Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

See store for details.


aus+uk / uk.current-events.terrorism / Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

SubjectAuthor
* Putin is a nuclear threatThe Happy Hippy
`* Re: Putin is a nuclear threatTWP
 `* Re: Putin is a nuclear threatThe Happy Hippy
  `* Re: Putin is a nuclear threatTWP
   +- Re: Putin is a nuclear threatThe Happy Hippy
   +* Re: Putin is a nuclear threatJeSSe
   |`* Re: Putin is a nuclear threatTWP
   | +* Re: Putin is a nuclear threatJeSSe
   | |`- Re: Putin is a nuclear threatTWP
   | +- Re: Putin is a nuclear threatThe Happy Hippy
   | `- Re: Putin is a nuclear threatThe Happy Hippy
   `- Re: Putin is a nuclear threatThe Happy Hippy

1
Putin is a nuclear threat

<20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4796&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4796

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: the.happ...@ntlworld.invalid (The Happy Hippy)
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Subject: Putin is a nuclear threat
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 15:55:35 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3390d1df01b52b809325edeaaffb9d15";
logging-data="32503"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+wRhb4ROI6T1AWe90wQ0yU1plcK9EH8Cw="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/qkJAi85KOHE6YpOBmJ+R2Uke6E=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 by: The Happy Hippy - Wed, 11 May 2022 14:55 UTC

https://www.ibtimes.sg/putin-could-use-nuclear-weapon-anytime-warns-us-spy-chief-avril-haines-russias-goals-lie-beyond-64560

<quotes>

US spy chief, Avril Haines, Director of National Intelligence, has warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin could use nuclear weapons in Ukraine if he sees an existential threat to the Russian state.

</quotes>

Nothing new there. Putin could equally chose to use nukes outside Ukraine, especially if he doesn't believe he has anything else left to lose, decides that, if he and Russia iare going down, he's taking everyone with him.

What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.

It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4798&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4798

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news1.tnib.de!feed.news.tnib.de!news.tnib.de!news.uzoreto.com!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx02.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
From: ngspamme...@yahoo.co.uk (TWP)
In-Reply-To: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@blocknews.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 15:15:34 UTC
Organization: blocknews - www.blocknews.net
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 2906
 by: TWP - Wed, 11 May 2022 15:15 UTC

On 11/05/2022 15:55, The Happy Hippy wrote:
> https://www.ibtimes.sg/putin-could-use-nuclear-weapon-anytime-warns-us-spy-chief-avril-haines-russias-goals-lie-beyond-64560
>
> <quotes>
>
> US spy chief, Avril Haines, Director of National Intelligence, has warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin could use nuclear weapons in Ukraine if he sees an existential threat to the Russian state.
>
> </quotes>
>
> Nothing new there. Putin could equally chose to use nukes outside Ukraine, especially if he doesn't believe he has anything else left to lose, decides that, if he and Russia iare going down, he's taking everyone with him.

Russia has thought in that direction for a long time. One doomsday
device they liked the sound of was hydrogen bombs on barges at sea that
would detonate and convert some of the hydrogen in the water they were
floating on into an even larger explosion with the aim of spreading
fallout over a wide distance - presumably the world.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18505712/putin-doomsday-nuclear-plan-flyover-cancelled/

>
> What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
>
> It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
>

No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin. He and others can't get the
idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by menace.
That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than it is
now. Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with the tiny
ability it has.

I don't think the sinking of their flagship using US intelligence was
particularly bright though - clearly things have the ability to get out
of hand and go too far at the US end. I'm sure it seemed like a good
idea at the time.

It's the old problem - this is a situation that needs to be handled with
the touch of a safe cracker. It can't start becoming a hunt - not with
NATO doing the hunting anyway.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4800&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4800

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: the.happ...@ntlworld.invalid (The Happy Hippy)
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 16:50:15 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3390d1df01b52b809325edeaaffb9d15";
logging-data="32503"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/HgzaN9I/n9whcanjGeh1Ei83Ead6/z8o="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:PfqtC0CN8jGRn2vchMtp9WJ5ejo=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 by: The Happy Hippy - Wed, 11 May 2022 15:50 UTC

On Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> > What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so
> > determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and
> > its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
> >
> > It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
> >
>
> No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin. He and others can't get
> the idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by
> menace. That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than
> it is now. Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with
> the tiny ability it has.

