Ukraine invasion

Exact, if they want to join NATO it is because they are not happy being CSTO (old Warsaw pact) and they don't trust a dictator.
 
CavaliereVerde said:
Unfortunatelly it is not just about "neutral Ukraine".
Putin wants to denazify-disarm Ukraine = install a friend puppet gov like in Belarus.

Invading a country to make in neutral... only a fool can think it...
Click to expand...
I think the logic is something like:
  • My neighbor told me he planned to get a dog.
  • I told him not to do it, but he still plans to get a dog.
  • A dog might bark and could even bite me if it gets loose.
  • So I'll kill my neighbor to prevent this, and I'll invite a friend to move into his house.
And this whole situation is the Kennel Club's fault because they encouraged my neighbor to apply for a club membership.
:D
 
Last edited:
timsk said:
Hi n_t,
As an aside, I think I'm right in saying you're a Mises man?
Click to expand...

Yes, I am a disciple of Mises and the Austrian School of Economics.

timsk said:
If so, (and even if you're not!) - do you think a crack up boom is underway?
Tim.
Click to expand...

More likely a period of stagflation. Either way, what is coming is a lot of misery for those who haven't prepared.
 
Rufus_Leakey said:
I think the logic is something like:
  • My neighbor told me he planned to get a dog.
  • I told him not to do it, but he still plans to get a dog.
  • A dog might bark and could even bite me if it gets loose.
  • So I'll kill my neighbor to prevent this, and I'll invite a friend to move into his house.
And this whole situation is the Kennel Club's fault because they encouraged my neighbor to apply for a club membership.
:D
Click to expand...

1. Your neighbour is not getting a dog.
2. Your neighbour is joining a gang of American pitbull dog owners called NATOs
3. NATO's will drop their Pitbulls in your neighbour's backyard for no particular reason other than to have less distance to run when ordered to attack you.

Go figure.
 
Last edited:
@Atilla
Let's suppose you were the president of Moldova.
NATO ans CSTO call you and give you the opportunity to instantly join.
Which alliance would you join?
 
CavaliereVerde said:
@Atilla
Let's suppose you were the president of Moldova.
NATO ans CSTO call you and give you the opportunity to instantly join.
Which alliance would you join?
Click to expand...
Neither.

Remain neutral n keep my nose clean.

Bit like asking a mosquito taking sides in a fight between an eagle and a bear.

How do you thing that's going to work out for Mr mosquito?
 
Last edited:
Atilla said:
How do you thing that's going to work out for Mr mosquito?
Click to expand...
I think NATO should be discontinued and maybe give military power to UN and EU.
Having said that NATO has worked so far to protect western countries from the soviet block.
Without NATO Putin would have already invaded baltic countries, that are much smaller and closer than Ukraine.
 
Last edited:
CavaliereVerde said:
I think NATO should be discontinued and maybe give military power to UN and EU.
Having said that NATO has worked so far to protect western countries from the soviet block.
Without NATO Putin would have already invaded balic countries, that ar much smoller and closer than Ukraine.
Click to expand...


Everything isn't military though. Don't you think the USA uses/abuses the privilege of having the world's reserve currency?
 
new_trader said:
Don't you think the USA uses/abuses the privilege of having the world's reserve currency?
Click to expand...
Yes they are abusing it, one of the real reasons to get rid of Saddam was that he wanted to be paid in euros.
US is not the good guy but there are no better alternatives ATM.
 
Ukraine wishing to join NATO is parallel to a swindler joining the local crime watch group. What better way to
CavaliereVerde said:
I think NATO should be discontinued and maybe give military power to UN and EU.
Having said that NATO has worked so far to protect western countries from the soviet block.
Without NATO Putin would have already invaded baltic countries, that are much smaller and closer than Ukraine.
Click to expand...
I have little faith in NATO's military effectiveness but it has always had the potential to make a Soviet and now Russian invasion of western Europe too costly and uncertain to be worthwhile. As well as this, it has successfully deterred minor incursions, regional land grabs and border raids.

As for the UN, its a club in which Putin's ambassador and Xi's ambassador and even Kim Jong-un's ambassador get a vote in how Britain should behave. Unthinkable.

As for the EU, the objective of the EU is political submersion of European member states into a single nation. Unacceptable.
 
tomorton said:
As for the UN, its a club in which Putin's ambassador and Xi's ambassador and even Kim Jong-un's ambassador get a vote in how Britain should behave. Unthinkable.
Click to expand...
Those are just 2 members, not UN.
If 150 members of UN decide that Sicily belongs to Greece for me it is fine.

