The New Cold War

Who is the most dangerous in this New Cold War

  • USA

  • UK

  • Russia/Russian Federation

  • China

  • North Korea

  • Random Middle East Threat

  • EU

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.
You do realise Assad’s govt has been found guilty by a unanimously appointed United Nations (which includes Russia and China) Joint Investigative Mechanism? Of using CW four times?

That OPCW have confirmed the UK findings on Novichok?

Looks to me like you’re the one who’s rather blinkered to be honest
It's their continent, let them get on with it. If Assad was ever that bad (and relatively speaking he is not) just compare this with George Dubya's banditry in Eye-rack, with full UK support, which has killed, maimed and made refugee perhaps millions. Assad's supposed crimes are small beer compared with those of our government and those with whom we enjoy cordial relations.

Why didn't the media show the ongoing reality of Iraq, the four Global oil cartels forcing, via the US puppet government, thirty year contracts ceding Iraq's oil to corporations without so much as a kiss-my-arse to the people who owned it? Don't hear many media pundits taxing their limited intelligence with that one.
 
It's their continent, let them get on with it. If Assad was ever that bad (and relatively speaking he is not) just compare this with George Dubya's banditry in Eye-rack, with full UK support, which has killed, maimed and made refugee perhaps millions. Assad's supposed crimes are small beer compared with those of our government and those with whom we enjoy cordial relations.
I say again, Chemical Weapons Convention. UNSC Resolution 2118, Joint Investigative Mechanism, repeat vetoes. UNSC Resolution 2254, roadmap to peace.

Why didn't the media show the ongoing reality of Iraq, the four Global oil cartels forcing, via the US puppet government, thirty year contracts ceding Iraq's oil to corporations without so much as a kiss-my-arse to the people who owned it? Don't hear many media pundits taxing their limited intelligence with that one.
You tell ‘em! Make it headline news!

I don’t suppose your sources are factual?
 
You'd better ask RCT(V) since he was the one that raised ancient history. I was perfectly happy discussing post-Soviet Russia up to that point.
Oye!! I was still only in my "formative" years back then!

You calling me ANCIENT ?!

HOW - jolly well - DARE YOU ?! ;) .
 
I don't think the Russians need to waste missiles on empty airfields and new housing estates, unless they want to just make sure the remaining targets are well and truly molten glass.
My airfield is not empty
 

DaManBugs

LE
Book Reviewer
It's their continent, let them get on with it. If Assad was ever that bad (and relatively speaking he is not) just compare this with George Dubya's banditry in Eye-rack, with full UK support, which has killed, maimed and made refugee perhaps millions. Assad's supposed crimes are small beer compared with those of our government and those with whom we enjoy cordial relations.

Why didn't the media show the ongoing reality of Iraq, the four Global oil cartels forcing, via the US puppet government, thirty year contracts ceding Iraq's oil to corporations without so much as a kiss-my-arse to the people who owned it? Don't hear many media pundits taxing their limited intelligence with that one.
Exactly! Very well put indeed!

MsG
 
I have a bit of an in here by talking to my Russian/Latvian mate, as far as he is concerned it is all about Russian strength. They like Putin because he is masking the loss of superpower status by thumbing his nose at the accepted order of things and playing on a deep-seated fear of all bad things coming from the west, Napoleon , Hitler etc.
There is a deep seated inferiority complex compounded by a rabid nationaliism which he is milking to the max.
 
He also thought that killing Chechen kids was similar to stopping rats breeding.
 

AfghanAndy

On ROPS
On ROPs
My thoughts exactly. If indeed the Russians were supposedly behind all of this in both Syria over the last year and in the UK this past month, what have they gained by all of this supposedly-smart terror-inducing chemical hysteria? Wow. I can’t think of a single thing they’ve gained.

But I can see what they’ve lost when you add it all up - worldwide condemnation, sanctions, loss of trade, a weakened stock market, a falling rouble, a possible head-on military confrontation.. Why would Vlad (and his puppet) risk that? For what? To kill a few dozen women and children? To bump off a crusty old turn-coat in a Salisbury park? And by the way, just exactly how do we know that this guy (and his daughter) were ... don't get me started on that one...
They (the Russians) are securing a naval base.
 
