Be Excellent To Each Other :: View topic - Russian aggression in Eastern Europe

Yeah, I read about that earlier - do you know if the sightings were confirmed?

EDIT: yes, but they weren't in UK airspace. A bit of willy-waving, do you think?

I am sure Kern knows more.

Mimi wrote:

Yeah, I read about that earlier - do you know if the sightings were confirmed?

EDIT: yes, but they weren't in UK airspace. A bit of willy-waving, do you think?

I am fairly sure it is a regular occurrence but only deemed newsworthy now.

I suppose worse case in the short term is a proxy war in the Baltic states, followed by booing at Eurovision. I heard somewhere Putin is very much of the old school and very distrustful of the West, viewing it still as the enemy. this is then reinforced by continuing sanctions.

Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards.

Kern wrote:

Is he wrong? I am not defending Putin's choice in resorting to military force, but isn't there some truth to us having attempted to undermine Russia's influence for decades, and now it has backfired spectacularly and everyone is busy washing their hands and blaming everything on him?

lasermink wrote:

Kern wrote:

No, not so much. We're not in the cold war, we're not trying to site nukes near his border so we can blow him up, and he doesn't have any god given right to a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and the fact that his reaction to Eastern European democracies waiting to cosy up to the EU (and (a) why the hell wouldn't they and (b) why the hell shouldn't they) is to fucking invade them suggests that every single bit of the blame here lies on his side of the fence. 1960s responses to 2010s problems is not sane, let alone sensible.

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

lasermink wrote:

Kern wrote:

First of all, it's not as simple as every state having 100% of the population fully behind the idea of turning their back to Russia, especially in Ukraine.

Secondly, if it works, it works. Just because we have moved on to a different set of excuses for our invasions doesn't mean he's insane, that's just stupid.

lasermink wrote:

Mr Kissyfur wrote:

lasermink wrote:

Kern wrote:

First of all, it's not as simple as every state having 100% of the population fully behind the idea of turning their back to Russia, especially in Ukraine.

What? What the fuck does that matter? At what percentage of the population agreeing or disagreeing with anything does a light go on saying "IT IS NOW OK FOR RUSSIA TO INVADE AND KILL PEOPLE".

Quote:

Secondly, if it works, it works. Just because we have moved on to a different set of excuses for our invasions doesn't mean he's insane, that's just stupid.

"Our" invasions? Sorry, who have we invaded in Eastern Europe?

So, looks like Trump and L'il Kim may be our best bets now.

Poor, poor Guam. What have they ever done to anybody?

I'm actually genuinely concerned that the man-babies in charge of the two countries may escalate to a full scale war before we know it, probably destroying most of South Korea in the process, just because both of them have tiny hands and are just massive, massive tools.

You just happened to be searching for 'topless Putin'?

What's the UK position on all this? Not that Mr Johnson is someone I have much faith in.

Kern wrote:

What's the UK position on all this? Not that Mr Johnson is someone I have much faith in.

Something along the lines of 'sorting them out', mixed with a bit of latin and some obscure phrases with mildly racist overtones

The NK statement was awesome, though "Sound dialogue is not possible with such a guy bereft of reason".

North Korea is quickly becoming my favourite country.

TheVision wrote:

North Korea is quickly becoming my favourite country.

Yes, people starving in the streets while others are summarily executed is great fun!

TheVision wrote:

North Korea is quickly becoming my favourite country.

Yes, people starving in the streets while others are summarily executed is great fun!

Author:	Mimi [ Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:07 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Yeah, I read about that earlier - do you know if the sightings were confirmed? EDIT: yes, but they weren't in UK airspace. A bit of willy-waving, do you think?

Author:	MaliA [ Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:12 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Mimi wrote: Yeah, I read about that earlier - do you know if the sightings were confirmed? EDIT: yes, but they weren't in UK airspace. A bit of willy-waving, do you think? I am fairly sure it is a regular occurrence but only deemed newsworthy now. I suppose worse case in the short term is a proxy war in the Baltic states, followed by booing at Eurovision. I heard somewhere Putin is very much of the old school and very distrustful of the West, viewing it still as the enemy. this is then reinforced by continuing sanctions. I am sure Kern knows more.

Author:	Kern [ Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:18 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
MaliA wrote: I am sure Kern knows more. I'm very glad you think so.

Author:	Kern [ Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:20 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
MaliA wrote: Mimi wrote: Yeah, I read about that earlier - do you know if the sightings were confirmed? EDIT: yes, but they weren't in UK airspace. A bit of willy-waving, do you think? I am fairly sure it is a regular occurrence but only deemed newsworthy now. I suppose worse case in the short term is a proxy war in the Baltic states, followed by booing at Eurovision. I heard somewhere Putin is very much of the old school and very distrustful of the West, viewing it still as the enemy. this is then reinforced by continuing sanctions. Aye. Testing response times is a pretty common technique. I doubt Putin would do anything that would risk a response from NATO, but he might try to see how far he can go. Are the Russians entering the festival of western decadance this year, or was the bearded lady a step too far for them?

