Defiant Putin warns the west: your sanctions are akin to an act of war

coluka said:
It is, but not with the UK. Every time a war starts somewhere in the globe, we can not send UK troops in to battle. When that aggressor turns out to be a nuclear state then you also need to be aware that in doing so, you are risking being mutually destructed. Not a sensible decision to take.

Risking a nuclear war with a madman has to be a last resort as it means likely that you, me and most on the board will die along with our kids and grandkids. The UK would be a soulless worthless piece of land for years to come. The only solution is either Putin being removed internally or him being given a way out diplomatically. Their is a third possible option, but nobody in the UK wants to think about that.
Click to expand...
I hear this idea of a diplomatic victory for Putin reasonably often and I think that after a day or two of the war it may have been possible but as time progresses I just don't see how it can be negotiated. Why should anyone expect Ukraine to give up some of their sovereign land especially after many lives have and are currently being lost to defend it?
 
Last edited:
Sulamani said:
I hear this idea of a diplomatic victory for Putin reasonably often and I think that after a day or two of the war it may have been possible but as time progresses I just don't see how it can be negotiated. Why should anyone expect Ukraine to give up some of their sovereign land especially after many lives have and are currently being lost to defend it?
Click to expand...
Sunk cost fallacy applies to both sides heavily now.

It will be an incredible bit of negotiation if someone manages to pull something diplomatically out of the fire with this. Worthy of all the Nobel peace prizes for ever more.

Notwithstanding his own military's actions, I found it interesting that Putin was more ready to call sanctions an act of war, than even acknowledge the likely billions of military equipment Ukraine has been given being more of red rag. Given that without them Russia would have steamrolled Ukraine in 3 days.
 
He really did not think this one out. He seems to be living in a different decade and did not think of the power the rest of the World has over him with regards to technology etc. At the flick of a switch Barclays etc have cut them off. Export/imports have dried up. In a few weeks his people will be starving and hopefully will start to see the real leader for what he is. His Military might has become a joke, they have all the gear but no idea. A simple thing like mud has held up his advance. They are short of fuel but blow up a fuel depot. The blind are leading the blind.
The 6 P's come to mind.
 
Sulamani said:
I hear this idea of a diplomatic victory for Putin reasonably often and I think that after a day or two of the war it may have been possible but as time progresses I just don't see how it can be negotiated. Why should anyone expect Ukraine to give up some of their sovereign land especially after many lives have and are currently being lost to defend it?
Click to expand...
The same was said about Cyprus. It wouldn’t be fair, it wouldn’t be moral, but it might save countless lives worldwide. Some of the land in question has a majority of people that are Russian speakers and are said to align more with Russia, such as the Donbas region. Putin can spread his propaganda and save face saying he has liberated an area for Russians. Ukraine survives total destruction and absorption into Russia’s system. It may have to give up hope of ever joining NATO too and be a buffer zone for now.

However, Putin may be insane and the idea be irrelevant. I see a few possible outcomes, there may be others or variations of them.

1. Putin wins and Ukraine has a puppet government installed, The more that flea Ukraine the more likely he can govern it.
2. Putin is taken out inside Moscow and Russian troops withdraw and a new Russian leader tries to agree a new world order and treaties signed Russia is eventually de sanctioned.
3. Ukraine is annexed as stated, the Cyprus model or some other diplomatic solution
4. A long occupation but unwinnable war taking the land but with regular insurgency from within like Afghanistan eventually with a land occupied but with constant conflict
5. World War 3 and Nuclear mayhem (hopefully least likely, but still possible).
6. Putin runs out of money and withdraws entirely and goes back into his hole (least likely of all)

I hope 2 or 3 are achieved but am not holding my breath.
 
coluka said:
The same was said about Cyprus. It wouldn’t be fair, it wouldn’t be moral, but it might save countless lives worldwide. Some of the land in question has a majority of people that are Russian speakers and are said to align more with Russia, such as the Donbas region. Putin can spread his propaganda and save face saying he has liberated an area for Russians. Ukraine survives total destruction and absorption into Russia’s system. It may have to give up hope of ever joining NATO too and be a buffer zone for now.

However, Putin may be insane and the idea be irrelevant. I see a few possible outcomes, there may be others or variations of them.

