CINCUSAREUR concerned about Russian rapid deployment and interior lines

[cool breeze]

17 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

 I think it's got less of a chance of happening than the EU invading Great Britain to take back all the superior cuisine that Britain acquired over the past 40 years.

Steve

LOL!     Kick em right back to the culinary stone age and probably have em mass migrating to the new world all over again.

[General Melchid]

I have to object, cuisine was exchanged both ways; we gave them dumplings and marmite

[cool breeze]

Your profile pic goes perfect with that post

[Battlefront.com]

6 minutes ago, cool breeze said:

LOL!     Kick em right back to the culinary stone age and probably have em mass migrating to the new world all over again.

I lived in London for 6 months back in 1990.  I remember a guide book that said terrible British cuisine is a myth, then justified this statement by pointing out all the great Indian and Pakistani restaurant choices available in London.  Talk about a self defeating argument And if that didn't convince me, having supper with my Brit expat Father-In-Law would certainly do it.  The man eats to live, not lives to eat... that's for sure.

3 minutes ago, General Melchid said:

I have to object, cuisine was exchanged both ways; we gave them dumplings and marmite

Don't forget toast!  The Brits raised toasted bread to an art form!

Steve

[cool breeze]

Lol, Funny story.  They also don't rinse the dishes and are all used to the soapy taste.  Or so I hear   And just so we are clear Marmite is that funky smelling green rotten veggie goop, right?  Just kidding its not that bad.  Toast tho, that's a good'un.  They do butter it, right?

[Sublime]

2 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

...AFTER WHICH NATO NEGTIAES FOR PEACE AFTER BEING HANDED A FAT ACCOMPLI.

I dont know if im gonna sue for peace but the last fat ones sure got me hungry....

[sburke]

35 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

I lived in London for 6 months back in 1990.  I remember a guide book that said terrible British cuisine is a myth, then justified this statement by pointing out all the great Indian and Pakistani restaurant choices available in London.  Talk about a self defeating argument And if that didn't convince me, having supper with my Brit expat Father-In-Law would certainly do it.  The man eats to live, not lives to eat... that's for sure.

Don't forget toast!  The Brits raised toasted bread to an art form!

Steve

I've eaten very well in England.  They have a nice assortment of other people's food. Irish pubs, Indian, Sushi even. In all my time there I don't recall eating anything "British".  That alone should have been reason enough for Britain to not only want to stay in the EU, but to welcome as many immigrants as they can.

One of the best lines from Frazier - "banger Dad?"

 

[Kinophile]

5 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:

Would be great for Russia  how ever that's not happening. I doubt the EU will let the UK leave so easy, they're already talking about a second referendum :/ 

Vlad,  do you not understand the basic nature of the EU? It's membership is voluntary,  completely contingent on the approval of member states' population. The UK held a referendum specifically to allow the population to voice that opinion, yay or nay. And now is preparing to follow that result. The EU has no say in that decision and have been very clear that they respect that decision and the process that lead to it. They gave no ability to force a second referendum simply because they don't like the result. They are not the Russian Government. They are a democracy of democracies. 

I don't know what mickey-mouse news outlets you're reading that could give that impression,  as it is completely and utterly wrong. 

 

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, kinophile said:

Vlad,  do you not understand the basic nature of the EU? It's membership is voluntary,  completely contingent on the approval of member states' population.

From my understanding the Russian media portrayal of the EU is as an over bearing, involuntary, repressive political system which apparently forces European countries to be more prosperous than Russia, even the dirt poor ones like Greece.  Now that Great Britain has chosen to leave it will suffer the same fate as Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Chechnya, Georgia, and Ukraine.

Quote

The UK held a referendum specifically to allow the population to voice that opinion, yay or nay.

It's easy to see the source of confusion.  Russian referendum ballots don't have "nay" votes options, only a choice between yay or yeah.

Quote

And now is preparing to follow that result. The EU has no say in that decision and have been very clear that they respect that decision and the process that lead to it. They gave no ability to force a second referendum simply because they don't like the result. They are not the Russian Government.

See, here's where you're mistaken.  Russia never makes the mistake of having an embarrassing result because if it even allows people to vote they've already decided what the outcome is ahead of time.  Cameron should have thought of that.

Quote

I don't know what mickey-mouse news outlets you're reading that could give that impression,  as it is completely and utterly wrong. 