North Korea only turned back to acquiring nukes after we reneged on the deal which saw them give up such ambitions.

And there is no actual evidence Putin wants to expand the Russian empire. He might dream of it but that doesn't mean he would.

He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which gave Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.

It really is laughable that taking Crimea back after we took it from Russia is the evidence we use to assert a policy of Russian expansionism.

Stability comes from 'you leave us alone and we leave you alone'. NATO wouldn't comply with that so here we are.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4801&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4801

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer01.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx03.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
From: ngspamme...@yahoo.co.uk (TWP)
In-Reply-To: <20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@blocknews.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 17:44:49 UTC
Organization: blocknews - www.blocknews.net
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 18:44:48 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 3000
 by: TWP - Wed, 11 May 2022 17:44 UTC

On 11/05/2022 16:50, The Happy Hippy wrote:
> On Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
> TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so
>>> determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and
>>> its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
>>>
>>> It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
>>>
>>
>> No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin. He and others can't get
>> the idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by
>> menace. That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than
>> it is now. Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with
>> the tiny ability it has.
>
> North Korea only turned back to acquiring nukes after we reneged on the deal which saw them give up such ambitions.
>
> And there is no actual evidence Putin wants to expand the Russian empire. He might dream of it but that doesn't mean he would.
>

I think there's a growing list of countries that would disagree with you
there.

> He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which gave Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.

and now he says it's because of Nazis. There isn't a consistent story
from him. If it was because NATO was expanding why didn't he take that
reason to his people instead of Nazis?

>
> It really is laughable that taking Crimea back after we took it from Russia is the evidence we use to assert a policy of Russian expansionism.
>
> Stability comes from 'you leave us alone and we leave you alone'. NATO wouldn't comply with that so here we are.
>

I don't agree. It didn't bring stability for those living around
Ghengis Khan, the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler... I don't think you can
get out of this mental hole you've dug for yourself where your own side
is always the bad guy. It's the first place you go. Maybe you're right
HH, maybe we are bad guys but maybe there are worse.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<20220511222315.00000d4f@ntlworld.invalid>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4804&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4804

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: the.happ...@ntlworld.invalid (The Happy Hippy)
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 22:23:15 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <20220511222315.00000d4f@ntlworld.invalid>
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3390d1df01b52b809325edeaaffb9d15";
logging-data="32503"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19c92sDrNXtWbJA1G7HAf/wBPIEgU2+y/o="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fl6N8cPu7qqTtmxA2BB0aXIOEBU=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 by: The Happy Hippy - Wed, 11 May 2022 21:23 UTC

On Wed, 11 May 2022 18:44:48 +0100
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I don't think you can
> get out of this mental hole you've dug for yourself where your own
> side is always the bad guy.

It's not a hole I chose to be in, its a hole created through the absence of truth, honour, integrity and decency.

> Maybe
> you're right HH, maybe we are bad guys but maybe there are worse.

We definitely are bad guys. Not the worse, obviously; we stand second in line behind America.

Who else has invaded and waged wholesale war on countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, murdered tens of thousands of innocent civilians in pursuit of regime change and self-interest ?

How much worse can a country get than when it's Prime Minister calls upon parliament to support, arm and fund Islamic State terrorists, calls them the good guys, in pursuit of regime change ?

We even ran our own care home genocide and killed 30,000-plus of our most vulnerable the government said they'd put a protective ring around.

Who else is pushing for the eradication of Russia, the overthrowing of Putin, and nonchalantly risking nuclear annihilation of the world while doing it, is willing to sacrifice innocent Ukrainians to have a proxy war to enable that ?

We promised to take in hundreds of thousands of those whose lives we ruined but haven't, and never intended to.

