Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

UK reaction / response to the invasion

I don't have any bright ideas about military assistance that could improve on what the UK is currently doing I'm afraid. However I am absolutely certain that sending British troops across the border, whatever the intention, is a very bad idea with zero upside and that would risk making things much much worse.
So you just have a go at me?
 
If I was a betting person I think once the initial brutality of this is over the sanctions will slowly slip. Have already heard some moaning from businesses about the impact on them here. Money will win out over political will again.
I would imagine so, yes.
After all, this is not an ideological conflict.
 
If I was a betting person I think once the initial brutality of this is over the sanctions will slowly slip. Have already heard some moaning from businesses about the impact on them here. Money will win out over political will again.

Also Badgers I totally baget what you're saying, but effectively you'll be inflaming (I won't say starting as Russia would have done that) WW3, leading to fuck knows what.

The grim reality is there's not much more we can do militarily atm. Maybe fund/arm an insurgency long term if that happens
I do get this I promise and trust me when I say I want peace. Have been in the Middle East for the UN and honestly hate the inhumanity of war.

Peacekeeping troops are not always 'peaceful' are they? But what else do people recommend?

Soft sanctions?
More disposable rocket launchers?
A strongly worded letter?


A show of strength and solidarity from the (so called) westerny democracy might change the Russian stance.

Have no beef with the people of Russia. They are not complicit in this mess. My mother is a Russian translator and I spent a lot of my young years sitting on a rug, eating Russian biscuits and listening to Russian people talking with my mum.

We have NO diplomats left in this country. NONE at all, so what's left? @
 
I mean this is clearly (as it stands now anyway) not going to drag NATO into a wider conflict.

But what's the red line that might? Noises against Finland and/or Sweden if they join NATO? Actual invasion looking moves to their borders? A Baltic state invaded by deniable 'green men'? Nukes in Belarus with that lunatic talking about launching them? A battlefield nuke used by Russia in Ukraine?

Bet there's some frantic discussions going on somewhere...?
 
I mean this is clearly (as it stands now anyway) not going to drag NATO into a wider conflict.

But what's the red line that might? Noises against Finland and/or Sweden if they join NATO? Actual invasion looking moves to their borders? A Baltic state invaded by deniable 'green men'? Nukes in Belarus with that lunatic talking about launching them? A battlefield nuke used by Russia in Ukraine?

Bet there's some frantic discussions going on somewhere...?

With just the beer light to guide us?
 
The UK has been in Ukraine since 2015, on an op called OP ORBITAL - we've trained them, and bought huge quantities of rifles, ammunition, CBRN gear, GPS and communications gear for them.
In addition we've provided them with around 2500 of our own anti-tank weapons from our war stocks and used our people in Ukraine to train them on how to use them - and we did so before the war started, meaning they weren't just dumped at the border with Ukr having little ability to move them to where they needed to be.
The UK provided, for years regular and persistent signals and radar intelligence gathering, both above Ukr in the form of RC-135 and Sentinel, and SIGINT on the ground.
The UK did, with the US, the public warnings that Russia was going to invade.
Do you think all that is a good thing?
 
Why?

Do you think it should have been heavy stuff like Self Propelled Artillery, or more like Germany, offering to send 5,000 helmets and leaving them at the border?
TBH doesn't take much training to use a helmet.
After the massive shambles that was it's coronavirus response, I think the EU has been outstanding in the way it's responding to this, standing together, applying sanctions, supplying weapons and aid and taking in refugees even if there has been a slight stain in the fact they seem less keen on any that might be of a duskier hue.
Our own Govt has been pretty piss poor though, it's attitude to financial sanctions seems to be geared more to cover its own arse should questions be asked about iffy donations from even iffier Russian businessmen.
Blustercunt gives the impression that he wants to claim some glory but doesn't want to do anything about it especially anything that has the teeniest chance of coming back on him, I wouldn't have thought my opinion of the cunt could sink any lower but once again he proves me wrong.
There is a strong difference in opinion in the Q household over this, I'm with the majority on this that we need to tread carefully lest we get dragged into a conflict that might very well escalate from one in which 10,000's are going to die to one in which 100's of millions are going to die. I'm opposed to a Nato NFZ but OK with sending them missiles and even slightly used Russian made jets.
Mrs Q on the other hand has turned out to be a lot more gung ho than I expected, she not only supports an NFZ but thinks NATO should bomb Russian convoys in Ukraine. Even after nearly 40 years that woman can still surprise me.
 
Last edited:
Mrs Q on the other hand has turned out to be a lot more gung ho than I expected, she not only supports an NFZ but thinks NATO should bomb Russian convoys in Ukraine. Even after nearly 40 years that woman can still surprise me.

I'm with Mrs Q here. It's becoming clear that Russia's military is bobbins, the world's #1 thief gave his generals trillions of roubles to upgrade their shit and amazingly they all now drive new Mercs and Porsches. Turkey shoot the 80km column, wtf can Putin do about it? Send his nukes over on a propeller plane? Fantasy missiles don't work irl.
 
I think it would have been a good thing if Ukraine had been so hard a target that Russia had stayed inside her borders.

No dead Ukrainians, no dead Russians.
So you are saying we didn't arm them enough? And you think that wouldve solved the problem. Not enough Western weapons in Ukraine. And you dont think that wouldve been an even bigger provocation to Putin?
 
Again, blundercunt's [nicking that !] response is far too little and far too late to stop the invasion itself. That's because the response in 2014 was far too weak.