There's nothing "Mickey Mouse" about Russian news outlets.  More like Goofy or, at best, Donald Duck.  Hence why I'm departing from my usual middle of the road tone and going straight into sarcasm.  The Russian media brainwashing is getting on my nerves, I suppose.

Steve

[VladimirTarasov]

5 hours ago, kinophile said:

Vlad,  do you not understand the basic nature of the EU? It's membership is voluntary,  completely contingent on the approval of member states' population. The UK held a referendum specifically to allow the population to voice that opinion, yay or nay. And now is preparing to follow that result. The EU has no say in that decision and have been very clear that they respect that decision and the process that lead to it. They gave no ability to force a second referendum simply because they don't like the result. They are not the Russian Government. They are a democracy of democracies. 

I don't know what mickey-mouse news outlets you're reading that could give that impression,  as it is completely and utterly wrong. 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/brexit-petition-for-second-eu-referendum-so-popular-the-government-sites-crashing-a7099996.html

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/petition-second-eu-referendum-crashes-house-of-commons-website

there's like way more articles than this^ and btw I said they're already talking I didn't say they were. I just read it from here and btw don't get all defensive, what happened in the UK is pretty democratic. I for one like referendums (Crimea and now UK leaving EU  ) Obviously the EU does not have involuntary members. I didn't phrase correctly, I meant that the Brits wouldn't leave the EU so easy. How ever if they do without any issues, great job mates! I support it  

Edited June 25, 2016 by VladimirTarasov

[VladimirTarasov]

8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

However, you've only address Russia's ability to invade Ukraine, not Russia's ability to win a war with Ukraine.

What would Russia's objectives be?  The only thing I can think of is to knock Ukraine down to the ground and then force some sort of lopsided punitive arrangement from it.  Based on what we've seen over the past 2.5 years, I think that is extremely unlikely to happen.  I think Putin is well aware of that as well.

OK, so Russia has stripped all of its best, most ready, most capable forces from everywhere in the Russian Federation and pushed them into Ukraine and Ukraine doesn't surrender. 

Well to be honest, march on Kiev would have to be the worse outcome because it would mean Kiev did something very very bad. A more likely scenario is for Russian forces to attack through Donbas and push Ukrainian forces out of artillery range, so artillery doesn't rain over Donetsk anymore. And while at it encircle and destroy those groups or make them surrender or route them. When success is achieved you can ask them to sign a ceasefire, if they don't want to sign a cease fire then Russia can just go on a limited offensive to take push back Ukrainian forces farther, while targeting Ukrainian bases and logistics with cruise missiles, and air strikes. This is the most likely scenario you can face in Ukraine to be honest. It is a simple goal, which can be achieved, similar to Georgia almost.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

9 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

This is my opinion too (unless Putin attacked NATO first, of course).  The most likely response would be the military aid which, apparently, the US (and presumably other NATO countries) said that they would hold off sending to Ukraine on the condition that Russia not invade.  Which is one reason that Russia has bent over backwards to lie about the fact that it already has invaded Ukraine and continues to be present there.  The West, sadly, is letting Russia get away with it.  But I digress

If Russia were to invade Ukraine proper there would be no NATO response in any direct way.  However, the amount of military aid that would suddenly appear in Ukraine would be substantial.  Even if NATO doesn't officially do it, several of its member states definitely would.  Having Poland on the border with Ukraine ensures that the aid would get there quickly and in whatever quantity chosen by NATO.  If it had to be flown in by air or moved by ship then perhaps Russia could interdict it, but not by land.

Exactly.

Even if Russia could get very far into Poland (which I doubt VERY much), what would it do?  It would have a very hostile population which, incidentally, Poland is now preparing for guerilla warfare.  Russia's supply lines would be extremely long as they would have go go through the Baltics, not Belarus (anybody that thinks Lukashenko would throw his lot in with Putin is ill informed).  The Baltics would be a hotbed of partisan activity as well.  Russia doesn't have the manpower for the invasion much less keeping whatever takes EVEN IF not a single NATO country lifted a finger to help Poland.  Which is, of course, not likely at all.

You are still missing the point.  Let me explain it to you in as simple terms as possible...

