Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> On 25/02/2022 14:12, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
> > On 25/02/2022 10:29, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
> >> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
> >>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
> >>>>> Hitler's play book,
> >>>>
> >>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Don't you mean BoJo?
> >>
> >> No.
> >>
> >> I'm trying to learn what history can teach us about a serious
> >> internatinal situation, not make cheap party political jibes.
> >>
> >
> > Is it not possible to analyse the current situation without reference to
> > previous dictators?
> >
> > And if you /must/ compare with history then isn't Czechoslovakia in 1968
> >  a closer fit than Hitler in the 30s?
> >
> >
>
> No, Hitler in the 1930s is the exact parallel. In 1968 Czechoslovakia
> was still a Soviet colony, Ukraine, up till yesterday, was a sovereign
> state.
>
> Hitler invade Austria and got away with it, he then invaded
> Czechoslovakia and got away with it. He then invade Poland…
>
> Putin invaded Georgia and got away with it, he has invaded Ukraine and
> will get away with it. He will then invade?

Apparently (according to some who claim to k now him well) he has, for
many years, had a bee in his bonnet about putting the Soviet Union back
together. Ukraine is just one more step in that process ...but it is
the last step that doesn't involve a country which would bring him into
direct and immediate military conflict with Europe.

--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:23:07 am GMT, "Alan B"
<alanrichardbarker@nospamgmail.com.here> wrote:

> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>
>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>
>>
>>
>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>
> I’m not allowed to refer to BJ by his given name when my oldest son is
> around. To use it is a form of endearment and there’s nothing endearing
> about Boris, sorry, Johnson!

Boris is only his stage name anyway. Friends and family call him Alex.
--
TimH
pull tooth to reply by email

On 25/02/2022 20:18, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 25/02/2022 14:12, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2022 10:29, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>>>>
>>>> No.
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to learn what history can teach us about a serious
>>>> internatinal situation, not make cheap party political jibes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is it not possible to analyse the current situation without reference to
>>> previous dictators?
>>>
>>> And if you /must/ compare with history then isn't Czechoslovakia in 1968
>>>  a closer fit than Hitler in the 30s?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> No, Hitler in the 1930s is the exact parallel. In 1968 Czechoslovakia
>> was still a Soviet colony, Ukraine, up till yesterday, was a sovereign
>> state.
>>
>> Hitler invade Austria and got away with it, he then invaded
>> Czechoslovakia and got away with it. He then invade Poland…
>>
>> Putin invaded Georgia and got away with it, he has invaded Ukraine and
>> will get away with it. He will then invade?
>
> Apparently (according to some who claim to k now him well) he has, for
> many years, had a bee in his bonnet about putting the Soviet Union back
> together. Ukraine is just one more step in that process ...but it is
> the last step that doesn't involve a country which would bring him into
> direct and immediate military conflict with Europe.
>

He is trying to recreate the Soviet Empire with himself as Stalin.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:29:30 GMT, "Liz Tuddenham" <Liz Tuddenham> wrote:

> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>
>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>
>>
>>
>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>
> No.
>
> I'm trying to learn what history can teach us about a serious
> internatinal situation,

History teaches us that life for people like that seldom ends well.

--
This is not the signature you are looking for.
You can go about your business
Move along

D.M. Procida wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:09:15 CET, "David Kennedy" <davidkennedygm@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> Everyone is pussyfooting around Germany who are obstructing EU sanctions and
>>> the longer they do the worse it will eventually be.
>>
>> If only someone would blow up nordstream...
>
> The invasion of Ukraine is so senseless that apart from the purposeless horror
> visited upon its citizens, it seems perfectly plausible to me that Putin might
> decide to use nuclear weapons too.

Ukraine has about 125,000 troops against the attacking Russian forces of
about 280,000 soldiers - who are equipped with better and more
technologically advanced weapons. So the Ukranians can't win.

Their options are:

- to capitulate, setting an awful precedent for the rest of Europe.
Putin then takes over an antagonistic and unco-operative population -
but this probably describes much of the Russian population already.

- to leave - so we would see about 40 million refugees. For Putin this
is the ideal solution - it gives him an empty country which he can move
into easily.

- to fight to the death. Putin could lose many thousand soldiers and
would take over a competely trashed country - no infrastructure, just a
pile of rubble. He could minimise his losses by using nuclear weapons;
and it is inconceivable that some part of the West would not respond;
despite an general agreement not to.

