• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

A Political Thread pt. 2


He said that after Russia annexed Crimea The man is a ****.
Then you definitely don’t want to watch any part of his interview on Triggernometry. Although he doesn’t try to defend January 6th he does still believe that Trump can unite the US if he gets back in. Pie in the f’ing sky.

I didn’t watch his thoughts on Ukraine but suspect that is what he was correcting with his tweet.
 
That seems... Odd?

What did they think they were doing there?

Edit: OK so it sounds like they thought they were on a recon mission? Tbh that sounds a little like the Salisbury sightseeing excuse and they've just deserted after losing their bottle. Still would be a good sign
Doesn't russia still have conscription?

If not, for frontline, then I can still get it: there's nothing just about Russia's actions, difference between being posted on the border and being ordered to kill people you might identify with quite strongly
Easier to surrender to the Ukrainians after hoping you don't have to invade than to disobey orders while still on the Russian side of the border
 



Very bad if verified


I'd have thought it's only the necessary excuse if "we" want it to be.
"we" don't want it to be, so we'll probably call it a "guidance system error" or some such.


If we wanted to get involved militarily, we would have done so when Ukraine asked us to.
 
Prioritising the capture of Chernobyl is particularly sinister. Wait until the wind changes, remove the shield and let the contamination spread into the EU. Hard to imagine this would be a military objective if priorities were limited to Eastern Ukraine.


I have no opinion on China as they are very unpredictable now. Xi appears to be a genuine Communist so I imagine him loathing all that Putin stands for with his overtly nationalist aggression against the Ukranian proletariat. But clearly there are many mutual interests between them and if China can get away with supporting Russia without being penalised of course they will. Interestingly significant parts of eastern Siberia is old Chinese Manchurian territory and the two nuclear powers have had border disputes in the past. A little parcel of territory would keep China sweet as a long term ally.
 
Prioritising the capture of Chernobyl is particularly sinister. Wait until the wind changes, remove the shield and let the contamination spread into the EU. Hard to imagine this would be a military objective if priorities were limited to Eastern Ukraine.


I have no opinion on China as they are very unpredictable now. Xi appears to be a genuine Communist so I imagine him loathing all that Putin stands for with his overtly nationalist aggression against the Ukranian proletariat. But clearly there are many mutual interests between them and if China can get away with supporting Russia without being penalised of course they will. Interestingly significant parts of eastern Siberia is old Chinese Manchurian territory and the two nuclear powers have had border disputes in the past. A little parcel of territory would keep China sweet as a long term ally.
I'm not sure about how it works so purely spit balling here - if one was to store assets in chernobyl, would you basically protect it from bombing because of the risk of contamination? Or does it not work like that
 
Spitballing in ignorance and no little fear.
If you hold Chernobyl; you don't need to threaten nukes to scare people - just half a tonne of TNT and a favourable wind. Especially if you look willing to spend lives of peons on your own side.

again, you don't need to actually do it, just look like you might
 
I'm not sure about how it works so purely spit balling here - if one was to store assets in chernobyl, would you basically protect it from bombing because of the risk of contamination? Or does it not work like that

You could fairly safely store military assets in the Chernobyl exclusion zone, but I think generally it is more likely to be a tool for future blackmail. I don't think Russia needs storage for assets, it has all of Russia and now seemingly Belarus to store any assets. In terms of say a base for nukes, the range on Russian ballistic missiles means this probably isn't required either. I have no idea what a stray missile hitting the actual power plant would do and if it would be worse than simply removing the roof/shield (which I think is retractable on wheels?).
 
You could fairly safely store military assets in the Chernobyl exclusion zone, but I think generally it is more likely to be a tool for future blackmail. I don't think Russia needs storage for assets, it has all of Russia and now seemingly Belarus to store any assets. In terms of say a base for nukes, the range on Russian ballistic missiles means this probably isn't required either. I have no idea what a stray missile hitting the actual power plant would do and if it would be worse than simply removing the roof/shield (which I think is retractable on wheels?).
My thinking is that it would be a massive middle finger to the west optics wise tbh
 
Ugh. This article and video shows the Chernobyl shield was rolled on rails 300 metres to its final resting place. So presumably it can be wheeled back and forth at will based on prevailing winds, so that Putin could only bring nuclear devastation to selected nearby nations of his choosing rather than risking contamination clouds over Russia.


I'm not too critical of the democratic world. Nuclear weapons completely change military considerations and if someone with no logic or restraint gets their hands on enough of them and a capable delivery system then you have few options beyond trying to cripple their country economically over the long term.

Prioritisation of Chernobyl is definitely my numero uno horror on a catastrophic day. I cannot make sense of it other than to draw very sinister conclusions. There'd be no chance of Ukraine trying anything funky with it even if winds blew towards Russia.
 
Last edited:
Ugh. This article and video shows the Chernobyl shield was rolled on rails 300 metres to its final resting place. So presumably it can be wheeled back and forth at will based on prevailing winds, so that Putin could only bring nuclear devastation to selected nearby nations of his choosing rather than risking contamination clouds over Russia.


I'm not too critical of the democratic world. Nuclear weapons completely change military considerations and if someone with no logic or restraint gets their hands on enough of them and a capable delivery system then you have few options beyond trying to cripple their country economically over the long term.

Prioritisation of Chernobyl is definitely my numero uno horror on a catastrophic day. I cannot make sense of it other than to draw very sinister conclusions. There'd be no chance of Ukraine trying anything funky with it even if winds blew towards Russia.
Only if the rail system is still in place which I doubt it is given its the final resting place.
 
Judge Judy Reaction GIF
 
Only if the rail system is still in place which I doubt it is given its the final resting place.
Fair point, but we can do things like this, so putting it back onto rails is likely technically achievable.


Perhaps it is an attempt to prevent Ukraine from the hypothetical situation of using radioactive material in a dirty bomb. All a bit baffling.
 
Last edited:
I'm not too critical of the democratic world. Nuclear weapons completely change military considerations and if someone with no logic or restraint gets their hands on enough of them and a capable delivery system then you have few options beyond trying to cripple their country economically over the long term.
There is always assassination of the leadership group.

Which right now might be the best of a bunch of rather crap choices.

[not saying it'd be easy or anything, but if Putin et al knew they could one day find a JDAM with their name on it dropping from a B-2, instead of some poor wee private freezing his balls off in a ditch in a country he doesn't want to be in, then it might give them pause.]
 

Latest posts

Back
Top