Russia could no more take on Poland than I could get a date with Kate Upton.  Even if I should happen to go to a bar where she was hanging out with her crew and "gambled" on going over to her VIP table to ask her on a date with her, it would never happen.  I'm not young enough, good looking enough, famous enough, or rich enough to get past her body guards.  My hopes and desires, planning, what I told my friends at the bar before I went over to her table, etc. MEANS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.  I would leave that bar without her phone number.

Let me summarize so you don't misunderstand me again...

Under the most extreme circumstances Russia might invade the Baltics.  It might militarily conquer the Baltics.  It would not be able to hold the Baltics for more than a few weeks, perhaps a few months.  Any talk of Russia invading Poland is utterly insane.  I think it's got less of a chance of happening than the EU invading Great Britain to take back all the superior cuisine that Britain acquired over the past 40 years.

Steve

Steve I do not misunderstand you.All i am saying is the plan might be considered but it would be a really risky iea. however, THE CAVEAT is that there have been times whensomeone has done the unexpected in military history. In 1940 nobody on the Allied side expEcted the Germans to come through the Ardennes but that is exactly what they did do.

While we agree a Russia advance into Poland is extremely unlikely we should not completely rule out the possibility, however small 

If someone produces a CMBS scenario against the backgroundof a Russian invasionof Poland grat, I will play it. Back in the 1980s moderns tabletop gamers were war gaming Warsaw Pact invasions of Western Europe (Sci Fi on the Rhine) Move East and to the present day in CMBS we re gaming Sci Fi on the Dnieper. We might as well use the game engine to play Sci Fi on the Vistula/Sci Fi Baltic States. Or even Sci Fi Russia The game engine is designed for Moderns in Eatern Europe. Suspend the geopolitical disbelief and have fun assuming they actually did fight a wa that way - just play the war game scenario and concentrate on fighting te battle ven if it is a bayttle unlikely ever to be fought - and I hope all the battlles in CMBS are never actually fought in the real world.

Again, I reiterate what I said earler,The most likely scenario is that Russia halts on the Poland - lithunia border and digs in

Now please read what I ACTUALLY said, not what you THINK i SAID

Thankyou

[LUCASWILLEN05]

6 hours ago, kinophile said:

Vlad,  do you not understand the basic nature of the EU? It's membership is voluntary,  completely contingent on the approval of member states' population. The UK held a referendum specifically to allow the population to voice that opinion, yay or nay. And now is preparing to follow that result. The EU has no say in that decision and have been very clear that they respect that decision and the process that lead to it. They gave no ability to force a second referendum simply because they don't like the result. They are not the Russian Government. They are a democracy of democracies.

I don't know what mickey-mouse news outlets you're reading that could give that impression,  as it is completely and utterly wrong.

 

Please let us not discuss Brexit. I see enough ofthat on the news and franly come here to get away from it for a bit. Thanks

[LUCASWILLEN05]

13 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

My own opinion is that there is no scenario in which NATO would choose to engage directly with Russia in Ukraine. It's not legally obligated to do so and none of the major NATO powers have national interests at stake that would justify direct conflict with a nuclear armed near-peer adversary.

Like I very much doubt the US would send armed forces into the #Ukrane. Maybe a future President Trump might do it for some reason but if he wanted to try it the Joint Chiefs would likely put him firmly in his place for obvious reasons. A war over a Russian invasion ofthe Baltic States is more probable but if he tried that Putin would vbe startinga war with NATO.

However, in CMBS we assume, for wargamng purposes, that the politicians were stupd enough to start such wars. If we didn't make thatssumption we wouldn't have a game would we!

[John Kettler]

Steve,

I think your Glory to the Defenders would be a great scenario title, but it has me thinking a bit further. And that is? Since you brought up the issue of a US response to a direct Russian invasion of Ukraine by sending in load after C-17 load of Javelins, why not give us the ability to depict exactly this situation in the game? After all, it is eminently more credible than a bunch of hardware items already there, would seem to be easy to do as far as implementation and would yield something like relatively poorly equipped US infantry, since the UA would have little in terms of the full-on US capabilities but could now bite with considerable effect despite the current real limits which make it the weakest of the three national forces. 