I find it impossible not to accept and admit we are bad guys.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4805&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4805

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx46.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
From: zo...@so.org (JeSSe)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/68.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 77
Message-ID: <5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 22:48:31 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4270
 by: JeSSe - Thu, 12 May 2022 02:48 UTC

TWP wrote:
> On 11/05/2022 16:50, The Happy Hippy wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
>> TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>> What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so
>>>> determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and
>>>> its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
>>>>
>>>> It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
>>>
>>> No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin.  He and others can't get
>>> the idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by
>>> menace. That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than
>>> it is now.  Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with
>>> the tiny ability it has.
>>
>> North Korea only turned back to acquiring nukes after we reneged on
>> the deal which saw them give up such ambitions.
>>
>> And there is no actual evidence Putin wants to expand the Russian
>> empire. He might dream of it but that doesn't mean he would.
>>
>
> I think there's a growing list of countries that would disagree with you
> there.
>
>
>
>
>> He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and
>> persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which gave
>> Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.
>
> and now he says it's because of Nazis.  There isn't a consistent story
> from him.  If it was because NATO was expanding why didn't he take that
> reason to his people instead of Nazis?
>
>>
>> It really is laughable that taking Crimea back after we took it from
>> Russia is the evidence we use to assert a policy of Russian expansionism.
>>
>> Stability comes from 'you leave us alone and we leave you alone'. NATO
>> wouldn't comply with that so here we are.
>>
>
> I don't agree.   It didn't bring stability for those living around
> Ghengis Khan, the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler...   I don't think you can
> get out of this mental hole you've dug for yourself where your own side
> is always the bad guy.  It's the first place you go.  Maybe you're right
> HH, maybe we are bad guys but maybe there are worse.
>
>
>
If one wants to be objective and learn from history, Hitler had a far
stronger case for his aggressive expansion than putin.
The Sudetenland was very arguably an integral part of Germany ripped
from it after WW1 and inhabited by not 1,000's but 1,000,000's of German
speakers who were indeed oppressed by the newly created Czech state.

Prussia was also torn apart, given to Poland and Russia, again with
1,000,000's of Germans under heavy oppression, including famously the
huge district of Danzig [98% German].

Many people at the time noted that this state of affairs was a recipe
for another conflict, and thus it was - And it must also be noted that
it was England and France which declared war, not Germany.

Compared to that, putins claims on Ukraine are near 0 ,,, Though since
he has been mutilating wholesale cities and the population [while in
turn having his bumbling armed forces decimated], he seems to have
dropped the early angle that they are 1 people and he is there to save
them.

--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<20220512175012.000069ab@ntlworld.invalid>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4811&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4811

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: the.happ...@ntlworld.invalid (The Happy Hippy)
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 17:50:12 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <20220512175012.000069ab@ntlworld.invalid>
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0a298b29ea40b05cd7280cbb812d8ee9";
logging-data="26745"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Z6RyEO3kZvzM8aTJ+dVf11cWx9G+8cgU="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pktlNpZbRx7Ks6ZTpAK5ZV9WO+s=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 by: The Happy Hippy - Thu, 12 May 2022 16:50 UTC

On Wed, 11 May 2022 18:44:48 +0100
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> > He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and
> > persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which
> > gave Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.
>
> and now he says it's because of Nazis. There isn't a consistent
> story from him. If it was because NATO was expanding why didn't he
> take that reason to his people instead of Nazis?

I doubt you know any better than me what he has actually said or told his people. We are merely told what others say he has said and told his people.

We often don't even know what our own have actually said. King's comments about Putin's nukes were reported across rightwing media both as a warning he would use them and a reassurance that he wouldn't.

Recall how Merkel's "Germany's approach to multiculturalism has failed" was twisted to become "multiculturalism is a failure" by many, even when that could easily be proven to be false.

We can't even trust Russian media sources because they make up shit as much as western media does, equally twist words to be what they want them to be.

Has Putin been inconsistent, blamed his action on different things, at different times ?

Almost certainly. It's core to how rallying, rabble rousing and propaganda works.

And it's not unreasonable for anyone to decide there are multiple reasons or factors for something, then mix and match, pick and choose, which is put forward or put first in any speech or other.

Our own politicians do it all the time. You can never get a consistent story out of them either.

Michael Gove went from assuring us a Scotch Egg definitely wasn't a substantial meal to assuring us it definitely was over the course of mere hours.

Your question is equally apt for Ben Wallace who has been all over the shop in justifying why we have to stand against Russia, switching - as Putin has - between expansionism and Nazism.

