Couldn't agree with hodgynd more. I mean, by 2010 they would have seen what singletrack was going to become, they are after all known for their meticulous planning and preparation..
Obviously (I hope obviously) I'm not entirely serious, though Mooman's protestations do read somewhat similar to those you get btl on the guardian for instance, which are often called out by the regulars on their website. It amused me is all..
And lets face it, with the kind of nutter on the button that we have in old DT (I don't consider Putin to be a nutter, psychopath maybe, but not a nutter) we need something to laugh at!
I am not saying Russia are trustworthy – but I am saying that the UK government certainly isn`t.
So you’re saying we cooked up the Salisbury poisoning, and all the other cases of suspicious deaths involving former Russian spies and dissidents then? Do you also think we’re making up the attacks in Syria as well? Please explain your reasoning as to why we would want to bump off someone who had been working for us, when former British agents who had secretly worked for the Soviets were left alone in Russia. And we have no specific reason to want to piss off the Russians, whereas they’re consistently the empire-building aggressors, especially in the former Soviet States.
Sadly i think youve got infected by the daily mail virus, there is no antidote, youll now vote tory at every election,
If it all kicks off the US would easily give the Russians a doing over in a non nuclear encounter. Putin knows this and once the fighting starts is he honesty going to sit back and see his side get a kick in? So unless someone (the Chinese ) offers him a face saving way out, I actually don’t think a full on nuke war is all that unrealistic . Hopefully I’m totally wrong however . . .
It's completely unrealistic, both sides know full well that nukes will never be used at a strategic level. The Russian top brass have actually come out and essentially laughed at the idea of ever actually using them unless struck first.
What has become apparent is that both sides now think that they can engage each other in limited wars, without that war escalating into an all out nuclear holocaust.
And no, the Russians won't get their head stoved in - they probably would do in Syria, however they can threaten to escalate and rapidly deploy around 40,000 men in the Baltics http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/03/if-russia-started-a-war-in-the-baltics-nato-would-lose-quickly/ They have an advantage in how easily they can mobilise.
Reading this thread while watching the ITN news article about women and children being mutilated in the Congo. As my father always said " The world is a beautiful place, it's the people on it who have gone to shit "
Afghanistan gave the russians a bloody nose iirc ....to be honest though despite the fact some of the worst photos are trotted out if someone did release a chemical weapon where theres civvys and kids ....i hope they get whats coming to them, thats cowardice not conflict
So forgive me, I’m not politically orientated but I do want to have a moan. Why oh why is May going to cabinet to get us into a War with Syria and then most likely, Russia? Do we not have enough problems and issues to sort out in this country? What makes her think a veto to War is what we want? Why does the UK (I understand the moral ground) feel the need to jump into peoples wars? Don’t we have enough issues to deal with, companies going bust etc, squeezed middles, racial tensions...
ffs, I didn’t want brexit, I don’t want a War, but I do want off this shitty little island that’s going to hell in a hand cart quite quickly.
/rant
Because when Trump says jump it's only a question of how high ..
With the state of our military forces in terms of cutbacks ..what else can we do if we want uncle Donalds protection ..
That in itself pisses me off ...
even Turkey shot down a supposedly invincible Russian fighter jet recently
Well no, it was an SU-24 ground attack aircraft which was attacked by an F-16, which is a fighter. The F-16 would probably have won even if the Russians started the aggression.
Why oh why is May going to cabinet to get us into a War with Syria and then most likely, Russia? Do we not have enough problems and issues to sort out in this country?
You've just answered your own question. A nice little war is a handy distraction from the absolute shambles at home
Because when Trump says jump it’s only a question of how high ..
With the state of our military forces in terms of cutbacks ..what else can we do if we want uncle Donalds protection ..
Or a decent trade deal
Allows May to strike back at Russia for the use of poison in Salisbury, with the added advantage that she doesn't have to attack Russia directly, looks better in the press than sending home diplomats plus any collateral damage will just be brown people. Maintains the illusion that Britain still has international weight. Will go down well with the right wing press, and the beeb will get a hard on for flak vests and helmets. Also no time to wait for parliament as she want to "act desisively" With other members of security Council, and avoids having Corbyn telling her I told you so, in front of cameras... Again.
End result?
We are going to bomb Syria
Interesting "article" Scotroutes..it does make you wonder ..
