Popular Post Górnik Leicester Posted 11 February 2022 Popular Post Share Posted 11 February 2022 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post SpacedX Posted 11 February 2022 Popular Post Share Posted 11 February 2022 26 minutes ago, SO1 said: You should read my comment in the war thread yesterday as it states my feelings about this issue. You mean the one in which you talk about preemptive strikes in Libya and Iraq by a US NATO lead coalition whilst completely ignoring the Russian military propping up the Assad regime and indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Syria, in addition to, off the top of my head, the conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and Chechnya, territorial expansion into the Arctic, the withdrawal from the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe treaty which limited the deployment of heavy military equipment across Europe, MH17 and the veto of the UN resolution on Syria which would have bought an end to conflict. Previous posts in this thread have focussed on the deployment of troops and munitions on three borders of Ukraine and the threat of possible invasion. You have consistently assumed an anti-NATO stance citing the West as the aggressors, when in fact the current tensions are caused by Ukrainian independence, which Russia does not accept, and the possibility of joining NATO - which is obviously of concern to Moscow. As I previously suggested, I don't believe that the Kremlin is on a war footing, but this brinkmanship and with it, coercive diplomacy is something that Vladimir Putin excels at. On the War thread you also said this.. I don't think anyone would disagree - there are two sides to every story, but you seem intent upon simply recounting one through the use of subjective far right blogs and web pages affiliated with Russia's pillar of disinformation South Front. Perhaps that's why you said the following?... Could you substantiate these claims? What 'genocide', what 'war crimes' are you referring to? Only, I've been asking you for over a fortnight now. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WigstonWanderer Posted 11 February 2022 Share Posted 11 February 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said: Yes, on the one side there's the tale of a country wanting to democratically join an international cooperation treaty, in part for security and the ability to better defend itself. On the other side there's the tale of a different country whose leader wants to prevent that country gaining these benefits and has threatened nuclear war if we don't let them occupy a foreign state. The former is highly aggressive and confrontational, the latter is perfectly peaceful and justified behaviour, right? As detestable as the Russian oligarchy is, I’m not at all sure that it’s the democratic right of any country to join NATO. They have the democratic right to aspire to such, but it is up to NATO to decide if they can enter, and that would be an extremely provocative move to Russia. I think we can all imagine the reaction of the US if Russia and China formed a military alliance and tried to recruit Mexico. Surely the best solution post breakup of the USSR would have been a demilitarised zone around Russia in their old satellite states? I had thought that this was the original position? Russia is extremely dangerous as a cornered animal. Edited 11 February 2022 by WigstonWanderer 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weller54 Posted 11 February 2022 Share Posted 11 February 2022 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zear0 Posted 11 February 2022 Share Posted 11 February 2022 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60356373 They'd like a word Boris... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobHawk Posted 11 February 2022 Share Posted 11 February 2022 Since when did the police send a ****ing questionnaire? Surely if you have questions, you ask them properly. Or am I being dense here? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 11 February 2022 Share Posted 11 February 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said: As detestable as the Russian oligarchy is, I’m not at all sure that it’s the democratic right of any country to join NATO. They have the democratic right to aspire to such, but it is up to NATO to decide if they can enter, and that would be an extremely provocative move to Russia. I think we can all imagine the reaction of the US if Russia and China formed a military alliance and tried to recruit Mexico. Surely the best solution post breakup of the USSR would have been a demilitarised zone around Russia in their old satellite states? I had thought that this was the original position? Russia is extremely dangerous as a cornered animal. So those 'old satellite states' (or alternatively, 'sovereign nations') don't get any say in the matter? They have no right to self-determination because granting them that might offend poor old Russia? That seems a pretty shitty deal to me. Edited 11 February 2022 by ClaphamFox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legend_in_blue Posted 11 February 2022 Share Posted 11 February 2022 48 minutes ago, RobHawk said: Since when did the police send a ****ing questionnaire? Surely if you have questions, you ask them properly. Or am I being dense here? On a scale of 1 to 5, how did you rate the champagne at the Xmas Quiz? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WigstonWanderer Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, ClaphamFox said: So those 'old satellite states' (or alternatively, 'sovereign nations') don't get any say in the matter? They have no right to self-determination because granting them that might offend poor old Russia? That seems a pretty shitty deal to me. They don’t get the right to join NATO, no. That’s for NATO to decide, and for NATO to do so is effectively expansionist, plays to Russian paranoia, and risks confrontation. There seems to be a great deal of jingoistic thinking on this subject in this thread. Do we really think NATO should risk nuclear confrontation to pursue expansion? Perhaps such confrontation is inevitable. Same with China over Taiwan and their general increased assertiveness in Asia. The world will be a dangerous place over the next 50 years or so. I don’t know what the answer is, but prodding the bear does seem to help to me. Edited 12 February 2022 by WigstonWanderer 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 28 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said: They don’t get the right to join NATO, no. That’s for NATO to decide, and for NATO to do so is effectively expansionist, plays to Russian paranoia, and risks confrontation. There seems to be a great deal of jingoistic thinking on this subject in this thread. Do we really think NATO should risk nuclear confrontation to pursue expansion? Perhaps such confrontation is inevitable. Same with China over Taiwan and their general increased assertiveness in Asia. The world will be a dangerous place over the next 50 years or so. I don’t know what the answer is, but prodding the bear does seem to help to me. You could be right, there's certainly no evidence to the contrary, but I hope not. Humanity becoming even more divided right at the wrong time isn't exactly what we need. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 4 hours ago, ClaphamFox said: So those 'old satellite states' (or alternatively, 'sovereign nations') don't get any say in the matter? They have no right to self-determination because granting them that might offend poor old Russia? That seems a pretty shitty deal to me. It is but it is also common sense. It is not in their interests to have war with Russia either, and like it or not they cannot change their neighbours. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 9 hours ago, RobHawk said: Since when did the police send a ****ing questionnaire? Surely if you have questions, you ask them properly. Or am I being dense here? Yeah but you could lie in an interview, whereas this ‘must be answered truthfully’. So makes sense really. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facecloth Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 4 minutes ago, Strokes said: Yeah but you could lie in an interview, whereas this ‘must be answered truthfully’. So makes sense really. Yeah and there's absolutely no way they'll all get together and make sure their stories match up 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 2 minutes ago, Facecloth said: Yeah and there's absolutely no way they'll all get together and make sure their stories match up They aren’t allowed to mate, it will come with instructions. 1. don’t collaborate. 2 tell the truth. Whatever happens now, we will obviously get justice. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 (edited) People were worried about police funding cuts, but really this just proves we don’t need beat bobbies and expensive CID teams. We just need a database of email addresses and no crime will ever go unsolved. Edited 12 February 2022 by Strokes 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Falling Foxes Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 57 minutes ago, Strokes said: They aren’t allowed to mate, it will come with instructions. 1. don’t collaborate. 2 tell the truth. Whatever happens now, we will obviously get justice. They'll collaborate all right. One of his aides will answer I wasn't there, and Johnson's answer will be, neither was I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 18 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said: They'll collaborate all right. One of his aides will answer I wasn't there, and Johnson's answer will be, neither was I. Seems very unlikely pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zear0 Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 Sounds likely the police have photos and witness statements for attendees at most of these "work gatherings" and will use the answers as admissions of guilt for the basis of issuing fines so they can't be contested. If you started telling porkies at this stage you go down the Chris Huhne route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WigstonWanderer Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 57 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said: They'll collaborate all right. One of his aides will answer I wasn't there, and Johnson's answer will be, neither was I. And neither was my wife Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daggers Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 6 hours ago, Strokes said: Yeah but you could lie in an interview, whereas this ‘must be answered truthfully’. So makes sense really. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weller54 Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 A questionaire was addressed to Mrs Johnson by the police, but it was returned with the message on the envelope.. Carrie doesn't live here anymore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 12 February 2022 Share Posted 12 February 2022 13 minutes ago, weller54 said: A questionaire was addressed to Mrs Johnson by the police, but it was returned with the message on the envelope.. Carrie doesn't live here anymore! That’s a yellow …… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 13 February 2022 Share Posted 13 February 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 13 February 2022 Share Posted 13 February 2022 Generally I refrain from posting lefty talking heads videos to avoid the inevitable triggering it would cause but just take a look. They are literally making it all up as they go along and laughing at you all behind your backs for trusting them. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pSinatra Posted 13 February 2022 Share Posted 13 February 2022 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/feb/10/climate-activists-buy-environment-secretarys-cornwall-constituency-office Top trolling by Insulate Britain. Buy the building that George Eustice rents for his constituency office & use those payments towards legal costs for protesters. For anyone who has ever visited Camborne, I find the whole town deeply disturbing. The place is poverty ridden. They guy mustn't have a conscience to witness that level of deprivation on a regular basis & behave the way he does. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts