UK intelligence officials have reported a correlation between alcohol consumption by troops and the high number of Russian casualties in the Ukraine war.
The Ministry of Defence provided an update stating that due to heavy drinking in Russian society, army commanders have come to accept this issue as a “part of military life.”
The UK Ministry of Defence’s latest intelligence update reveals that a noteworthy number of casualties resulted from non-combat causes.
“While Russia has suffered up to 200,000 casualties since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, a significant minority of these have been due to non-combat causes. On 27 March 2023, a Russian Telegram news channel reported there have been ‘extremely high’ numbers of incidents, crimes, and deaths linked to alcohol consumption amongst the deployed Russian forces.
Other leading causes of non-combat casualties likely include poor weapon handing drills, road traffic accidents and climatic injuries such as hypothermia. Russian commanders likely identify pervasive alcohol abuse as particularly detrimental to combat effectiveness. However, with heavy drinking pervasive across much of Russian society, it has long been seen as a tacitly accepted part of military life, even on combat operations.”
Latest Defence Intelligence update on the situation in Ukraine – 02 April 2023.
Find out more about Defence Intelligence's use of language: https://t.co/98MyQNQKmJ
🇺🇦 #StandWithUkraine 🇺🇦 pic.twitter.com/XBel6Fvgf0
— Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 (@DefenceHQ) April 2, 2023
In my opinion, It does not matter how they die! as long as they do.
Are you being serious Chris. Despite what many think (especially our politicians and journalists it seems) we are not at war with Russia. When that changes I’ll join you in the hate stakes, as it’s a matter of national loyalty and pride. But until then, it will remain an internal squabble between two closely related recovering communist states. Neither are NATO members with very little to separate them, in my opinion. Both nations have serious internal issues left over from their soviet past. That to include Putin’s and others very existance.
We should be pushing hard for peace.
Did you see the latest speech by Zelensky and the importance he now places on Bakmut. I’m pleased it’s not my sons waiting to be consumed in that meat grinder.
You don’t have to be a citizen of either country to take a side. I also celebrate the obliteration of Russian armour as they try to advance and capture more Ukrainian territory, committing atrocities on the unfortunates that fall into their clutches.
Jack, both sides in this conflict have been committing atrocities since 2014. Amnesty International and others have been reporting on it. Our journalists seem to have completely missed it, except one notable Channel 4 documentary.
I’m afraid to say that kind of behaviour is in their nature. If we had endured what the people of that region have suffered for more than 100 years. (30 under Stalin.) We would probably be like that too. The extent to which marxism poisons the human mind must be experienced to be fully appreciated.
This BBC timeline gives a rough overvue. It’s well worth a read to refresh the memory. See Soviet union timeline.
So many militias/autonomous factions with differing agendas are operating in the current conflict. That it’s a miracle there is any central coordination at all, for either side. Reporting and punishing illegal behaviour must be near impossible!
Looting civilian homes seems to be how both sides feed themselves. The Chechen mujahideen alone, on both sides are notorious for committing atrocities everywhere they go. Using schools and hospitals for cover is also the norm for both sides. As is attacking medical personnel and using the wounded as bait. They take pleasure in posting drone videos of their crimes too, see funker530.com.
British troops have been court martialed for much less.
George I’m with you on this one. I got absolutely berated below and insulated for merely suggesting we should be looking at brockering peace and also questioning the government and MSN narrative on the conflict. I’m with you on this we need to be thinking everytime about what is in the UK national interest. I made the point that EU and NATO expansion as well as US foreign involvement was always going to be a powder keg waiting to go off if we didn’t look at Russia responses to this expansion. Now those saying well tough Moscow should offer a better economic deal to the former Eastern bloc fail to understand the one rule of foreigh policy which is what is the geopolitical effects of our decisions and what are the responses of our decisions by the state actors involved. I’ll repeat for those that think I’m a Russian subversive or stooge (or hard of hearing) that I’m as patriotic as they come but with the Iraq dodgy dossier, the war Afghanistan, the war in Libya and the war in Syria we don’t have good form in picking the right winners. Compare AQ with Saddam…which one would you prefer if those were the only choices…Gaddafi and Assad versus Islamic State (again which one do you prefer). I do love all the military pundits (including former military intelligence) here stating clearly don’t worry we are right this time even if were were wrong 99% of the time last time..quite rightly people would go well show me the proof….
stay classy, chris!
It’s really sad to see this war keep going. We really need to get the politicians around the table to end this death and destruction. People drink (to excess) to forget and clearly there are lot of Russian soldiers that do not want to be part of this war. If I could enact one law it would be for politicians to be given guns and let them shoot it out between one another before any soldier sets foot in a theatre of war. I’m no pacifist but this war in Europe is due to one maniac/psychopath in Russia but also the failire of the west to keep up its military spending to deter these types of wars (plus also a stupid expansion of the EU into the former eastern bloc backed by America and with a CIA backed coup in Ukraine). All these things combined led to this war. We never learn just like Britain after the first world war stopped investing in its military and then paid the price in WWII by spending money we didn’t have (when it would have been much cheaper to invest in the military in the 1920s – we have Churchill’s military spending cap after WW1 to blame for that – in the early 1930s he became a convert to rearmanment). We should set a minimum defence spending of 3% of GDP and then fit all other spending around that. The first role of a government is defence and law and order and then after that the health of the nation and education and industry. Everything else is subsidiary to these things in my opinion.
Good post
have to disagree a bit. Spending should go up but 2.5% is upper limit unless things get worse. Historically it didn’t matter what Churchill thought in the 1920s the Uk was in dire financial difficulties from WW1 and so defence had to be low – doubly so as both the public and parliament wanted it that way. Not until mid 1930s did attitudes start to change in that regard. Finally even if defence spending had been higher both recently and in the 1930’s or 20’s for that matter it is unlikely that Hitler would have altered his views and as for Putin he hasn’t been put off by the US of A so why would he be put off by a much smaller UK military (even with 3% spending).
