Ukraine declares martial law after Russia fires on and seizes warships

Wow, you complain about my punctuation look at yours,you dont even make any sense putinbot and they pay you lol!!

Appeasement has never worked. If Russia is allowed to bully & annex neighbouring states, they will do, as will China( already annexed Tibet, South China sea & courting many nations with their economic powers), as will any dictator anywhere in the world who sees they can get away with it. It’s up to the freedom loving nations to stand up to it before the world goes to pot. Having allies like Saudi Arabia doen’t help our cause.

That’s a terrible idea. Imagine if we’d said the same thing in 1939 when Germany invaded Poland.

If us, the US and others had said the same thing about Islamic State when they began their campaign in Iraq and Syria, IS would have taken Baghdad by now.

As others have said, appeasement or just ignoring it because we’re ok is just kicking the can down the road and making it worse for later.

wish you have the same message!!

Russia respects strength, your quite right there, but Europe has been on a binge of demilitarisation since humiliating Russia by winning the cold war, leaving our strength dangerously weak.
Sanctions can only be partly effective, but don’t forget that sanctions against Japan in 1940-41 drove them to make war for which we were very ill prepared for. Russia & China just completed major joint exercises only this summer & China is building a fleet to seriously challange USN intervention in the far east.

Clark
That premise would require me to view Russia as a child or grandchild. I don’t, I view them as a fellow nation.
Second it would require me to say that Russia is doing something out of the ordinary. That they are truly acting differently than the West.
Third this view “we have to do something” is incorrect. My neighbor may bang two crack whores every night but that is not my business. That would be a moral buisy body’s buisness.

Nicholas. So maybe the answer is to not let him get away with it ?

Nicholas, there is something extremely disturbing about your statement about the South China Sea. Some other country? Last time that happened it was the Japanese.
Today there are several independent sovereign countries in South East Asia that have equal claims to the South China Sea. Unlike China, they do not claim the entire Sea but those areas adjacent to their coastline, and those islands that they may have historical claim to. China does not. They claim that since the Seas have “China” in their name, they are therefore Chinese. By this same reasoning, India can lay claim to the entire Indian Ocean. China’s claims violates the sovereign rights of those nations. Be careful, next China will be laying claim to parts of UK because of a preponderance of Chinese Nationals living there, much like how Russia laid claim to the Crimea.

Neville Chamberlains diaries have been recently released to the public and it highlights why he aggressively pushed for appeasement. The UK had just come out of recession and there was severe riots in India over independence. The armed forces at the time were purely set up to police the Empire with a small reactionary force in case of trouble.
From his diaries he wrote of his meetings with Hitler and realised very quickly on that Hitler would not be satisfied with just annexing the Sudetenland etc. Also, he recognised that another war was very likely, but the armed force and industry were not geared for another European war. This is why he pushed for delay and appeasement to make sure that our industry had enough time to gear up for war, but also that the armed forces would be ready.
It is said that if our troops and the French had prevented the German Army from reoccupying the Rhine valley and the industrial heartland it may have prevented Hitler’s ambitions. But I doubt that Hitler would have been so easily thwarted, he was a man on a mission to right the wrongs done to the German people after WW1, by any means!
The recent film: “The Darkest Hour” that shows how Churchill took over from Chamberlain does not mention the reasons behind appeasement, it did show how Lord Halifax wanted to bend the knee to Hitler though. It did highlight how precarious the situation with the Army and Airforce was, in some respects Dunkirk was a serious wake up call. It was believed that the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) would be used much like the Army in WW1. Basically forcing the German Army into a stalemate via trench warfare.
The mandarins of the Army didn’t take the combined infantry, artillery and armoured tactics developed by Fuller and Hart to heart, believing that future ground warfare would be dictated by the Airforce and artillery. Manoeuvre warfare was a unpleasant surprise and we’re lucky any troops at all made it out of Dunkirk.
The Russians are the best at practising total combined warfare, using tactics originally developed during WW2 and against NATO, but also using subversion, propaganda, fake news cyber hacking and intelligence. The conflict in Ukraine highlights all of the above, where Russia is using “proxies” to carry out the ground action, but who are fully supplied with modern arms, intelligence and training whilst Russia is providing the fake news, cyber hacking and adverse propaganda in the background. The difference between then and now is that Hitler was blatant and open about his so called vision of a Aryan empire, whilst today Russia is denying all knowledge.

It is still the majority view amongst Histirians that the balance of power at the point Hitler annexed Sudetenland meant that Germany was not in a position to go to War with the British Empire and Or the Third republic, infact it is very likely that a single Alied Power acting agressively towards German at that point would have knock Hitlers government out of power, points to back this up:
1) he had just blackmailed and removed the leadership of the German army because it had told him the Germany was not ready for war and would loss in short order against the British Empire or France.
2) 25% of German tanks involved in the invasion of France were tanks taken from or built in Czechoslovakian.
3) German armour in 38 was not fit for purpose (as evidenced in the Spanish civil war)
4) German U boat production in 1937 was a total of 1, with 9 in 1938 but had then gone to 18 and 50 in 39 and 40 up to 200 in 41.
5) In 1938 German fuel reserves could only support 25% of mobilisation needs.
6) Aviation lubricants reserves could only support 6% of Luftwaffe mobilisation requirements in 1938.
7) in 38 German industry was working at only 80ish% output due to steal shortages
8) Goring started that German industry in 38 had reach a point of maximum distress.

Hitler used war by other means to take Austria when he needed its currency and gold reserves then he acted in 38 against Czechoslovakian out of apsolute need, due to impending industrial collapse. Chamberline the leader of one of the two preeminent superpowers in the world did not act against a hyper aggressive minor power (knowing war was in reality inevitable, unless the British empire was willing to sacrifice a number of Europe nations) because to act would cause some destabilisation to the Empire. Instead he set a red line which allowed the beast to feed itself on two other nations,becoming unmanageable and allowing it to choose the point at which it crossed the red line, dooming the very empire he sort to keep strong.

Chamberlain made a catastrophic miss-calculation in policy, what the documents released under the 30 year rule do is give some insight into why he made the mistake ( it does not really remove the mistake itself).

Now I’m not saying any of this relalas to Russia in the present day, as there is one big difference, Russia is a nuclear power with the ability to turn Western Europe Into a wasteland , remembering if your a utter nutter, Russia has the land mass to take every single Nuclear weapon European nations have and you could make a fair gamble that a Trump administration would blink when faced with the loss of all US cities balanced against avenging a strike on Europe.

Moving that many assets would require serious coordination across multiple countries and Russia would for sure find out. We would then give Russia the perfect excuse for invading the rest of Ukraine on the context that they are countering a NATO aggression or at least further justification for its position of reinforcing its western border against the NATO expansion.

There is also the problem that NATO does not want Ukraine as a member, for multiple reasons but mainly because they would just be a liability. Plus I believe Ukraine originally decided not to join.

Also how sure would we be that doing this would not trigger a shooting war, i imagine there are rogue factions in Ukraine on both sides, that would happily have NATO attack and push back Russia from Chimera and could stage military action.

If Ukraine joined NATO would we not have to go to war to free the occupied areas of the Ukraine? Rather than fight with tanks etc, why not go after the Russians with a campaign to cause a political revolution in Russia.