Putin Threatens The West

[The_DADDY]

10 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

I'm lost here.

Who are we trying to convince, and what are we trying to convince them of because I don't know anyone who would welcome Putin?

 

It's the old "If you aren't fawning over Zelensky then you're in love with putin" childishness posted by the less well informed on the forum.

Ignore it 😁

 

[L00b]

14 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

I'm lost here.

Who are we trying to convince, and what are we trying to convince them of because I don't know anyone who would welcome Putin?

 

I’m seeing plenty on here and elsewhere who would capitulate Ukraine to Putin for the sake of sleeping better at night, letting Ukrainians to the tender mercies of Russia.

 

No differently to all those who, no doubt, wanted to capitulate Austria, the Sudetenland, Poland (…) for the sake of sleeping better at night 70 years ago. And then we all know how that one went.

I grew up in the 80s on the Continent, so don’t kid yourselves that I’m unaware of the risks and horrors of nuclear conflict, or that I dismiss those lightly. But if our generation doesn’t deal with Putin today, younger generations will have to. Like 70 years ago.

 

Because if the west cowers before Putin and gives him what he wants every time he threatens with nukes, when and where does it end, do you think?

Edited February 12, 2023 by L00b

[RollingJ]

2 minutes ago, The_DADDY said:

It's the old "If you aren't fawning over Zelensky then you're in love with putin" childishness posted by the less well informed on the forum.

Ignore it 😁

 

So who's the biggest threat to the West (as we know it)?

[The_DADDY]

2 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

So who's the biggest threat to the West (as we know it)?

America, EU, Nato. 

You're welcome 👍

[RollingJ]

Just now, The_DADDY said:

America, EU, Nato. 

You're welcome 👍

Your paranoia is showing.

[L00b]

14 hours ago, Jim Hardie said:

Does anybody else find it difficult to decide where the truth lies in this conflict? Not many in the west challenge the standard narrative of Zelensky good, Putin evil but this ex soldier stands it on its head and he’s VERY plausible. It’s worth a listen.

 

 

Does anybody else find it difficult to decide where the truth lies in this conflict?

 

Not with McGregor, for starters.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Macgregor

 

Difficult to find an ex-RT, anti-NATO, racist, antisemite Russia sympathiser who’s been more wrong about everything since the conflict started. 

[Guest makapaka]

Be lucky to see another Xmas. 
 

said it ages ago. 

[Jim Hardie]

Just now, L00b said:

Does anybody else find it difficult to decide where the truth lies in this conflict?

 

Not with McGregor, for starters.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Macgregor

 

Difficult to find an ex-RT, anti-NATO, racist, antisemite Russia sympathiser who’s been more wrong about everything since the conflict started. 

I tend to agree with you, but what about what he actually says in the video?

[trastrick]

1 hour ago, L00b said:

With respect, I think you'll find I'm well aware of all that.

 

I don't correct posters who post facts, I debate their interpretation of those with them. That's what this forum, and any other forum for discussion, digital or not, is all about. What I "correct", is what I perceive as disinformation, regurgitated or otherwise. And God knows there's heaps of the stuff spouted by all sorts for the past decade, ramped up to the n-th power since Russia's war of aggression started last year.

 

Currently, Putin very clearly chooses to not see western-made or -supplied weapons as 'NATO' weapons, nor to do anything about US-supplied targeting intelligence  fed to Ukraine. He knows perfectly well that if the US and allies go all in, either he'll end up like Saddam /Gadhafi, or we'll all end up glowing in the dark. Because what Russia has demonstrated over the last year, is that it is utterly incapable of matching western prowess in combined arms warfare as seen in Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, <...>. Fighting insurgents and "winning the war", is where the west fails time and again, not least because the US never knows when to stop (freeing Kuwait should have been 'it', back in the 90s). But fighting a conventional army...it'd a guaranteed slam dunk, Russia's army would be steamrolled within a few weeks.

 

Putin can't risk things coming to that, if he wants to last in power. Even 'losing' the Ukrainian war is not certain to see him toppled, so strong is his authoritarian grip on Russian politics and people. But doing anything bad enough to provoke the West (or 'NATO', however you want call it) into actual action, and he'd be gone.

 

'NATO' is a red herring in that overall context, has been ever since before the Ukraine-Russia conflict started in 2014. It's a defensive pact of European nations started in the post-WW2 days of the USSR, which pre-dates the Russian Federation by decades, of which Ukraine is not part, nor was about to join in 2022. NATO was never about to invade the USSR BITD, and it still isn't today: it's sole reason for existence has always been to prepare for and stop the USSR if it should decide to rolli across eastern europe towards western europe. But it features heavily in Russian propaganda, and has done likewise for decades since long before the Russian Federation was a thing. Catch Russian TV and they're spouting outlandish propaganda against 'NATO' every single day.

 

That disinformation above? It's what Putin's government has been serving Russian across the state's MSM for years and longer, the whole Russian population bar perhaps intellectual elites in Moscow and St Petersburg is gaslit up to their eyeballs with it and believes NATO paratroopers are going to land and break down their front doors next week.

 

I don't see why posters spouting the same rubbish on here for reasons best known to themselves, accessorily turning SF into yet another Russian propaganda outlet, should get a free pass. Now if that makes me arrogant or getting "well known for correcting everything that other posters say", then hey, so what.

Don’t give up your day job!

 

(if you have one)!  

 

[Guest]

Just now, L00b said:

I’m seeing plenty on here and elsewhere who would capitulate Ukraine to Putin for the sake of sleeping better at night, letting Ukrainians to the tender mercies of Russia.

 

No differently to all those who, no doubt, who wanted to capitulate Austria, the Sudetenland,,Poland (…) for the sake of sleeping better at night 70 years ago.

 

I grew up in the 80s on the Continent, so don’t kid yourselves that I’m unaware of the risks and horrors of nuclear conflict, or that I dismiss those lightly. But if our generation doesn’t deal with Putin today, younger generations will have to. Like 70 years ago. Because if the west cowers before Putin every time he threatens us with nukes, when and where does it end, do you think?

You quite obviously think then, that I would capitulate to Putin and dump Ukraine.

I can assure you that I am certainly not a capitulating kind of bloke and I also never go back on my word.

I have stated many times that the west should not have let Putin get as far as he has.

We didn't do enough about  Syria. We didn't do enough about Crimea and we should have issued strong warning before he went into Ukraine.

If your abilities with the written word are lacking, I was talking about our big brave prime ministers who are not shouting, "You will have to deal with NATO"

They are shouting "You will have to deal with the UK".

We are a member of a western Alliance and, as I said, we are only a minor member. Without the USA on side, Putin would crucify us. Don't you agree?

 These brave shouty prime ministers of ours, who are more or less saying to Putin "Come on, lets have thee outside"  will be the first down a foxhole if it all kicks off.

Don't ever take me for a coward because I really do feel very angered about that.