We could easily make it to 3% of GDP. Look at Croydon council….backrupt with £1.8Billion worth of debt because of poor spending decisions. The whole government needs an audit from top to bottom and any extraneous spending cut. I can’t think of a single law instituted since 22 November 1990 that has actually made the UK a better place. We need, as tax payers, to hold our politicians to greater account for wasted spending. Then we make these calls about going to 3% of GDP spending on defence. There is no good reason since 1990 that our government debt has ballooned…just bad spending decisions and many costly wars that had nothing to do with our national interest. We wonder why the Falklands was the only justified war it’s because it was in our national interest and for democracy…all subsequent wars have been for the benefit of the US and not for the UK. I just wish for once our politicians would ask themselves the fundamental question “If we went to war how does this directly benefit the UK’s national interests”. If that question was asked more often I think we wouldn’t be so much of a mess that we are in currently. The Georgian’s and Victorian’s always asked this question and never put more than the minimum force in the field usually and with a plan for what happens afterwards (i.e., concert of Europe after the Napoleonic wars). I wish we had William Pitt (either the elder or the younger in charge of the UK).
“I can’t think of a single law instituted since 22 November 1990 that has actually made the UK a better place”
Seriously?!?! From 1991 alone…
• Census (Confidentiality) Act 1991
• War Crimes Act 1991
• Motor Vehicles (Safety Equipment for Children) Act 1991
• Football (Offences) Act 1991
• Children and Young Persons (Protection from Tobacco) Act 1991
• Property Misdescriptions Act 1991
• Smoke Detectors Act 1991
• Arms Control and Disarmament (Inspections) Act 1991
• Coal Mining Subsidence Act 1991
• Armed Forces Act 1991
• Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
Though you might disagree if you’re a Nazi war criminal living in the U.K., working as as a dodgy estate agent, and in your spare time engaged in football hooliganism…
“There is no good reason since 1990 that our government debt has ballooned”
How about ensuring the economy didn’t collapse during the global pandemic of 2020?
How about ensuring the economy didn’t collapse during the financial crisis of 2008/9?
LOL…you mentioned parochial laws that probably effect about less 1% of the population…Jesus is that all you could come up with…I rest my case…
In terms of the financial crisis, first it was caused by Bill Clinton’s bank deregulation, which also had an impact through Blair and Brown’s reforms. This pair of morons also destroyed our pension system as well to boot. We should have saved depositors and let the financial investors and share holders suffer the hit. We didn’t and then we had quantitative easing which inflated asset prices affecting ordinary people. We should never have locked down under the pandemic and just safeguarding the elderly and vulnerable (just like Sweden did). I would also add that Gordon Brown also massively expanded the state and that includes tax credits which subsidised low paid jobs and allowed business to pay peanuts. This also followed by an immigration boom that made the minimum wage now the maximum wage for many in the UK. But please go ahead and keep voting for more of the same from the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems….I’m not buying what they are selling anymore (this is from a conservative voter for the last 30 years).
Not parochial laws but national legalisation. I take it you have no objection to your census data being revealed to everyone? And you don’t believe in inspections for arms control treaties?
Those were just from 1990…
I guess you’re a Remoaner too, as Brexit was achieved via legislation too…
You’re obviously anti-NATO too as you don’t think the “Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG)” act was beneficial to the U.K. – it allowed for Finland and Sweden’s membership…
That you think in 32 years not a single act beneficial to the U.K. as a whole has been passed just highlights your tendency to make sweeping generalisations without bothering to check the facts first.
You clearly don’t understand what caused the financial crisis of 2008/9. It’s a matter of historical record, are you simply too lazy to read up? Here’s a starter, look up Credit Default Swaps.
What armrest you wittering on about “destroyed our pension system”? The state pension is about to go up 10% and everyone is now auto enrolled into private pensions. It’s also been apparent since the late 80’s that people had a personal responsibility to save for their retirement, first thing I did after graduating.
Bingo, I knew you’d be a pandemic denying fruit-cake too. Sweden, Norway and Finland, all have similar culture, demographics, climate, level of health-care, etc.
Yet Sweden has a Corvid-19 death-rate TEN times higher than its neighbours. Even before the end of 2020, Sweden itself admitted it had got its strategy WRONG.
https://www.businessinsider.com/sweden-admits-coronavirus-strategy-underestimated-strenght-virus-lofven-stefan-2020-12?amp
As a conspiracy theorist though, you’re not too good with actual facts 🤦🏻♂️
Look up the Glass-Steagall Act and its repeal by Bill Clinton with similar reforms in the UK and the division between high street banking and investment banking blurred…This is a crucial factor at play as yes the sub-prime housing market debt was packaged up into financial instruments that were worthless and the credit swap defaults (akin to an insurance policy fo the lender) caused systemic problems in the wider investment market as multiple banks take advantage of crdit swap defaults. However, it was the banking reforms that were really the issue as this enabled depositors to be at risk if banks failed (to big to fail) rather than just institutional investors and shareholders. Why do you think the Glass-Steagall Act was implemented after the wall street crash in 1933 to prevent a repeat of this happening and affecting depositors and thus prevent runs on banks…
Also covid-19 figures from WHO demonstrate conclusively that Sweden had less excess deaths. The lockdown for the young (not the old and vulnerable) was unnecessary. Note what I said carefully Sean because I stated clearly we should have protected the elderly and vulernable but allowed the young to go about their business this would have kept mortality rates low for those groups whilst enabling business to keep going. Also care homes caused the majority of deaths and we all known now why and how that happened. Mortality in the young and fit is very small indeed. Gordon Brown’s tax reforms of the pension are very widely acknowledged by almost everyone in the pension sector to have destroyed the viability of final salary pensions.
Now in terms of your insults I voted for Brexit as I thought that the EU was a racket. I’d actually seen this up front as I used to go to Brussels and do work..discussion for another day my friend…but don’t rush to conclusions and certainly don’t disparage people with insults as it denigrates your own opinion.
