe that these are only the initial steps in a much
more ambitious plan to reassert Russian global influence.
To the same extent or greater, than that which existed during the Cold War.
When Nord stream 1 was announced in 2005, I thought then, that European
reliance on Russian energy wouldn't end well.

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

Why risk going to war over a country which was never essential to NATO's ability to defend itself.
A better solution would be to agree an IMF-EU-Russian aid package to rebuild Ukraine's industrial base.
At the same time, NATO should stop leading Ukraine up a primrose path.
100,000 troops and equipment is not enough to capture and successfully hold a country as large as Ukraine.
Russia has always stated that it views Ukraine as a country within it's sphere of influence.
However, it may accept an officially neutral Ukraine, in preference to getting bogged down in another Chechnya.
But this time, a Chechnya where the opposition is openly supported by Western arms and hard currency.
China is the bigger threat and instead of driving Russia into willing Chinese arms, we ought to be partnering with Russia, to neutralise China. China is a big investor in Russia's moves to open an Arctic trade route between Asia and Europe, which would save weeks in transport time by sea.
Russia's stated aim of recent years has always been a neutral Ukraine with minority (Russian) rights guaranteed.
Or, if US/EU - Russian agreement can't be reached, an economically destroyed Ukraine, costing the West trillions of dollars to rebuild. Its no choice at all, really.

 

[MrRMB]

Why risk going to war over a country which was never essential to NATO's ability to defend itself.
A better solution would be to agree an IMF-EU-Russian aid package to rebuild Ukraine's industrial base.
At the same time, NATO should stop leading Ukraine up a primrose path.
100,000 troops and equipment is not enough to capture and successfully hold a country as large as Ukraine.
Russia has always stated that it views Ukraine as a country within it's sphere of influence.
However, it may accept an officially neutral Ukraine, in preference to getting bogged down in another Chechnya.
But this time, a Chechnya where the opposition is openly supported by Western arms and hard currency.
China is the bigger threat and instead of driving Russia into willing Chinese arms, we ought to be partnering with Russia, to neutralise China. China is a big investor in Russia's moves to open an Arctic trade route between Asia and Europe, which would save weeks in transport time by sea.
Russia's stated aim of recent years has always been a neutral Ukraine with minority (Russian) rights guaranteed.
Or, if US/EU - Russian agreement can't be reached, an economically destroyed Ukraine, costing the West trillions of dollars to rebuild. Its no choice at all, really.

You need to be in the FO, very sensible and realistic.

 

[Oneball]

I actually thought for a moment that the big success of Trump’s presidency was going to be closer ties with Russia and a more stable Western Hemisphere but then Donald had a burger and changed his mind.

 

[Phil H]

40 years ago:

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

The Yes Minister scene above had currency in the 70's and 80's because the Warsaw Pact was viewed as much stronger than NATO ITO conventional forces. If the Russians had invaded West Germany, NATO doctrine was to use tactical nuclear weapons to destroy / disrupt massed Warsaw Pact formations of tanks and mechanised infantry.
If we had wanted to try to halt Warsaw Pact forces, we'd have had no option but to use short-range nuclear weapons.
Following the break-up of the USSR in the 90's, Russia was in a much weaker position relative to NATO, as it lost all of it's indigenous manpower in the Warsaw Pact. At the same time, it withdrew from ten years of catastrophic guerrilla
warfare in Afghanistan, which left the military in a very weakened state that needed to be rebuilt from the ground up. Critically for Russia, it lost it's buffer states between it and NATO, which is why it went to war with Georgia and why its now poised to invade Ukraine. Russian core demands haven't changed in two decades. Belarus and Ukraine in particular must remain neutral between NATO and Russia.
Russia and NATO destroyed all of their stockpiles of intermediate nuclear weapons in the early 90's as part of the INF Treaty. Because of continued NATO encroachment eastwards, Russia rebuilt its short range (>500km) and intermediate (500>5,000km) mobile nuclear weapons during the last decade. This is why we again have short range NATO nuclear missiles on NATO's eastern borders with Russia. The INF Treaty was discarded by NATO when it became clear that the Russians were in violation and intended to remain in violation.
Essentially we're back where we were during the Cold War. Except that NATO expansion has moved east.
Sweden and Finland are already having informal initial talks with NATO about membership, as they look eastwards towards a more assertive Russia.
NATO started with twelve members. Essentially the WWII western allies and West Germany. Now it has thirty members and in the rare occasions when all members agree, it forms an effective counter to Russia.
Article V of the NATO Treaty states that an attack on one member shall be regarded as an attack on all.
Which brings us full circle. It's in neither party's interests to go to war over Ukraine. Least of all the Ukrainians.
Russia can be an effective partner to NATO, as it was in Kosovo. But, it cannot be seen to dictate terms to NATO either. I believe it would be prudent for the US, as NATO leaders, to give assurances to Russia, that Ukraine's NATO aspirations will be slow tracked for the foreseeable future. Also, NATO and EU countries ought to partner with Russia, economically as well as militarily, whilst verifying every undertaking the Russians enter into.
As soon as China seeks to change the status quo between it and Taiwan. Or on the Senkaku or Natuna Islands.
Or, actively seeks to deny freedom of passage in international waters in the South China Sea.
Then we will see the US focus on China with laser-like discipline. Before this happens, it would be in Europe's best interests to settle its disputes with Russia for the next decade or two, at least.