Personally, I think the various former Warsaw Pact countries, like Ukraine, that have shown an interest in joining / associate membership of the EU & NATO should have been fast-tracked into an associateship status - initially, on a temporary basis.

The scope of the fairly feeble sanctions should be increased dramatically - both wider in terms of the topics covered, but also the number of people individually included.

The UN general assembly needs to vote for a) Putin & his troops to fuck off out of Ukraine
b) a NFZ & UN [NATO] peacekeepers
and c) Putin & Russia to pay for repairing all the damage caused to people, the environment and the infrastructure - domestic, commercial, communications, agriculture & industrial [& that includes rebuilding the An-225].

Next, any oligarch mansions should be used to house refugees ... and more assistance widely provided to areas currently hosting them. That included fast-tracking covid-19 vaccinations and other medical support. Checks - looking for security risks - can be done later.

Funds confiscated off oligarchs etc should be used in two ways - firstly to provide for refugees and secondly to pay for the required rebuilding.
 
you are saying we didn't arm them enough? And you think that wouldve solved the problem. Not enough Western weapons in Ukraine. And you dont think that wouldve been an even bigger provocation to Putin?

I think that if Ukraine had a strong military, and the sanctions had been clearly spelt out, and the political shift within Europe - German rearmament, Sweden and Finland seriously thinking about NATO membership - in the event of an invasion had been clearly spelt out, all 6 months ago, then it's quite possible that Putin/the people around him would have decided that the game wasn't worth the candle.
 
Trouble is even if half putins nukes don't work they need constant maintenance and specialist skills. The 1990s were not good for Russia. The US has had issues with its nuke arsenal loss of very specifics skills etc etc. It would be aot worse for Russia.
That still leaves over 1000 nukes more than enough to fuck everyone.
Putin probably doesn't give a fuck about other people's children
 
I believe it when I see it :


They're not rushing into it are they. It's just noise. I doubt many of those mansions are held in the name of the sanctioned oligarchs themselves, so there's delay upon delay in discovering the true beneficiaries of the trusts and shell companies that own them, even when everyone 'knows' who they really are.

Full FT article cited is free to read btw, as part of their Ukraine service
 
Not sure what thread this fits best on so might as well go here, since it's probably not worth starting a "hitmouse's mad housemate sounds off" thread - had managed to avoid discussing the subject with my anti-vax housemate so far, since I know his opinions do tend towards the Putinist, but a third housemate brought it up this morning and we got the full list rolled out - denazification, Zelensky as a puppet of the US, Putin not wanting war and so on. He kept asking how many wars the US had started, apparently on the grounds that if I/we oppose the invasion of Ukraine then we must be in favour of the US invading places instead?

He is a very decent bloke as long as you stay away from the pandemic or geopolitics, though. 🤷‍♂️
 

"Britain will not be able to sanction Roman Abramovich and other oligarchs for “weeks and months” because the government has been unable to build a case against them. The Foreign Office and National Crime Agency have been unable to prove that there are “reasonable grounds” for designating the UK’s most prominent oligarchs for sanctions because they have struggled to link their finances to the Putin regime.

Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, wants to sanction Abramovich but has been left frustrated after being told that the government has been unable to build up a case against him and others. The Times has been told that the crime agency previously attempted to build a case against Abramovich in 2018 but failed. Ministers have been warned that they could sue the government for millions if the decisions are made on a flawed basis.

Full article: archive.ph
 
Idling wondering if the Boomers* are getting excited by the prospect of finally getting to send other people to fight in a proper war to make up for the one that finished just before they were born but bang on about all the time?


*I know #notallboomers. It's not an entirely serious question.
 
Last edited:

"Britain will not be able to sanction Roman Abramovich and other oligarchs for “weeks and months” because the government has been unable to build a case against them. The Foreign Office and National Crime Agency have been unable to prove that there are “reasonable grounds” for designating the UK’s most prominent oligarchs for sanctions because they have struggled to link their finances to the Putin regime.

Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, wants to sanction Abramovich but has been left frustrated after being told that the government has been unable to build up a case against him and others. The Times has been told that the crime agency previously attempted to build a case against Abramovich in 2018 but failed. Ministers have been warned that they could sue the government for millions if the decisions are made on a flawed basis.

Full article: archive.ph
Can't Tom Burgis or Carole Cadwalladr give her a steer?
 

"Britain will not be able to sanction Roman Abramovich and other oligarchs for “weeks and months” because the government has been unable to build a case against them. The Foreign Office and National Crime Agency have been unable to prove that there are “reasonable grounds” for designating the UK’s most prominent oligarchs for sanctions because they have struggled to link their finances to the Putin regime.

Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, wants to sanction Abramovich but has been left frustrated after being told that the government has been unable to build up a case against him and others. The Times has been told that the crime agency previously attempted to build a case against Abramovich in 2018 but failed. Ministers have been warned that they could sue the government for millions if the decisions are made on a flawed basis.

Full article: archive.ph


They should be able to freeze his assets in the UK, AFAIK he's put Chelsea up for sale, friends of Putin should not be able to make off with the loot.
 
I suppose one person's "stringent laws to enable the swift seizure of foreigners' assets" is another person's "authoritarian over-reaching government". Perhaps the UK government's power's have been insufficient in this regard, or perhaps not.

Are any other European countries managing to effect the swift seizure of mansions belonging to Russians with no easy paper trail connecting them to Putin?
 
Back
Top Bottom