I’m fully au fait with the Glass–Steagall provisions of the United States Banking Act of 1933. That simply required the separation of investment banking from commercial/ retail banking. However this was not the cause of the crisis. It was the uncontrolled and unaccountable repackaging of debt into CDSs for resale that caused the issue. (It was analogous to the repackaging of risks for reinsurance in the Lloyds of London that saw Piper Alpha payouts spiral around the market eleven-fold and almost bankrupting – along with long-tail asbestos claims.)
However even without this repeal all that might have been different is that we would not have seen any long-queues at bank branches, such as Northern Rock, by depositors withdrawing their savings. Governments would still have needed to bailout the investment banks because their collapse would have severely damaged their economies for decades. Neither Bear Sterns or Lehman Brothers had commercial/retail operations, and by letting them fail we had the financial crisis that ensued. Arguably if they had been bailed out, there would have been no crisis.
So Grass-Steagall had zero impact upon what happened to Bear Stern’s and Lehman Brothers, despite your bluster.
Wrong yet again. Official statistics show that Sweden had proportionately more Corvid-19 deaths than its neighbours. Which is why the Swedish Prime Minister confessed their strategy had been wrong. Or do you claim to know more about Sweden than its Prime Minister?
No the majority of Corvid-19 deaths were not in care homes. Though I’m sure you subscribe to the Midazolam Genocide conspiracy that casts care-home staff as mass-murders…
So you said no beneficial legislation has been passed since 1990… but you support Brexit…. Don’t you realise legalisation had to be passed to leave the EU? What an idiot 🤦🏻♂️
You do have problems reading my posts don’t you Sean…
This is a crucial factor at play as yes the sub-prime housing market debt was packaged up into financial instruments that were worthless and the credit swap defaults (akin to an insurance policy fo the lender) caused systemic problems in the wider investment market as multiple banks take advantage of crdit swap defaults. However, it was the banking reforms that were really the issue as this enabled depositors to be at risk
try and read properly next time my friend or you end up looking like an idiot yourself,,,,again I return back to my thesis that perhaps your parents thought you a failure in life and now you are desperately seeking approval from people…it’s sad to see but you have my sympathy Sean. I truly wish you all the best with your inferiority complex…
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
It was never about depositors being at risk, both the Fed and BoE guarantee depositors. The risk was the collapse of the investment banks, which invested for corporations, pension funds, etc. the failure of these, is what caused the financial crisis. Whether these were retail banks or not made ZERO difference.
But hey what do I know, I only worked in international finance for a decade before being head-hunted into the tech sector.
A thesis is a presentation of learned and existing information. All you are presenting is senile ramblings in a hilariously incompetent attempt to annoy me. Do the wardens/nurses know you’re still up this late?
Wrong again Sean…however I loved it that I did annoy you now or why else post back to me….your mother obviously saw you as the runt of the litter…
Yeah I soooooo annoyed by pompous attempts at insights into my character 😆
You’re correct I had a mother, yours no doubt disowned you long ago for being so embarrassing.
Anyway, unlike yourself I have a responsible job to do tomorrow so this will be my last posting tonight.
Try not to piss your bed again, it’ll annoy your carers.
Boom! 😂
To be fair you state parochial laws, and Sean, has (for example) stated the smoke detector act 1991, that alone legally affects 100% of the population. Ignore my possible ignorance but how is that a parochial law which affects just 1% of the population? He stated other laws which in fact impact the majority? Cheers!
The problem is Andrew, I’d you actually left it to the British taxpayer we would probably end up with a few patrol boats and frigates, a limited airforce to secure British airspace and an army just enough to provide minimal input to NATO. AKA Germany.
All the polling shows the public apart from a minority and people connected to the military have very little interest in defence spending..what matters to them are the bits that affect their daily lives…pot holes, poor schools, not being able to see a GP, gas and electric costing a fortune…these are what people really care.it’s why we don’t have direct democracy that much ….do you think people would vote for CASD funding over getting all the pot holes fixed and some more GPs…not a snowflakes chance in hell.
I’ve got sympathy for what you say, I would point out though that the politicians bever make the arguments properly to the general public. Also we don’t really teach critical thinking in the UK…we seem to focus more on other topics in schools…however, I shan’t go there as it would get me in hot water if I did…I would say this though we should really be asking about value for money in public service…the NHS and other services always seem to want more money but we don’t question how they spend the current sums they get. I would go back to what I said which is we need a reform of the tax system and a complete audit of central and local government. We should also teach Adam Smith’s the wealth of nations in schools as well….but that’s a chat for another day…
In the 1920’s we were very much Great Britain, not the “UK.” Therein lies most of our problem, a loss of self respect, self belief and cultural integrity.
When it comes to Putin/Russian Federation it’s NATO and the EU they are “put off by.” Both militarily and economically. Had NATO maintained it’s cold war military, the defeated USSR would have had no choice but to accept it’s fate. Especially if we had kept promises and reassurances about spreading east. Things would have unfolded very differently with dangerous men such as Putin, behind bars. The best outcome for all concerned, would have been if a democratic Russia had been the first former Warsaw Pact nation invited to join a renamed NATO. Followed by the rest. But that is now a pointless hypothetical. What if?
Historically, had the allies intervened when the Rhineland was taken back by the german military in 1936. Hitler would have pulled his troops back and thought again. His commanders had orders to do just that. If the allies responded by sending troops, they were to get back on their bicycles and peddle home ASAP. Perhaps a good sabre rattle by the allies, would have prevented Anschluss 1938 and the Sudetenland debacle too. As far as I’m concerned, the reason for studying history is to learn lessons from past mistakes. Such as any delusion of a peace dividend.
Oh well, back to drunk Ivan. You have a good day.
“CIA backed coup in Ukraine”
Afraid you’ve fallen for Russian propaganda there.
If you had read my balanced post you will see I’m not a Russian stodge..I question things. The LA times had an excellent op-ed (with facts) that the CIA has been involved in Ukraine since the 1950s:
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2022-02-25/ukraine-cia-insurgents-russia-invasion
Peter Hitchens has excellent posts on Ukraine (and the involvement of the CIA) and Peter is an expert in Eastern European politics (he lived in Russia for some time and has visited and stayed in Ukraine many times as well).