As for British food, I'd observe that the classic American breakfast (sans kippers) is very much English in origin and that a lot of our stews and pies, including pot pies, are also from there. Likewise puddings of divers types and what we call cookies. Believe that biscuits (not in the British sense) also hail from there. Bread, in the typical American loaf form, is English, as one glance at any number of nations' bread will instantly confirm. The American fondness for beef and pork is another aspect of the Albion connection, though somehow mutton and lamb really didn't catch on all that well here, despite being an English staple. What did port well was the chicken side of the menu, including fried chicken, I believe. Naturally, the various dishes based on grouse, quail and pheasant  are largely, methinks, British. I have had bangers and mash once , as well as a fair amount of fish and chips and the more exotic clams and chips. Sadly, I've yet to enjoy Beef Wellington. Would further argue that the British side of sausages and cheese here precedes later arrivals from France and Germany, which is why we eat lots of cheddar, instead of Camembert and Gouda, adore grilled cheese sandwiches (that English guy, the Earl of Sandwich, was responsible for that now quintessential American sandwich tradition). Then, of course, we have dishes based on such root vegetables as turnips and beets; a rich tradition of jams, jellies and preserves, not to mention mincemeat. Fish should really be a big deal, but I simply don't know all that much about the fish dishes of England, so shall leave that to others to discourse upon. Despite the apparent name origin from the French (chaudiere), clam chowder as we know it is very much Britannic. Unless someone's prepared to argue Boston was settled by the French!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Sublime]

Sigh. Ok John. Ill bite. Im from Boston as is my family. You know this.

The British influence in Boston as it relates to Bostons culture and food is ancient. In fact in certain parts of town famous for republican sympathies you.d probably get 'bottled' in a bar waxing lyrical about anything British.  Of course gentrification will have erased almost any trace of the true Irish (and Italian in other parts) working class neighborhoods within another few years completing years of rich 'yuppies' pushing poorer people from here out of where they.re from.

The Irish, Italians, and latinos have had waaaaaaayy more effect on anything happening in Boston since before the Civil War.  You absolutely can see it if you come here you wont see mention of the Brits- ( and to be fair noone really cares whether you like them or you.re a Brit anymore unless as I said theyre drunk and you.re in the wrong part of town anyways )

-Unless its in conjunction with a revolution monument or referring to something from whats essentially the US equivalent to Magna Carta days. Only Americans stand much less on tradition in my limited experience with the 'cousins'

[GAZ NZ]

I appreciate your views Steve and others but I recommend you listen to Dr Paul Craig Roberts - he was Reagan's former assistant Sec of Treasury and wrote for the wall street journal

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCI1f74ElkeoZwkdMhKDfR2g/videos

He has interesting talks on U tube and is well respected.

You seem to focus on Russia media when you should be looking else where

and

No the Russians wont be going through Poland as the focus from some people seems to be

The only thing going through Poland would be Gas/Fuel pipes in a big economic deal

 

Dr Roberts is well connected and has been quite clear about whats going on for a long time.  He discusses why and how the EU has been misusing funds, and is totally corrupt and a puppet of the US foreign policy.

He goes into detail about NATO an the events in the Ukraine

I recommend you all listen to what he has to say on the matter, this is where I get my info from - not RT or Fox

I've been clearly aware of this for sometime along with US foreign policy from his talks

Looking at the British vote very briefly as this links in

All the media talk about is what will happen if the British leave - but do not go into detail about what will happen if they stay which is far worse and it is not talked about

Britain takes in immigrants irrespective of refugee car being played I note

The British Pound is a major trading currency and it will stabilize

The whole thing is an over reaction and any negative effect will be the powers that be punishing the Average Briton

 

Due to there welfare policy most Immigrants go to Europe then go to Britain an sit on welfare.

There welfare system pay them to do nothing.

Germany you get welfare for three weeks and that's it.  Britain its for life.

I work with people from the UK and they have all been flooding to NZ to get away form the Violent Turkish, Eastern Europeans etc flooding the UK and all the migrants who sit on the benefits and do crime

Crime etc is really bad in the UK an has been getting worse.