Other countries could have helped Ukraine, but it is now probably too
late, since there is no way go get enough well equipped troops in place
to counter a Russian attack. But of course pre-emptive defensive aid to
Ukraine would have been visible to Putin and could well have provoked
him into a much earlier attack.

So the question is: is there any political pressure that can be applied
to Putin to get him to back down? For all the strong talk, I rather
think not. Russia is substantially self-sufficient and can probably
tolerate commercial pressure indefinitely - unlike Europe which is
heavily dependent on Russian oil and gas.

Environmentally, the immediate need for the world as a whole is to stop
digging up fossil fuels. This would mean that Russia had nowhere to
sell its oil and gas; and it's an immediate incentive for us all to
develop a zero-carbon world. We should be thanking Putin!

I'm 73 years old and like most in the Ukraine I will be dead soon; so I
won't see what happens. I might outlast Putin (69), but he will be
replaced by somebody equally nasty.

--
Graham J

On 26/02/2022 08:59, Graham J wrote:
> D.M. Procida wrote:
>> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:09:15 CET, "David Kennedy"
>> <davidkennedygm@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Everyone is pussyfooting around Germany who are obstructing EU
>>>> sanctions and
>>>> the longer they do the worse it will eventually be.
>>>
>>> If only someone would blow up nordstream...
>>
>> The invasion of Ukraine is so senseless that apart from the
>> purposeless horror
>> visited upon its citizens, it seems perfectly plausible to me that
>> Putin might
>> decide to use nuclear weapons too.
>
> Ukraine has about 125,000 troops against the attacking Russian forces of
> about 280,000 soldiers - who are equipped with better and more
> technologically advanced weapons.  So the Ukranians can't win.
>
> Their options are:
>
> - to capitulate, setting an awful precedent for the rest of Europe.
> Putin then takes over an antagonistic and unco-operative population -
> but this probably describes much of the Russian population already.
>
> - to leave - so we would see about 40 million refugees.  For Putin this
> is the ideal solution - it gives him an empty country which he can move
> into easily.
>
> - to fight to the death.  Putin could lose many thousand soldiers and
> would take over a competely trashed country - no infrastructure, just a
> pile of rubble.  He could minimise his losses by using nuclear weapons;
> and it is inconceivable that some part of the West would not respond;
> despite an general agreement not to.
>
>
> Other countries could have helped Ukraine, but it is now probably too
> late, since there is no way go get enough well equipped troops in place
> to counter a Russian attack.  But of course pre-emptive defensive aid to
> Ukraine would have been visible to Putin and could well have provoked
> him into a much earlier attack.
>
> So the question is: is there any political pressure that can be applied
> to Putin to get him to back down?  For all the strong talk, I rather
> think not.  Russia is substantially self-sufficient and can probably
> tolerate commercial pressure indefinitely - unlike Europe which is
> heavily dependent on Russian oil and gas.
>
> Environmentally, the immediate need for the world as a whole is to stop
> digging up fossil fuels.  This would mean that Russia had nowhere to
> sell its oil and gas; and it's an immediate incentive for us all to
> develop a zero-carbon world.  We should be thanking Putin!
>
> I'm 73 years old and like most in the Ukraine I will be dead soon; so I
> won't see what happens.  I might outlast Putin (69), but he will be
> replaced by somebody equally nasty.

Putin should have read here:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_shall_fight_on_the_beaches

Once the Ukrainian people have, themselves, shown that they will not
capitulate, I suspect that OUR people will demand of OUR government that
we help the Ukrainians militarily and drive the Russians from Ukraine.

I also suspect that plans are already afoot to do just that.

On 26/02/2022 08:59, Graham J wrote:
>
> So the question is: is there any political pressure that can be applied to
> Putin to get him to back down?  For all the strong talk, I rather think not.
> Russia is substantially self-sufficient and can probably tolerate commercial
> pressure indefinitely - unlike Europe which is heavily dependent on Russian
> oil and gas.

Stop ALL trade with Russia AND with any other countries who deal with them.
>
> Environmentally, the immediate need for the world as a whole is to stop
> digging up fossil fuels.  This would mean that Russia had nowhere to sell its
> oil and gas; and it's an immediate incentive for us all to develop a
> zero-carbon world.  We should be thanking Putin!
>
I just hope his troops are considering the environment...