1. Putin wins and Ukraine has a puppet government installed, The more that flea Ukraine the more likely he can govern it.
2. Putin is taken out inside Moscow and Russian troops withdraw and a new Russian leader tries to agree a new world order and treaties signed Russia is eventually de sanctioned.
3. Ukraine is annexed as stated, the Cyprus model or some other diplomatic solution
4. A long occupation but unwinnable war taking the land but with regular insurgency from within like Afghanistan eventually with a land occupied but with constant conflict
5. World War 3 and Nuclear mayhem (hopefully least likely, but still possible).
6. Putin runs out of money and withdraws entirely and goes back into his hole (least likely of all)

I hope 2 or 3 are achieved but am not holding my breath.
Click to expand...
I understand your perspective and I agree it would be the outcome, barring a bullet for Putin, that causes the least bloodshed but the fact that Crimea has already been annexed might fortify the Ukrainian resolve. If they give up Sevastopol, which is the only region of Ukraine with a majority ethnic Russia population, what’s to stop Russia coming back in 5 years for Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv? What’s to stop them invading Latvia to annex a piece? Death by a thousand cuts.
 
Sulamani said:
I understand your perspective and I agree it would be the outcome, barring a bullet for Putin, that causes the least bloodshed but the fact that Crimea has already been annexed might fortify the Ukrainian resolve. If they give up Sevastopol, which is the only region of Ukraine with a majority ethnic Russia population, what’s to stop Russia coming back in 5 years for Donetsk, Luhansk and Kharkiv? What’s to stop them invading Latvia to annex a piece? Death by a thousand cuts.
Click to expand...
Nothing bar a bit of paper like say the Budapest memorandum 😱 Your point is valid so long as Putin is in power. No treaty guarantees anything as politics evolve. Hope is all we have got in truth.
 
coluka said:
The same was said about Cyprus. It wouldn’t be fair, it wouldn’t be moral, but it might save countless lives worldwide. Some of the land in question has a majority of people that are Russian speakers and are said to align more with Russia, such as the Donbas region. Putin can spread his propaganda and save face saying he has liberated an area for Russians. Ukraine survives total destruction and absorption into Russia’s system. It may have to give up hope of ever joining NATO too and be a buffer zone for now.

However, Putin may be insane and the idea be irrelevant. I see a few possible outcomes, there may be others or variations of them.

1. Putin wins and Ukraine has a puppet government installed, The more that flea Ukraine the more likely he can govern it.
2. Putin is taken out inside Moscow and Russian troops withdraw and a new Russian leader tries to agree a new world order and treaties signed Russia is eventually de sanctioned.
3. Ukraine is annexed as stated, the Cyprus model or some other diplomatic solution
4. A long occupation but unwinnable war taking the land but with regular insurgency from within like Afghanistan eventually with a land occupied but with constant conflict
5. World War 3 and Nuclear mayhem (hopefully least likely, but still possible).
6. Putin runs out of money and withdraws entirely and goes back into his hole (least likely of all)

I hope 2 or 3 are achieved but am not holding my breath.
Click to expand...
There is another scenario Coluka. The west of europe decide they can't stand by and watch a genocide on their doorstep.
 
Hp_Boro said:
I think thats included in point 5
Click to expand...
Not really, I don't believe for a minute a nuclear weapon would be used. I think that is a very unlikely. As the conflict goes on, I more and more believe that we shouldn't be held to ransom and we should put boots on the ground. By we I mean NATO. Let justice be done though the heavens may fall.
 
There are many other scenarios too. The Russian troops get fed up of being ambushed once they enter any large city and call it a day. Sending a column of armoured vehicles to the outskirts of a city is one thing, once that turns into Guerilla warfare the invading force is at a huge disadvantage and Ukraine are not some backwards military force. They are a modern army that will cause massive loss of life to the Russians.

The Ukraine fight long enough and hard enough that Putin just gives up in a war he feels he can't win, is another scenario.
 