My personally beliefs are that I don’t want this escallating into a nuclear war on our doorstep (not the American’s) and I don’t believe in wasting our money on wars that are peripheral to our national interests. I want to know more about the people we are backing rather than the polished media representation we get. The first casualty of war is truth…I want to know the truth before we get embroiled further in a war that has massive ramifications for us.
However, if you believe everything we see in the media without question and this is a good versus bad scenario only (yes Putin a psychopath who I would like to see eliminated). However. we live in the real world with real world consequences. I want to know the full story before we embark further into this quagmire.
Sorry but Peter hitchings isn’t a expert is a sour old man who wants the world to be something it isn’t he’s a intelligent man but his answer to Ukraine is to give Russia what it wants and hope it doesn’t come back for more once it’s rebuilt it’s military and the so called coup in Ukraine happened decades ago when Russia had control of the country the thrown out president was only elected because he said he would move closer to the west he went back on that and was thrown out new election elected a new government Russia doesn’t like the fact it can’t control them and invaded
Nothing balanced in your post.
You totally misrepresent what is in the article in the LA Times. The CIA has NOT been involved with Ukraine since the 1950’s as you claim.
• The article reports that in the 1950’s when Ukraine was part of the USSR, the CIA backed an insurgency there. An insurgency against communism that collapsed.
• The article says that the CIA has been training insurgents since Russia invaded since 2914. You disingenuously try and portray this as a continuous interference since the 1950’s. The British Army has been training Ukranians to fight since 2014, through Operation Orbital. I’m glad to hear the CIA has been contributing too.
Peter Hitchins has a disreputable record for making judgements. He believes the MMR vaccine is dangerous, he was anti-lockdown and anti-mask, he denies climate-change, thinks involvement in WW2 was not in our national interest, and he wants to see the destruction of the Union (of Great Britain).
Seriously, you value this guy’s opinion?
Nuclear weapons aren’t restricted to “doorsteps”. Any use of nuclear weapons has global impacts.
Like many conspiracy theorists you assume that anyone who disagrees with you is beholden to the ‘MMS’. Well I haven’t had a tv for 25 years, and the news that I read comes from a variety of international newspapers to avoid national bias. Living in London, the majority of my friends are not actually British with a good portion of them East European, including Russian and Ukrainian. I even had some in Russia during the first year of the war before they were able to escape. Tell me, are you so widely informed
(YouTube videos don’t count.)
While the majority of what you post could be regarded as ill-informed and misguided speculation. The deliberate misrepresentation of the article in the LA Times – hoping people wouldn’t bother to read it – suggests an agenda to mislead.
So interesting that you parrott out precisely what you hear through most of the MSN. I like to question things and when the stakes of this high I don’t just believe what our government tells us….Iraq (weapons of mass destruction), Afghanistan (no we won’t be there long)…Libya (we are defending innocent people and this can be a democratic country again). Syria..the list is endless my friend….no I’m not a conspiracy theorist but likewise I’m not just going along with the consensus view. Peter Hitchens is an intelligent, thoughtful man who knows much more than you and I do about Russia and Ukraine…remember that when we start escalating this into a potential nuclear conflict.
Good so see that you’d didn’t try to deny or defend that you’d been found out dishonestly misrepresenting what was printed in the LA Tines article you quote.
It’s also hilarious that for all your decrying what appears in the MSN, you lead your original post with a reference to the LA Times, which is MSN. Which is it, hypocrisy or cognitive dissonance on your part?
What you fail to comprehend is that there is no huge global conspiracy dictating what every journalist should right about every story. I agree with opinions in some newspapers, and disagree with others. I look for the actual reporting of facts by them, and then draw my own conclusions.
That you don’t question Peter Hutchins’ lunatic conspiracy theory beliefs and his treacherous hopes for the end of Great Britain says a great deal about the beliefs you’re too frightened to reveal here.
You’re more devious that JohnInMK, but you’re still one of the Kremlin’s “useful idiots”.
Andrew Thorne wrote:
Hello Andrew, my name is farouk, its an Egyptian Arabic name and it means: “discerning truth from falsehood”. Which I would like to believe is part of my makeup. So just like you, I like to question things. So that LA Times article you linked into has as its very first two paragraph the following:
“”Russia invaded Ukraine by land, air and sea on Thursday, but for years now the Central Intelligence Agency has been preparing for such a moment, not only with prescient intelligence gathering and analysis but also by preparing Ukrainians to mount an insurgency against a Russian occupation.
A news story last month revealed that the agency has been training Ukrainian special forces and intelligence officers at a secret facility in the U.S. since 2015. Some U.S. officials have played down the report by claiming that the CIA is simply training the Ukrainians in intelligence collection. Others say the program has another secret purpose, which I believe: preparing Ukrainians for an insurgency in the event of a Russian occupation.””
The interesting thing about the above is the author omits from the entire article that the US (Along with the UK and Russia) signed up to defend Ukraine on the 5th Dec 1994 (Budapest memorandum) after it agreed to give up it Nuclear weapons which when the USSR broke up left Kyiv with the worlds 3rd largest holding of nuclear weapons.
The US (as well as the UK) only started training the Ukrainian Military away from the Soviet way of military operations after Moscow annexed the Crimea and actively fermented a bun fight in the east of the country as was the remit they agreed to in 1994. In otherwords they honoured their part of the agreement
Instead the author went down the route of Well the US has form, so they are automatically guilty. If you are going to post the adage “That you like to question things” then it would help your case if you did just that and not base your opinion on an op piece where salient information pertaining to the war inside the Ukraine is left out which from your other posts supports your Anti US bent.
The CIA has a presence in nearly every country’s around the world.