> I'm 73 years old and like most in the Ukraine I will be dead soon; so I won't
> see what happens.  I might outlast Putin (69), but he will be replaced by
> somebody equally nasty.
>
It seems likely. Hasn't he killed all the opposition?

On 25/02/2022 21:33, TimH wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:23:07 am GMT, "Alan B"
> <alanrichardbarker@nospamgmail.com.here> wrote:
>
>> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>>
>>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>>
>> I’m not allowed to refer to BJ by his given name when my oldest son is
>> around. To use it is a form of endearment and there’s nothing endearing
>> about Boris, sorry, Johnson!
>
> Boris is only his stage name anyway. Friends and family call him Alex.
>
AKA Smart?

On 26/02/2022 08:53, Ray wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:29:30 GMT, "Liz Tuddenham" <Liz Tuddenham> wrote:
>
>> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>>
>>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> I'm trying to learn what history can teach us about a serious
>> internatinal situation,
>
> History teaches us that life for people like that seldom ends well.
>

Ends even less well for those caught up in the megalomania.

It isn't even that true, many despots and dictators have lived out a
life of luxury at the expense of those they have repressed, eg Mugabe,
the Kim dynasty, arguably Stalin, though his own paranoia caught up with
him in the end. Castro is another.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2022 09:27, David Kennedy wrote:
> On 25/02/2022 21:33, TimH wrote:
>> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:23:07 am GMT, "Alan B"
>> <alanrichardbarker@nospamgmail.com.here> wrote:
>>
>>> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>>>
>>> I’m not allowed to refer to BJ by his given name when my oldest son is
>>> around. To use it is a form of endearment and there’s nothing endearing
>>> about Boris, sorry, Johnson!
>>
>> Boris is only his stage name anyway. Friends and family call him Alex.
>>
> AKA Smart?

No one in their right mind would call Boris smart.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 25/02/2022 16:36, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
> > David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 25/02/2022 14:19, TimS wrote:
> >>> On 25 Feb 2022 at 14:16:02 GMT, David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 25/02/2022 13:54, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
> >>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 25/02/2022 12:45, Alan B wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I fear the worse for Moldova in the short term but agree any attack on
> >>>>>>> the Baltic states would mean WW3. Finland must also be concerned as
> >>>>>>> the Russians invaded them at the start of WW2 and only left in 1945.
> >>>>>>> It's inevitable that Ukraine will fall but if they can give the
> >>>>>>> Russians a very bloody nose, Putin might just think again about
> >>>>>>> further aggression.
> >>>>>>> According to the one o'clock news Putin wishes to liberate Ukraine
> >>>>>> and return it to self governance...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Once he's in they'll not get him out again you only have to look at
> >>>>>> Crimea.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If the cost to the Russian people (in money and lives) is too great,
> >>>>> they may take matters into their own hands. Remember, the majority
> >>>>> didn't vote for Putin.
> >>>>> You're tight that they didn't vote for him but then again, not many
> >>>>people voted for Hitler...
> >>>
> >>> After various elections the Nazis were the largest party.
> >>>
> >> United Russia has over 70% of the seats in the Duma.
> >
> > How many of those are actually supporters of Putin and his policies and
> > how many are there purely for their own power and will turn on him when
> > the winds change? I've heard comments about the body language of his
> > 'supporters' in his recent publicity video.
>
> What you say maybe true but, who, other than Putin is going to give them the
> same treatment?

When Putin no longer is able to give them that treatment they will turn
on him - but he needs the banking and commerce of the West to be able to
give them that treatment. That is why sanctions will eventually hurt
him more than he seems to realise; his personal money may be
invulnerable to anything we can do, but in the longer term his position
of power, and possibly his life, aren't.

--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

On 26/02/2022 08:44, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> Apparently (according to some who claim to k now him well) he has, for
>> many years, had a bee in his bonnet about putting the Soviet Union back
>> together.  Ukraine is just one more step in that process  ...but it is
>> the last step that doesn't involve a country which would bring him into
>> direct and immediate military conflict with Europe.
>>
>
> He is trying to recreate the Soviet Empire with himself as Stalin.

Russia and Belarus signed a union agreement in 1999 but here we are 20
years later and they still aren't re-united, so it can't be quite as
simple as rebuilding the USSR.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

On 26/02/2022 08:53, Ray wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:29:30 GMT, "Liz Tuddenham" <Liz Tuddenham> wrote:
>
>> Graham J <nobody@nowhere.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ... secondly the idea was straight out of
>>>>> Hitler's play book,
>>>>
>>>> There are many parallels with Hitler:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't you mean BoJo?
>>
>> No.
>>
>> I'm trying to learn what history can teach us about a serious
>> internatinal situation,
>
> History teaches us that life for people like that seldom ends well.

On the subject of ending well, Putin is 70. It's odds-on he'll be
toppled in a putsch within 10 years. And sooner as the sanctions (and
behind closed-doors whispers of support to would be replacements) start
to have their effect.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

On 26/02/2022 08:59, Graham J wrote:
> D.M. Procida wrote:
>> On 25 Feb 2022 at 10:09:15 CET, "David Kennedy"
>> <davidkennedygm@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Everyone is pussyfooting around Germany who are obstructing EU
>>>> sanctions and
>>>> the longer they do the worse it will eventually be.
>>>
>>> If only someone would blow up nordstream...
>>
>> The invasion of Ukraine is so senseless that apart from the
>> purposeless horror
>> visited upon its citizens, it seems perfectly plausible to me that
>> Putin might
>> decide to use nuclear weapons too.
>
> Ukraine has about 125,000 troops against the attacking Russian forces of
> about 280,000 soldiers - who are equipped with better and more
> technologically advanced weapons.  So the Ukranians can't win.
>
> Their options are:
>
> - to capitulate, setting an awful precedent for the rest of Europe.
> Putin then takes over an antagonistic and unco-operative population -
> but this probably describes much of the Russian population already.
>
> - to leave - so we would see about 40 million refugees.  For Putin this
> is the ideal solution - it gives him an empty country which he can move
> into easily.
>
> - to fight to the death.  Putin could lose many thousand soldiers and
> would take over a competely trashed country - no infrastructure, just a
> pile of rubble.  He could minimise his losses by using nuclear weapons;
> and it is inconceivable that some part of the West would not respond;
> despite an general agreement not to.

You forgot the option to wage an on-going guerilla war. I expect that
arms caches have been hidden all over the country. Chechnya managed
quiet a long struggle and they are a much smaller country.

> Other countries could have helped Ukraine, but it is now probably too
> late, since there is no way go get enough well equipped troops in place
> to counter a Russian attack.  But of course pre-emptive defensive aid to
> Ukraine would have been visible to Putin and could well have provoked
> him into a much earlier attack.

Ukrainian borders with Belarus and Russia are so extensive there was
never any possibility of deploying troops.

> So the question is: is there any political pressure that can be applied
> to Putin to get him to back down?  For all the strong talk, I rather
> think not.  Russia is substantially self-sufficient and can probably
> tolerate commercial pressure indefinitely - unlike Europe which is
> heavily dependent on Russian oil and gas.

Russia has declared war on Ukraine. The corollary is that Ukraine can
use acts of war in retaliation. There are plenty of large Russian cities
dependent on Russian gas served by relatively long and vulnerable
pipelines that a few acts of sabotage would put under pressure.

> Environmentally, the immediate need for the world as a whole is to stop
> digging up fossil fuels.  This would mean that Russia had nowhere to
> sell its oil and gas; and it's an immediate incentive for us all to
> develop a zero-carbon world.  We should be thanking Putin!
>
> I'm 73 years old and like most in the Ukraine I will be dead soon; so I
> won't see what happens.  I might outlast Putin (69), but he will be
> replaced by somebody equally nasty.

Putin has eliminated any popular opposition so any replacement will be
someone the Russian public has more or less never heard of. That favours
a pragmatist who can do deals - both with the oligarchs, the regional
governors and the rest of the world. Getting sanctions lifted will be a
the obvious first test and if that means leaving Ukraine then that's the
easiest bit of Putin's legacy to undo.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

On 26/02/2022 10:42, Graeme Wall wrote:
> No one in their right mind would call Boris smart.

Smarting, perhaps.

--
Bruce Horrocks
Surrey, England

Bruce Horrocks wrote:

[snip]

>> - to fight to the death.  Putin could lose many thousand soldiers and
>> would take over a competely trashed country - no infrastructure, just
>> a pile of rubble.  He could minimise his losses by using nuclear
>> weapons; and it is inconceivable that some part of the West would not
>> respond; despite a general agreement not to.
>
> You forgot the option to wage an on-going guerilla war. I expect that
> arms caches have been hidden all over the country. Chechnya managed
> quiet a long struggle and they are a much smaller country.

