The Shadow of Revenge: Putin's Inevitable Turn Toward Britain

[Will B Good]

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Of course, just like everything you write without a link.

 

In your opinion.

[animalmagic]

7 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

Apart from the American war of independence, name one other war since WW11, That America won. And left that country in better condition than before America bombed the sh..te out of it. The Answer is None.

Your original comment was relating to the Charge of the Light Brigade, and I replied to that.  I have absolutely no interest in your post above as it is totally unrelated to the original topic or what you posted.

[Dcheech]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO the Soviet vs Germany war was the first US proxy war in that region. All that's changed now are the main players.

Operation Barbarossa & the main theater of World War II, was a US proxy war?!     That is way beyond your usual ridiculous twaddle.  Just curious how did the USA & Roosevelt, manipulate Hitler to attack his Soviet ally Stalin?! They had worked so well together in the invasion of Poland, & the Soviets take over of the Baltic States & Finland (with Nazi approval) in 39/40. 

[spidermike007]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You think the war in Ukraine will still be going on in 2026?

I think Putin is desperate. And badly humiliated. He is very unpredictable. It is impossible to say. I hope Russia is defeated by then and surrenders. But, I don't see Putin ever doing that. 

[spidermike007]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Putin should be very careful.

 

If he puts any of that on FaceBook Starmer will have him locked up on a 3 stretch before his feet touch the ground. 

Somebody should lock him up, or end his miserable life. 

[deadbeat]

Warmongering rubbish. Just another way to justify increased defense spending when clearly the russians couldn't even take over their nearest neighbour. What kind of threat is that to the west? It's laughable.

[spidermike007]

22 minutes ago, CharlieKo said:

Apart from the American war of independence, name one other war since WW11, That America won. And left that country in better condition than before America bombed the sh..te out of it. The Answer is None.

Though largely correct, it has nothing to do with this topic. I do agree, but the Korean war was something different. 

 

An argument can be made for the Korean war. Should the Korean War still be called the “Forgotten War”? Ask the people of South Korea. They have never forgotten the sacrifices made by the thousands of UN forces who helped save their country and are still standing guard today. I saw an example of just how thankful they still are to the United States and its UN allies.

 

https://www.legion.org/honor/259643/why-korean-war-matters

 

The war broke out on June 25, 1950 when North Korean troops crossed the 38th parallel, invading South Korea. North Korean leader Kim Il-sung launched the attack once he had received a promise of support from Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. In January 1950, U.S. Secretary of State Dean Acheson haddelivered a speech in which he said South Korea and Taiwan were not part of the American "defensive perimeter," which seemed to indicate the U.S. would keep out of a Korean conflict. And it's clear that Stalin only agreed to support the invasion after being convinced the U.S. would not get involved.

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/bomb-korean-war/

[thaibeachlovers]

14 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I think Putin is desperate. And badly humiliated. He is very unpredictable. It is impossible to say. I hope Russia is defeated by then and surrenders. But, I don't see Putin ever doing that. 

Carry on hoping, but not too hard.

[Will B Good]

2 minutes ago, deadbeat said:

Warmongering rubbish. Just another way to justify increased defense spending when clearly the russians couldn't even take over their nearest neighbour. What kind of threat is that to the west? It's laughable.

 

 

 

Apart from the nuclear weapons you mean?

 

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, spidermike007 said:

An argument can be made for the Korean war. 

No it shouldn't. It isn't even over, as technically it is only "frozen".

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/30/asia/korean-war-armistice-peace-explained-intl-hnk-ml/index.html

 

Didn’t the Korean War end in 1953? The short answer is no

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

 

Apart from the nuclear weapons you mean?

 

 

 

Nukes are a last resort, and it's lose lose.

 

That's why it's called MAD.

[frank83628]

19 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Somebody should lock him up, or end his miserable life. 

Putin ain't going anywhere, far far stronger leader than any western ones!

[spidermike007]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No it shouldn't. It isn't even over, as technically it is only "frozen".

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/30/asia/korean-war-armistice-peace-explained-intl-hnk-ml/index.html

 

Didn’t the Korean War end in 1953? The short answer is no

Do you think letting the Russians and Chinese take over Korea would have been the preferable path? One can argue South Korea has become quite a dynamic nation. I realize it is a very complex argument. 

[Will B Good]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Nukes are a last resort, and it's lose lose.

 

That's why it's called MAD.

 

 

So Russian nuclear weapons pose no threat to West?......Phew!

[gargamon]

3 hours ago, CharlieKo said:

Not to mention that Russia was part of the allied forces during the second world war. Who were largely responsible for the defeat of the Nazi's. But America wants to insist it was they who won the war. Wonder why they left it to the Russians to enter Berlin for the Victory!  

And Patton got it right, when he said at the closing of WWII, and I paraphrase, “We're going to fight them eventually, and we got our boys here now, so lets march on Moscow.“

[Cameroni]

Britain's relations with Russia were going rather well in modern times, twenty years ago Britain of course profited with millions from the influx of Russian oligarchs into London. That did lead to some friction with Russia, as some criminals like Berezovsky and others used the London base to agitate against Russia, some were wanted for tax crimes in Russia. However, it did not terribly disrupt relations with the UK, in 2013 Cameron flew to visit Putin and was full of praise.

