smallholder99
Member
thought there were anti govt protests in russia few months ago and the usa embassy there were openly helping organize protestors
Invasion bets
- Thread starter beardface
- Start date
Ah that's more sensible, always came across well.I rather think JP1 is talking about Hague not Vlad. He is probably right too, certainly could not be worse
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I think this will be the first time that the nuclear deterrent is proved more or less worthless as a weapon in this sort of creeping war.
If you want to do something, it helps if it stands half a chance of actually succeeding.
I can hardly see us a winning a conventional war with the Russians over Ukraine, or at any rate without leaving it a smouldering ruin costing millions of lives.
So out of interest what would you suggest we actually do?
If we fight at this stage and get a pasting, it will only embolden Putin, then what next? The rest of the old eastern bloc?
Might be better to look like we are making some concessions, showing some understanding of their concerns and de escalating the situation.
Whatever happens, I can't see the gas pipeline coming off very well. Big mistake relying on your enemy for your energy supply.
But we never learn. The greenies in the EU are terrified it will be shut off.
- Location
- Lincolnshire
We are in a sort of 1939 situation all over again. Totally unprepared. Been too busy faffing about with all sorts of other rubbish.
Don't think we have the resources to face them down.
Negotiation has to be tried, tried and tried again.
An extremely dangerous situation.
Don't think we have the resources to face them down.
Negotiation has to be tried, tried and tried again.
An extremely dangerous situation.
beardface
Member
- Location
- East Yorkshire
I'd say the current geo political situation mirrors the build up to ww1. Superpowers building the wealth and power to the point where one of them has to act against one of the others to move forwards.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
I disagree here, before WW1 the powers UK , France , Russia and Germany had all been upgrading there military on a massive scale
Now we have 3 powers, 1 who is supreme by far but tired of fighting with little will for a battle. The other two one has zero history of foreign expansion but has historic desires for a certain piece of territory which it lost.
The last is another old power run by a dictator who is looking to leave his name on monuments. He wants to be known in history as the restorer of the Greater Rus.
He is facing other old foes and friends who have sat on their laurels or for diplomatic reasons never updated and have relied on cover from the first power.
It in some way matches the second world war and certainly his tactics are identical. He knows that if he invades he could take a hiding and be bogged down and his name will become mud. So he will go for the weak points and try to extract concessions here and there and sadly there are large numbers of appeasers who think just as in 1937 that giving the dog a bone will keep him quiet. It works but fter a sleep to digest that one , the dog wakes up and wants more, and of course every time he becomes stronger and former allies suddenly think it may be better to do a deal rather than join the coalition against..
ollie989898
Member
Putin spends as much as the UK on defence. The US, by contrast spends 10 times as much. There is no comparison. If Putin makes a move, he will be blasted by US air power. Remember, the US has just spent the best part of 20 years learning about the use of air power.
- Location
- North Hampshire
The US has spent to best part of twenty years losing ....
lloyd
Member
- Location
- Herefordshire
Dont forget it's not just how much you spend but how
that money gets spent.
The USA spends approx 4 x the amount China does on defence
but the Chinese make their money go much further as they can
do things much cheaper.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I do find the us of he word 'Defence' an oxymoron. The word 'War' would be more appropriate.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
its all about bang for your buck, and if you copy the best US technology with labour costing a dollar an hour rather than 100 you can build far more missiles shells etc.
lloyd
Member
- Location
- Herefordshire
Let's hope they've left out some important components.
ollie989898
Member
Yeah right. Pray tell how the Russians can manage to make their 70 billion go as far as 700 billion.
- Location
- Limousin
At times the biggest danger to the coalition force was their own side.
ollie989898
Member
Losing is a broad term that can be measured through a variety of metrics.
The US kicked the Taliban out of Afghanistan when first arrived. What followed was a counter insurgency effort with little or no political end game. That wasn't the fault of the US military. The USA and their allies killed scores of enemy combatants, numbers that were nearly politically damaging.
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
As i said development cost and employment
Why do you think the Americans gave up launching their own rockets in favour of Russian launches for several years.
Mind you the Russians do not always get it right, look at Concordski
Exfarmer
Member
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
My FIL who fought from DDay through would have said “was ever thus”
ollie989898
Member
The simple fact is that the Americans have more of everything and more importantly can keep their assets in the field, doing what they do.
The Americans are using Russian space rockets? So what?