Ukraine Making Significant Gains in Eastern Counter-Offensive

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: IAMTAT

The US is quite a lot bigger than the UK so of course not.

We sure are doing our bit.

www.statista.com...

If the US suddenly stopped funding Ukraine would you be okay with the UK making up the difference?
IOW...how many more billions to Ukraine would you still be okay with the UK spending...before you said "enough"?
Another £20b? £30b? £50b?
Is there a limit?

Just curious...because Ukraine seems to be a financial bottomless pit.

Well, we took $300b in russian gold as a result of their invasion, so my limit would be somewhere over $300b.


Say $300b plus the additional expected cost of defending NATO countries as a result of allowing russia to take Ukraine.

That puts it square in the $1 trillion range, as a floor.




So we've barely started.

originally posted by: MidnightWatcher

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: IAMTAT

The US is quite a lot bigger than the UK so of course not.

We sure are doing our bit.

www.statista.com...

If the US suddenly stopped funding Ukraine would you be okay with the UK making up the difference?
IOW...how many more billions to Ukraine would you still be okay with the UK spending...before you said "enough"?
Another £20b? £30b? £50b?
Is there a limit?

Just curious...because Ukraine seems to be a financial bottomless pit.

Well, we took $300b in russian gold as a result of their invasion, so my limit would be somewhere over $300b.

Now, at least HERE is an actual answer.
Thank you.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Any chance of an actual answer to my questions?

Or is it only a one way thing?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: IAMTAT

Any chance of an actual answer to my questions?

Or is it only a one way thing?

You haven't earned it...but I'll indulge you.
Your question:

Just curious, if Putin starts using tactical nukes, what do you think the West should do about it?

My answer:

NOT nuke Russia in retaliation.
It would be Ukraine's job to respond...if it can't; it can't.

Game Over...and Russia will have to live with even more shame and world condemnation.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Respect needs to be earned.


Sick of you putting words in my mouth which I never said.


Get off your high horse.

Obviously not nuke Russia.

But question was, what you gonna do?

If that wasn't a too difficult question for you?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Reading is fundamental.
Try it.

As I said...when and if Russia decides to use nukes in Ukraine...tactical or otherwise...it's GAME OVER.
Russia wins...as Ukraine can't respond in kind.

Nukes, when used, are always 'Game Over'...especially when only one side has them to use.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Yawn.

I can read, ta.


I asked how the West should respond. Like NATO?

Did you not read that?


Anyway, tired of responding to a snarkey keyboard warrior.



Carry on licking Putin's boots.

a reply to: IAMTAT

NATO has them, FFS?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: IAMTAT

NATO has them, FFS?

Yes. NATO has nukes.
So what?

Are you suggesting NATO should nuke Russia?
Are you suggesting NATO should give nukes to Ukraine to nuke Russia?

I hope not.
BOTH ideas are stupid as #!

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Reading is fundamental.
Try it.

As I said...when and if Russia decides to use nukes in Ukraine...tactical or otherwise...it's GAME OVER.
Russia wins...as Ukraine can't respond in kind.

Nukes, when used, are always 'Game Over'...especially when only one side has them to use.

Putin won't nuke Kyiv. Firstly it would be a tacit admission that he'd lost the war. Secondly his generals would not obey that order - they're incompetent, not insane. No-one's used a nuke in warfare since 1945. Putler would only press the button if he had no other choice, like if Moscow was about to be attacked by Ukrainian armed forces.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Reading is fundamental.
Try it.

As I said...when and if Russia decides to use nukes in Ukraine...tactical or otherwise...it's GAME OVER.
Russia wins...as Ukraine can't respond in kind.

Nukes, when used, are always 'Game Over'...especially when only one side has them to use.

Putin won't nuke Kyiv. Firstly it would be a tacit admission that he'd lost the war. Secondly his generals would not obey that order - they're incompetent, not insane. No-one's used a nuke in warfare since 1945. Putler would only press the button if he had no other choice, like if Moscow was about to be attacked by Ukrainian armed forces.

Agreed.

I hope Ukraine manage to win this as well but as you say, that money could have been used to help so many other issues in the US, water quality in some states being a mass issue.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Stu112
Americans - how do you feel about your tax dollars going to a war that apparently your not involved in?

Hope Ukraine kicks Russia out...glad we're not fighting there...but unhappy we spent so much $$$.
It's needed here...No more $$$ to Ukraine.
There has to be a financial limit...and it's been reached and surpassed IMO.

We've given Ukraine over $50b...perhaps actually TWICE that.

If they can't win with all that...it's not the US's fault.

originally posted by: Stu112
I hope Ukraine manage to win this as well but as you say, that money could have been used to help so many other issues in the US, water quality in some states being a mass issue.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Stu112
Americans - how do you feel about your tax dollars going to a war that apparently your not involved in?

Hope Ukraine kicks Russia out...glad we're not fighting there...but unhappy we spent so much $$$.
It's needed here...No more $$$ to Ukraine.
There has to be a financial limit...and it's been reached and surpassed IMO.

We've given Ukraine over $50b...perhaps actually TWICE that.

If they can't win with all that...it's not the US's fault.

I think of it like this... if no one did anything to help Ukraine, and ruZZia took it in the first month or so... what would be next for ruZZia? Who would be next in their sights? (and given their media, they definitely appear to have ideas about a pan Europe USSR).