 

[Phil H]

The beauty of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister is that they are a timeless reflection of politics, and they show that little changes in that world. With a few exceptions, politicians have always been two-faced conniving gits who would sell their own grandmother for seat on the benches, and sell everyone else's for a peerage. The only things that seem to change are the scale of their antics, and the apparent ease with which otherwise unemployable yobs can sound off at the despatch box.

Not that I'm jealous of course

 

[midlifecrisis]

The Yes Minister scene above had currency in the 70's and 80's because the Warsaw Pact was viewed as much stronger than NATO ITO conventional forces. If the Russians had invaded West Germany, NATO doctrine was to use tactical nuclear weapons to destroy / disrupt massed Warsaw Pact formations of tanks and mechanised infantry.
If we had wanted to try to halt Warsaw Pact forces, we'd have had no option but to use short-range nuclear weapons.
Following the break-up of the USSR in the 90's, Russia was in a much weaker position relative to NATO, as it lost all of it's indigenous manpower in the Warsaw Pact. At the same time, it withdrew from ten years of catastrophic guerrilla
warfare in Afghanistan, which left the military in a very weakened state that needed to be rebuilt from the ground up. Critically for Russia, it lost it's buffer states between it and NATO, which is why it went to war with Georgia and why its now poised to invade Ukraine. Russian core demands haven't changed in two decades. Belarus and Ukraine in particular must remain neutral between NATO and Russia.
Russia and NATO destroyed all of their stockpiles of intermediate nuclear weapons in the early 90's as part of the INF Treaty. Because of continued NATO encroachment eastwards, Russia rebuilt its short range (>500km) and intermediate (500>5,000km) mobile nuclear weapons during the last decade. This is why we again have short range NATO nuclear missiles on NATO's eastern borders with Russia. The INF Treaty was discarded by NATO when it became clear that the Russians were in violation and intended to remain in violation.
Essentially we're back where we were during the Cold War. Except that NATO expansion has moved east.
Sweden and Finland are already having informal initial talks with NATO about membership, as they look eastwards towards a more assertive Russia.
NATO started with twelve members. Essentially the WWII western allies and West Germany. Now it has thirty members and in the rare occasions when all members agree, it forms an effective counter to Russia.
Article V of the NATO Treaty states that an attack on one member shall be regarded as an attack on all.
Which brings us full circle. It's in neither party's interests to go to war over Ukraine. Least of all the Ukrainians.
Russia can be an effective partner to NATO, as it was in Kosovo. But, it cannot be seen to dictate terms to NATO either. I believe it would be prudent for the US, as NATO leaders, to give assurances to Russia, that Ukraine's NATO aspirations will be slow tracked for the foreseeable future. Also, NATO and EU countries ought to partner with Russia, economically as well as militarily, whilst verifying every undertaking the Russians enter into.
As soon as China seeks to change the status quo between it and Taiwan. Or on the Senkaku or Natuna Islands.
Or, actively seeks to deny freedom of passage in international waters in the South China Sea.
Then we will see the US focus on China with laser-like discipline. Before this happens, it would be in Europe's best interests to settle its disputes with Russia for the next decade or two, at least.

You also have to remember that Russia still have that fear of being invaded by Western powers. WW2 to us, is the Great Patriotic War to the Russians. Yes it was a different regime but the Russians still fear it. Hence why they had the Warsaw Pact and the other Soviet Republics as the buffer to the west.
I'm somewhat suspicious of the US these days and the $hit stirring they create, ever since Blair dropped his trousers...

 

[Wattie]

As the world teeters on the edge of conflict I’d like to remind everyone that the “Bikini” is the greatest symbol of democracy.

It separates the left from right, protects the centre, changes everyone’s point of view and focuses a vast majority to look in the same direction, with the same goal.

peace and love makin.

 

[midlifecrisis]

As the world teeters on the edge of conflict I’d like to remind everyone that the “Bikini” is the greatest symbol of democracy.
View attachment 96048
It separates the left from right, protects the centre, changes everyone’s point of view and focuses a vast majority to look in the same direction, with the same goal.

Notwithstanding the Honourable Gentleman's viewpoint. I would add that going forwards both left and right are rounded up on a common direction.

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

Speaking of bikinis. Have you seen the delicious Carol Vorderman's bikini photos for charity?
Either there's a lot of post process editing going on, or the delightful Carol has a new PT and the regime is working wonders. Be still my beating heart!