You are simply trying to hold Putin to a consistency which doesn't exist, to a standard no one else is held to. It's just another case of it's okay when we do it, not when they do.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4815&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4815

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!peer02.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx06.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4> <5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
From: ngspamme...@yahoo.co.uk (TWP)
In-Reply-To: <5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@blocknews.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 00:00:12 UTC
Organization: blocknews - www.blocknews.net
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 01:00:10 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 5250
 by: TWP - Fri, 13 May 2022 00:00 UTC

On 12/05/2022 03:48, JeSSe wrote:
> TWP wrote:
>> On 11/05/2022 16:50, The Happy Hippy wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
>>> TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so
>>>>> determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and
>>>>> its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
>>>>
>>>> No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin.  He and others can't get
>>>> the idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by
>>>> menace. That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than
>>>> it is now.  Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with
>>>> the tiny ability it has.
>>>
>>> North Korea only turned back to acquiring nukes after we reneged on
>>> the deal which saw them give up such ambitions.
>>>
>>> And there is no actual evidence Putin wants to expand the Russian
>>> empire. He might dream of it but that doesn't mean he would.
>>>
>>
>> I think there's a growing list of countries that would disagree with
>> you there.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and
>>> persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which gave
>>> Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.
>>
>> and now he says it's because of Nazis.  There isn't a consistent story
>> from him.  If it was because NATO was expanding why didn't he take
>> that reason to his people instead of Nazis?
>>
>>>
>>> It really is laughable that taking Crimea back after we took it from
>>> Russia is the evidence we use to assert a policy of Russian
>>> expansionism.
>>>
>>> Stability comes from 'you leave us alone and we leave you alone'.
>>> NATO wouldn't comply with that so here we are.
>>>
>>
>> I don't agree.   It didn't bring stability for those living around
>> Ghengis Khan, the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler...   I don't think you can
>> get out of this mental hole you've dug for yourself where your own
>> side is always the bad guy.  It's the first place you go.  Maybe
>> you're right HH, maybe we are bad guys but maybe there are worse.
>>
>>
>>
> If one wants to be objective and learn from history, Hitler had a far
> stronger case for his aggressive expansion than putin.
> The Sudetenland was very arguably an integral part of Germany ripped
> from it after WW1 and inhabited by not 1,000's but 1,000,000's of German
> speakers who were indeed oppressed by the newly created Czech state.

>
> Prussia was also torn apart, given to Poland and Russia, again with
> 1,000,000's of Germans under heavy oppression, including famously the
> huge district of Danzig [98% German].
>
> Many people at the time noted that this state of affairs was a recipe
> for another conflict, and thus it was - And it must also be noted that
> it was England and France which declared war, not Germany.

Germany effectively declared war by continually demanding a higher and
higher price for peace. I think he shares that with Putin right now. I
notice rightly or wrongly we're gradually getting weaned off of the fear
of nuclear war. When Russia beats the nuclear war drum we hardly
respond at all. We won't give them video clips of our leaders
threatening to nuke Russia to show to their brainwashed people.

HH thinks NATO has been prodding Russia by expanding but I say Russia
has been prodding NATO. Putin has done everything
he could to keep everyone's fear of Russia alive including buzzing them
with Bear bombers. Some might say that Russia would only attack if it
were attacked but quite apart from that depending on what Russia chooes
to define as 'attacked', that is also the philosophy of NATO. Putin
wants to be able to mess with his neighbours though, so this is
unacceptable.

>
> Compared to that, putins claims on Ukraine are near 0 ,,, Though since
> he has been mutilating wholesale cities and the population [while in
> turn having his bumbling armed forces decimated], he seems to have
> dropped the early angle that they are 1 people and he is there to save
> them.
>

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<ShlfK.14024$6dof.7028@fx13.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4819&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4819

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx13.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4> <5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
<gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4>
From: zo...@so.org (JeSSe)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
Firefox/68.0 SeaMonkey/2.53.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 163
Message-ID: <ShlfK.14024$6dof.7028@fx13.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Easynews - www.easynews.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 00:39:13 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 8546
 by: JeSSe - Fri, 13 May 2022 04:39 UTC

