How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[barbos]

Ha! Why do you think that all the countries in Eastern Europe want to either join Nato or strengthen their ties to Nato?

Not all, and according to international law/principles it does not matter what they want.

Exactly my point! Russia is reaping what it sows by bullying the countries around them. If you want friends; start treating other countries like friends.

No, NATO is reaping. NATO violated international laws when they expanded.

 

[barbos]

It's because they don't trust imperialist Russia.

No, that's patently not the reason.

You think that the eastern European countries don't see what your country is doing in Ukraine?

No, they can't see that, unless they had/have a time machine.
And Time Machine is impossible according to Many World Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.
Hence you are patently false.

 

[SLD]

Billy Mitchell insisted on talking about tests of dropping bombs on ships, and his superiors didn't want him talking about those tests very much.

The first naval-warfare techniques were to try to board an enemy shop or else to try to ram it, with the Byzantines using "Greek fire", a kind of marine napalm. When guns became good enough a half a millennium ago, shooting each other became the dominant tactic, all the way to World War I. The next big naval war, World War II, had a mixture of both old and new: ships with big guns and aircraft carriers. The big-gun ships were outperformed by carriers in that war, and the largest naval vessels since then have been carriers.

The world's navies still have plenty of other surface ships, though relatively small and fast ones. They have guns, but relatively small ones, suitable for attacking airplanes and missiles. But are they also becoming vulnerable?

Wrong about WWII. In WWII, over 50% of Japanese warships were sunk by submarines. Most all of their commercial ships were also sunk by submarines. Submarines itterly destroyed Japanese commerce inside the greater Asia area. They are also the only ones to attack the homeland of Japan with a raid inside of Tokyo Bay that blew up a train. See USS Barb.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Ha! Why do you think that all the countries in Eastern Europe want to either join Nato or strengthen their ties to Nato?

Not all, and according to international law/principles it does not matter what they want.

Exactly my point! Russia is reaping what it sows by bullying the countries around them. If you want friends; start treating other countries like friends.

No, NATO is reaping. NATO violated international laws when they expanded.

What international law is that?

 

[barbos]

What international law is that?

The one which says "One can not improve their security at the expense of security of other"

 

[Harry Bosch]

What international law is that?

The one which says "One can not improve their security at the expense of security of other"

Buddy, you really are in denial. You need therapy! Russia's primary threat is China. There is no threat from the west of invasion. What Putler really wants is the ability to invade countries with no consequences. You want the ability to bully at no cost to your country.

 

[barbos]

Buddy, you really are in denial. You need therapy! Russia's primary threat is China. There is no threat from the west of invasion.

If you say so.

 

[barbos]

What Putler really wants is the ability to invade countries with no consequences.

Well, russian people are not buying your shit. Georgians are not buying it either.
Even ukrainians are not buying. But wait. Even your neocon rullers are not buying their own shit.
Do you know how I know that?
Because NATO pretty much disarmed themselves by arming ukro-nazis.
Ukraine was NATO only chance to have a serious war with Russia. Russia were not invading NATO. So NATO had to invent Ukraine and arm them. So you see, Russia is not really afraid of "old" NATO. We are afraid of idiots from Georgia and now Ukraine who are willing to start a war with Russia for some Florida properties for few of their government critters.
I think once Ukraine is back in Russia, the NATO threat will be over. You will have no willing idiots to cause troubles for Russia. Baltic states are too small and are not dumb enough. Georgia learned their lesson. There is Armenia of course now with their incompetent idiot.
But overall security will be more less restored.

 

[Harry Bosch]

What Putler really wants is the ability to invade countries with no consequences.

Well, russian people are not buying your shit. Georgians are not buying it either.
Even ukrainians are not buying. But wait. Even your neocon rullers are not buying their own shit.
Do you know how I know that?
Because NATO pretty much disarmed themselves by arming ukro-nazis.
Ukraine was NATO only chance to have the war with Russia. Russia were not invading NATO. So NATO had to invent Ukraine and arm them.

Why would anyone in the west want to invade Russia? For what? Your oil and gas? We can get that from Ukraine at a much cheaper price. And we won't need your oil and gas in a few years anyway. And Russia would just nuke a country trying to invade it anyway.

 

[barbos]

Why would anyone in the west want to invade Russia? For what? Your oil and gas?

Yes, at least that's what neocons say.

We can get that from Ukraine at a much cheaper price

What are you smoking? seriously, what are you smoking?

And Russia would just nuke a country trying to invade it anyway.

Your ignorance has no bounds. Go and educate yourself on how the West was planning to "invade" Russia.

 

[Elixir]

Go and educate yourself on how the West was planning to "invade" Russia.

Nobody else is interested in the fetid contents of the rotted brain left over from Putler’s dinner last night.
You need a new hobby, babs.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Why would anyone in the west want to invade Russia? For what? Your oil and gas?

Yes, at least that's what neocons say.

We can get that from Ukraine at a much cheaper price

What are you smoking? seriously, what are you smoking?

