• BeardedGingerWonder
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 个月前

    No, absolutely I don’t think they should let them have any of it, I’m not sure how that could be read into my comment.

    Equally NATO have in no way indicated they have any plans of setting foot in Ukraine and outright said they won’t. None of which explains why senior military leaders in the UK are saying they need to be able to raise an armed force double what they have at the minute, why nukes are being stationed in the UK or why Sweden are foreseeing land war in Europe.

      • BeardedGingerWonder
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 个月前

        Well that’s kind of what I’m asking, is there something obvious I’m missing? Russia don’t look capable of escalating, they’re not even making inroads into Ukraine. A couple of squadrons of F35s would make a significant dent in Russian progress in Ukraine, but no-one even seems super keen to send F16s.

        I’m genuinely curious what scenario they’re currently seeing where a few hundred thousand troops are going to be necessary soon?

        • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 个月前

          i bet theres a metric fucktonne of info only handful of world leaders on in on. if i had to guess, russia is prolly internally throwing ideas of doing something stupid.

          for reasons, well… it could be the f16s already in use are having an effect, and russia is about to respond hard core with air control… it could be that russia is frustrated and now willing to use small scale, ‘local nukes’ to shock ukraine.

          maybe ukraine is starting to take the fight over the border, and that is spooking russia

          a lot of these things lead to the war bleeding outside of ukraine, and stepping directly into nato territory on all sides.