UN is the democracy of the world without military power.

Do you have better ideas to solve borders questions?

We can stay as today and keep wars going on because of a megalomaniac in Russia or Turkey... or Syria....
 

Should Ukraine Accept Putin’s Terms of Peace?​

BTL comment from 'Mark' which strikes me as being pretty well on the money . . .

"As Tucker Carlson pointed out earlier today, we are in the midst of the third great civilisation-wide moral panic to sweep the US sphere in just two years. Previously we had covid and BLM, both of which relied on emotional manipulation and the bullying of dissenters into silence, both of which were based on outright lies, for which the truths were suppressed for long enough for great harms to be done.

As those tail off (though by no means have they disappeared completely), we now have the third sweeping in over Russia, already having done huge harm and threatening much more.

This is based on lies just as the others were:

– the pretence that Russia is some kind of equivalent of the Soviet Union or Third Reich, and that Russia could be a plausible military threat to the US and its major satellite states. The simple facts about military spending and capabilities and economic power render this an obvious lie.

– the claim that this is “irrational” or “unprovoked aggression” by Russia, which is demonstrably untrue given the history of US policy and NATO expansion. The fact that we were repeatedly warned by many experienced strategists that the policy adopted by the US would lead to trouble with Russia establishes this beyond honest question.

– the pretence that Russia’s action is some kind of threat to a non-existent “rules based global order”, ignoring the repeated breaches of any such rules by the US and UK that proves beyond honest debate that there is no such order in existence..

And the underlying similarity of these three panics is apparent from the way they are pushed, using the same basic techniques:

– wall to wall, constant repetition of the founding lies in the mainstream media

– suppression of dissenting opinion by both outright censorship and by browbeating and emotional blackmail

– evasion of reasoned debate, in favour of emotionally manipulative responses. Don’t go along with the covid panic? You’re “uncaring”, “selfish”, “anti-science”. Don’t go along with the BLM mobs? You’re a “racist”, “uncaring”, “white supremacist”. Don’t side with Ukraine against Russia in a conflict we have no real national interest in the outcome of? You’re “uncaring”, “unpatriotic”, a “Putin stooge”.

Regardless of how you jumped in the previous two moral panics, it’s time to choose whether to let yourself be swept up in the latest one."

Tucker: We are at war with Russia
 
CavaliereVerde said:
Those are just 2 members, not UN.
If 150 members of UN decide that Sicily belongs to Greece for me it is fine.

UN is the democracy of the world without military power.

Do you have better ideas to solve borders questions?

We can stay as today and keep wars going on because of a megalomaniac in Russia or Turkey... or Syria....
Click to expand...
The UN does not seem very successful in preventing wars. However, it has been successful in fighting and winning WWII, the Korean War and the Gulf War.

NATO, not the UN, has deterred a Soviet (and so far) a Russian invasion of European NATO territories. The west's nuclear deterrent has been the main instrument in this.

It seems that the best deterrent against a war starting is to increase the probability of the aggressor losing through superior military capability and the will to use it.
 
tomorton said:
The UN does not seem very successful in preventing wars. However, it has been successful in fighting and winning WWII,
Click to expand...
The UN was created after World War II ended. Did you mean WWIII?:D
1646789555159.png
1646789571131.png
 
Rufus_Leakey said:
The UN was created after World War II ended. Did you mean WWIII?:D
View attachment 314609View attachment 314610
Click to expand...
This is a common misperception that I suppose Britain and the US have not wished to do anything to eliminate.

The term United Nations was adopted by the Allies in December 1941, its Declaration was signed by the allies on 01/01/42 and 21 other countries joined the next day. From that point, the "United Nations" became the official term for the Allies. 21 more had joined by March 1945 while the war still had months to run.
 
Mumpsimus said:
Wrong. Do more reading.
Click to expand...
I've done some reading and amended Tom's comment so that it's now 100% accurate:
As for the EU, the objective of the EU is political submersion of European member states into a de facto single nation. Unacceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

trendie
nasty invasive CMC advert
Replies
11
Views
3K
shadowninja
shadowninja
N Rothschild
Ukraine flu
Replies
0
Views
1K
N Rothschild
N Rothschild
M
Austria - Ukraine
Replies
0
Views
2K
markvighan
M
J
Ukraine plays?
Replies
8
Views
2K
PieterSteidelmayer
P
Y
Investing in Ukraine !
Replies
0
Views
2K
Yuriy
Y
Top