Ultimately it amounts to the same thing - just a longer and more
drawn-out death.

[snip]

> Russia has declared war on Ukraine. The corollary is that Ukraine can
> use acts of war in retaliation. There are plenty of large Russian cities
> dependent on Russian gas served by relatively long and vulnerable
> pipelines that a few acts of sabotage would put under pressure.

Interesting point.

[snip]

> Putin has eliminated any popular opposition so any replacement will be
> someone the Russian public has more or less never heard of. That favours
> a pragmatist who can do deals - both with the oligarchs, the regional
> governors and the rest of the world.

Not sure that follows at all - it could be somebody equally unsavoury -
depends on the support he can get from the military ...

> Getting sanctions lifted will be a
> the obvious first test and if that means leaving Ukraine then that's the
> easiest bit of Putin's legacy to undo.

It's a nice idea but don't hold your breath!

--
Graham J

On 26/02/2022 10:52, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 25/02/2022 16:36, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 25/02/2022 14:19, TimS wrote:
>>>>> On 25 Feb 2022 at 14:16:02 GMT, David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 25/02/2022 13:54, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
>>>>>>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 25/02/2022 12:45, Alan B wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I fear the worse for Moldova in the short term but agree any attack on
>>>>>>>>> the Baltic states would mean WW3. Finland must also be concerned as
>>>>>>>>> the Russians invaded them at the start of WW2 and only left in 1945.
>>>>>>>>> It's inevitable that Ukraine will fall but if they can give the
>>>>>>>>> Russians a very bloody nose, Putin might just think again about
>>>>>>>>> further aggression.
>>>>>>>>> According to the one o'clock news Putin wishes to liberate Ukraine
>>>>>>>> and return it to self governance...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once he's in they'll not get him out again you only have to look at
>>>>>>>> Crimea.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the cost to the Russian people (in money and lives) is too great,
>>>>>>> they may take matters into their own hands. Remember, the majority
>>>>>>> didn't vote for Putin.
>>>>>>> You're tight that they didn't vote for him but then again, not many
>>>>>> people voted for Hitler...
>>>>>
>>>>> After various elections the Nazis were the largest party.
>>>>>
>>>> United Russia has over 70% of the seats in the Duma.
>>>
>>> How many of those are actually supporters of Putin and his policies and
>>> how many are there purely for their own power and will turn on him when
>>> the winds change? I've heard comments about the body language of his
>>> 'supporters' in his recent publicity video.
>>
>> What you say maybe true but, who, other than Putin is going to give them the
>> same treatment?
>
> When Putin no longer is able to give them that treatment they will turn
> on him - but he needs the banking and commerce of the West to be able to
> give them that treatment. That is why sanctions will eventually hurt
> him more than he seems to realise; his personal money may be
> invulnerable to anything we can do, but in the longer term his position
> of power, and possibly his life, aren't.
>
>
Well, it looks as if they are finally going to get their fingers out and do it
by Monday. How much effect that will have it's anyone's guess. I suspect that
Putin's plan was to have Ukraine fully occupies by then.

On 26/02/2022 11:54, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
>
> On the subject of ending well, Putin is 70. It's odds-on he'll be toppled in a
> putsch within 10 years. And sooner as the sanctions (and behind closed-doors
> whispers of support to would be replacements) start to have their effect.
>

Now there's a horrible thought; another 10 years of this...

On 26/02/2022 11:48, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
> On 26/02/2022 08:44, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> Apparently (according to some who claim to k now him well) he has, for
>>> many years, had a bee in his bonnet about putting the Soviet Union back
>>> together.  Ukraine is just one more step in that process  ...but it is
>>> the last step that doesn't involve a country which would bring him into
>>> direct and immediate military conflict with Europe.
>>>
>>
>> He is trying to recreate the Soviet Empire with himself as Stalin.
>
> Russia and Belarus signed a union agreement in 1999 but here we are 20
> years later and they still aren't re-united, so it can't be quite as
> simple as rebuilding the USSR.
>

Belarus is ruled by a Putin puppet. In Soviet days the colonial states
in Eastern Europe: Poland, Czechoslavakia, Hungary, East Germany etc
were also ruled by Kremlin anointed puppets while not politically being
part of the USSR.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2022 12:22, Bruce Horrocks wrote:
> On 26/02/2022 10:42, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> No one in their right mind would call Boris smart.
>
> Smarting, perhaps.
>

Right at the moment he's breathing sighs of relief, Putin has got
partygate off the front pages.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 25/02/2022 07:37, David Kennedy wrote:
> I know this is well off topic but, as the Government don't seem to have a clue...
>
> https://chng.it/m5rQMVhrN5
>
> And my apologies for getting serious for a moment.