And Russia would just nuke a country trying to invade it anyway.

Your ignorance has no bounds. Go and educate yourself on how the West was planning to "invade" Russia.

You and I have been going back and forth in this thread for two years. If I could only convince you of one thing, I start with this: no-one in the west wants war with Russia. We don't need your oil and gas. You don't understand the west if you think we want to invade your country. The fact is that war is very expensive and causes great harm in markets and in the supply chain. People in the west care about making money and economics. The sad part here is that the real threat to Russia comes from your eastern flank. China is very expansionist. And they share a long border with a foolish neighbor, recklessly weakening and exposing itself by attacking windmills that pose no threat. If I were you, I'd book a trip to Bolshoi Ussuriyskiy island before it's too late.

 

[barbos]

Why would anyone in the west want to invade Russia? For what? Your oil and gas?

Yes, at least that's what neocons say.

We can get that from Ukraine at a much cheaper price

What are you smoking? seriously, what are you smoking?

And Russia would just nuke a country trying to invade it anyway.

Your ignorance has no bounds. Go and educate yourself on how the West was planning to "invade" Russia.

You and I have been going back and forth in this thread for two years. If I could only convince you of one thing, I start with this: no-one in the west wants war with Russia.

Jesus fucking Christ. I just said the same thing.
Yes, nobody in the west wants to have a war with Russia. But if they could convince someone else to fight Russia that would be greatly appreciated in the West. They even arm you and pay you money and then arrange for you a retirement in Florida.

 

[Elixir]

China is very expansionist. And they share a long border with a foolish neighbor, recklessly weakening and exposing itself by attacking windmills that pose no threat.

Well said. Babs seems completely unaware of the fact that The West has many better things to do than controlling outcomes of Russian stupidity. Pootey is similarly preoccupied with delusions about US intent. So much so that he is likely to wake up one morning to find that his good buddy has moved into the mineral-rich eastern regions of the formerly Russian eastern frontier, without even giving the courtesy of notifying the preoccupied Putler.

 

[bilby]

Billy Mitchell insisted on talking about tests of dropping bombs on ships, and his superiors didn't want him talking about those tests very much.

The first naval-warfare techniques were to try to board an enemy shop or else to try to ram it, with the Byzantines using "Greek fire", a kind of marine napalm. When guns became good enough a half a millennium ago, shooting each other became the dominant tactic, all the way to World War I. The next big naval war, World War II, had a mixture of both old and new: ships with big guns and aircraft carriers. The big-gun ships were outperformed by carriers in that war, and the largest naval vessels since then have been carriers.

The world's navies still have plenty of other surface ships, though relatively small and fast ones. They have guns, but relatively small ones, suitable for attacking airplanes and missiles. But are they also becoming vulnerable?

Wrong about WWII. In WWII, over 50% of Japanese warships were sunk by submarines. Most all of their commercial ships were also sunk by submarines. Submarines itterly destroyed Japanese commerce inside the greater Asia area. They are also the only ones to attack the homeland of Japan with a raid inside of Tokyo Bay that blew up a train. See USS Barb.

In the great game of naval "rock, paper, scissors":

Aircraft beats battleship
Submarine beats battleship
Aircraft beats submarine
Battleship beats hasty retreat (if it knows what's good for it).

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

From Yahoo News
......
Russia's State Duma is considering a return to the Soviet practice of so-called "work troops," in which city dwellers were forced to work in rural areas, The Moscow Times reported on Feb. 2.

In this way, Moscow is trying to compensate for labor shortages caused by widespread drunkenness among farmers, while reminding various "intellectuals" that it can do whatever it wants with them.
.....

The Workers Paradise version 2.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

From Yahoo News
......
Russia's State Duma is considering a return to the Soviet practice of so-called "work troops," in which city dwellers were forced to work in rural areas, The Moscow Times reported on Feb. 2.

In this way, Moscow is trying to compensate for labor shortages caused by widespread drunkenness among farmers, while reminding various "intellectuals" that it can do whatever it wants with them.
.....

The Workers Paradise version 2.

Has all the makings of Green Acres. Who gets to be Arnold Ziffel?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Pootie will move intellectuals to the farms because the farmers are too drunk to farm.
So the Work Force members will soon become drunks and cease work. then Pootie
will draft more Work Force members and then ......

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The thing that you are missing is that Ukrainians have nowhere to retreat to.

Puh-leez, they can surrender right now and nobody will carpet bomb them like you did with Dresden.

You wouldn't need carpet bombing to genocide them if you were in control.

Ukraine has no reason to expect any better treatment overall than what we have already seen in the areas you occupy--and that's basically genocide.

Strong words from someone who actually supported and supports actual genocide.

Calling what is happening in Gaza "genocide" doesn't make it so. They're always claiming genocide, that doesn't make it so. If it rises to the level of "genocide" then you're guilty of genocide in Ukraine. Far more so because of so much basically random attacks on cities.