Russian Troop Movements Reported Near Ukraine

When Will Russia Invade Ukraine

  • Wed 16th Feb

    Votes: 19 6.7%
  • Before 22nd Feb

    Votes: 54 19.1%
  • By St David's Day (1 March)

    Votes: 90 31.9%
  • By St Georges Day (23 April)

    Votes: 21 7.4%
  • By August

    Votes: 9 3.2%
  • By Christmas

    Votes: 6 2.1%
  • Some time in 2023

    Votes: 15 5.3%
  • Before Hell Freezes Over

    Votes: 68 24.1%

  • Total voters
    282
I spose the poll numbers are also incorrect?
I seem to recall someone insisting they were in the run up to the presidential election when they showed a Trump defeat looming.

Can't recall who, mind...
 

JCC

LE
"Ultimately, phoney war suits everyone — above all, those leaders with electoral problems at home. Talk is cheap."

and, "What could that victory be? The Russian senator Oleg Morozov, who until his retirement last year was close to Putin’s inner circle, recently gave a crucial insight into the Kremlin’s hopes for its talks with Washington. ‘The [Americans] could have said no a long time ago,’ Morozov told Rossiya One on 21 January. ‘This means that negotiations are ongoing… part of these talks does not appear in the public sphere.’ Both sides will come away with an off-the-record understanding held in their ‘clenched fists’, Morozov predicted — and that would be about ‘the very point that scares everyone so much — Ukraine and Nato’. In other words, Putin’s team believe that a private understanding with Washington that Russia’s red line has been noted and will be respected is more achievable than a public deal where Nato renounces Ukraine."

Source: The phoney war: what’s really going on between Boris and Putin | The Spectator
 
As a cynic, I suspect you have just realised you have made a fool of yourself………..which is why you couldn’t follow up with details.

And, as a double plus good comedy effect………..Am I to take the Russian press release that they have no plan to invade Ukraine as meaningless?

That is of course a genuine question, as I’m curious as to your previous posts that have relied heavily on Russian press releases.
Do you seriously believe that even one NATO member will not vote against Kiev's membership ????
Knowing with absolute certainty that a unanimous vote will lead to the Invasion of Ukraine. If you believe that, then your a dishonest person.

I believe Moscow tells lies and I believe Kiev tells lies and nobody at our level knows the whole truth and our dishonest leaders are choosing to believe one set of lies exclusively, because its convenient for us. I'm objective and going against the grain will always cast you as the odd man out.
 
It's like they are hanging around, waiting to come to the aid of a completely unplanned "spontaneous" uprising by a bunch of Ukrainians that can't speak Ukrainian.
 

Slime

LE
As ever the words of a press release are meaningless. But you keep believing.

Forgot to ask.
Meaningless?
Are you saying that as fact, or was that just your personal opinion?

I’m aware you have nothing whatsoever to do with the negotiations, and can’t know what has been said behind closed doors, so would appreciate the clarification.

And.

Are you applying exactly the same standards to Russian press releases?
 

Slime

LE
Do you seriously believe that even one NATO member will not vote against Kiev's membership ????
Knowing with absolute certainty that a unanimous vote will lead to the Invasion of Ukraine. If you believe that, then your a dishonest person.

I believe Moscow tells lies and I believe Kiev tells lies and nobody at our level knows the whole truth and our dishonest leaders are choosing to believe one set of lies exclusively, because its convenient for us. I'm objective and going against the grain will always cast you as the odd man out.

I did ask you to stick to the subject, but see you couldn’t do that.

Someone here mentioned people with an ounce of sense etc, WE AREN'T TALKING ABOUT AN ARTICLE TEN SITUATION.

Can we get back to the subject of the NATO statement, and not some pretend situation only you brought up?
 

Slime

LE
Do you seriously believe that even one NATO member will not vote against Kiev's membership ????
Knowing with absolute certainty that a unanimous vote will lead to the Invasion of Ukraine. If you believe that, then your a dishonest person.

I believe Moscow tells lies and I believe Kiev tells lies and nobody at our level knows the whole truth and our dishonest leaders are choosing to believe one set of lies exclusively, because its convenient for us. I'm objective and going against the grain will always cast you as the odd man out.

Polite tip.
Harping on about a different subject may also cast you as the odd man out.
 

Yokel

LE
I am not sure how much we rely on undersea cables that much that we have been allowing Russia to cut them recently.

There are people on this site working in that area that may, or may not disclose anything, but I would be surprised they are cutting any cable worthy of worrying about.