TWP wrote:
> On 12/05/2022 03:48, JeSSe wrote:
>> TWP wrote:
>>> On 11/05/2022 16:50, The Happy Hippy wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
>>>> TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so
>>>>>> determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and
>>>>>> its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin.  He and others can't get
>>>>> the idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by
>>>>> menace. That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than
>>>>> it is now.  Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with
>>>>> the tiny ability it has.
>>>>
>>>> North Korea only turned back to acquiring nukes after we reneged on
>>>> the deal which saw them give up such ambitions.
>>>>
>>>> And there is no actual evidence Putin wants to expand the Russian
>>>> empire. He might dream of it but that doesn't mean he would.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think there's a growing list of countries that would disagree with
>>> you there.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and
>>>> persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which gave
>>>> Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.
>>>
>>> and now he says it's because of Nazis.  There isn't a consistent
>>> story from him.  If it was because NATO was expanding why didn't he
>>> take that reason to his people instead of Nazis?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It really is laughable that taking Crimea back after we took it from
>>>> Russia is the evidence we use to assert a policy of Russian
>>>> expansionism.
>>>>
>>>> Stability comes from 'you leave us alone and we leave you alone'.
>>>> NATO wouldn't comply with that so here we are.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't agree.   It didn't bring stability for those living around
>>> Ghengis Khan, the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler...   I don't think you can
>>> get out of this mental hole you've dug for yourself where your own
>>> side is always the bad guy.  It's the first place you go.  Maybe
>>> you're right HH, maybe we are bad guys but maybe there are worse.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> If one wants to be objective and learn from history, Hitler had a far
>> stronger case for his aggressive expansion than putin.
>> The Sudetenland was very arguably an integral part of Germany ripped
>> from it after WW1 and inhabited by not 1,000's but 1,000,000's of
>> German speakers who were indeed oppressed by the newly created Czech
>> state.
>
>
>
>>
>> Prussia was also torn apart, given to Poland and Russia, again with
>> 1,000,000's of Germans under heavy oppression, including famously the
>> huge district of Danzig [98% German].
>>
>> Many people at the time noted that this state of affairs was a recipe
>> for another conflict, and thus it was - And it must also be noted that
>> it was England and France which declared war, not Germany.
>
> Germany effectively declared war by continually demanding a higher and
> higher price for peace.

Yes true, only a statement of simple fact that is was not Germany who
declared war - It was England, fulfilling a pact to guarantee by force
of arms Polands contrived borders.
Not much use pondering what might have happened had she not declared
war, but we don't need to guess the future of Polands borders, which
were ultimately seized and occupied by Russia ,, Guess the pact was no
longer in effect by then.
I recall Churchill pondering the irony of embarking on a ruinous, years
long world war to guarantee Polands frontiers then standing idly by
while she was raped by Russia. Of course by then, England no longer had
the stamina, resources, manpower or will to tangle with Russia.

>  I think he shares that with Putin right now.  I
> notice rightly or wrongly we're gradually getting weaned off of the fear
> of nuclear war.  When Russia beats the nuclear war drum we hardly
> respond at all.  We won't give them video clips of our leaders
> threatening to nuke Russia to show to their brainwashed people.

Yes I have also noticed alot of talking heads, almost all left wingnuts,
beating the war drums and with glassy eyes, spin out scenarios of us
prevailing in a nuclear war.
But for any deescalation to work it takes 2, and Putin, due to having
walked out on a sketchy limb, is not minded to deescalate, nor is the
prevailing power structure in the west.

>
> HH thinks NATO has been prodding Russia by expanding but I say Russia
> has been prodding NATO.  Putin has done everything
> he could to keep everyone's fear of Russia alive including buzzing them
> with Bear bombers.  Some might say that Russia would only attack if it
> were attacked but quite apart from that depending on what Russia chooes
> to define as 'attacked', that is also the philosophy of NATO.  Putin
> wants to be able to mess with his neighbours though, so this is
> unacceptable.

Of course its true that Russia has for decades been aggressive and
unprofessional with their buzzing, I'll make allowances for them being
almost always in the Black Sea or other near border of Russia, and they
are saying "back off, getting too close" and most often, message was
received. We had our freedom of navigation of international waters and
airspace, they have theirs, and the cycle repeats.

I still think NATO overtures were and are over-reach, and this is one
area which, granted may not cause putin to back off but may take a
little steam out of his excuses and thus put heat on him to veer in
another direction, and that is namely to state that we have no intention
of any military alliance with Ukraine, and float out the possibility of
enshrining this in treaty and laws [since promises from either side are
meaningless]
Instead, we see the EU in particular in a love embrace, clamoring to get
their hands on Ukraine, and NATO/US refusing to rule out the possibility
of membership. We see the Bolsheviks pouring out more billions to
Ukraine unanimously to preserve their borders while our own borders are
stampeded over, which is seen as upping the ante.
Some are even speculating that Ukraine is calling out favors owed for
keeping silent on the criminal, corrupt Biden syndicate, which they are
and have been in a position to know an awful lot about. I think to a
degree at least their is truth in that.

