US and NATO escalation of conflict with Russia is leading to war - PART 2

[Mirai]

NATO still wouldn't do it, even if it violated Ukraine airspace. They would however get anti-aircraft into position, just like they are doing with all the current "Training" operations for NATO. They are busy all over-preparing and all on standby. The French have made a large play currently.

They may very well do it. And the Russians would understand that their bombers are seen as a lethal threat and would back off.

NATO would also not fire on a plane, not over a current NATO territory that poses a significant threat. That would just confirm that NATO is now involved and it would trigger a response in a head-on collision of NATO vs Russia.

I think many people misunderstand NATO, they are a giant deterrent more than an actual response team. They will not be the ones to ever start the conflict or war. That is why there is such a slow process to helping Ukraine because any direct conflict between the countries of NATO and Russia will trigger many articles like article 5.

We understand NATO very well and we use NATO as shorthand.

 

[Mystic Twilight]

But are they all getting paid to fight ?

No idea, as far as I'm aware and under correction, there is no evidence that they are getting paid and equally there is no evidence they are not getting paid.

 

[rietrot]

A situation that can change very quickly.

If NATO gets involved. But then everything changes.

 

[Mirai]

Mercenaries should be shot on the spot - no POW rules.

They're official Ukrainian army and the international law does allow for third party citizens to enlist in the military of a nation. Shooting them on the spot would be a warcrime and those who did it or ordered it would have to be handed over by the Russian Federation before it was able to resume its participation in the Western world it so wants to be a part of.

 

[ghostRgg]

They may very well do it. And the Russians would understand that their bombers are seen as a lethal threat and would back off.

They won't because that's well... NATO! I will keep using it because I am too lazy to mention every country that is currently involved.

Doing so would literally give Putin what he wants in terms of declaring WAR. He can then churn that into getting more people in Russia to believe it is a just cause.

Nobody wants to be the reason WW3 starts, so that is why currently they are allowing Ukraine to be invaded and not directly helping them out. The moment NATO gets directly involved, it's a whole other ball game of war.

 

[daveza]

Slow from the ground sure. At their actual speed at bombing height nowadays? Fast as faaaaaaaaaaa

Only proper ground-to-air missiles, you aren't going to takeout any of the major bombers with a stinger.

Ukraine only have stingers and can only hit low flying aircraft.

What about the stuff the Ukrainians have captured from the Russians ?

 

[LetsDance]

Well, take them to the ICC - the USA laughs themselves silly over the power it has

 

[Mirai]

They won't because that's well... NATO! I will keep using it because I am too lazy to mention every country that is currently involved.

Well if you say so Mr Biden.

Doing so would literally give Putin what he wants in terms of declaring WAR. He can then churn that into getting more people in Russia to believe it is a just cause.

No it wouldn't. The Russians are not stupid and know the situation is tense and nuclear capable bombers flying sorties near NATO territory would be very problematic. They're not you.

 

[Mirai]

Well, take them to the ICC - the USA laughs themselves silly over the power it has

Milosovic and a bunch of other Serbs and so on also... laughed. They had full Russian protection too.

 

[Mystic Twilight]

A situation that can change very quickly.

But not that quickly, you can't hand over and transport a SAM system like a stinger in wooden boxes on the back of a bakkie. But capturing and using the russian left behind SAM systems, that's a different story.

 

[thestaggy]

I was also interested to know so did some digging a while ago. The numbers are exaggerated. Even in the movie the Spartans were backed up by about 3000 troops from other regions. Also Leonidas forced Xerxes to fight along a narrow coastline which gave them an edge (lol). From what I have gathered the waterline here ran a lot higher up but due to coastlines altering the beach is now much further away and so Xerxes was forced to fight in a narrow strip between the coastline and the cliffs. Xerxes did not have a million more like 10000 give or take? The Spartans also narrowed it even further by building obstacles like stone walls to split Xerxes' army up.

I've read as much as 7000 allied Greek forces, excluding retainers (people carrying weapons, supplies, foraging etc. ) on the Spartan side.