Star quote of the whole wretched affair came today when the Russian spokesman
when defending the fact that they are blocking the BBC said - "even your own
government tells us the BBC spread fake news..."

David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 25/02/2022 07:37, David Kennedy wrote:
>> I know this is well off topic but, as the Government don't seem to have a clue...
>>
>> https://chng.it/m5rQMVhrN5
>>
>> And my apologies for getting serious for a moment.
>
> Star quote of the whole wretched affair came today when the Russian spokesman
> when defending the fact that they are blocking the BBC said - "even your own
> government tells us the BBC spread fake news..."
>

Nothing like a bit of disinformation.

I don't know how many other subscribers to ukcsm have visited Ukraine, but
Anne and I have a very pleasant holiday there in 2006. Some of the places
we went to are now under Russian control. Brings it home rather…

John.

--
Winning isn't everything, but losing isn't anything - Snoopy.

On 04/03/2022 17:46, John Hill wrote:
> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 25/02/2022 07:37, David Kennedy wrote:
>>> I know this is well off topic but, as the Government don't seem to have a clue...
>>>
>>> https://chng.it/m5rQMVhrN5
>>>
>>> And my apologies for getting serious for a moment.
>>
>> Star quote of the whole wretched affair came today when the Russian spokesman
>> when defending the fact that they are blocking the BBC said - "even your own
>> government tells us the BBC spread fake news..."
>>
>
> Nothing like a bit of disinformation.
>
> I don't know how many other subscribers to ukcsm have visited Ukraine, but
> Anne and I have a very pleasant holiday there in 2006. Some of the places
> we went to are now under Russian control. Brings it home rather…
>
> John.
>
When you've experienced things for yourself then it becomes more personal/real.

On 4 Mar 2022 at 17:46:28 GMT, "John Hill" <yclept@outlook.com> wrote:

> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 25/02/2022 07:37, David Kennedy wrote:
>>> I know this is well off topic but, as the Government don't seem to have a
>>> clue...
>>>
>>> https://chng.it/m5rQMVhrN5
>>>
>>> And my apologies for getting serious for a moment.
>>
>> Star quote of the whole wretched affair came today when the Russian spokesman
>> when defending the fact that they are blocking the BBC said - "even your own
>> government tells us the BBC spread fake news..."
>>
>
> Nothing like a bit of disinformation.

All those troops involved are for the most part ordinary citizen conscripts.
They will all have true stories to tell when/if they get home.
Unless Putin has plans to kill them all.
Most of the people in charge of the war back in the comfort of their homes
have no military experience. Despite the impressive uniforms and medals.

--
Only in our dreams are we free. The rest of the time we need wages.
TERRY PRATCHETT

On 05/03/2022 08:32, Ray wrote:
> On 4 Mar 2022 at 17:46:28 GMT, "John Hill" <yclept@outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> David Kennedy <davidkennedygm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2022 07:37, David Kennedy wrote:
>>>> I know this is well off topic but, as the Government don't seem to have a
>>>> clue...
>>>>
>>>> https://chng.it/m5rQMVhrN5
>>>>
>>>> And my apologies for getting serious for a moment.
>>>
>>> Star quote of the whole wretched affair came today when the Russian spokesman
>>> when defending the fact that they are blocking the BBC said - "even your own
>>> government tells us the BBC spread fake news..."
>>>
>>
>> Nothing like a bit of disinformation.
>
> All those troops involved are for the most part ordinary citizen conscripts.
> They will all have true stories to tell when/if they get home.
> Unless Putin has plans to kill them all.
> Most of the people in charge of the war back in the comfort of their homes
> have no military experience. Despite the impressive uniforms and medals.
>
>
And apparently when the commanders do show up it's just to get shot. 5 this
week if my counting is correct.