USA is ready to send troops in Ukraine against Russia next week?

a reply to: rickymouse

It wasn't the Iraqi soldiers that were the problem, but their Officers who had all been replaced by Malaki to favour his Shia buddies. Take Mosul for example, an entire Iraqi Army Division was based there, but the night before IS attacked the city, the entire Command staff of the Division fled. This obviously had an affect on moral and the Iraqi soldiers downed their weapons and ran.

Now, the Iraqi Government has brought back the old generals (the US trained ones) who know what their doing and they are fighting back. Any army who's officers desert the field is likely to collapse, even the US or UK army.

a reply to: crazyewok

So it wasn't sanctioned by the UN, even though UNSC resolution 1441 actually did sanction military action if Saddam didn't co-operate with weapons inspectors, which he didn't? Funny logic there, Crazy.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky
This thread is awesome! Mix Russia / Ukraine mumbojumbo with a healthy dose of world conspiracy and a dash of crazy Greek prophecies! Of course some references to Vietnam popped up spontaneously with the following obligatory MAD discussion.

I wonder where this thread will end!

This.

If you honestly believe that Ukraine is worth ending the world over to Russia then ATS is the perfect place for you.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: crazyewok

Ukraine's economy may be struggling, but is that alone the impetus to throw our collective hands up and abandon them to be overrun by Russian forces and taken back into a reforming Soviet Union? What about when Russia goes after other non-nuclear states, when do we say enough is enough?

so you would risk the world?

Apart from Belarus I dont see what other states then can move into.


Plus countrys rise and fall all the time in Africa. Where you keenness to intervene there?

a reply to: stumason
He was complying with weapon inspectors Stu,I clearly remember them saying that on TV before the pathetic shock and awe campaign started and whole battalions saw their life vaporise instantly from daisy cutters long before they had chance to flee



NATO with American troops have been training in Ukraine for some time now,even with the blessing of the ousted president (had to get on topic!) nothing new here apart from the higher numbers:-/

As long as they don't train them near the front line and mission creep takes this one stage further

a reply to: crazyewok

They've already started stirring the pot in Estonia and Lithuania, for example, which is why NATO made it quite clear that the sneaky covert support for "rebels" as they did in Ukraine will be construed as an Article 5 situation should they try it.

As for Africa, not sure of it's relevance here, Crazy. I can't think of one example in the last 20 years of one African country invading and annexing land off another, except maybe the long running Eritrea/Ethiopia argument over the delineation of the border but that is a situation where Eritrea declared independence from Ethiopia. Sure, they all stir the pot with their neighbors along tribal lines, but taking whole lumps of a sovereign nation?

a reply to: stumason

Russia are just posturing with the Baltic states..

They would not dare cross over EU or NATO lines.

Im as anti war as you can get and that would be a big fat red line for even me.

All hell would break lose and they know that. Putin might be many things but he is not stupid.

And im 100% all for sending UK troops to the Baltic and Poland today to send a clear message. Its just a shame we barely have anything to send.

Only cowards sit back and allow bullies to succeed, all while under the pretense of keeping the peace. Problem is that the bullies never seem to be satisfied. They inevitably take more and more.
Eventually they will be at your borders.... Where will your pacifism be then, and what good will it have served.
Thousands and more will have died, all because you were all to afraid of disturbing the monsters he carried in his silos, transports and subs.

Better to stop the bullies in their tracks. Chances are he will threaten to use his monsters, but knows his destruction is assured if he does. He won't and I for one, am ready to cover that bet with my life.

a reply to: Whereismypassword

He was in a manner of speaking, but Iraq dragged their feet providing technical data for proscribed weapons (missile system exceeding 150Km for example) and many people requested to be interviewed simply refused - in Iraq at the time, Saddam could have simply forced them, but they did not. They also found a number of chemical weapons (shells, ingredients etc) related items which Iraq had not declared and when prompted, Iraq was slow to non-responsive when asked to provide information on any other such surprises. Iraq also tried to attach conditions to inspectors activities and while they appeared to want to cooperate, practically they were making life difficult for Mr Blix.

Now, like I said earlier, it was a trumped up charge and also difficult for Iraq to prove a negative, but they certainly didn't make life easier for themselves by simply complying 100%, which they did not. It was reported at the time that Saddam seriously doubted any military action was to take place and it was only on the eve of such action, Iraq became increasingly compliant with the inspectors, but they had already given the US enough of the run around to allow the excuse of WMD to fly, so it was too little too late. Saddam should have taken the last gasp chance he was given and stepped down, which would have been enough for the US not to take action, but again he doubted their seriousness.

a reply to: crazyewok

It only takes one low-ranking muppet to exceed his remit, or even an officially sanctioned mission to go wrong and it all blows up. Russia should cease with the posturing altogether as doing so only makes itchy trigger fingers even itchier.

Worse, Russian speaking people in those countries are already posturing along the lines of "being discriminated" and may themselves start to take action outside of Moscow's control, which could be construed by NATO as having been instigated by Russia as they have done in the Ukraine which will only send things further south.

Problem is, they've been caught lying (and even admitted as much several times - most recently on Russian state TV about Crimea) so even if they told the truth about any such uprising that may be started by Russians in NATO states (that they didn't instigate it), no one will believe them.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: crazyewok

It only takes one low-ranking muppet to exceed his remit, or even an officially sanctioned mission to go wrong and it all blows up. Russia should cease with the posturing altogether as doing so only makes itchy trigger fingers even itchier.

Worse, Russian speaking people in those countries are already posturing along the lines of "being discriminated" and may themselves start to take action outside of Moscow's control, which could be construed by NATO as having been instigated by Russia as they have done in the Ukraine which will only send things further south.

Problem is, they've been caught lying (and even admitted as much several times - most recently on Russian state TV about Crimea) so even if they told the truth about any such uprising that may be started by Russians in NATO states (that they didn't instigate it), no one will believe them.

Just a question what would you do then?


Sure im all for more economic sanctions.

I would happily turf every single Russian oligarch out of London my self.


But I draw the line at military action in Ukraine.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: crazyewok

Ukraine's economy may be struggling, but is that alone the impetus to throw our collective hands up and abandon them to be overrun by Russian forces and taken back into a reforming Soviet Union? What about when Russia goes after other non-nuclear states, when do we say enough is enough?

What would you do then?

originally posted by: crazyewok
Sure im all for more economic sanctions.
I would happily turf every single Russian oligarch out of London my self.
But I draw the line at military action in Ukraine.

As soon as you draw that line you have lost Ukraine. The dictator moves in, takes it and says F U. After that he takes another part of a country. Then again. Until you take away the 'line' you drew and say you will fight to stop him. History makes this fact very clear.

Unless you think Putin is like Ghandi...then I guess we should keep talking to him.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: crazyewok

Ukraine's economy may be struggling, but is that alone the impetus to throw our collective hands up and abandon them to be overrun by Russian forces and taken back into a reforming Soviet Union? What about when Russia goes after other non-nuclear states, when do we say enough is enough?

What would you do then?

I don't pretend to have a viable solution, I'm not part of a highly-paid political think-tank nor am I a military adviser. But letting Russia do as it pleases with Ukraine is patently wrong, I know that much.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: crazyewok
Sure im all for more economic sanctions.
I would happily turf every single Russian oligarch out of London my self.
But I draw the line at military action in Ukraine.

As soon as you draw that line you have lost Ukraine. The dictator moves in, takes it and says F U. After that he takes another part of a country. Then again. Until you take away the 'line' you drew and say you will fight to stop him. History makes this fact very clear.

Unless you think Putin is like Ghandi...then I guess we should keep talking to him.

And if you send the military in then what?

WW3 and and you dont just lose Ukraine, we are all DEAD.

So what would you do? Start WW3?

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: crazyewok

Ukraine's economy may be struggling, but is that alone the impetus to throw our collective hands up and abandon them to be overrun by Russian forces and taken back into a reforming Soviet Union? What about when Russia goes after other non-nuclear states, when do we say enough is enough?

What would you do then?

I don't pretend to have a viable solution, I'm not part of a highly-paid political think-tank nor am I a military adviser. But letting Russia do as it pleases with Ukraine is patently wrong, I know that much.

And military action is suicide I know that much too.

originally posted by: crazyewok
And if you send the military in then what?
WW3 and and you dont just lose Ukraine, we are all DEAD.
So what would you do? Start WW3?

A conventional war in Ukraine between Russia and the US does NOT automatically lead to a nuclear exchange. I know it's difficult to believe from underneath the desk you've been taught to hide under when the bomb is coming...but it's true.

originally posted by: noeltrotsky

originally posted by: crazyewok
And if you send the military in then what?
WW3 and and you dont just lose Ukraine, we are all DEAD.
So what would you do? Start WW3?

A conventional war in Ukraine between Russia and the US does NOT automatically lead to a nuclear exchange. I know it's difficult to believe from underneath the desk you've been taught to hide under when the bomb is coming...but it's true.

O get real.

NATO goes in to Ukrainian and Russia would withdraw behind there border as they would not stand a chance conventionally.
And they would then launch forays from behind that border and missiles so then what?
You would have to then CROSS in to actual Russian to take those units out and that is when it will escalate.

a reply to: crazyewok

Not all military intervention is a slippery slope that inevitably leads to Nuclear War.

The fearmongering and constant not-so-subtle reminders by Russia that they are nuclear armed is doing a bangup job of cowing you into doing nothing, which is exactly what they want.

Do I think Military intervention is the only way forward? Certainly not. I think if Russia and West could come to some sort of agreement and actually STAND BY that agreement that would be great. The trouble is no power wants to give in to ANYTHING and risk losing face.

300 or 600 does it really matter ? How many kids are in one school, where i live 500. So sending amount of one school´s pupils to Ukraine doesn´t mean WAR it means training. Keep the perspective !