Author:	Kern [ Fri Feb 20, 2015 11:21 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
The House of Lords report (executive summary: 'we were caught with our pants down') is compelling reading. I keep on flipping to it whenever I get frustrated with Visio. From what I've read so far, gives a good explanation of how Russia and the west see themselves. PDF link.

Be Excellent To Each Other https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/

Russian aggression in Eastern Europe https://www.beexcellenttoeachother.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3379	Page 3 of 6

Author:	Kern [ Fri Feb 20, 2015 14:08 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
BBC: Be vigilant, citizens.

Author:	lasermink [ Sat Feb 21, 2015 9:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
The way things seem to work these days, I fully expect the western media to launch a campaign painting Putin as a mad despot who is plotting to drop the big one, and the only way to prevent it being a preemptive strike.

Author:	MrChris [ Sun Feb 22, 2015 10:30 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
I have a horrible feeling they wouldn't be far wrong, though.

Author:	Cras [ Sun Feb 22, 2015 14:51 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Why would the west want to kick off against Russia? It buys us nothing, not even good PR. Plus the risk of escalation to all out war is huge, and no sort of pre-emptive strike short of glassing half the continent and hoping they wouldn't notice in time to retaliate would achieve anything in terms of crippling the Russian army.

Author:	Kern [ Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:38 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards. The bear wants to be a great power again, and views any country aligning itself, or considering to align itself, with western institutions to be tantamount to being hostile. Of course, from numerous games of 'Risk' we all know that any attempt to invade Russia is doomed to failure, unless you want to be holed up in the Antipodes.

Author:	lasermink [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 9:55 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Kern wrote: Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards. Is he wrong? I am not defending Putin's choice in resorting to military force, but isn't there some truth to us having attempted to undermine Russia's influence for decades, and now it has backfired spectacularly and everyone is busy washing their hands and blaming everything on him?

Author:	Kern [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 10:00 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
I don't think there is much love between, say, the Baltic states and Russia after the whole Soviet thing. If the people of those countries want to look west and embrace what they see as a better future, should we stop them? That's probably a rhetorical question as geopolitics isn't really my thing.

Author:	DavPaz [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 10:29 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Would a strong Russia allied with China, India and numerous other eastern powers not provide a nice future?

Author:	Cras [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 10:33 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
China and India aren't likely to make friends. China and Pakistan is a lot more likely.

Author:	NervousPete [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 11:04 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
A lot of Ukranians initially saw the Germans as liberators. Rather touching letters from the initial wave of German infantry spoke proudly of how moved the villagers were at their liberation in the Ukraine. Then the SS moved in, the gauleiters bled them and the regular troops were sucked into a mire of atrocity owing to partisan activity. But Russia never fully forgave part of the Ukraine for welcoming what it initially saw as a liberation. But Ukraine never forgave Russia for two disastrous cataclysmic famines, one in the 30's and one under two misguided five year plans in the 50's. Food still got shipped to Moscow, but many died in the provinces. It's weird that Russia always fears people invading and killing them, but seem to welcome dictators even more adept at bumping off their own people in a rule of terror.

Author:	MrChris [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 22:49 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Ah, ok. I see what you mean. You're still wrong. I was listening to Putin on Radio 4 this morning. Either he genuinely believes the bollocks he's coming out with, in which case he's insane, or he is trying to fix 2010s problems with the old 1960s-80s approach which is also, as the saying goes, insane (as Einstein had it, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.) Also, whilst we've had a few misguided invasions in the last 10 years, I'm not aware that we've actually annexed anywhere. When we've invaded places recently, it's been to install democracies, however shite they ended up being. That's the exact opposite of what Putin's up to - he's taking these places over (e.g. East Georgia, Crimea, soon Eastern Ukraine) and keeping them as his own toys. There is no moral equivalence whatsoever.

Author:	NervousPete [ Sat Feb 28, 2015 0:43 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Russian opposition politician Boris Nemtsov shot dead ahead of anti-Putin march. By a lone nut. Okay, five lone nuts. In a car. In the back. Possibly the gunmen were people on vacation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31669061 Depressingly the Russian Times comments section is full of how the Jewish conspiracy CIA funded traitor deserved it. Seriously, fuck Russia.