They’re called embassies. Pretty sure the same can be said of MI6 and FSB presence at their respective embassies 🤷🏻♂️
Farouk my friend…how do you assume I’m anti-American just because I question the narrative about the War. We’ve been here before: Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (dodgy dossier), Afghanistan (no we will not be there long just in and out to get AQ), Libyan (we are defending innocent civilians and this won’t impact upon Europe), Syria (now this won’t be us supporting Islamic insurgents). Heard it all before and total garbage most of it. I want to see the other side of the story. What do we know about the leadership in Ukraine about from the story the government and media wants to present. Yes Putin is a psychopath and should be eliminated but that’s not going to happen. This war will draw on and kill more innocent people. If this escalates into a nuclear conflict I’ll remind you of your words as we both reach 1 million degrees and vaporize in 1 second. I like to question things and it doesn’t make me anti-american, anti-British, anti anything. For once you post above falls way short of your normally excellent posts. Your more balanced than this usually and worth reading but this time you seem almost unhinged which is a bit weird to be honest.
Andrew Thorne wrote:
“”Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq””
What people tend to overlook when they make that statement, is that:
1) Saddam did have a program prior to 1991
2) After 1991 he played silly buggers with UN t inspection teams which lead credence that he was hiding something
3) Time and time again between 1991 and 2003 he hinted along the lines he still had something hidden away
4) After he was captured, Saddam is on record of stating to FBI integrator George Piro he encouraged the perception that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) because he was afraid of appearing weak in Iran’s eyes.
and David Kelly debunked all of this before in his evidence. I’m afraid George Bush and Tony Blair were too close. Alistair Campbell sexed up the document and sold us all a lie. I for one didn’t get sucked in by that and was one of very few protestors against the Iraq war. We need to question the motives of our elite more and not jave one narrative which is the one they want to sell to us. That being said yes the Ukrainians have suffered immensely from an illegal invasion from a Maniac/sociopath/psycopath. However, questioning the current Ukrainian governement, EU and US foreign policy doesn’t make me a Russian stooge by the way (if it does then a huge number of British people will be tarred in the same way)..it makes me someone that wants to see the evidence first and foremost. Until I do I want to see some peace negotiations and also I don’t want this war escalated to a European war by idiots like Boris Johnson suggesting we send Eurofighters and also our Challenger 2 tanks as well. Defensive systems yes but offensive absolutely no and no further escallation of our involvement. It only takes one nutter (like Putin) who may have a terminal disease to decide he wants everyone to go down with him. We shouldn’t give him that excuse. Now can we please have a reasoned debate without recourse to saying I’m anti-American – it makes me think that you aren’t balanced and your normal posts are very good usually. You did go down in my estimation with that throwaway comment in the end….
“I for one didn’t get sucked in by that and was one of very few protestors against the Iraq war.”
I see you like to re-write history too. On the 15 February 2003 protest march the police estimated 750k and the BBC a million in attendance. Hardly “very few”… 😆
Just about everything you write can be debunked with facts. 🤷🏻♂️
We had a population of nearly 60 million at the time Sean. 1% is a small number…but you can read whatever you want into that…
You didn’t say “proportionally a few” you said “a few”.
But then I’ve already shown you’re disingenuous, dishonest, and a fruitcake, so not knowing the difference between relative and absolute figures is hardly your greatest fault 🤷🏻♂️
Andrew Thomas wrote:
“”Now can we please have a reasoned debate without recourse to saying I’m anti-American – it makes me think that you aren’t balanced and your normal posts are very good usually””
I based that statement on the following snippets from your recent posts:
1) I made the point that EU and NATO expansion as well as US foreign involvement was always going to be a powder keg waiting to go off
2) plus also a stupid expansion of the EU into the former eastern bloc backed by America and with a CIA backed coup in Ukraine
3) …all subsequent wars have been for the benefit of the US and not for the UK.
4) I’m afraid George Bush and Tony Blair were too close
5) The ascent of Saddam was supported by the US as he was a good guy to keep the Iranians busy with a war that cost countless lives and also kept the oil running for them. (On that note Saddam signed a 15-year Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union in 1972 which kind of explains the large number of Russian (and Eastern European) weapons systems in use by Iraq and a complete lack of US weapon systems until 2004, this can be substantiated further by how the US had no embassy in Iraq from 1967 to 1984.)
You missed the final point in the he had a history of actually deploying weapons of mass destruction against civilian populations and military and used them around 14 times killing many 10s of thousands of people. Infact he was the most prolific user of chemical weapons since WW1. One thing you can say about Iran…even after constant chemical weapons attacks against its killing many 10s thousands of Iranian they never did strike back with a weapon of mass destruction themselves.
Jonathan…this may sound awful but it was his own people here not ours if his people want democracy it’s up to them to do it and fight for it and not us or our young working class men..You think we are good at building democracies in Islamic countries…look at our record…Iraq, Iran (CIA/MI6 coup 1953), Syria, Libya, Afghanistan. How do you think these despots get into power in the first place? The ascent of Saddam was supported by the US as he was a good guy to keep the Iranians busy with a war that cost countless lives and also kept the oil running for them. He became the bad guy when he invaded Kuwait (a corrupt set of Arab Oligarchs again supported by the US) and then he affected the oil markets and the US dragged us into the first gulf war…when we will learn not to interfer in these hell holes…let them kill each other…it’s none of our business. The twin towers were mainly Saudi nationals…what should we have done bombed Saudia Arabia and force demoncracy on them…of course not…let their own people gain democracy and they will value it then…Don’t forget Saudia Arabia sponsors wahhabism in the UK (you think this is a good country). Don’t forget through Asylum we are taking in many of these Islamic refugees from conflicts we got involved with…how do you think that will work out in twenty years time when the second and third generation of these start to feel more affinity for organisations like Islamic state then they do for the UK (this is happening already as religion trumps nationality)…it’s all a mess and quite frankly I would prefer we stopped getting involved in wars that are not in the national interest (including removing ourselves from the 1951 UN asylum act)…these types of wars should go to a vote in my opinion…unless a country declares war on us or affects our vital national interests. But keep us getting involved and all we will do is slowing drag the UK down..
In regard to what side of the fence we are, Hitchens isn’t a fair and neutral commentator as for instance, he opposes gay marriage! That in itself smacks of intolerance and an agenda which is directed by either religion or a personal issue. Delve a little deeper and things aren’t fair or rosey! Cheers.