Scotroutes, that is the same guy who sits on a board alongside Assad's father-in-law, he has also been accused by Anti-Assad forces of being pro-Assad. He's George Galloway MKII and the idea that this is all going to end in a nuclear holocaust, or that a handful of Russian attack planes pose much of a threat to a carrier battlegroup with 70 odd embarked F-18s is frankly quite hilarious.
Here's what will happen if the Orange Idiot decides to do it, Syrian and Russian air defences and armour will get flattened, Russian fighters will get swatted like flies attempting to sink some American destroyers, Russia will lose influence in Syria and will retaliate by annexing more of all of the Ukraine and then a stalemate will ensue. Hopefully, Russia will learn that you don't use chemical weapons on UK residents.
It certainly makes you wonder about those who swallow every line punted out by the UK state broadcaster.
I guess that makes me a Russian trollbot in the (small) minds of some folk on here too.
Edit: I rest my case
or that a handful of Russian attack planes pose much of a threat to a carrier battlegroup with 70 odd embarked F-18s is frankly quite hilarious.
It doesn't matter how powerful or how puny the thing is that is shot down, it's an act of war. That is the issue, Russia knows that and has small tricks like gas pipelines at it's disposal.
Russia will lose influence in Syria and will retaliate by annexing more of all of the Ukraine and then a stalemate will ensue. Hopefully, Russia will learn that you don’t use chemical weapons on UK residents.
Collateral damage of 10s of thousands of lives then.
Perhaps. I'm not sure what the unintended consequences would be for the normalisation of the use of VX, Sarin and Novichok would be though, in the decades to come. Is that a price that is worth collateral damage now?
Secondly, Russia will shoot itself in the foot if it cuts of gas supplies as it's the only thing propping up their economy.
Anyway, an act of war between two nuclear armed nation states doesn't necessarily mean buckets of instant sunshine for everyone involved, see the Kargil War etc.
Is that a price that is worth collateral damage now?
It's not a binary choice
I think it is, either the international community backs up the convention or it becomes toothless.
If May goes ahead with a military strike and things go wary, Syrian civilians killed etc. Will she be accountable for war crimes too? Will she be held to account by the government or British Public. Will this be another excuse for someone to target the UK and future backlashes.
Something needs to be done but a military strike is not the option if it could start WWIII.
Not sure how we'd explain that to our 1 yr old
I think it is, either the international community backs up the convention or it becomes toothless.
First mistake - make military threats you don't want to follow through with, at this point somebody needs to look weak unless some diplomatic moves can be made. attacking Russia ends badly for everyone.
Without wishing to state the obvious Jolmes..you wouldn't be explaining that to your 1 year old ..
Fight? If ww3 genuinely starts, we’ll all be incinerated in minutes.
Only if you're one of the lucky ones. The majority of us get to enjoy the extended aftermath.
Not sure how relevant this is...
But it may go some way to help explain...
maybe I've watched too much homeland but I can' believe Syria (or russia) is really so dumb as to use chemical weapons despite what the press is saying. Given the diplomatic impact why would you?
I really hope we (uk) stay out of any escalation and focus on sorting out our own internal problems
Anyway, back to Matthew Rycroft, who until January this year was Her Majesty's representative to the UN:
In 1998, he joined the British embassy in the United States, where he served for four years. In 2002, Rycroft was appointed Private Secretary to Prime Minister Tony Blair, to advise him on matters related to foreign policy, the European Union, Northern Ireland and defence.During this time Rycroft wrote a letter to Mark Sedwill, private secretary to the foreign secretary, Jack Straw. The letter reveals that "we and the US would take action" without a new resolution by the UN security council if UN weapons inspectors showed Saddam had clearly breached an earlier resolution. In that case, he "would not have a second chance". That was the only way Britain could persuade the Bush administration to agree to a role for the UN and continuing work by UN weapons inspectors, the letter says.
Sir Mark Sedwill mentioned above is now the UK's National Security Adviser;
He has previously been a UN weapon's inspector... spookily, he was also drafted in as the Permanent secretary to the Home Office shortly after the Jimmy Savile scandal broke... remember the 114 missing files?
Small world...
I'm hope the Russians do a better job of shooting American planes down than they do of Israeli ones.
The Russian force in Syria are a little isolated, to get backup they would need to be airlifted up and over Turkey, plus get their bulk supplies by ship through the Bosphurus, so unless Turkey suddenly decides to leave NATO (and Russia attacking a NATO member kind of stands for what NATO is about) I don't see all this as being more than a bluff.