 

[Wattie]

Speaking of bikinis. Have you seen the delicious Carol Vorderman's bikini photos for charity?
Either there's a lot of post process editing going on, or the delightful Carol has a new PT and the regime is working wonders. Be still my beating heart!
View attachment 96054

Would
Root
U?

Just a guess.

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

You also have to remember that Russia still have that fear of being invaded by Western powers. WW2 to us, is the Great Patriotic War to the Russians. Yes it was a different regime but the Russians still fear it. Hence why they had the Warsaw Pact and the other Soviet Republics as the buffer to the west.
I'm somewhat suspicious of the US these days and the $hit stirring they create, ever since Blair dropped his trousers...

Yep. I made that point on Tuesday.
'Putin grew up in post war Leningrad. A city that had been under siege for
approaching three years and was almost completely destroyed.
This experience and the general paranoia of Russians of that era regarding
future invasions and similar calamities, has influenced almost every strategic
decision by Russian leaders since Stalin.'

We cannot comprehend the wasteland that western Russia became between 1942 and 1945.
The Germans invaded on a broad front and destroyed everything not worth shipping off to Germany.
As the Russians retreated, they destroyed every factory and resource that they couldn't transport east,
out of reach of the German advance. Whole villages and towns ceased to exist, to make way for German
settlers. We were extremely lucky that we were never occupied during either world war.
The trauma that whole populations suffered while occupied, has been passed down through the two generations that have succeeded those who were adults during WWII.

Unfortunately, NATO has no effective balance to the neo cons who've been running US foreign policy since 9/11.
Germany is the size and in the right position to balance the US. Especially when they ally with France. However, German foreign policy has been paralysed by memories of WWII and it is painfully reluctant to be seen in a political European leadership role.

 

[Wattie]

Ok here’s a prediction.

Russia does nothing.Now.

Western economies are f’d.

Biden/Boris/Eu (no one’s gonna go to war over Effing Ukrain) have to create a distraction to cling to- to distract from home woes.
Ie Fed tries to taper/increase rates…
..everything goes boom.

Economies tank, problems multiply.

Putin waits moves in…unless the Us creates a false flag and Us blames deteriorating situation on him.

 

[midlifecrisis]

Nope, not buying that. Russia needs foreign currency to prop up its economy by selling gas to the west. Western economies are recovering quickly from COVID.
Nobody moves...Sell gold!

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

Nope, not buying that. Russia needs foreign currency to prop up its economy by selling gas to the west. Western economies are recovering quickly from COVID.
Nobody moves...Sell gold!

Selling gold would be fine. If we had any to sell.
Unfortunately, that screaming, bullying, one-eyed moron from Scotland sold most of our gold,
during a period of historically low gold prices.
This is the same screaming, bullying, one-eyed moron from Scotland who had the hubris to claim
that he'd ended boom and bust cycles for good.
He's another chronically incompetent f*kwit who will be amongst the first against the wall, come the revolution.

 

[Wack61]

Speaking of bikinis. Have you seen the delicious Carol Vorderman's bikini photos for charity?
Either there's a lot of post process editing going on, or the delightful Carol has a new PT and the regime is working wonders. Be still my beating heart!
View attachment 96054

She's been upgraded by aliens

 

[UlstermanAbroad]

She's been upgraded by aliens
View attachment 96072

Well, in that case Wack, I would like to take this opportunity to thank those, clearly very gifted, aliens on their excellent work.


Further, I would encourage them to hone their skills still further, on some other people in the public eye.
The Duchess of Cornwall would benefit from some remedial work, as I lose my appetite every time I see her.
The Duchess of Cambridge would benefit from a more hourglass figure. We see her so often that improving this particular piece of eye candy would improve the general mood of the country. Double D's amongst other fittings.
The Bliars could do with losing their teeth, so we no longer have to suffer those hubristic self-important grins.
The Leader of the SNP in Westminster shall have a kilt surgically attached to his mid-section so that while he has little of substance to say, he at least provides something to laugh at.
In fact, I find all of the SNP MPs such a scruffy bunch, that they should all have brightly coloured kilts surgically attached. The men also have fishnets attached and the women FM boots.
Every Labour woman MP will have a burqa surgically attached, as collectively they're very unappealing.
Diane Abbott will have her mouth permanently shut, so we never again have to hear that whiney, condescending voice.
Anyone man who sports a top knot shall be made bald. Except for their crotch, which shall sprout bright orange dreadlocks, at least two feet long.
Nigel Farage, Andrew Windsor, Piers Morgan, Boris Johnston and Keir Starmer shall all be surgically attached to make one human centipede. Nigel Farage will be at the front. But he will have his head permanently inserted into a pig's anus. Sincere and profuse apologies in advance, to the pig.
That ought to keep the aliens busy for a little while.