Don’t be so naive. Read/watch some American MSM who have reported it.
You mean like Fox News?
No thanks, I’ll stick to credible news reporting agencies and not fantasists.
What the BBC….come on it’s not exactly the bastion of balance these days…Jesus they have that guy who munches crisps and avoids tax reading the news these days 😉
I wouldn’t know, as Ive previously said I haven’t watched terrestrial tv in over 20 years…
However it is more likely to suffer from group think from recruiting like-minded individuals than the deliberate falsification of news that has been shown at Fox News by the Dominion trial. Tell me, as a Fox News watcher, how does it feel now knowing that the presenters there think you’re an idiot?
Sean you love your insults don’t you. I don’t need to resort to insults…maybe a deep seated inferiority complex for some reason. When you insult people you loose the argument immediately in most peoples eyes. I don’t know what goes on in your mind but you seem to leap to conclusions about who I am…anti-Brexit (no I voted for it)…watch Fox News (no I don’t watch much TV as i prefer reading)…any other conclusions you want to jump to…if you can’t have a civilised debate then don’t have one. I think there is a deep seated need for you to be accepted for some reason…maybe a father that was absent or maybe a mother who thought you were a failure in life,..I don’t know you mind but I wish you all the best in this life you clearly have some issues but I hope you get better…
Look like a duck, quack like a duck, waddle like a duck, don’t complain come duck hunting season.
Given what I’ve achieved in life so many areas of life, I’d have to aspire to be another Steve Jobs, or Steven Hawking to have an inferiority complex. Seems your understanding of psychology is as bad as your understanding of finance, pandemics, modern warfare, climate-change, etc, etc.
Gosh you still don’t get it, how stupid are you?
• You are pro Brexit
• You don’t think any beneficial legislation has been passed since 1990
How on earth do you think Brexit was enacted? A wave of a magicians wand?
BREXIT WAS ONLY ACHIEVED THROUGH LEGISLATION 🤦🏻♂️
I would suggest you stop watching you YouTube conspiracy theory channels and posts on social media and learn a bit of discernment. Try reading The Telegraph and The Guardian and compare the reporting of the same stories from different political perspectives. From there move on to Der Spiegel, La Monde, and the Washington Post.
I think you have proved my point. I do pity you Sean trapped in the past with your absent father and disappointed mother….you have my sympathies and my understanding. I hope you get the help you need
I proved you’re a pompous idiot, though I must admit that you gave me a huge amount of help 😆
Only thing absent is any sign of intelligence on your part. Every single description you assign to me is completely and utterly wrong. I can see why you’ve been so gullible in falling for so many conspiracy theories. Given 1 plus 1 you get 86 and 3/4s…
Andrew Thorne wrote:
In 2014 (and for the next 3 years) , I was part of an officer training team which held induction training weekends for potential officers, OTC candidates and for the old and bold who had earned a commission. So one of the elements required for future officers was a good grounding in current affairs and after the events of 2014 inside the Ukraine, we added what was happening there to our syllabus. For us to gauge the depth of their knowledge, we had to immerse ourselves into the 3 Ws:
What?
Why?
When?
Meaning we had to know more than your best-informed pundit. So regards that stupid expansion of the EU comment of yours.
1) When the USSR broke up in 1991, the Ukraine had a GDP of $77.35 Billion, its neighbour Poland had a GDP of $85 billion. The Ukraine decided to stay wedded to Moscow and Poland decided to go West
2) 20 Years later, Poland’s GDP had grown to $679 Billion, whilst the Ukraine had risen to $169 billion.
3) The Ukrainian people looked across the border not only at Poland but at others such as Romania (1991: $29 Billion. 2011: $192 Billion)
4) The people wanted what their fellow USSR bedfellows had, and started a movement for closer ties with Western Europe, specifically the EU. This resulted in Kyiv (under Yanukovych)
to agree to the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement
5) Now here is what a lot of people don’t know. The EU Association Agreement (AA) was given the go ahead on the 30th March 2012 with a date for it to be signed on the 30th Nov 13.
In July 2013, Moscow put in place a huge trade embargo on Ukrainian Goods in which to place pressure on Kyiv.
On the 14th of August, that embargo went up a couple of notches.
On the 18 August 2013 Adviser to the President Sergey Glazyev said that if Ukraine signs the Association Agreement with the European Union customs policy for Ukrainian companies would be made stricter.
On the 19th Aug, Russia lifted that embargo.
On the 17th,31st Oct and the 12th of Nov 2013, Moscow blocked Ukrainian imports from entering the country.
6) On the 21st November 2013, Yanukovych suspended the signing of the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement
7) That evening saw the first Euromaidan protests in Kyiv on the streets of Ukraine
8) The Us had nothing to do with any of the above and if you look at the events which lead up to the first protests, we see Moscow as the reason why people were angry and after the gas cuts of 2006,2009, the trade embargo you can see why the vast majority wanted nothing to do with Russia and instead wanted a better much more secure future with the West.
For someone involved in an officer training team you missed out one critical factor from the above. What is the perception of Moscow when the European union expands through the former Eastern block (and with those countries seeking NATO ascension). Now you may say well tough on Moscow they should up their game economically and offer a better deal than the West or NATO. However, anyone looking from this from a geopolitical perspective would reason that this would make the Russian’s nervous and cause a backlash. Now I’m all for freedom of association and in an ideal world we would allow countries to join whatever bloc they want (or leave as in case of the UK), However, this isn’t an ideal world and we have to live real politick. Therefore, I posit that it was unwise in the extreme not to get agreement with Russia for a buffer zone between the west and Russia. This might involve countries signing non-aggression pacts or being neutral like Switzerland. I’ll repeat for you (because you seem to think I’m a Russian subversive) that I think Putin should have been eliminated in an ideal world but it’s not and he’s not dying soon (assuming that the terminal disease that he may have takes him over the next few years). However, we should be careful what we wish for that we don’t get someone even worse…Think AQ compared to Saddam…You seem to like your insults “Meaning we had to know more than your best-informed pundit. So regards that stupid expansion of the EU comment of yours” rather than your normal reasoned Farouk….did you get up on the wrong side of bed or something? It’s not normally like you and as I said I usually like your posts and they are quite good…However, today you less than on form and you don’t need to resort to insults – I didn’t so why do you feel the need to???