 

This is how the EU is and has been and its getting worse

There is a lot going on that the all media doesn't report (RT included ) and I recommend you all listen to Dr Roberts on subjects on Europe and the US position on Russian and its ECONOMIC decisions to counter Russia and the economics of what is going on

the EU is part of all this - ie the Sanctions, the US had to get the EU to agree to the sanctions

Russia was doing well financially and the US saw it as opposition not wanting to join the IMF like China ( they are all in BRICS) , its basically an economic war 

Dr Roberts noted that the US cancelled there nuclear treaties without discussion with Russia that were established in the Reagan administration and the US Senate also voted to be able to use US nuclear weapons in first strike situations

The so called Hot lines are gone and once black and white lines for conflict are now blurred

The US think tanks seem to have the US NEOCONS thinking they can win a first strike and that to me is there only chance hence there aggressive policy with Russia hence pushing over heavy divisions to Europe

However if 10% of any sides arsenals is detonated its all over for humanity

So from a logical perspective you need to look where the real war is cause no one would nuke unless there nuts

 

Its clearly economic and on places like Wall street and the banking system, and in agreements like the Trans Pacific partnerships etc

The Corporations have the power now and run countries like the US and put people into power like Obama ( just like that he was there - came from nowhere )

Dr Roberts has attempted to have investigations started into the US financial system but has been stone walled but Corporate lawyers and bankers

Its very clear the US financial system is failing and the US policy makers are simply adjusting the markets buying time ( he discusses this in detail in his many comments)

Internally the US is falling apart - flints water issues are the tip of the ice berg.  The US power grid is itself old and failing amongst other critical infrastructure. The US itself is being neglected with essential services.

The US gold markets are are a clear example of the manipulation on wall Street
The discovery channel documentary on gold and it shows this very clearly,the manipulation of gold prices.

Its on U tube look it up  - its right at the end but i recommend you watch the whole thing

It clearly shows the manipulation of the worlds markets and countries an how gold is a central part of this control

There were investigations into these illegal gold /silver trades that are yet unresolved. Some traders are running illegal algorithms doing 25,000 purchases and sales in 2-5 minutes

The effect on the market can cause them to profit the way they do this making 25 Million minimum per day doing this

one transaction they profited 250 million running illegal sale and buys in this special manner and was the subject of an ongoing unresolved investigation 

This may not be shown in the video as i read it else where

And that's just gold/silver which is a fraction of the trades

Gold is the largest virtual commodity market in the world

 

The EU is part of this corrupt profiteering through Market manipulation and trade with the US dollar etc and Dr Roberts believes due to the massive un-serviceable US debt, if the EU splits over time as Britain has from it

The ongoing effect would be US financial market will collapse sooner than expected with the EU unable to support the US / investments etc

THE EU is in essence helping to prop the US markets up with there corrupt use of money.  You can argue it all you want but that's the reality

US Bankers with European support are trying to keep the US western  lifestyle and general system going for another 10-20 years but its all starting to crumble

Suppressing the Russian economy especially there energy sector is helping to keep US profits up and Russia's down

The US's middle eastern allies have too been reaping rewards

However the flawed trading system we have Its going to collapse at some point ( it always crashes but this one will be the final one ) , and resources are starting to run low.

The worlds biggest problem is over population and given a small number moving out of a battle zone in other countries look at the effects - social and economic

If you think I'm talking crap google Ted Turner an Bill Gates re depopulation

There Americans - quite important rich people Steve and not on RTs payroll  - Teds quite vocal on the matter - very upfront. UN reports have noted at our current growth rates humanity will be extinct by 2070.       Google the Georgia Standing Stones and what they say

This will just get worse as water runs out for many and other countries sink under water as there plates subduct, plus famine and war to survive

Additionally As Dr Roberts said - all countries involved with Migrants moving in now are now starting to lose there cultural identity and will do so over the next 10 plus years 

the UK is so multi cultural now - its no longer British as one would call it.

The UK is a social mess now and so Europe heads down that path.

I note when a country loss there identity, it makes them unstable, more prone to civil war if you set them up to do this, and they can be easier to control with less major groups to contest with as society is fragmented.  There is no national unity.  Its easier to become part of a world order in that context which is where the world needs to be heading, to survive, at a lower population level. Less resistance from a population that is fragmented and and has a lacking in identity. Moving them to a unified purpose is easy to do - its what a fella called Hitler did. Germany was a mess and he unified them and directed them to a purpose. Making people do very evil things i note.

Europe is such a mess they have poor out dated equipment and are forced to rely on the US for military support. Combined with a mixture of peoples which is growing - you start to get countries who do not want to fight and are unsure what they are fighting for or for what borders if such a thing exists for them anymore. That why the US are there as they are pushing for it, to keep the economic war going they have to support it with force, backing up there intentions.

ironically all the of the main business leaders of several nations France, Austria etc want to resume trading with Russia amongst all this and it may be a main drive now the UK could exit after voting that way

But A US military presence is saying no

So who is doing the threatening?

