Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ok folk how long before Putin invades Finland before it joins NATO How many on here think like me that Putin isnt going to take this lying down we all got big problems a head if Findland dose join NATO" The UK has already agreed to support Finland and Sweden militarily. If Russia invades either then they get a NATO member as opposition and that could lead to all of NATO. Is Putin that crazy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ok folk how long before Putin invades Finland before it joins NATO How many on here think like me that Putin isnt going to take this lying down we all got big problems a head if Findland dose join NATO" Finland has one of the largest armies in Europe… and they are very… very well trained… the Russians won’t do shit! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is Putin that crazy?" I think so. He's acting very "North Korea" and his ego won't let him back down. Here's hoping China slap some sense into him before it's too late! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Only option he has is to park/point nuclear weapons I reckon" Or stop being a murderous dictator. That's another option. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some people seem to think that Turkey will block the Swedish and Finnish applications " So it seems. I wasn't aware that application acceptance has to be unanimous. My scepticism suggests that's unwise as it only takes one to block a benefit for the many...and besides, isn't Erdogan a little too pally with Putin? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some people seem to think that Turkey will block the Swedish and Finnish applications So it seems. I wasn't aware that application acceptance has to be unanimous. My scepticism suggests that's unwise as it only takes one to block a benefit for the many...and besides, isn't Erdogan a little too pally with Putin? " More than likely scared of him  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"our PM mr johnski, has just promised all you under 30 somethings arses to sanna marin. "She seems nice. I'm sure their arses will be comfortable in her hands. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some people seem to think that Turkey will block the Swedish and Finnish applications " The Turks will bluster for a bit but with all the pressure they won’t want to be the only one blocking the move… the swedes and Finns will get in quickly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The Turks will bluster for a bit but with all the pressure they won’t want to be the only one blocking the move… the swedes and Finns will get in quickly " There's a real irony in the neo-Nazi Turkish leader backing Putin! (Not really, considering that Putin is a fascist. Yet, ironic given the narrative Putin is trying to spin.) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some people seem to think that Turkey will block the Swedish and Finnish applications The Turks will bluster for a bit but with all the pressure they won’t want to be the only one blocking the move… the swedes and Finns will get in quickly " My Understanding is Hungry may also veto. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some people seem to think that Turkey will block the Swedish and Finnish applications The Turks will bluster for a bit but with all the pressure they won’t want to be the only one blocking the move… the swedes and Finns will get in quickly My Understanding is Hungry may also veto. " The countries who want to make a something out of it will hang on for a sweetner
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ok folk how long before Putin invades Finland before it joins NATO How many on here think like me that Putin isnt going to take this lying down we all got big problems a head if Findland dose join NATO The UK has already agreed to support Finland and Sweden militarily. If Russia invades either then they get a NATO member as opposition and that could lead to all of NATO. Is Putin that crazy?" No, but Boris hardmanski needs to keep his mouth shut and stop unilaterally poking the bear. "We'll stand by Sweden", that nuclear weapon, Poseidon 2M39 Tsunami torpedo might be headed our way soon. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agree,why the fuck is it no one mentions assisnate one fucking twat ?,how can one guy cause so much death " It wpuld not be just one though as his close circle are just as hardline as he is. Unless they are just good actors! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Agree,why the fuck is it no one mentions assisnate one fucking twat ?,how can one guy cause so much death " There are rumours of a coup, the only issue might be - it's by hardliners that believe Russia need to be more aggressive in Ukraine and towards the West. The 'good guys' are locked up. Be careful what you wish for.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. " Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name " Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy." I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? " come to their aid same with Sweden too | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? " i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? " Not totally sure but think it largely depends on what Finland ask for. It will be up to them to ask for assistance , and specify what type of assistance they want | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? come to their aid same with Sweden too" Thanks Worrying situation considering our lack of defence against an all out conventional attack from Russia. Are we becoming the playground loudmouth who’s about to be chinned in front of all our friends who will do nothing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires. "There is zero chance of the Russians attacking the fins… Finland have 280,000 regulars plus 900,000 reservists… plus they are all super trained and have the latest tech!! If Russia went to war with Finland there would be a greater chance of Finland getting back all the land they succeeded to Russia in 1940 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? come to their aid same with Sweden too Thanks Worrying situation considering our lack of defence against an all out conventional attack from Russia. Are we becoming the playground loudmouth who’s about to be chinned in front of all our friends who will do nothing. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? come to their aid same with Sweden too Thanks Worrying situation considering our lack of defence against an all out conventional attack from Russia. Are we becoming the playground loudmouth who’s about to be chinned in front of all our friends who will do nothing. " an all out conventional attack from Russia ffs have you not seen how shit they are against ukrain they couldn’t manage anything to worry about for the U.K. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Turkey is still refusing to lift its veto on Sweden and Finland joining NATO. Won’t make any difference in reality… they have both sign security pacts with the uk, the us, and various other countries in the last week… that basically covers them in all but name Exactly as soon as boris signed a security deal with them they were virtually signed up by proxy. I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? come to their aid same with Sweden too Thanks Worrying situation considering our lack of defence against an all out conventional attack from Russia. Are we becoming the playground loudmouth who’s about to be chinned in front of all our friends who will do nothing. " Not exactly sure how a conventional war would even happen. Maybe the navy and airforce but certainly no ground troops. Advantage of being an island. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires. "Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment. The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Without their Nukes i’d bet Nato would already be all over Russia and driving all the way to Moscow for regime change (or control the oil and gas). From their performance so far they seem to be an utter shambles of an army in conventional terms. Finland And the UK have little to fear. " I thought the same. If he didn't have nukes I think NATO would have had enough and counterattacked. Xx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Without their Nukes i’d bet Nato would already be all over Russia and driving all the way to Moscow for regime change (or control the oil and gas). From their performance so far they seem to be an utter shambles of an army in conventional terms. Finland And the UK have little to fear. " Driving into Moscow isn't a defensive stance though as NATO proportional to | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he didn't have nukes I think NATO would have had enough and counterattacked. Xx" Not a chance. NATO are very aware of Russia's friends - many of whom also have nuclear weapons. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he didn't have nukes I think NATO would have had enough and counterattacked. Xx Not a chance. NATO are very aware of Russia's friends - many of whom also have nuclear weapons. " Yeah, NATO would have invaded years ago | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he didn't have nukes I think NATO would have had enough and counterattacked. Xx Not a chance. NATO are very aware of Russia's friends - many of whom also have nuclear weapons. " do Russia really have friends lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he didn't have nukes I think NATO would have had enough and counterattacked. Xx Not a chance. NATO are very aware of Russia's friends - many of whom also have nuclear weapons. do Russia really have friends lol" More concerned about what they have got and how many. Satan and Satan mark 2s | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If he didn't have nukes I think NATO would have had enough and counterattacked. Xx Not a chance. NATO are very aware of Russia's friends - many of whom also have nuclear weapons. " There's only really China, I'm not sure they'd help. India I'm sure wouldn't. Xx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response. "the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response.
the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again."Russia invades a sovereign nation state in Europe and the US won’t react despite 70+ years of European troop deployment? You can’t seriously be suggesting that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response.
the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again.
Russia invades a sovereign nation state in Europe and the US won’t react despite 70+ years of European troop deployment? You can’t seriously be suggesting that."you seem politically naive chap | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response.
the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again.
Russia invades a sovereign nation state in Europe and the US won’t react despite 70+ years of European troop deployment? You can’t seriously be suggesting that.
you seem politically naive chap "In that case can you pleas explain to this naive chap why the US has positioned troops in mainland Europe pretty constantly since the end of the Second World War? I assume that because they clearly are not here for defensive purposes against. Russian threat (as per your argument) then it is because they don’t have enough room for them back home? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response.
the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again.
Russia invades a sovereign nation state in Europe and the US won’t react despite 70+ years of European troop deployment? You can’t seriously be suggesting that.
you seem politically naive chap
In that case can you pleas explain to this naive chap why the US has positioned troops in mainland Europe pretty constantly since the end of the Second World War? I assume that because they clearly are not here for defensive purposes against. Russian threat (as per your argument) then it is because they don’t have enough room for them back home?"what a nice strawman you're building there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response.
the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again.
Russia invades a sovereign nation state in Europe and the US won’t react despite 70+ years of European troop deployment? You can’t seriously be suggesting that.
you seem politically naive chap
In that case can you pleas explain to this naive chap why the US has positioned troops in mainland Europe pretty constantly since the end of the Second World War? I assume that because they clearly are not here for defensive purposes against. Russian threat (as per your argument) then it is because they don’t have enough room for them back home?
what a nice strawman you're building there "I am only asking you to educate me as you have pointed out I am naive. Please do enlighten me. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn’t read the detail on this was it to supply weapons or come to their aid in the event they are attacked ? i did. our idiot leader signed us up to go to war if sweden and finland are attacked. turkey's veto has left the uk dangerously exposed as our pact would mean that if we go to the aid of either finland or sweden then nato no longer have our back. johnski is a moronic idiot with no idea of the statesmanship which his role as PM requires.
Seriously? If Finland or Sweden were attacked and we defended them then the US would be right behind us. That is the only power coupling that meaningful matters in Europe at the moment.
The reality is that an attack on any European country - particularly in the Northern Arctic - would elicit a strong UK and US response.
the reality is that the US would first have to get agreement in the upper house to go to war without any appetite for it from the voters. it's doubtful that there would be any agreement in the upper house, other than on the supply of weapons in exchange for new US bases on UK owned soil and the bankrupting & plundering of the UK economy yet again.
Russia invades a sovereign nation state in Europe and the US won’t react despite 70+ years of European troop deployment? You can’t seriously be suggesting that.
you seem politically naive chap
In that case can you pleas explain to this naive chap why the US has positioned troops in mainland Europe pretty constantly since the end of the Second World War? I assume that because they clearly are not here for defensive purposes against. Russian threat (as per your argument) then it is because they don’t have enough room for them back home?
what a nice strawman you're building there
I am only asking you to educate me as you have pointed out I am naive. Please do enlighten me."he can’t lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