We wouldn't even send them old Soviet era jets in fear of being dragged
into the conflict, and you want to have a binding treaty to rush to
their aid if they are attacked ?

No matter the outcome of the present conflict it will always simmer and
flare, I obviously stand for supporting Ukraine in their struggle
against the communist brutes, but not an open ended commitment to see
our forces fighting side by side against Russia.
>
>
>
>>
>> Compared to that, putins claims on Ukraine are near 0 ,,, Though since
>> he has been mutilating wholesale cities and the population [while in
>> turn having his bumbling armed forces decimated], he seems to have
>> dropped the early angle that they are 1 people and he is there to save
>> them.
>>
>

--
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for
light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<0gnfK.1442370$dS2.141233@fx11.ams4>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4820&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4820

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!news-out.netnews.com!news.alt.net!fdc2.netnews.com!peer03.ams1!peer.ams1.xlned.com!news.xlned.com!peer01.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx11.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4> <5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
<gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4> <ShlfK.14024$6dof.7028@fx13.iad>
From: ngspamme...@yahoo.co.uk (TWP)
In-Reply-To: <ShlfK.14024$6dof.7028@fx13.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 191
Message-ID: <0gnfK.1442370$dS2.141233@fx11.ams4>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@blocknews.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 06:53:48 UTC
Organization: blocknews - www.blocknews.net
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 07:53:47 +0100
X-Received-Bytes: 10144
 by: TWP - Fri, 13 May 2022 06:53 UTC

On 13/05/2022 05:39, JeSSe wrote:
> TWP wrote:
>> On 12/05/2022 03:48, JeSSe wrote:
>>> TWP wrote:
>>>> On 11/05/2022 16:50, The Happy Hippy wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 11 May 2022 16:15:34 +0100
>>>>> TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> What hasn't been explained is why NATO and the west are so
>>>>>>> determined to make themselves that existential threat to Russia and
>>>>>>> its regime when the stakes and risks are so high.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's almost as if NATO has a death wish.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, I can see the logic of pushing Putin.  He and others can't get
>>>>>> the idea that they can make military gains with no losses purely by
>>>>>> menace. That sort of thing won't leave the world any more stable than
>>>>>> it is now.  Look at the havoc North Korea is capable of causing with
>>>>>> the tiny ability it has.
>>>>>
>>>>> North Korea only turned back to acquiring nukes after we reneged on
>>>>> the deal which saw them give up such ambitions.
>>>>>
>>>>> And there is no actual evidence Putin wants to expand the Russian
>>>>> empire. He might dream of it but that doesn't mean he would.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think there's a growing list of countries that would disagree with
>>>> you there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> He has only responded how he has because NATO has determinedly and
>>>>> persistently threatened Russian security, broken promises which
>>>>> gave Russia that security, and was increasingly threatening it.
>>>>
>>>> and now he says it's because of Nazis.  There isn't a consistent
>>>> story from him.  If it was because NATO was expanding why didn't he
>>>> take that reason to his people instead of Nazis?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It really is laughable that taking Crimea back after we took it
>>>>> from Russia is the evidence we use to assert a policy of Russian
>>>>> expansionism.
>>>>>
>>>>> Stability comes from 'you leave us alone and we leave you alone'.
>>>>> NATO wouldn't comply with that so here we are.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree.   It didn't bring stability for those living around
>>>> Ghengis Khan, the Romans, Napoleon, Hitler...   I don't think you
>>>> can get out of this mental hole you've dug for yourself where your
>>>> own side is always the bad guy.  It's the first place you go.  Maybe
>>>> you're right HH, maybe we are bad guys but maybe there are worse.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If one wants to be objective and learn from history, Hitler had a far
>>> stronger case for his aggressive expansion than putin.
>>> The Sudetenland was very arguably an integral part of Germany ripped
>>> from it after WW1 and inhabited by not 1,000's but 1,000,000's of
>>> German speakers who were indeed oppressed by the newly created Czech
>>> state.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Prussia was also torn apart, given to Poland and Russia, again with
>>> 1,000,000's of Germans under heavy oppression, including famously the
>>> huge district of Danzig [98% German].
>>>
>>> Many people at the time noted that this state of affairs was a recipe
>>> for another conflict, and thus it was - And it must also be noted
>>> that it was England and France which declared war, not Germany.
>>
>> Germany effectively declared war by continually demanding a higher and
>> higher price for peace.
>
> Yes true, only a statement of simple fact that is was not Germany who
> declared war - It was England, fulfilling a pact to guarantee by force
> of arms Polands contrived borders.