Otherwise they could go through Iran, that would encourage some in the Middle East to maybe make this little regional conflict a little more widespread.
I suspect this will all ramp up a bit then die down when China tells them all to calm down as its affecting their Belt and Road plans.
What needs to happen is Assad getting some McDonalds franchises in as I seem to remember there being some stat that says no country with McDonalds franchises have ever gone to war with each other (I could of course be hopelessly wrong here)?
I've read the majority of that report Dazh posted and flicked through the rest ..last updated in 2003.
It sounds fun doesn't it !
With regard to the UK ..almost a third of the population wiped out straight away ..anyone think the odds are any better 15 years on ?
I simply wouldn't want to be a survivor in that scenario..a slow death in the aftermath just does not appeal .
First mistake – make military threats you don’t want to follow through with, at this point somebody needs to look weak unless some diplomatic moves can be made. attacking Russia ends badly for everyone.
No, the convention becomes toothless as soon as a weapon is used without robust action in response. The world still only understands hard power, firing some diplomats here and there and trying to isolate a country economically just doesn't work.
So you either accept that or accept the increased use of these weapons against civilian targets both abroad and in the west, as they lend themselves perfectly to Russias brand of implausibly deniable hybrid warfare/state based terrorism - as they have much greater areas of effect than explosives (with Novichok anyway) per gram of substance - so easy to to smuggle.
I'm ****ed. I live in Surrey, London to the north east, Southampton and Portsmouth to the south west, As well as our pirbright, Aldershot etc just down the road.
I won't even have time to open a beer, let alone look in the cupboard for the nice stuff.
Edit: tbh, this is probably the best option if it all goes tits up.
Only if you’re one of the lucky ones. The majority of us get to enjoy the extended aftermath
Do you mean the aftermath like when DCC resurface everything
A nice little war is a handy distraction from the absolute shambles at home
it is also a visual manifestation of Tanking Back Control.
And that’s what Brexiteers want. They want to belittle and bombast those they feel are an oppressed group, an easy target to Goosestep all over.
There will be a vote in parliament before we engage in action, DasFurhur can not act alone. So it’s lain to those who despise War to oppose her Own political dogma.
The local elections are close, whose taking bets that DasFurher instigates “something” oppressive to gain a few votes from the right wing swiveleyed looms and morons.
I’m ****. I live in Surrey
According to nukemap I'm in the 3rd degree burns and fallout zone so I can look forward to a nice bout of radiation sickness while my skin peels off. If I survive that I can look forward to starving to death. Joy.
Surprised nobody has mentioned this yet...
that missile map thing kim jong un has a proper pants weapon and only one at that...whats all the fuss about wasnt even big enough to take out sheffield city centre
There is no need to worry about a nuclear blast. Plenty of helpful information on this gov website. You just need to stay in doors until the fallout has finished and then you can carry on with your daily business.
https://www.ready.gov/nuclear-explosion
Strange how the article fails to mention that even if you survive the blast you'll most likely be living in a world resembling that of Mad Max and you'll probably die of starvation or radiation sickness!
Something tells me the Russians are still pissed about this
https://taskandpurpose.com/russian-mercenaries-syria-leaked-audio/
Strange how the article fails to mention that even if you survive the blast you’ll most likely be living in a world resembling that of Mad Max and you’ll probably die of starvation or radiation sickness
It will however solve the climate change and over-population problems. Those who survive can look forward to a bright new future of clean air, sustainable living and less cars on the road.
And a nuclear winter😀
on the back of the shit winter we've just had. I'd be really pissed off by that.
So, Trump’s apparently made his mind up (if he has one, that is)
Awaits Russia’s response.
They have got to respond. Very sad time for the UK. Apart from the Daily Mail brigade, I don’t think any believe what the US, UK and France are doing is the right thing to do.
Vikings vs Saxons vs Arabs, not exactly a new story.
The Russians have gone rogue but you cant go bombing Moscow so Damascus will have to do. They wont do anything, they are skint heavies in leather jackets.
These bombs seem very expensive though at £1m a pop. What would be more effective is to tighten the money screws on their trade and laundering. Putin would be out but then you never know who you’ll get instead.
The magic money tree is back.
How come we haven't bothered with sexed up dossiers this time?
