So they should form an alliance that would be useless against the biggest threats europe faces? Doesn't sound that smart. European countries are USA's puppets for a reason : it's by far the strongest military power in the world. It would take decades and trillions of euros for european countries to be on par with the arsenal the USA have.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
I don’t think anyone will agree terms any time soon.
It’s in Ukraine plus everyone else’s interest (apart from actual Ukrainians) to string this along for as long as possible and bleed Russia dry. This is inevitable. The longer it goes the more fecked putin and Russia will be.
Putin is so pig headed The only way he gets out of this without something awful happening is him in a wooden box.
My money (and I am a bad gambler!) Is on putin drinking a poloniumcalada within the next 6 months and things returning vaguely back to normal.
European countries were never the puppets of the British even at the height of the Empire.
Well, yeah. "Millions" can mean tens of or hundreds of. I'm not saying the maximum number would be 9,999,999.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I wasn't being pedantic, I was adding to your point. If I wanted to be pedantic I'd just call you a stupid bird and tell you to go shit on a roof.
Edit: Also accuracy is important when explaining to him why the World War would be bad enough to avoid at all costs.
Now go home and get your shinebox.
I did not say that but I give you two perspectives:
USA dropped two nuclear bombs, not one, two on Japan, destroyed afghanistan, destroyed Iraq, 1 million casualties. Putin for all the "atrocities" he is doing now, doesnt even compare to that. Both are insane, but do you trust someone like the USA?
They might want to check it with a giger counter first if they do
Putting "atrocities" in quotation marks does not help your larger point one bit.
Over Putin, 100%.
America aren't insane. I'm also not sure you can hold Biden to actions carried out by Truman as well.
It'll get resolved when Putin finally realises he can't defeat Ukraine militarily, can't remove the Ukrainian government, and can't take Kyev.
At that point he will have lost very significant portions of his invasion force and equipment and be left with an utterly demoralised military, withdrawing from some areas of Ukraine but still occupying other areas. And then the real negotiations will begin about what (if any) areas of Ukraine the government is willing to cede to Russia.
Ukraine will not agree to demilitarisation, nor to staying out of the EU. They might agree to not joining NATO.
Putin will then have to decide whether to reject what Ukraine offers, or instead face military conflict without end inside Ukraine. The latter prospect will be a very unattractive option for him, risking substantial further losses with little means of replacing them, and ever-rising unrest inside Russia.
But what is the threat here? You expect Putin to be able to invade all of europe? And for what exactly? There were a lot of business operations and common benefits between russia and european countries, take germany/russia for example, you are making it seem as if Russia is in some other continent, the russians are european as much as any other european country and what the european countries should do, if they care about the future of europe, is to engage the russians directly for cease fire instead of waiting to see what the usa/tells them what to do because they will be the one paying in the end...
Biden is a shit president, but Bush(both father and son) for example, are these what you consider better than Putin? They are as bad and even worse
If you think any of these big countries are helping you out of the goodness of their heart, you are deluded or naive.
The question is, do you prefer the USA, Russia or China. I know what my lesser evil would be.
There is no such thing as neutrality in the modern world. Going forward, it'll be big blocks against each other in economic and social warfare.
The fact Russia is trying to go for the brute force approach shows how outdated their thinking and general approach is. They're still dangerous but only as far as a suicide bomber screaming his head off. China, on the other hand are a much more sophisticated opponent.
Wellllllllllllll.....a bit more than half us aren't
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I think Russia/China are trying to re-shape how the world is currently being run, for the good or the bad, yet to be seen, but you can't deny that the whole planet has been a slave to the petro-dollar that started since WW2 finished
Both Bushes cannot be compared to Putin. I am not sure how to respond to the claim that they are worse, except to point out that none of the stuff Putin has done even over the last few weeks in Russia is comparable to moves conducted by US Presidents.
But it's military conflict yet the media are making seem worse than a holocaust...
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
European countries are not America's puppets - that's Russian propaganda speaking. They are voluntarily part of NATO and/or the EU, or closely associated with both. They include two independent nuclear powers and numerous democratic political systems.
Moreover, the European economy is larger than that of the USA - significantly larger if you include non-EU members.
Of course America has a lot of influence in Europe, being the largest NATO contributor and the biggest single economy within NATO. But having a lot of influence does not make you a puppet Master.
Dropping nuclear bombs on Japan was during a military conflict.
Both attacked Iraq under a false narrative and killed together more than 1 million people, I suggest you read some history books, should be good for you
Military conflict still has rules and that doesn't include shelling maternity hospitals, deliberately starving civilians, waving white flags then shooting or breaking ceasefires by targeting the pre-agreed safe zones.
Can someone please explain why it's WWIII if a NATO country joins in to help Ukraine, but not if Belorussia join in to help Russia?
Well then why didnt they mobilize Nato towards Ukraine? Who takes the final decision in the end? It's evident no move can be made unless washington gives the green light
In short because Belarus doesn't have nukes.
If a NATO country gets involved and gets attacked, Art 5 kicks in all mutual self defence means all NATO nations get involved, including the three with nuclear weapons.
Maybe if you learned to read, you wouldn't come out with such bs.
Okay then you are saying it would be okay for Putin to drop some of his 6500 nuclear warheads at the moment? Why didnt he do it then since it's also a military conflict now?
No, all NATO decision making is made through consensus.
You do realise NATO did just that?
Both the UK and US have thousands of troops in the countries boarding the Ukraine
Nope, did not say that.
What bullshit exactly? Why don't you give at least some arguments to prove as to why these two scumbags invaded Iraq let's see