Author:	NervousPete [ Sun Mar 15, 2015 17:38 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Wo ist Putin? Interesting article on the Beeb regarding the current mysterious absence of Putin, him not having been seen in public since the 5th of March. A recent Kremlin press release showing photographs of Putin attending events have been discredited since local media reported that they had in fact been taken days earlier. And Putin's close ally, Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, has released an instagram post declaring his loyalty to Putin. "I am devoted to him as a person. And this regardless of whether he is in his position or not!" Rumour-mongering has it that powerful figures in the FSB, angry at Chechen officials ordering the elimination of Boris Nemtsov, have formed a faction and moved against Putin. More here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-31897304 Who knows what's going on? He might simply be playing City Skylines a lot and trying to use mod assets to build gulag for his enemies and a sexy homo-erotic stud ranch for himself with monster-trucks and gun-racks and everything. But until we find out this is all sounding excitingly Soviet old-skool. Cue that LeCarre spy-thriller cello soundtrack, I think. Probably just has a bad cold, mind.

Author:	MrChris [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 21:52 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
lasermink wrote: Kern wrote: Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards. Is he wrong? I am not defending Putin's choice in resorting to military force, but isn't there some truth to us having attempted to undermine Russia's influence for decades, and now it has backfired spectacularly and everyone is busy washing their hands and blaming everything on him? No, not so much. We're not in the cold war, we're not trying to site nukes near his border so we can blow him up, and he doesn't have any god given right to a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and the fact that his reaction to Eastern European democracies waiting to cosy up to the EU (and (a) why the hell wouldn't they and (b) why the hell shouldn't they) is to fucking invade them suggests that every single bit of the blame here lies on his side of the fence. 1960s responses to 2010s problems is not sane, let alone sensible.

Author:	lasermink [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 22:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Mr Kissyfur wrote: lasermink wrote: Kern wrote: Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards. Is he wrong? I am not defending Putin's choice in resorting to military force, but isn't there some truth to us having attempted to undermine Russia's influence for decades, and now it has backfired spectacularly and everyone is busy washing their hands and blaming everything on him? No, not so much. We're not in the cold war, we're not trying to site nukes near his border so we can blow him up, and he doesn't have any god given right to a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and the fact that his reaction to Eastern European democracies waiting to cosy up to the EU (and (a) why the hell wouldn't they and (b) why the hell shouldn't they) is to fucking invade them suggests that every single bit of the blame here lies on his side of the fence. 1960s responses to 2010s problems is not sane, let alone sensible. First of all, it's not as simple as every state having 100% of the population fully behind the idea of turning their back to Russia, especially in Ukraine. Secondly, if it works, it works. Just because we have moved on to a different set of excuses for our invasions doesn't mean he's insane, that's just stupid.

Author:	MrChris [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 22:25 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
lasermink wrote: Mr Kissyfur wrote: lasermink wrote: Kern wrote: Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards. Is he wrong? I am not defending Putin's choice in resorting to military force, but isn't there some truth to us having attempted to undermine Russia's influence for decades, and now it has backfired spectacularly and everyone is busy washing their hands and blaming everything on him? No, not so much. We're not in the cold war, we're not trying to site nukes near his border so we can blow him up, and he doesn't have any god given right to a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and the fact that his reaction to Eastern European democracies waiting to cosy up to the EU (and (a) why the hell wouldn't they and (b) why the hell shouldn't they) is to fucking invade them suggests that every single bit of the blame here lies on his side of the fence. 1960s responses to 2010s problems is not sane, let alone sensible. First of all, it's not as simple as every state having 100% of the population fully behind the idea of turning their back to Russia, especially in Ukraine. What? What the fuck does that matter? At what percentage of the population agreeing or disagreeing with anything does a light go on saying "IT IS NOW OK FOR RUSSIA TO INVADE AND KILL PEOPLE". Quote: Secondly, if it works, it works. Just because we have moved on to a different set of excuses for our invasions doesn't mean he's insane, that's just stupid. "Our" invasions? Sorry, who have we invaded in Eastern Europe?

