beautifulthailand99

No thanks those that want a GoFundMe be my guest.

Sorry my German friend or if you want that adventure on your soil again be my guest I would prefer in the UK with our "moat' and nukes to stay out of other's beefs. The Switzerland solution as I like to call it. It has worked well for them. And if Russia want a second revolution that's up to them we should stay out of interfering in other's systems. It seldom ends well.

Putin is more ruthless than Hitler—Rommel was allowed an honorable death after taking part in the assassination plot, whereas Prigozhin was blown out of the sky after a 'chef’s kiss' from Putin.

Aye ....but burgers.... they won that war. As a 17 year old commie at college I remember a heated argument with friends and comardes in which I espostulated America would turn fascist in my lifetime and would be called Amerika. It doesn't make me happy to be proved right but I never envisaged this clown show who could imagine that ?

Russians can endure anything. Their capacity for suffering is virtually limitless, and their patience far outlasts their oppressors. Just ask Napoleon and Hitler - DON'T POKE THE BEAR it should be written on Mount Rushmore under the new face of Donald Trump as a reminder to generations to come.

When the thugs come knocking at the door us liberals are the first to fall.........silent.

No, Russia won’t break up. The people will endure extreme hardship, even eating their pets and living in filth, as long as the central government holds. Their greatest fear is a repeat of the post-collapse anarchy of Perestroika, when the economy and social system disintegrated almost overnight. Then there’s the five-million-strong security apparatus—the Siloviki—who have everything to lose if the state falls apart. As long as the lights stay on, there’s food on the table, and cheap vodka to numb the pain, they will endure. Besides, as the world’s largest country with the planet’s richest mineral reserves, they can always trade with China. But that said things are going to get pretty rough almost everywhere from hereonin that's baked into the cake now and you can't unbake it.

The editor of The Spectator, Freddie Gray, has come out with a pungent essay that he now feels emboldened to publish. Meanwhile, Boris Johnson, once a stout defender of Ukraine, remains silent 24 hours after Trump’s latest outburst, seemingly unwilling to alienate the MAGA crowd and risk losing their support. If the world had listened to me, we might have had a peace deal in 2022, potentially saving a million lives and leaving Europe in a much stronger position than it is now—perhaps even avoiding the rise of Trump. But here we are. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-cruellest-thing-about-trump-vs-zelensky-trumps-right/ There’s no doubt that, in our eagerness to champion the man in the military fatigues, we overlooked the more sordid aspects of his leadership. The Pandora papers showing his links to shady offshore bank accounts were forgotten about. His ties to deeply corrupt and double-dealing oligarchs, such as Ihor Kolomoisky, were brushed over. His ruthless suppression of Moscow-affiliated religious groups was dismissed as Kremlin ‘disinformation’. Western politicians, and military-industrial types who have made a lot of money from the war effort, have always known, deep down, that in supporting Ukraine against Putin they have covered up awkward truths. What really frightens them now is not necessarily Trump’s recklessness. It’s that the murkier realities of the Ukraine-Russia relationship and the West’s involvement in the conflict going back to 2014 and before, may soon come to light.

Which is a cogent argument for less nukes which isn't the point you made earlier.

We agree totally on this. But Hitler (Godwin's law sorry) over eggs the pudding somewhat.

Aye it's a nonsense arguement on so many levels.

Well, since the pro-Ukraine argument often goes something like 'Putin would never use nuclear weapons' or 'he’d be toast if he did,' then surely a more rational and sane actor like Ukraine would be even more cautious with such weapons—taking it to the extreme. This is where the argument about nuclear weapons becomes somewhat spurious. The assumption that a nuclear power would never use its weapons relies on a balance of fear and deterrence, but it's a false equivalence to compare Ukraine’s potential for nuclear use with Russia’s. Ukraine is not a nuclear state and doesn't have the infrastructure or doctrine in place to support a nuclear arsenal. And if you remember at the time there was much alarm at the prospect of rogue actors aquiring nukes or nuclear material so it was the right decision made at the right time.

He's British of Pakistani origin and a decent man in a wolrd of snakes. and where do you live ?

I live in London voted for Khan and would do so again. I appreciate it's expensive but then owning your own house having a great pension and a free bus pass sugars any problems that it might cause. Not for everyone and when you move out there is no going back. The air is clean and ULEZ is part of that , Bangkok no thanks - couldn't wait to get away this time. Obviously mileage may vary.

Ukraine didn't give up their nukes they belonged to the Soviet Union and when that ceased to exist and power receded to Moscow they were effectively useless. Besides which I think it was Bush that promised Gorbachov no expansion of NATO on the eastern flank. Whatever it's a moot point now to reflect on what have might been those ships have long since sailed.