Andrew Thorne wrote:
“”What is the perception of Moscow when the European union expands through the former Eastern block (and with those countries seeking NATO ascension).””
I see a lot of people who play that card in which to excuse Russia’s so-called concerns towards the West (read NATO and EU) and thus by default legitimise its invasion of the Ukraine by painting Moscow as the victim. But the people who say that never ever mention the concerns of former USSR countries, such as Hungary, Czechoslovakia and the Baltics who have all felt the wrath of Moscow after they expressed a desire to leave the Russian embrace. Whilst Poland never got to that stage during the 80s, it like each and every other Eastern European country had to suffer under the Russian jack boot for 45 years, meaning people alive today in all of those countries have had to live under Russian occupation, Russian redrawing of their national borders and knowing peoples who have been disappeared thanks to that little red book beloved by Moscow. All of which means they have a genuine reason to look for somebody (NATO and EU) to ensure that Moscow never gets to bully them ever again. To that end name any Western country which since 1991 which has threatened Moscow , that’s right there isn’t one, but I can list quite a few which Moscow has threatened (including with nuclear strikes) if they don’t dance to the tune of Boney M.
Also and a big final also each and every NATO country has until fairly recently cut it offensive and defensive capability, Moscow on the other hand started rearming in 2000. That is something you yourself actually berate the Uk for in you posts, now why would Moscow be worried about NATO expanding east, when as we can see NATO has been emasculated year in year out from 1991 till around 2018.
How would America respond if Mexico and Cuba became part of the Russia orbit. Oh we know how in terms of Cuba…the Cuban missile crisis…..this is real politick not ethics. In terms of ethics I agree in terms of geopolitical real politick I would argue I’m right.
This a common trope banded around time and time again in which to excuse Moscow’s fears. Basically what people are saying is how would the US react if Moscow based Nukes next door to the contiguous United States. But here is where that premise fails. In 1962, the longest ranged Russian Ballistic missile at the time the R-12 Dvina (as was deployed to Cuba) had a max range at the time of 932 miles in contrast the US had missiles based in the Uk, Italy and Turkey which had a range of 1500 miles. So the only way Moscow could achieve parity with the US regards a missile based nuke was by basing them in Cuba
Todays Nuclear armed nations have missiles with ranges in excess of 8000 Miles. Meaning that if Push came to shove the US and Uk could launch missiles at Moscow from off the coast of Rio de Janeiro. Which begs me to ask the question, why would NATO place nukes inside the Ukraine (Russia’s main argument) inside the strike range of Moscow’s land and air elements when they can hide anywhere in the Atlantic or Pacific. But it gets better, NATO isn’t just the US, it includes Europe and in 2018, Moscow deployed nuclear capable Iskander missile system in Kaliningrad and when concerns were raised, Moscow replied that it had the sovereign right to deploy such missiles on its territory
Also in 2018 Putin revealed that the Poseidon underwater drone can swim across the Atlantic and swamp the US with a huge tidal wave
In 2016 Putin threatened Romania with a Nuclear strike if they continued down the path of allowing the US to base an anti-missile system
In 2015, Moscow threatened Denmark with a nuclear strike after it stated that it would link its ships radar systems to the Missile shield based in Poland and Romania, a system designed to combat missiles from Iran.
In 2008, Moscow threatened Poland with a nuclear strike if it joined the above missile system.
Both of those Missile systems in Poland and Romania contain 10 SM3 missiles each which have a max range of 745 miles which pose no threat to any sub launched missile any going East, South or North and lets be honest 10 interceptor missiles wouldn’t stop missile number 11 and who’s to say Moscow wouldn’t launch older missiles without warheads to clear the field.
My point it is Western nations who have been threatened by Moscow and not Moscow by NATO Yet the people who try to claim actually Moscow has a point always fail to mention those threats
P.S
Might want to contrast your snippet I replied to above, with what I stated was your anti-American stance which you claim isnt true.
Unfortunately Farouk you get key elements missing but nice try. Don’t forget the Cuba missile middle crisis was preceded by US missiles based in Italy and Turkey as well as the Bay of Pigs CIA operation. It’s understandable as you use the usual trope that the USSR was the aggressor when the US was..I’m a supporter of UK US ties but servitude in helping the US destabilise regions for own political ends. Our interests come first with me…you approach leads to disasters like Iraq and Afghanistan which is why the military should be confined to military strategy and not geopolitics.
Andrew or Andre wrote:
From that post of mine you replied to:
“” in contrast the US had missiles based in the Uk, Italy and Turkey which had a range of 1500 miles. So the only way Moscow could achieve parity with the US regards a missile based nuke was by basing them in Cuba””
We also have the Bay of Pigs. I think you misread my original statement in that you thought I was talking about ethics. This is understandable as the military are taught ethics and strategy. The geopolitics is left to the politicians but they are sadly lacking in this regard with posturing and strutting whilst we inch closer to a Cuba missile crisis moment.
Andrew Thorne wrote:
I’m pretty sure, that rarely have I gone off the reservation and disparaged Russia in any form of infantile manner. If anything, you will find I berate the Uk gov (and MOD) far more. I’ll admit I have questioned dubious military Russian operations and have even questioned John in Milton Keynes regards some of his posts, but I’d like to think I have remained civil, seeing as I feel the best way to communicate with others is by being polite and keeping to the subject at hand. If anything, I’m more prone to disparaging myself than anybody else.