Author:	lasermink [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 22:37 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Mr Kissyfur wrote: lasermink wrote: Mr Kissyfur wrote: lasermink wrote: Kern wrote: Unfortunately, the general assessment of Putin's strategy is that he fears NATO, the EU, and the west are encircling and threatening Russia, and convincing bordering countries to look westwards rather than eastwards. Is he wrong? I am not defending Putin's choice in resorting to military force, but isn't there some truth to us having attempted to undermine Russia's influence for decades, and now it has backfired spectacularly and everyone is busy washing their hands and blaming everything on him? No, not so much. We're not in the cold war, we're not trying to site nukes near his border so we can blow him up, and he doesn't have any god given right to a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, and the fact that his reaction to Eastern European democracies waiting to cosy up to the EU (and (a) why the hell wouldn't they and (b) why the hell shouldn't they) is to fucking invade them suggests that every single bit of the blame here lies on his side of the fence. 1960s responses to 2010s problems is not sane, let alone sensible. First of all, it's not as simple as every state having 100% of the population fully behind the idea of turning their back to Russia, especially in Ukraine. What? What the fuck does that matter? At what percentage of the population agreeing or disagreeing with anything does a light go on saying "IT IS NOW OK FOR RUSSIA TO INVADE AND KILL PEOPLE". Quote: Secondly, if it works, it works. Just because we have moved on to a different set of excuses for our invasions doesn't mean he's insane, that's just stupid. "Our" invasions? Sorry, who have we invaded in Eastern Europe? I never argued that it was OK, only that the fact he invaded doesn't automatically imply he's insane. Our leaders have also been invading countries to protect their own interests, making up bullshit stories to defend it. I don't see how it affects my argument whether it took place in Eastern Europe or not.

Author:	MrChris [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 22:59 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Also, fuck off Chamberlain.

Author:	lasermink [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 23:46 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
I heard on radio that spouting bullshit is simply how Russian politics work, always has been. The person doing it knows it's bullshit, everyone who hears it knows it, the person doing it knows everyone knows it, etc. All you can do is spout your own bullshit in return. And if Einstein was right, why are we still trying to install democracies everywhere? EH?

Author:	MrChris [ Tue Feb 24, 2015 23:52 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Because sometimes, democracies work. More often than any other system does.

Author:	NervousPete [ Sat Feb 28, 2015 1:23 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Oh wow, Putin's going to personally head the investigation! I am immediately reassured!

Author:	MrChris [ Sat Feb 28, 2015 21:07 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Fuck me, he's not even trying any more.

Author:	Morte [ Sat Feb 28, 2015 22:07 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Sorry...can we all club together and get him the fucking rent boy he's been absolutely been gagging for? Strangely, when I mention this to my Russian colleagues, they go mental...which means it must be true, he's gagging for the cock.

Author:	Kern [ Wed Mar 04, 2015 12:07 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Putin is 'shocked, shocked' at illegal gambling political killings in Russia.

Author:	MrChris [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:07 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with [s]topless Putin?[/s] Trump
So, looks like Trump and L'il Kim may be our best bets now. Poor, poor Guam. What have they ever done to anybody? I'm actually genuinely concerned that the man-babies in charge of the two countries may escalate to a full scale war before we know it, probably destroying most of South Korea in the process, just because both of them have tiny hands and are just massive, massive tools.

Author:	Kern [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:11 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
It'll keep the Russian stuff out of the headlines for a bit. But yeah, I really don't trust Mr Trump, his temperament, or his grasp of international affairs (Miss World notwithstanding).

Author:	MrChris [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:12 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
You can also tell I'm genuinely bothered by this because I didn't bump a year old thread with another massive, florid post.

Author:	Kern [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:13 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
You just happened to be searching for 'topless Putin'?

Author:	MaliA [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with [s]topless Putin?[/s] Trump
MrChris wrote: So, looks like Trump and L'il Kim may be our best bets now. Poor, poor Guam. What have they ever done to anybody? I'm actually genuinely concerned that the man-babies in charge of the two countries may escalate to a full scale war before we know it, probably destroying most of South Korea in the process, just because both of them have tiny hands and are just massive, massive tools. Yes. But, i take some comfort that Kim isn't THAT stupid, and it'll be deescalated by China whilst Trump crows over it. The NK statement was awesome, though "Sound dialogue is not possible with such a guy bereft of reason". I hope it doesn't end in a nuclear winter as Londoners moaning about not getting to work through snow will be insufferable

Author:	MrChris [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
Kern wrote: You just happened to be searching for 'topless Putin'? And, would you believe it, Google chucked up this thread!

Author:	Trousers [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:14 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
It's not like both of them are entitled idiots who have never really had to back down in their entire lives. Or if they have it's ground their gears for decades to create a seething resentment that only monumental dick waving can resolve. It's not as if a military engagement would be an excellent distraction from domestic concerns for both parties. I don't want know what anyone is worried about.

Author:	Kern [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:15 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with[s] topless Putin?[/s] Trump?
If only Pyongyang had a Trump Hotel...

Author:	DavPaz [ Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:16 ]
Post subject:	Re: WW3 a go-go with topless Putin?
There's no way in hell that NK will strike first. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose. The Trump* card here is the whispers in the President's ear. How a preemptive strike could save lives by taking out the NK nukes. Resulting in hundreds of thousands of Koreans killed in a land war. Or something. I dunno. *Clever, I know