I watch very high definition TV on a satellite, whilst the bandwith to order movies and rewind them etc. is the need to have internet, I doubt the government are limited by such and if the financial institutions of Europe was at the sole mercy of an undersea cable we seemingly don't care that much about it then more fool us, let them build new ships to fcuk around with a red herring 200ft below the surface!

Where to start? The cables are a lot deeper than 200ft, and the majority of data traffic is carried by them.

See Undersea Cables: Indispensable, insecure by Rishi Sunak MP

Summary of chapter 1

• The UK and the world is highly dependent on undersea communications cables.
97% of global communications are still transmitted via cables lying deep beneath the oceans.
• Today’s submarine network comprises an estimated 213 independent cable systems and 545,018 miles of fibre. • There is no alternative to using these undersea cables. Satellite technology cannot effectively handle the communications requirements of the modern digital economy and society.
• In a single day, these cables carry some $10 trillion of financial transfers and process some 15 million financial transactions.
 
I did ask you to stick to the subject, but see you couldn’t do that.

Someone here mentioned people with an ounce of sense etc, WE AREN'T TALKING ABOUT AN ARTICLE TEN SITUATION.

Can we get back to the subject of the NATO statement, and not some pretend situation only you brought up?
Lets review:-
I said that Kiev would never be allowed to join NATO.
You countered with dissonance.
I countered with a reference to article 10.
You countered with a press release affirming nothing is ruled out and are now avoiding the difficult question.

Summary:-
The reason why our response to 2014 and now 2022, is all over the shop is because you can never get a straight answer. We've grown to operate in these weird ambiguities and keeping it vague is something were masters at and exactly why we spend decades fighting pointless forever wars is because were dishonest with ourselves..... Worst of all as Sun Tzu illustrated; We don't know ourselves and we certainly don't care to have any real understanding of the other side and then look around and wonder why everything has turned to s***.
 

Slime

LE
Lets review:-
I said that Kiev would never be allowed to join NATO.
You countered with dissonance.
I countered with a reference to article 10.
You countered with a press release affirming nothing is ruled out and are now avoiding the difficult question.

Summary:-
The reason why our response to 2014 and now 2022, is all over the shop is because you can never get a straight answer. We've grown to operate in these weird ambiguities and keeping it vague is something were masters at and exactly why we spend decades fighting pointless forever wars is because were dishonest with ourselves. Worst of all as Sun Tzu illustrated; We don't know ourselves and we certainly don't care to have any real understanding of the other side and then look around and wonder why everything has turned to s***.

Oh dear, you are floundering very badly now.

It seems you just can’t find a decent response to me mentioning what NATO said, or, perhaps much more worrying………….You don’t seem to be able to relate to chronological order of the posts in this thread :)
 

Slime

LE
@Emcon Ecomcon

In order to try to help you out a bit.

I had only really heard of the NATO statement this morning, and first referred to it with you in post #6737.

Any poster here ‘with an ounce of sense’ would know the statement had nothing to do with NATO article 10, and I suspect if they had read your later suggestion to read article 10 they would be even more sure it had nothing to do with article 10…………They may even wonder if you had an ounce of sense by suggesting I read it.

Now, for me, you posts that FOLLOWED my post #6737 come after post #6737.

Please don’t feel insulted by my conventional use of counting, but it does perhaps go against the way you suggested the debate has gone :)

You are referring to ‘our’ again. I’m not on either or any side here, who are you referring to, and what part if any are you part of the ‘our’?
 
Where to start? The cables are a lot deeper than 200ft, and the majority of data traffic is carried by them.

See Undersea Cables: Indispensable, insecure by Rishi Sunak MP

Summary of chapter 1

• The UK and the world is highly dependent on undersea communications cables.
97% of global communications are still transmitted via cables lying deep beneath the oceans.
• Today’s submarine network comprises an estimated 213 independent cable systems and 545,018 miles of fibre. • There is no alternative to using these undersea cables. Satellite technology cannot effectively handle the communications requirements of the modern digital economy and society.
• In a single day, these cables carry some $10 trillion of financial transfers and process some 15 million financial transactions.
Thank you, it’s good to know the protection of these cables is reliant on the Irish Fishermen.
 