Laughing said:
Not really, I don't believe for a minute a nuclear weapon would be used. I think that is a very unlikely. As the conflict goes on, I more and more believe that we shouldn't be held to ransom and we should put boots on the ground. By we I mean NATO. Let justice be done though the heavens may fall.
Click to expand...
So you are happy to risk global nuclear destruction of parts of Russia, Europe and USA? The UK would be destroyed almost entirely, Putin is a madman. He has a nuclear safe town built inside the mountains of Russia. We’d all be dead bar the privileged few if we went in.
Perhaps we should send troops into Yemen, China, parts of Africa? Should we have intervened in Myanmar too?
 
coluka said:
So you are happy to risk global nuclear destruction of parts of Russia, Europe and USA? The UK would be destroyed almost entirely, Putin is a madman. He has a nuclear safe town built inside the mountains of Russia. We’d all be dead bar the privileged few if we went in.
Perhaps we should send troops into Yemen, China, parts of Africa? Should we have intervened in Myanmar too?
Click to expand...
This.

Nuclear Winter is not even an agreed upon theory. You think Putin is not prepared for all out Nuclear War? You think the Oligarch's aren't? Are you one of them? Plenty of people think that the world would be more than habitable 1-3 years after nuclear war. Maybe not like we had it before but certainly liveable.

In one of my darker moments I saw the Aeroflot hostesses thing more as a selection of prescreened 'breeders' ready to head to Putin's retreat. Sorry if that alarms anyone.
 
coluka said:
So you are happy to risk global nuclear destruction of parts of Russia, Europe and USA? The UK would be destroyed almost entirely, Putin is a madman. He has a nuclear safe town built inside the mountains of Russia. We’d all be dead bar the privileged few if we went in.
Perhaps we should send troops into Yemen, China, parts of Africa? Should we have intervened in Myanmar too?
Click to expand...
I never once said I was happy Coluka, debate honestly please.

I don't believe nuclear weapons would be used. Consider this. If Putin is insane enough to launch a nuclear attack, why is he not insane enough to continue invading beyond Ukraines borders?

Why is NATO invasion a line in the sand? Why would we go to war then but not now, the risks are identical.

BTW I don't believe Putin ius insane. Detached from reality due to isolation, probably, but most of his actions over the years have had a definitie advantage to Russia, politically. An american general on TV last week talked about Putin out-manouvering the west time and time again.
 
Ex Footy Legs said:
Great post and summing up.
I hope your right because he has a massive ego and taking just the eastern provinces would be a huge climb down but he hasn’t really got any other options because even if he eventually took Ukraine main cities they wouldn’t have the personnel and troops to keep peace and would be a disaster

Be great if someone in his cabinet (or 4-5 of them) realised his massive errors and had the balls to stand upto him….
Which I’m convinced they must be plotting given these biting sanctions and the companies worldwide deserting Russia
Click to expand...
Sanctions are interesting. Where is an article in the Guardian today that discusses the fact that Iran suffered sanctions for two years and a 20% drop in the economy but no change In the leadership. He states that for sanctions to work the West may have to endure a lot more financial hardship
 
Laughing said:
I never once said I was happy Coluka, debate honestly please.

I don't believe nuclear weapons would be used. Consider this. If Putin is insane enough to launch a nuclear attack, why is he not insane enough to continue invading beyond Ukraines borders?

Why is NATO invasion a line in the sand? Why would we go to war then but not now, the risks are identical.

BTW I don't believe Putin ius insane. Detached from reality due to isolation, probably, but most of his actions over the years have had a definitie advantage to Russia, politically. An american general on TV last week talked about Putin out-manouvering the west time and time again.
Click to expand...
I am debating honestly. Happy or willing (i think its a moot point anyway) it is a more than likely consequence Imho. The UK is more than likely a first target to hit than anywhere else. We are an Island away from USA and mainland Europe. If he wanted to send a single strike as a warning and if I was him I would choose the UK. I would be torn as to where perhaps RAF Fylingdales (think about it the consequences for Teesside and where I live. I doubt London would be used as a warning. He has shown that life to him has no value unless under his control.

Nato is a line in the sand due to the actual written agreed pact. It is a defensive pact not an aggressive one. Attacking a country in defence of a non Nato country risks breaking Nato apart were we to do so. All members would need to agree otherwise it becomes a free for all. He is a 69 year old man with alleged health issues, what has he personally got to lose?
 
coluka said:
He is a 69 year old man with alleged health issues, what has he personally got to lose?
Click to expand...

For all this talk of his health issues, it didnt seem like it at the Aeroflot thing, and I'm mnuch more worried about Biden's health than Putins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top