 

The reality to me is NATO is outdated and not working, not needed ( just like the UN )  and it will crumble along with the EU.

NATO is the US

The original NATO is a fragment of its former self; and from a European perspective was something collectively used in a different era after WW2 in an uncertain world with clear lines and allies/enemies in that thinking of the time

That's all gone now    Its all Corporations fighting for the Worlds resources and profits

For the EU to succeed it needs to stop being corrupt, have decent economic policy ( Brussels needs to stop raping other EU countries resources at the behest of the US )

It needs to start caring for people and have its own standing army , and military tech with mixed peoples and actually be a unified EU

Europe should sort its own issues out and that includes with Russia

The US needs to sort out its own Country out and stop going into all other countries

There are probably more shootings in the US than there were in the IRAQ war or Russia/Ukraine war

This I believe is where Trump is coming from in his views and hes quite correct that NATO should be self funded

what are US people doing over there - They should be with there families in the US

 

But Europe having its own army it could potentially threaten the US / China or Russia! if it was possible

So id expect US policy makers would want to see a fragmented Europe stay as is

France said they wanted a unified Europe with its own army and looked what happened to them

Multiple Terror attacks in France  ....  hmmmmmm ... wonder who did that to get them to toe the line

Why France each time ?   Frame publicly denounced the US for invading the middle east and did not support it when it happened

So why terror attacks on them?  Pretty obvious

 

NATOs toast as far as I'm concerned, as the years drag on and millions of refugees flood Europe people will lose the will to fight, there national pride will be gone an there country will be in economic ruins, no borders

The world we know it , is a mess, the US is trying to keep together what it can for its power bases and its own economic survival with its allies

I now know what it was like to be in Rome and watching Romes peak then decline in power

Rome was torn down from within and destroyed by corruption so watch the same unfold here

 

A person from any country will have there own views on all this which is expected and we all respect those views 

but this is the reality we face

you can argue about what media outlet said what but it doesn't matter any more

Media reports are baseless from both Western and RT sources

and the Russians do not care for invading Poland lol 

Why would Russia invade it trading partners it sells to or wants to sell to?   There is no logic in that

Its all economic with small scale wars or terror attacks to EFFECT financial markets ( manipulate them ) 

As for a Russian mil op - Maybe a Speztnaz hit on the people running the EU but that would be it lol

 

Edited June 25, 2016 by GAZ NZ

[VladimirTarasov]

18 minutes ago, GAZ NZ said:

A person from any country will have there own views on all this which is expected and we all respect those views 

but this is the reality we face

you can argue about what media outlet said what but it doesn't matter any more

and the Russians do not care for invading Poland lol 

I especially respect your view, and I generally agree with you, especially on the sanctions imposed on Russia. The EU and the US can care less for Donbas and Crimea. Basically geopolitics at play, and it's people like me who have to suffer through sanctions. Not political leaders whom which the US and EU have issues with, I guess they like collective punishment. 

[Kinophile]

19 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:

. I doubt the EU will let the UK leave so easy, they're already talking about a second referendum :/ 

I'm working off the wording of this sentence,, specifically 'let', which implies EU control of the UKs political process. 

But you're quite correct that there are genuine public initiatives to push for a second referendum. Personally I think this is potentially even more destabilizing -  the vote was held,  it was clean and open, and while not a large majority,  a majority it was none the less. Forcing a second round would v cause the Leave vite to get very angry  and entrenched, would polarize British politics even more and destroy their international financial stability to a terrible degree. I feel Cameron etc could have run a dar stronger campaign and I suspect his conservative background of preventing him from honestly,  in his heart if hearts,  agreeing with the Remain vite.

Still, the results are in and now it's time to move on. 

They can always rejoin, if the EU let's them. But I suspect it'll be another 10-15 years before that happens - this generation of Conservatives needs to due off,  and the full negative impact of leaving the EU needs to be felt before another referendum can/should be held. 

[VladimirTarasov]

15 minutes ago, kinophile said:

I'm working off the wording of this sentence,, specifically 'let', which implies EU control of the UKs political process. 