I’ll be honest the reason I frequent this board, is simply to avail myself to different points of view, I may not always agree with them, but as I said it allows me to see things through a different set of eyes. Which allows to weight up both sides of most arguments
Well said. I almost totally agreed. I’d have the absolute minimum of GDP spent on defence as 6-7%, more in the years recovering from the delusional peace dividend. The £15 billion per annum wasted on the overseas aid budget would be a nice immediate addition to the military coffers. There are so many things wrong currently that sadly, money will not solve them all. But it will help.
You have a supporter in me there…Overseas aid…what a waste…anything Andrew Mitchell supports you automatically know it is wrong and should be stopped…
The issue with many of these upper middle class twits that support overseas aid, military intervention and asylum is that they think all us “plebs” are brainless and should be treated with contempt and only their views are worth listening to on these matters…The Tory party party has taken on too many left wing liberal nuts and is now sinking under the mass of its own contradictions…role on the election when many lower middle class and working class can give the conservatives, Labour and Liberal democrats a good metaphorical kicking in the nuts…
And we all know why you really hate Andrew Mitchell…
Conspiracy theorists all blame him for alerting opposition MPs the other week that Andrew Bridgen was about to make another of his ridiculous speeches about Corvid-19. As a result, Bridgen was left making his unfounded claims to an empty chamber 😆
There you go jumping to conclusions again…bet you still wear your mask even now…
no I dislike Andrew as he is arrogant…rude…and isn’t aware of his own intellectual failures much like yourself…
Of course I don’t wear a mask now, the medical advice is that it’s not necessary. But then I listen to those who are experts in their particular fields whereas you are clearly too pompous too.
You mean he doesn’t believe in the conspiracy theories that you do.
My intellectual failures? Hmm, never got to grasp with foreign languages I must admit. But otherwise 10 O-Levels, 6 A-Levels, and a degree in Computer Science from a Russel Group University isn’t so bad.
Put him down Sean there’s a good boy, good boy! He’s had enough and needs to limp off to reassess his OSINT 😂👍!
The problem with that idea is that Putin was a trained KGB agent. Even though he is a little pig eyed weasel he would still kick the butt of sleepy Joe Bidden or fat alcohol and cheese swilling Boris or tiny dweeb Sunak and don’t even get me started on ankle bitter Macron. Lord Ashdown (ex SAS) would probably give Putin a kicking.
Hi Mr Bell, Paddy Ashdown was in fact SBS and RM.
cheers
Paddy was SB mate, so not quite the best lol 😂👍
Sadly a lot of Russian troops will be turning to alcohol as they all must be acutely aware of their huge casualties, lack of a strategy, forlorn hope of a victory and worn out antiquated equipment. Mad Vlad the Impaler and all his cronies need to go. Then Russia can re-integrate with the civilised world and develop into a country the Russian people hope for. It is however going to take a revolution, something I’m not sure the peasantry in Russia are capable of. Any planning for a revolution would be crushed immediately by the FSB.
That only leaves someone powerful and already inside the Russian elite ousting Mad Vlad- ditto not going to happen without military support. Any emerging leader who is already in the current ranks of Russia’s elite is already likely to have blood on their hands and a good proportion of guilt for war crimes already committed in Ukraine as well as abuse of power within Russia itself. In short Russia is a failed state.
Mr Bell wrote:
Eastern Europe (especially the Baltics) does have something of an alcohol problem, but Russia has it worse and there are many reports (going back to the 1980s) which shines a very bright light on alcoholism inside the Russian military.
That said the Uk had its problems, my first posting was to 24 field Sqn based in Chatham, which was where BAOR sent its sappers for treatment for.. alcoholism. As a 19 year old Sapper I was regaled to the sights of grown men with DTs (Delirium Tremens) if that doesn’t put you off drinking I don’t know what will. To the frank there was a huge drinking culture in place, which kind of explains the squadron parade we had every Friday at 4 in the squadron bar. I can remember been given a pint glass full of spirits (with a raw egg cracked into it) to drink, I simply poured it over my head instead. The lads cheered and not only did I get out of drinking that, I had shiny hair for a week. My saving grace was I joined the boxing team and the Q in charge banned us from drinking alcohol.
Perhaps we should be sending Whisky to Ukraine? Their special forces could leave cases of Whisky where the fed up Russian conscripts could find them. If they are too p*ssed to fight Ukraine, it is a result.
That tactic was used in Rhodesia but with poisoned beer I believe
Whisky? Methylated spirits would be cheaper, have a quicker impact on Russian troop numbers, and they also have a history of drinking it 🤷🏻♂️
Well I drink to that 😎
It’s a problem having substance abuse issues with serving soldiers.
Some of those Russian troops could of been deployed for over a year now.
A lot of Wagner’s prison manpower must be getting to the end of 6 month contract shortly. What a delight for the Russian population back home to deal with.
Monkey Spanker wrote:
“”A lot of Wagner’s prison manpower must be getting to the end of 6 month contract shortly. “”
Been a number of tic tok videos showing some of them getting Hammered.
Already a case of a Wagner prison recruit returning home and committing another murder (that’s what he was in for).
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/03/31/europe/wagner-convict-fighter-detained-after-return-intl/index.html
It’s as much about Russian culture as anything, they have always had a massive public health issue with alcohol related deaths…it was actually a pretty major contributor to reduced life expectancy in Russia.
Russian male life expectancy was down to about 55 in the late 1990’s. and as you say a huge part of it is down to drink
People are talking about peace ,it can only happen when putin is gone and his corrupt cronies, until then KEEP FIGHTING SLAVA UKRAINE 🇺🇦, any chinese deal throw it out the window, don’t roll over
If I were in their shoes I’d be drunk too. Torn from my family and friends and forced into a war I’m neither trained nor equipped to win.
None story, average Russian first drink at 7, regular drinker by 12, drunken sexiest at 19, regular drunken wife beater at 26, murdering nonce by 30, recruitment by Wagner at 35……job done, released by 36 (if survive) continue previous lifestyle!
With Russian leadership I’d think heavy drinking is about the only way to live as a Russian Orc. Being fed hideously callously into the meat grinder for the little man at the top’s ego & colonial ambitions & unable to speak freely about it without heavies bearing down on you at home.