We're lining up to do it all over again with Finland and Sweden. Once
they become NATO members it won't expose us so much but there's
definitely something familiar about it.

> Not much use pondering what might have happened had she not declared
> war, but we don't need to guess the future of Polands borders, which
> were ultimately seized and occupied by Russia ,, Guess the pact was no
> longer in effect by then.

In Europe probably the same countries would have been occupied even
faster, then there would be no European war for the US to join and more
resources would have been available to use against Russia. Japan would
have still attacked the US because they were a rival in the Pacific and
the US would still have ultimately vapourised them because by then the
atom bomb was an inevitability and if anyone was going to get it America
was. Ultimately there would have probably been a Cold War between the
US and the Nazis and we - if we weren't occupied and maybe we would have
been left out of it, we did get that offer from Hitler - would have
fallen under the US sphere and nuclear umbrella. Basically I could see
things turning out much the same except the Soviets would have been
replaced by Nazis.

> I recall Churchill pondering the irony of embarking on a ruinous, years
> long world war to guarantee Polands frontiers then standing idly by
> while she was raped by Russia. Of course by then, England no longer had
> the stamina, resources, manpower or will to tangle with Russia.
>

In fairness the US was in a better position than we were to stop them
and they didn't either. I do think everyone cared it was happening but
no-one wanted that kind of trouble.

>
>
>>   I think he shares that with Putin right now.  I notice rightly or
>> wrongly we're gradually getting weaned off of the fear of nuclear
>> war.  When Russia beats the nuclear war drum we hardly respond at
>> all.  We won't give them video clips of our leaders threatening to
>> nuke Russia to show to their brainwashed people.
>
> Yes I have also noticed alot of talking heads, almost all left wingnuts,
> beating the war drums and with glassy eyes, spin out scenarios of us
> prevailing in a nuclear war.
> But for any deescalation to work it takes 2, and Putin, due to having
> walked out on a sketchy limb, is not minded to deescalate, nor is the
> prevailing power structure in the west.
>

It's already starting to look like a war of attrition.

>> HH thinks NATO has been prodding Russia by expanding but I say Russia
>> has been prodding NATO.  Putin has done everything
>> he could to keep everyone's fear of Russia alive including buzzing
>> them with Bear bombers.  Some might say that Russia would only attack
>> if it were attacked but quite apart from that depending on what Russia
>> chooes to define as 'attacked', that is also the philosophy of NATO.
>> Putin wants to be able to mess with his neighbours though, so this is
>> unacceptable.
>
> Of course its true that Russia has for decades been aggressive and
> unprofessional with their buzzing, I'll make allowances for them being
> almost always in the Black Sea or other near border of Russia, and they
> are saying "back off, getting too close" and most often, message was
> received. We had our freedom of navigation of international waters and
> airspace, they have theirs, and the cycle repeats.
>
> I still think NATO overtures were and are over-reach, and this is one
> area which, granted may not cause putin to back off but may take a
> little steam out of his excuses and thus put heat on him to veer in
> another direction, and that is namely to state that we have no intention
> of any military alliance with Ukraine, and float out the possibility of
> enshrining this in treaty and laws [since promises from either side are
> meaningless]
> Instead, we see the EU in particular in a love embrace, clamoring to get
> their hands on Ukraine, and NATO/US refusing to rule out the possibility
> of membership. We see the Bolsheviks pouring out more billions to
> Ukraine unanimously to preserve their borders while our own borders are
> stampeded over, which is seen as upping the ante.
> Some are even speculating that Ukraine is calling out favors owed for
> keeping silent on the criminal, corrupt Biden syndicate, which they are
> and have been in a position to know an awful lot about. I think to a
> degree at least their is truth in that.
>
> We wouldn't even send them old Soviet era jets in fear of being dragged
> into the conflict, and you want to have a binding treaty to rush to
> their aid if they are attacked ?
>
> No matter the outcome of the present conflict it will always simmer and
> flare, I obviously stand for supporting Ukraine in their struggle
> against the communist brutes, but not an open ended commitment to see
> our forces fighting side by side against Russia.
>>