But you're quite correct that there are genuine public initiatives to push for a second referendum. Personally I think this is potentially even more destabilizing -  the vote was held,  it was clean and open, and while not a large majority,  a majority it was none the less. Forcing a second round would v cause the Leave vite to get very angry  and entrenched, would polarize British politics even more and destroy their international financial stability to a terrible degree. I feel Cameron etc could have run a dar stronger campaign and I suspect his conservative background of preventing him from honestly,  in his heart if hearts,  agreeing with the Remain vite.

Still, the results are in and now it's time to move on. 

They can always rejoin, if the EU let's them. But I suspect it'll be another 10-15 years before that happens - this generation of Conservatives needs to due off,  and the full negative impact of leaving the EU needs to be felt before another referendum can/should be held. 

Sorry you know English is my 2nd language sometimes what I think in my head is projected way differently in my typing lol... even though my English is pretty darn good  

BTW I'm not a person from the UK, how ever I think the UK has made a good choice in becoming independent from the EU.

[Sublime]

Oh please. Give me a break.  That rant was such utter nonsense. You.re trying to say the US directed the French terror attacks? You.re living in a Kettlerian fantasy world - new world order etc. Pls.

Uh you do remember there were attacks elsewhere first of all, second of all why France? Uh maybe the flood of immigrants that are in France?

Maybe the enclaved huge muslim population thats living in what are essentially ghettos in the old fashioned sense? The same population that rioted and firebombed the Paris police responding in 05? So I bet you also think the US did 9 11 and the Brit terror attacks and the Spanish ones as well? Wheres the illuminati in your theory? (of making jews live in a specific area not in a rap sense.)

And no. Tens of thousands of people didnt get murdered in the US from shootings last year  sorry. So no no comparison whatsoever to Syria or even Ukraine.

P.s. Or instead of blaming the US/EU for sanctions you could blame the Russian government for continually lying, aggressively pursuing hybrid warfare, and violating the Minsk agreements? Of course the upper class isnt suffering. Ironically if theres a third world war the only surviors will be thise assholes on the top. But to blame the US EU for the sanctions, how about Putin et. Al. For getting the sanctions and declaring on your behalf without asking you that you and the entire nation will endure anyways despite the evil capitalist lap dogs plan to make a new world order. Another thread down the tubes.

Edited June 25, 2016 by Sublime

[Anthony P.]

You know those Putin trolls? Think I found one.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

1 hour ago, Sublime said:

Oh please. Give me a break.  That rant was such utter nonsense. You.re trying to say the US directed the French terror attacks? You.re living in a Kettlerian fantasy world - new world order etc. Pls.

Uh you do remember there were attacks elsewhere first of all, second of all why France? Uh maybe the flood of immigrants that are in France?

Maybe the enclaved huge muslim population thats living in what are essentially ghettos in the old fashioned sense? The same population that rioted and firebombed the Paris police responding in 05? So I bet you also think the US did 9 11 and the Brit terror attacks and the Spanish ones as well? Wheres the illuminati in your theory? (of making jews live in a specific area not in a rap sense.)

And no. Tens of thousands of people didnt get murdered in the US from shootings last year  sorry. So no no comparison whatsoever to Syria or even Ukraine.

P.s. Or instead of blaming the US/EU for sanctions you could blame the Russian government for continually lying, aggressively pursuing hybrid warfare, and violating the Minsk agreements? Of course the upper class isnt suffering. Ironically if theres a third world war the only surviors will be thise assholes on the top. But to blame the US EU for the sanctions, how about Putin et. Al. For getting the sanctions and declaring on your behalf without asking you that you and the entire nation will endure anyways despite the evil capitalist lap dogs plan to make a new world order. Another thread down the tubes.

I'd rather we didn't discuss Brexit or the Referendum  except in terms of how it might affect NATO interventionin EasternEurope. Otherwise please can we not dscuss it here. I know my views can be qcontroversial at times but t least they have some relevance on this forum.

This was an interesting thread and it would be nice to get bck on track gents :-)

[Kinophile]

5 hours ago, VladimirTarasov said:

[Ivanov]

6 hours ago, GAZ NZ said:

The only thing going through Poland would be Gas/Fuel pipes in a big economic deal

Interesting. Neither Poland nor Russia are planning to build pipelines through Polish territory. All the new Russian pipelines are going to bypass Poland, while Poland is doing everything possible to get the gas from other sources than Russia.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-12/poland-opens-lng-terminal-pledges-to-end-russian-gas-dependence

Edited June 25, 2016 by Ivanov