Europe War in Ukraine - Thread 4 - thread rules updated

Remove this Banner Ad

This is the thread for discussing the War in Ukraine. Should you want to discuss the geopolitics, the history, or an interesting tangent, head over here:


If a post isn't directly concerning the events of the war or starts to derail the thread, report the post to us and we'll move it over there.

Seeing as multiple people seem to have forgotten, abuse is against the rules of BF. Continuous, page long attacks directed at a single poster in this thread will result in threadbans for a week from this point; doing so again once you have returned will make the bans permanent and will be escalated to infractions.

This thread still has misinformation rules, and occasionally you will be asked to demonstrate a claim you have made by moderation. If you cannot, you will be offered the opportunity to amend the post to reflect that it's opinion, to remove the post, or you will be threadbanned and infracted for sharing misinformation.

Addendum: from this point, use of any variant of the word 'orc' to describe combatants, politicians or russians in general will be deleted and the poster will receive a warning. If the behaviour continues, it will be escalated. Consider this fair warning.

Finally: If I see the word Nazi or Hitler being flung around, there had better have a good faith basis as to how it's applicable to the Russian invasion - as in, video/photographic evidence of POW camps designed to remove another ethnic group - or to the current Ukrainian army. If this does not occur, you will be threadbanned for posting off topic

This is a sensitive area, and I understand that this makes for fairly incensed conversation sometimes. This does not mean the rules do not apply, whether to a poster positing a Pro-Ukraine stance or a poster positing an alternative view.

Behave, people.
 
Last edited:
The bipartisan committee charged with supporting democracy and human rights in post-Soviet states is pushing for the United States to dump the post-Cold War status quo in its relations with Russia and label Moscow as a “persistent” threat to global security.

These lawmakers are likely to embrace the report’s conclusions that “the United States must prepare for long-term contestation, understanding that Russia has a centuries-long history of violent imperialism toward its neighbors, Europe, and the world more broadly.”
The irony of a state with 800 military bases in 80 nations saying this
They further argue that Putin is a disingenuous negotiator and any deal that concedes Ukrainian territory to Russia will embolden the Russian leader to relaunch an expansionist war in Ukraine, further pursue aggression in neighboring, post-Soviet states and potentially attack NATO member states in which Moscow is already carrying out hybrid-warfare.

The report wants to shift Washington’s thinking away from viewing Russia as a superpower and near-peer of the U.S. just because it holds nuclear weapons.
Shit yeh, nuclear war, lets go baby
 

Log in to remove this ad.

And this is a rewrite of history. Chamberlain actually brought Britain time and poured money into the RAF, amongst other things getting the spitfire which arguably saved the Island and a complete take of western europe.

Churchill was and always remained a racist bastard, could give a speech though.

Appeasement gets a bad wrap. No one tried it in WW1 and it led to a cluste** for no real reason, they tried it in WW2 because they didn't want to do the same war 20 years later. Also led to a cluster** but it bought both the Soviet Union and Britain time to hold on
Pretty arse backwards understanding of appeasement. The French and British military forces were vastly superior to the Germans in the build up to WW2 considering the limitations put on them by the treaty of Versailles. The Germans were ramping up up preparations for war because they were always planning on it while the allies were slow to react and the Germans were able to start pulling ahead of them. Appeasement simply gave the Germans time to catch up.

If say the french had enacted the treaty of Versailles in 36 when the Germans remilitarised the Rhineland the Germans would not have had a chance. Three years later though and the Germans had outproduced the allies and evened out the balance of power to the point they were strong enough to defeat the french who had been dragging their feet in regards to rearmament.
 
NATO should have backed off Ukraine due to the various warnings that were given and that it something that Russia wouldn't swallow.
This to me is a bit icky. It's a "look what you made me do" thing on Putin's part.
However, I agree that NATO should have been better prepared for Putin's attack. That they don't seem to have had a concrete plan in place to send equipment in and train operators is pretty shocking.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Europe War in Ukraine - Thread 4 - thread rules updated

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top