 

However, it was again the poison chalice Ukraine that completely ruined relations with Britain. When NATO announced in 2008 that Ukraine would become a member it was clear to Russia that a policy of enrcirclement and weakening Russia would follow and all the promises to include Russia in a post 1990 security framework were just empty lies. So Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 after extremely pro Western forces came to the forefront in Ukraine, which demanded nuclear weapons for some time. A pro-American Ukraine with nuclear weapons was intolerable to Russia. Following the Crimea invasion  relations with the UK really deteriorated.

 

Anyway, as  many posters here have correctly pointed out, the author of the regurgitated article here is just again trying to construct the same propaganda lie which NATO has published on its website that Putin is a mad dictator intent on reconstituting Imperial Russia. Nothing could be further from the truth. As has been pointed out already, Russia can't even occupy all of Ukraine, its neighbour, least of all invade or occupy the UK. So your crumpets are more than safe.

[Will B Good]

3 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

Britain's relations with Russia were going rather well in modern times, twenty years ago Britain of course profited with millions from the influx of Russian oligarchs into London. That did lead to some friction with Russia, as some criminals like Berezovsky and others used the London base to agitate against Russia, some were wanted for tax crimes in Russia. However, it did not terribly disrupt relations with the UK, in 2013 Cameron flew to visit Putin and was full of praise.

 

However, it was again the poison chalice Ukraine that completely ruined relations with Britain. When NATO announced in 2008 that Ukraine would become a member it was clear to Russia that a policy of enrcirclement and weakening Russia would follow and all the promises to include Russia in a post 1990 security framework were just empty lies. So Russia invaded Crimea in 2014 after extremely pro Western forces came to the forefront in Ukraine, which demanded nuclear weapons for some time. A pro-American Ukraine with nuclear weapons was intolerable to Russia. Following the Crimea invasion  relations with the UK really deteriorated.

 

Anyway, as  many posters here have correctly pointed out, the author of the regurgitated article here is just again trying to construct the same propaganda lie which NATO has published on its website that Putin is a mad dictator intent on reconstituting Imperial Russia. Nothing could be further from the truth. As has been pointed out already, Russia can't even occupy all of Ukraine, its neighbour, least of all invade or occupy the UK. So your crumpets are more than safe.

 

 

As has been pointed out already, Russia can't even occupy all of Ukraine, its neighbour, least of all invade or occupy the UK. So your crumpets are more than safe.

 

Wow...and he knew that before he invaded so he had no other plans, dreams or fantasies.....what an idiot....or did he think he was going waltz in and occupy Kyiv in ...was it ...three days???? And maybe then move on to.......?

[Cameroni]

15 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

 

 

As has been pointed out already, Russia can't even occupy all of Ukraine, its neighbour, least of all invade or occupy the UK. So your crumpets are more than safe.

 

Wow...and he knew that before he invaded so he had no other plans, dreams or fantasies.....what an idiot....or did he think he was going waltz in and occupy Kyiv in ...was it ...three days???? And maybe then move on to.......?

 

We have to look at the facts. Has Putin ever said he wants to annex all of the UKraine? No. He has said however that he wants the Donbass. What is happening? The main fighting is in the Donbass. Why can't we just look at what's on record, what Putin said, and what is happening on the ground?

 

Surley that will gives us a better indication than speculating or some article which just happens to spew exactly the same propaganda lies as NATO does on its website, when they took Putin's view on history and misconstrued it as a master plan to occupy all of Eastern Europe and to resconstitute Imperial Russia. Someone is lying to us here, but it's not Putin.

Edited August 28 by Cameroni

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Putin should be very careful.

 

If he puts any of that on FaceBook Starmer will have him locked up on a 3 stretch before his feet touch the ground. 

Amazingly backward comment. Given Putin's actions, no need to go after him for his Facebook comment. As for those calling for rioting and murder on Facebook, freedom of speech isn't absolute when it's posted to promote criminal activity. As it has been recently in the UK.

Edited August 28 by placeholder

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

We have to look at the facts. Has Putin ever said he wants to annex all of the UKraine? No. He has said however that he wants the Donbass. What is happening? The main fighting is in the Donbass. Why can't we just look at what's on record, what Putin said, and what is happening on the ground?

 

Surley that will gives us a better indication than speculating or some article which just happens to spew exactly the same propaganda lies as NATO does on its website, when they took Putin's view on history and misconstrued it as a master plan to occupy all of Eastern Europe and to resconstitute Imperial Russia. Someone is lying to us here, but it's not Putin.

The main fighting now is in the Donbass. How quickly you forget what happened in February of 2022.

[Cameroni]

Looking at Ben Wallace, he's a career soldier, not a diplomat or scholar. And he's not the brightest tool in the box either:

 

"In August 2019, Wallace was overheard discussing Johnson's controversial prorogation of parliament with Florence Parly, the French Armed Forces minister. He suggested that the reason for the prorogation for five weeks was to prevent MPs from blocking the government's Brexit plans, rather than the government's official position that it was to introduce a new legislative agenda. 10 Downing Street responded to his comments by admonishing him and stating that he had "misspoken"."