"Ultimately, phoney war suits everyone — above all, those leaders with electoral problems at home. Talk is cheap."

and, "What could that victory be? The Russian senator Oleg Morozov, who until his retirement last year was close to Putin’s inner circle, recently gave a crucial insight into the Kremlin’s hopes for its talks with Washington. ‘The [Americans] could have said no a long time ago,’ Morozov told Rossiya One on 21 January. ‘This means that negotiations are ongoing… part of these talks does not appear in the public sphere.’ Both sides will come away with an off-the-record understanding held in their ‘clenched fists’, Morozov predicted — and that would be about ‘the very point that scares everyone so much — Ukraine and Nato’. In other words, Putin’s team believe that a private understanding with Washington that Russia’s red line has been noted and will be respected is more achievable than a public deal where Nato renounces Ukraine."

Source: The phoney war: what’s really going on between Boris and Putin | The Spectator
The trouble is 'talk' has become the currency of the west and maintaining ambiguity is everything in order to retain a consensus and maintain a status quo which suits our side. Whilst at the same time, covertly we do have forces trying to maintain the narrative of defense on one hand and simultaneously pushing a process of hostility towards Russia and everyone else deemed a problem in the other hand.

To me Putin wants more. His long term goal is to challenge strategic ambiguity at every opportunity, at a time and place of his choosing and its design is nothing less than break NATO apart. He has worked out that process has to come from within and why he is presenting these challenges like the invasion, to show how crazy one set of neocons are in wanting to exacerbate tensions and it divide the west as it divides this thread.

Of course, some will raise the NATO flag and call on everyone to rally against the division, whilst talking nonsense and refusing to be honest about anything. Simply respecting Moscow now is probably something that could have worked 10 years ago, but I think its long past that point.
 

4(T)

LE
It's like they are hanging around, waiting to come to the aid of a completely unplanned "spontaneous" uprising by a bunch of Ukrainians that can't speak Ukrainian.


Russian domestic media (TV and internet) is currently absolutely saturated with tales of NATO & Ukrainian SF about to launch "deniable" attacks on innocent Russian soldiers, and against civilian targets throughout Russia (pretty much every mundane domestic RTA or other accident is being reported with direct or indirect suggestions of foreign saboteurs and terrorists).

The stooges who serve tennis balls to the Kremlin (MPs, bloggers, bots) are demanding pre-emptive defensive strikes against the aggressors, and/or Russians being "oppressed" in the disputed areas. Plenty of demands for the separatist areas to be armed and assisted.

None of this stuff is being challenged internally, as there is of course no free political opposition, or media, or sanction-free private expression.

Lets hope that the war isn't initiated by another set of civilian apartment bombings a la 1999....
 

JCC

LE
The trouble is 'talk' has become the currency of the west and maintaining ambiguity is everything in order to retain a consensus and maintain a status quo which suits our side. Whilst at the same time, covertly we do have forces trying to maintain the narrative of defense on one hand and simultaneously pushing a process of hostility towards Russia and everyone else deemed a problem in the other hand.

To me Putin wants more. His long term goal is to challenge strategic ambiguity at every opportunity, at a time and place of his choosing and its design is nothing less than break NATO apart. He has worked out that process has to come from within and why he is presenting these challenges like the invasion, to show how crazy one set of neocons are in wanting to exacerbate tensions and it divide the west as it divides this thread.

Of course, some will raise the NATO flag and call on everyone to rally against the division, whilst talking nonsense and refusing to be honest about anything. Simply respecting Moscow now is probably something that could have worked 10 years ago, but I think its long past that point.

As long as the West buys into the concept that emotion trumps logic it is doomed to follow the Western Empire into ruin.
 

Slime

LE
The trouble is 'talk' has become the currency of the west and maintaining ambiguity is everything in order to retain a consensus and maintain a status quo which suits our side. Whilst at the same time, covertly we do have forces trying to maintain the narrative of defense on one hand and simultaneously pushing a process of hostility towards Russia and everyone else deemed a problem in the other hand.

To me Putin wants more. His long term goal is to challenge strategic ambiguity at every opportunity, at a time and place of his choosing and its design is nothing less than break NATO apart. He has worked out that process has to come from within and why he is presenting these challenges like the invasion, to show how crazy one set of neocons are in wanting to exacerbate tensions and it divide the west as it divides this thread.

Of course, some will raise the NATO flag and call on everyone to rally against the division, whilst talking nonsense and refusing to be honest about anything. Simply respecting Moscow now is probably something that could have worked 10 years ago, but I think its long past that point.

Top man, take a lead……..Be the one poster who is being honest.

How about owning up to being wrong about NATO article 10 having any connection to the official NATO announcement being reported in the MSM today?

Then, take a deep breath, and see if you can work up to who you keep describing as ‘we’ or ‘our’ :)

While you keep saying we or our, I’m still sat in the UK, reading a thread about Russian forces next to the Ukrainian border. :)
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top