Thats why, even sure though its gonna hurt us in the back pocket, its something we all have to endure... letting ruZZia even taking an inch and feeling like they got away with it like they did in 2014 would be tantamount to a global disaster, because they wouldn't just stop at the Ukraine. 10 years latter they'd just grab another piece, and another, and another...

Better to make the stand now, for the sake of all of us even if it costs what in some minds is to much in terms of tax payers money, better to finally call putler and ruZZia out on its BS now than find it much worse in the future... id say thats a decent investment long term.

And hey im someone that if in charge all military spending would be stripped down big time and used for civil projects and social systems... unfortunately, im not in charge nor do I live in a world id like too. Its a bitter pill, but one thats gotta be swallowed.

a reply to: Stu112

I agree water quality is a problem.

But not sure it is a reason to not support Ukraine. The quality of water has been a problem for what, decades? Truth is, we should have gotten serious about that long ago. I remember "Love Canal" and the media feeding frenzy that went along with it. But did the media or the government take the obvious lessons and start looking at cleaning up the water nationwide?

And yes, a lot of money has been misspent.

Cheers

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Putin won't nuke Kyiv. Firstly it would be a tacit admission that he'd lost the war. Secondly his generals would not obey that order - they're incompetent, not insane. No-one's used a nuke in warfare since 1945. Putler would only press the button if he had no other choice, like if Moscow was about to be attacked by Ukrainian armed forces

That's my take on it as well.....but there's a lingering doubt in my mind.
Putin is an egotistical megalomaniac, I don't trust him.
And he's fanatical about his belief in a Greater Russia and his desire for personal Greatness.....a volatile mixture.

My faith in Russian Generals refusing to carry out such an order has diminished somewhat with their blind acceptance of Putin's invasion. They are actively complicit in the continuance of this most needless and senseless war.

Honestly think if they took Ukraine that would be the end of it.

China meanwhile will be prepping themselves for their next moves as no one is watching.

originally posted by: BigfootNZ

originally posted by: Stu112
I hope Ukraine manage to win this as well but as you say, that money could have been used to help so many other issues in the US, water quality in some states being a mass issue.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Stu112
Americans - how do you feel about your tax dollars going to a war that apparently your not involved in?

Hope Ukraine kicks Russia out...glad we're not fighting there...but unhappy we spent so much $$$.
It's needed here...No more $$$ to Ukraine.
There has to be a financial limit...and it's been reached and surpassed IMO.

We've given Ukraine over $50b...perhaps actually TWICE that.

If they can't win with all that...it's not the US's fault.

I think of it like this... if no one did anything to help Ukraine, and ruZZia took it in the first month or so... what would be next for ruZZia? Who would be next in their sights? (and given their media, they definitely appear to have ideas about a pan Europe USSR).

Thats why, even sure though its gonna hurt us in the back pocket, its something we all have to endure... letting ruZZia even taking an inch and feeling like they got away with it like they did in 2014 would be tantamount to a global disaster, because they wouldn't just stop at the Ukraine. 10 years latter they'd just grab another piece, and another, and another...

Better to make the stand now, for the sake of all of us even if it costs what in some minds is to much in terms of tax payers money, better to finally call putler and ruZZia out on its BS now than find it much worse in the future... id say thats a decent investment long term.

And hey im someone that if in charge all military spending would be stripped down big time and used for civil projects and social systems... unfortunately, im not in charge nor do I live in a world id like too. Its a bitter pill, but one thats gotta be swallowed.

a reply to: IAMTAT

I'm not suggesting either of those things.

I asked you how the West should respond.

Are you suggesting it should do nothing?

I'm not suggesting responding with Nukes.

I'm just asking how the West should respond. So far, you have not come up with anything.

Should we just do nothing? To my mind that would encourage Putin.

Who would be his next target?

Appeasement of dictators hasn't ended well, as history tells us.

Are you trying to derail this thread, or what?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: IAMTAT

I'm not suggesting either of those things.

I asked you how the West should respond.

Are you suggesting it should do nothing?

I'm not suggesting responding with Nukes.

I'm just asking how the West should respond. So far, you have not come up with anything.

Should we just do nothing? To my mind that would encourage Putin.

Who would be his next target?

Appeasement of dictators hasn't ended well, as history tells us.

Are you trying to derail this thread, or what?

Derail? No.
Remember...YOU asked ME the question.
I answered it...twice.

Now three times:

You asked me what NATO/The West/me personally...any of us...should do if Russia uses nukes on Ukraine.

I said (very clearly to you)...It's "GAME OVER" if that happens.
Russia wins.
Ukraine can't retaliate in kind...so Ukraine unconditionally surrenders (Remember Japan?).

NATO/The West/you and me...can do nothing militarily to respond.

The West...and the rest of the world can continue to make Russia an international pariah...and Russia will have to wallow in it's shame...but as far as the war between Russia and Ukraine is concerned...NUKES always mean GAME OVER.

a reply to: IAMTAT

No need to shout. I'm not deaf.

So, do nothing then?

Where next then for Putin?

Did I say "militarily"?

Anything to add about the thread topic?

a reply to: IAMTAT

How about commenting on this, for instance?

www.bbc.co.uk...

Putin failing in his objectives.