 

Loose lips and giving away government policy, okay. What else?

 

"On 23 February 2022, Wallace was filmed saying that the Scots Guards "kicked the backside" of Nicholas I of Russia during the Crimean War, and could do so again. Russia invaded Ukraine the following day."

 

So a delusional national chauvinist to boot. Okay. Russia has invaded the Donbass. Where are the Scots Guards now, Mr Wallace?

 

Okay, so he's a delusional chauvinist, but he's a smart guy, he wouldn't be easily fooled, right?

 

"On 21 March 2022, clipped footage of Wallace in a prank call by Russian pranksters Vovan and Lexus was released online. The duo (suspected by the British government to have links to Russian security services or of being Russian state actors) impersonated the Ukrainian prime minister Denys Shmyhal saying that Ukraine wished to promote its own nuclear deterrent to protect itself from Russia, a false claim made by the Russian government during the Russo-Ukrainian War and the invasion of Ukraine. Wallace was believed to be on a Microsoft Teams call with the duo for ten minutes."

 

Ali G would have had a field day with Ben Wallace, lol. Okay

 

Clearly Mr Ben Wallace is not the brightest man in the world, just a career soldier and nationalist.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Wallace_(politician)

 

Edited August 28 by Cameroni

[Social Media]

Off topic video removed, the topic here happens to be:

 

The Shadow of Revenge: Putin's Inevitable Turn Toward Britain

 

 

[Dcheech]

1 hour ago, frank83628 said:

Putin ain't going anywhere, far far stronger leader than any western ones!

The Russians know that. Only one way Putin will end up. When you have had so many of your enemies & friends pushed out of windows, you know what is coming.  He is strong, until he is not, and then an unfortunate accident. 

[frank83628]

28 minutes ago, Dcheech said:

The Russians know that. Only one way Putin will end up. When you have had so many of your enemies & friends pushed out of windows, you know what is coming.  He is strong, until he is not, and then an unfortunate accident. 

hahah, pushed out of windows, i think you've been watching too many Hollywood movies

Edited August 28 by frank83628

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, frank83628 said:

Putin ain't going anywhere, far far stronger leader than any western ones!

Well, he is a dictator, after all. Apparently, that's the kind of leader you admire.

[AndreasHG]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No one is denying that the USSR depended on Allied tanks and weaponry, but an awful lot of Soviets died to defeat the Germans. Had the Soviets not born the brunt of the German army, which was mostly, IMO, destroyed in the USSR, the allies may not even have won their part.

 

You make it appear as if the Soviet fought against Nazi Germany of their own volition, which is ridiculous.

 

The only thing that Soviet Russia did on its own volition, was to invade Poland from the east, in 1939 and in agreement with Hitler whose troops attacked Poland from the west.

Had it not been for the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, Nazi Germany would never have proceeded to attack Poland, thus France, ending up in invading Russia itself. 

Russia itself was the cause of its own misfortune. Russia itself is responsible for the millions of deaths it suffered. 

 

Russia has no one to blame but itself for its suffering, for its backwardness, for the incompetence of its military, the incurable corruption of its ruling class, the inability to make the most of its human resources, counting rather on the exploitation of natural resources, best if achieved through semi-slave labor. 

 

But it has always been in Russia's DNA to play the victim and blame the West for its own misfortunes. Anything so that the responsibility is not placed on the megalomaniac Russian dictator of the day.

 

In its millenial history, Russia went to be ruled by bloodthirsty Mongols and Tatars, to similarly bloodthirsty tzars, to bloodthirsty soviets, to bloodthirsty Putin. Nothing has been learned, nothing has ever really changed.

The Russians are eternally condemned to pay with blood, tears and sweat for the megalomania of those who govern them. At times dragging their guiltless neighboring countries into the vortex of their tragedies.

 

As someone said in a different post, "Russia is a human tragedy", a tragedy that seems never-ending.

 

To me Russia is rather a black hole. A black hole that has swallowed up millions of human lives without ever giving anything valuable back.

 

Edited August 28 by AndreasHG

[frank83628]

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, he is a dictator, after all. Apparently, that's the kind of leader you admire.

a strong leader, superior to any western one!

[placeholder]

Just now, frank83628 said:

a strong leader, superior to any western one!

Because of how Russia has prospered under his rule?

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

You need to be more precise in your questions. Do you mean the court the imaginary court that sentenced Dunn to 3 years or the other court?

 

Yes, I did get the length of the sentence incorrect and I corrected it on one post but the other had already been quoted.

 

But the point stands, a jail term for a Facebook post that asks a question is completely unacceptable. It's totalitarian in the extreme. 

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

But it's good that you now concede he wasn't calling for riots or murder. That's progress. 

Well, that was because I based my search on looking for someone who had been sentenced to 3 years in prison according to you. I should have known better than to base my search on an assertion of yours. Just to remind you, that the party in question was sentenced to serve 8 weeks, not the 3 years that you claimed.

Edit: This posted almost simultaneously with JonnyF's post above.

Edited August 28 by placeholder