Click here to read the complete article
Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<20220513125233.00001f8d@ntlworld.invalid>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4827&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4827

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: the.happ...@ntlworld.invalid (The Happy Hippy)
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:52:33 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <20220513125233.00001f8d@ntlworld.invalid>
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
<5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
<gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e9ebb13f974e12f96d834e68e8752452";
logging-data="5790"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+ZwWwU+EFt8RlIBjKK5zGhUNjG1pTfrxk="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Fg/BEBkeikwJk2X5Qe5RE/3adh8=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 by: The Happy Hippy - Fri, 13 May 2022 11:52 UTC

On Fri, 13 May 2022 01:00:10 +0100
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I notice rightly or wrongly we're gradually getting weaned off
> of the fear of nuclear war.

And who is doing that ?

The peaceminicks and pussies who want to use the fear of nuclear Armageddon to steer us away from armed conflict ?

Or the warmongers who don't want fear of nuclear Armageddon to stand in the way of having their wars ?

Re: Putin is a nuclear threat

<20220513132520.0000389f@ntlworld.invalid>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/aus+uk/article-flat.php?id=4829&group=uk.current-events.terrorism#4829

 copy link   Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: the.happ...@ntlworld.invalid (The Happy Hippy)
Newsgroups: uk.current-events.terrorism
Subject: Re: Putin is a nuclear threat
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:25:20 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <20220513132520.0000389f@ntlworld.invalid>
References: <20220511155535.000052d5@ntlworld.invalid>
<qqQeK.3141481$u91.3085308@fx02.ams4>
<20220511165015.00000f09@ntlworld.invalid>
<lCSeK.1913519$Z91.173190@fx03.ams4>
<5A_eK.56$C7G6.31@fx46.iad>
<gchfK.2416822$X81.1571266@fx06.ams4>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e9ebb13f974e12f96d834e68e8752452";
logging-data="5790"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+U0Kilq81B8Nhb2I7jmZYLhwzlglextFk="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:xnc6hYN9MnCC0X2IJpuN2F2asEU=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.18.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
 by: The Happy Hippy - Fri, 13 May 2022 12:25 UTC

On Fri, 13 May 2022 01:00:10 +0100
TWP <ngspammersad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> HH thinks NATO has been prodding Russia by expanding but I say Russia
> has been prodding NATO. Putin has done everything
> he could to keep everyone's fear of Russia alive including buzzing
> them with Bear bombers.

Cause and effect.

We could argue forever who started it but we do know that in exchange for agreeing to German reuinification NATO promised Russia they would not expand eastwards, would not move troops towards Russia's borders, then broke both promises and have done exactly that.

You simply won't acknowledge that elephant in the room, that inconvenient truth.

> Some might say that Russia would only attack
> if it were attacked but quite apart from that depending on what
> Russia chooes to define as 'attacked', that is also the philosophy of
> NATO.

And everything was fine. So long as there was effectively a DMZ between Russia and the west neither could accuse the other side of threatening the other, and both sides could see and believe they were not under threat.

When NATO decided to encroach into that DMZ, move ever closer to Russia's border, broke her promises not to do either, while ramping up the anti-Russian rhetoric, it is hardly surprising Russia saw that as a threat, the precursor to something worse to follow.

Since promising not to expand eastwards, NATO has expanded eastward and has brought Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia into the fold, invited Ukrainian membership.

If Russia had done all that we would see it as a clear threat, probably an act of aggression, a guarantee of something worse to come. We would be compelled to act.

I have said before; it's the hypocrisy I can't stand.

> Putin wants to be able to mess with his neighbours though, so
> this is unacceptable.

Yet our messing with Russia, amongst Russia's neighbours, within Russia's sphere of influence, in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and elsewhere, is somehow fine, acceptable.

Did I mention that it's the hypocrisy I can't stand.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor