It's obviously both overt and covert.
Are Russia preparing for WW3?
- Thread starter MoBeats
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
That's the reality of war now and why a "conventional" WW3 will never happen. If Russia escalated their position beyond all this posturing and the US retaliated with a full blown war, they have the capabilities to cripple Russia in a very short time. Tactical strikes on key Oil lines would cripple their economy pretty quickly.
You're doing it again. Just to get that straight: You were absolutely serious about that ridiculous Hitler/Putin comparison graphic you posted in the Ukraine thread, right?
No, it's just plain stupid.
@Pexbo, if God forbid, there was a direct military conflict between Russia and US it would never be about bombing key oil lines. It would be about ballistic missiles. Either luckily or unluckily the weapons are so advanced today and both countries have nukes, so I do not see any direct conflict between any of EU, US, Russia, China anytime soon.
Today's world is about geopolitical interests, Syria being the primary example, unfortunately.
It is just PR/election talk. The Democratic Party adopted all the cold-warrior language and after all the stuff in Syria (+linking Trump to Putin), they need to appear tough. Quite pathetic that it works. Whatever happens behind closed doors would have happened anyway.
Being Russian I can imagine why.
What is that supposed to mean?
The drum beats of war.
preparing the population for when we send troops in. There is no reason for the Russians to go to war with us.
Keep talking to them. Give them something. They want their area of influence like we do.
preparing the population for when we send troops in. There is no reason for the Russians to go to war with us.
Keep talking to them. Give them something. They want their area of influence like we do.
Sorry , I was on the mobile. It means I would not want to be living in a place on the receiving end of a cyber attack. It would suck to have the likes of Government services and private financial services interrupted. The fact that this is public is entirely intentional as it is already causing a bit of panic and you can bet that once the narrative that Russian hackers (working with Intelligence services) was established, that the US would go public that it will respond so that when a repsonse happens, observers will deductive know who did it and why, despite any vague unbelievable denials from the US government. See the attack on North Korea after the Sony pictures hack as an example.
Yeah I'm talking about the hypothetical scenario that it did come to an actual war. Aside from the "tit for tat" of striking each other's cities and targeting key military bases and intelligence hubs, Russia have a huge weakness in that you can literally cripple their economy by striking key sections of their oil network.
70% of their economy is based on exporting oil, if you hit that hard, they couldn't afford anything prolonged.
If it ever came to a full scale war, protecting the oil network wouldn't be high on the list of priorities because I doubt any of us would last long enough to care or for that to become an issue.
And realistically the chances of a conventional war are nearly as low as a nuclear one, since a conventional conflict would obviously spill over to nukes very quickly. Economics and Cyber it is.
I doubt it would have reached the point of targeting the oil transportation lines. Firstly, the lines go to EU. Gas pipelines to China. Targeting those would have hit EU and China first. Moreover, at the time of war, I doubt that Russia would still be selling anything abroad. A direct war conflict between the major powers would end in a matter of hours maybe days followed by a doomsday. That is exactly why, there was no single shot made towards Russia after the Crimea and Donbass events. Likewise, Russia did not do anything of note when Gaddafi and Saddam were killed or when Yanukovich was overthrown. It is just too risky to go into direct confrontation, as the consequences will feck the whole planet.
How can we get to "none it is"?
Once Putin leaves and a proper statesman rises to power.
In the meantime....more sanctions on the horizon.
https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN12F0PM?client=safari
https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN12F0PM?client=safari
These sanctions caused problems not only to Russia but also to major EU companies which were working in Russia. What does hit the economy badly is the low oil prices.
And yet it is European states that are leading the charge to intensify them. Europeans, through their elected representatives, must therefore really be pissed about Putin's agitations in Syria and Ukraine.
Be careful what you wish for. In the current climate Putin can only be replaced by a more anti-West politician than himself.
The European states have no voice, they're US puppets. But it's going to change at some point.
Not so sure about this. Looks like just trying to get points before upcoming elections. Anyways, not sure the sanctions will cause any significant harm. Well, US are no angels in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East for that matter.
Realistically, with oil set to stay in the 40-60 range for the foreseeable future and Putin's endless spending of money on foreign wars at a time when his own economy is in tatters, it is more likely that both of these factors will gradually squeeze Putin out over time than any external war. He is basically in a self-inflicted death spiral that can't be stopped until he's gone. All the foreign wars, economic coercion on Ukraine and others, cyber attacks etc are just a way for him to securitize his public into supporting him for a bit longer. There will come a point in the coming years when quality of life inside Russia plummets so far that more external wars and propaganda fueled fear mongering will no longer work, at which point his days in office will be few.
And this brings the point of max. danger - when Putin will be tempted into far more aggressive foreign adventures - a full-scale invasion of Ukraine for example - to stir up Russian patriotism to the max.
Agreed. If it happens it will be one of the most transformative moments in International Politics this side of Y2K.
Why does every discussion about Russia with you lot end up being about how the US is worse? How about defending Russia on its own merits?
Was going to ask the same question. Instead of discussing what is indeed going on in the world which makes you think that Russia is prepare for World War III, you lot start talking about Putin the Devil, totally ignoring what has happened recently in the region. Then you switch to USA is superior to Russia when it comes to weapons, the corrupted Putin, then Putin in Chechnya.
To avoid all this, I will try to draw a line to make discussions a tad more productive:
Firstly, I do not think that Russia is preparing for WWIII.
Secondly, the conflict in Syria is just a chessboard for US/NATO and Russia. Each party is defending its interests. The main aim of Russia is to keep its only military base outside of the former USSR, the US/NATO have their own interests. Unfortunately, nobody gives a feck about Syrian people.
Thirdly, having seen what has happened in Afghanistan, Iraq, I do not think that the removal of Assad's regime will create any better conditions for the people of Syria. I can not see any positive thing for the people of the above mentioned countries. They have no government that is able to rule the country, they are divided, infrastructure is ruined, no even basic housing conditions available and extremism is on the rise there.
Finally, I do not see another World War happening soon, but I do believe that something more will happen in the Middle East.
God save us all from the evil of the evil politicians. We live on the same planet, and if something significant happens, there won't be an escape for any of us.
@Water Melon I think your third point is very important and it's one I'm at odds with probably most Americans.
It's clear the 'democracy building' program by the US has failed in the Middle East. And some talk as though toppling Assad is as simple as Football Manager. It's not. I believe he is a horrible person who has overseen multiple atrocities, but if you replace him you're talking about replacing an entire bureaucracy (and all that ties with it) which many fail to understand the implications of.
It's clear the 'democracy building' program by the US has failed in the Middle East. And some talk as though toppling Assad is as simple as Football Manager. It's not. I believe he is a horrible person who has overseen multiple atrocities, but if you replace him you're talking about replacing an entire bureaucracy (and all that ties with it) which many fail to understand the implications of.
newsflash.
There is no democracy building. Its 'business'..nothing personal.
There is no democracy building. Its 'business'..nothing personal.
These x 100. It is a shame that we live in a world of poverty, inequality, corruption, where money still makes the world go round. The saddest thing is that this all has always been the same.
Russia Today bank accounts 'frozen in UK'
Natwest bank has frozen the accounts of state-run broadcaster Russia Today (RT), its editor-in-chief says.
Margarita Simonyan tweeted: "They've closed our accounts in Britain. All our accounts. 'The decision is not subject to review.' Praise be to freedom of speech!"
RT says the bank gave no explanation for its decision.
It said the entire Royal Bank of Scotland Group, of which NatWest is part, is refusing to service RT.
The Kremlin-run news channel has previously been sanctioned by Ofcom for biased reporting.
This included claims that the BBC "staged" a chemical weapons attack for a news report on Syria.
Natwest bank has frozen the accounts of state-run broadcaster Russia Today (RT), its editor-in-chief says.
Margarita Simonyan tweeted: "They've closed our accounts in Britain. All our accounts. 'The decision is not subject to review.' Praise be to freedom of speech!"
RT says the bank gave no explanation for its decision.
It said the entire Royal Bank of Scotland Group, of which NatWest is part, is refusing to service RT.
The Kremlin-run news channel has previously been sanctioned by Ofcom for biased reporting.
This included claims that the BBC "staged" a chemical weapons attack for a news report on Syria.
Russia Today is the news organisation that claimed that the BBC "staged" a chemical weapons attack for a news report on Syria.
and the organisation Corbyn claims are "more objective than most"
in fact here is on Russia today forgetting to mention all about the BBC staging stuff
Last edited:
He's right. It's obviously a mouth piece for the Russian government but its a refreshing buffer to the Murdoch-led gutter 'journalism' we have here.
Since the naval base is worth feck all to Russia, it's not what Russia is interested in. It's interested in keeping the refugees coming and destabilizing the region for it's own gain.
Except its not worth feck all, it's Russia's only military base in a region dominated by US puppet states and allies, so it's a pretty big deal.
I can't say I am a fan of RT but it's definitely laughable that people dismiss their integrity so easily while reading and posting articles from newspapers owned by Murdoch, Harmsworth and Desmond.
The base hasn't been operational since the fall of the soviet union. So apart from some symbolic value, it's completely worthless. Even if it was operational, it's actual capabilities are rather small, it would need a major overhaul and also, enlargment.
Even if that were true (which it isn't), its still completely pointless. Russia and the US aren't involved in some sort of naval swinging dick contest in the Mediterranean.