The issue you have with Cold War 2, is that after 70 years of peace in Europe many countries have scaled back their Armed Forces to a fraction of what they were, this is especially true of many Western European nations. The emphasis has also changed from being a direct confrontation to one that is waged on line and in the electronic ephemera.

Without a tremendous re-spend in Defence I can't imagine the UK being able to little more defend the Isle of Wight against a group of nasty travellers than the Russian hordes should they choose to come West.
 
The issue you have with Cold War 2, is that after 70 years of peace in Europe many countries have scaled back their Armed Forces to a fraction of what they were, this is especially true of many Western European nations. The emphasis has also changed from being a direct confrontation to one that is waged on line and in the electronic ephemera.

Without a tremendous re-spend in Defence I can't imagine the UK being able to little more defend the Isle of Wight against a group of nasty travellers than the Russian hordes should they choose to come West.


Which rather underlines the nonsensical and disingenuous basis of Russian propaganda about being threatened by NATO armies.
 
The issue you have with Cold War 2, is that after 70 years of peace in Europe many countries have scaled back their Armed Forces to a fraction of what they were, this is especially true of many Western European nations. The emphasis has also changed from being a direct confrontation to one that is waged on line and in the electronic ephemera.

Without a tremendous re-spend in Defence I can't imagine the UK being able to little more defend the Isle of Wight against a group of nasty travellers than the Russian hordes should they choose to come West.
Russia is not the force the Soviet Union once was, and several of their old subjugated states will now be fighting against them. They also have a lot further to go, NATO forces are now a lot nearer Moscow than they were. While I'd like to see a serious improvement in our capacity for high intensity warfare I doubt we are in quite the desperate situation you describe.
As to electronic warfare I'd be very careful if I were Russia about this route. At least one virus that is believed to have come from Russia did significant damage within the country of origin. The term virus is not inappropriate to draw comparisons with genuine biological agents, both are equally unpredictable once released.
 
NATO is also not it once was, look at the UK we could possibly mobilze a Brigade possibly 2 at a heavy push. Our Navy could just about hold our coastal waters and the RAF are strapped for airframes and personnel as well. We can't get people to join, we can't get peole to stay and this is the same scenario across a lot of NATO's nations. NATO couldn't fight a credible threat if it came gift wrapped and half dead.
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
They (the Russians) are securing a naval base.
I
Latakia is very important to them.

Silly question: has anyone seen anything definitive on the number of Russian " private military contractors " on the ground?
 
Latakia is very important to them.

Silly question: has anyone seen anything definitive on the number of Russian " private military contractors " on the ground?
Definitive? No. There's an article here which talks about 2,500 or so: An experimental playground: Russian private military companies in Syria
Wagner makes heavy use of mercenaries and probably has about 2,500 people distributed in different operational units that provide security for key Syrian infrastructure and energy sites.
Whether you believe they're 300 less or not, I don't know. Seems high: Russian toll in Syria battle was 300 killed and wounded: sources I believe Russia only confirms five civilians killed. Other sources between 30 - 40 and 200 have been mentioned

They were also used in the recent Ghouta Op spearheading the breaking up of the area into three and securing the 'humanitarian relief corridors'.

They've been used not only in Syria, but obviously Ukraine, Sudan and Central African Republic. Plus 'demining' with the 'Libyan Cement Company'.

It's Wiki, but plenty of links in there from original sources: Wagner Group - Wikipedia

They seem to be using them as 'deniable deniable'. Nothing to do with the Russian govt as that would be illegal, but hired out to interests in other countries and used in 'formed units', especially in Syria spearheading assaults.
 
NATO is also not it once was, look at the UK we could possibly mobilze a Brigade possibly 2 at a heavy push. Our Navy could just about hold our coastal waters and the RAF are strapped for airframes and personnel as well. We can't get people to join, we can't get peole to stay and this is the same scenario across a lot of NATO's nations. NATO couldn't fight a credible threat if it came gift wrapped and half dead.
Speak for yourself....The Poles have a decent military and they are preparing for the Bear to head West. We of course (US) are ramping up to fight in Europe again, in a crash course effort.
 

Latest Threads

Top