Persia had a huge army, but most modern historians put it at 150,000 to 300,000. In battle, owing to the terrain as you mentioned, Xerxes was likely only capable of committing 10,000 troops at a time in unfavorable attacks.

 

[Ragnarök]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501948580596117509

 

[daveza]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501948580596117509

I'm not a violent person, but I want to slap this woman every time I see her face,

 

[The Trutherizer]

If NATO gets involved. But then everything changes.

Well if a Tupolev Tu-160 rocks up, then it would be a significant escalation by Russia to start with.

 

[daveza]

The Daily Mail does really tell very big porkies.

Cherno held by Russians who have 'NO CLUE about nuclear security'

Natalia Ruemmele has warned that staffers who usually work 12 hour shifts have been maintaining the nuclear plant at gunpoint for more than two weeks since Russian forces seized control of the site.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[LetsDance]

I'm not a violent person, but I want to slap this woman every time I see her face,

I would conscript that thing into the army as a bare foot mine sweeper.

 

[Grant]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1501948580596117509

Ai ya ya
2 yrs later and the crazed woman has yet to change her top or brush her hair.!!

 

[Nicodeamus]

Chris Hedges: Worthy & Unworthy Victims


The life of a Palestinian or an Iraqi child is as precious as the life of a Ukrainian child. No one should live in fear and terror. No one should be sacrificed on the altar of Mars.

Rulers divide the world into worthy and unworthy victims, those we are allowed to pity, such as Ukrainians enduring the hell of modern warfare, and those whose suffering is minimized, dismissed, or ignored. The terror we and our allies carry out against Iraqi, Palestinian, Syrian, Libyan, Somali and Yemeni civilians is part of the regrettable cost of war. We, echoing the empty promises from Moscow, claim we do not target civilians. Rulers always paint their militaries as humane, there to serve and protect. Collateral damage happens, but it is regrettable.

This lie can only be sustained among those who are unfamiliar with the explosive ordinance and large kill zones of missiles, iron fragmentation bombs, mortar, artillery and tank shells, and belt-fed machine guns. This bifurcation into worthy and unworthy victims, as Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky point out in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media, is a key component of propaganda, especially in war. The Russian-speaking population in Ukraine, to Moscow, are worthy victims. Russia is their savior: the resistance are unworthy “Nazis.” [Ed.: part of that resistance incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard under the Interior Ministry are the self-described neo-Nazi Azov Battalion.

Worthy victims allow citizens to see themselves as empathetic, compassionate, and just. Worthy victims are an effective tool to demonize the aggressor. They are used to obliterate nuance and ambiguity. Mention the provocations carried out by the western alliance with the expansion of NATO beyond the borders of a unified Germany, a violation of promises made to Moscow in 1990; the stationing of NATO troops and missile batteries in Eastern Europe; the U.S. involvement in the ouster in 2014 of Ukraine President Viktor Yanukovych, which led to the civil war in the east of Ukraine between Russian-backed separatists and Ukraine’s army, a conflict that has claimed tens of thousands of lives, and you are dismissed as a Putin apologist.

It is to taint the sainthood of the worthy victims, and by extension ourselves. We are good. They are evil. Worthy victims are used not only to express sanctimonious outrage, but to stoke self-adulation and a poisonous nationalism. The cause becomes sacred, a religious crusade. Fact-based evidence is abandoned, as it was during the calls to invade Iraq. Charlatans, liars, con artists, fake defectors, and opportunists become experts, used to fuel the conflict.

Chris Hedges: Worthy & Unworthy Victims

The life of a Palestinian or an Iraqi child is as precious as the life of a Ukrainian child. No one should live in fear and terror. No one should be sacrificed on the altar of Mars. By Chris Hedges ScheerPost.com Rulers divide the world into worthy and unworthy victims, those we are allow

consortiumnews.com

@Cray on how your empathy is weaponised,

 

[Unhappy438]

Ukraine only have stingers and can only hit low flying aircraft.

Fake, they have s-300 , tor, buk and now pantsir thanks to farmers.

 

[daveza]

But I'd slap this one first.



Now, back to the war.