strichener Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 6 minutes ago, WATTOO said: Until the average price reduces from £40k down to about £16k to £20k, then I'm afraid that only the elite in society (or those rattling the PCP) will be able to afford one !! Not to mention the complete lack of charging infrastructure of course.... More importantly in this context is - how the f**k could we generate the electricity to replace the petrol and diesel engines. We certainly can't do it without gas and putting renewable infrastructure in place will be slow. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullerene Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 5 minutes ago, Shuggie_Murray7 said: It's only just come to my attention that Putin appears to be a very, very small man. The thought of that never crossed my mind before now. Nice try but Zelensky is the same height. I think the dispute is about something else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stellaboz Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 A little off topic but I remember reading a few years back about the Tsar Bomba, the biggest nuke ever made. Was about 3000 times stronger than the one that flattened Hiroshimo. One of the things that stood out was that they could have made it almost twice as strong but some of the Russian experts were frightened that it would ignite part of the fucking atmosphere. The also felt the fucker in Finland ffs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 8 minutes ago, Shuggie_Murray7 said: It's only just come to my attention that Putin appears to be a very, very small man. The thought of that never crossed my mind before now. I'm 6' 3". Think it might help if I offer to go over and give him a hug, while apologising on behalf of all the big lads who gave him swirlies at school? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 1 hour ago, Detournement said: The Telegraph are dipping their toe into the pool of fascism. I don't know what's most frightening here, is it the actual story or is it the fact that many in the West still seem to believe that Russia and Putin are Communists !! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Just now, Stellaboz said: A little off topic but I remember reading a few years back about the Tsar Bomba, the biggest nuke ever made. Was about 3000 times stronger than the one that flattened Hiroshimo. One of the things that stood out was that they could have made it almost twice as strong but some of the Russian experts were frightened that it would ignite part of the fucking atmosphere. The also felt the fucker in Finland ffs. I'm sure I remember that being a concern when the initial tests of nuclear bombs were being performed. Of course, they did it anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 20 minutes ago, Shuggie_Murray7 said: It's only just come to my attention that Putin appears to be a very, very small man. The thought of that never crossed my mind before now. If you have twitter, Jim'll Paint It done a cracking Vladimir Putin effort that highlights just this. Unfortunately I am at work right now and the firewall won't let me find it and link it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 4 hours ago, ICTChris said: Navalny's like Putin's twin, Russian Nationalist with a big "N" before anything else. That's why he hasn't knocked him off yet, unlike Nemtsov who was actually offering an alternative and therefore much more dangerous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 If you have twitter, Jim'll Paint It done a cracking Vladimir Putin effort that highlights just this. Unfortunately I am at work right now and the firewall won't let me find it and link it.He should probably avoid touching door handles for a bit [emoji23] 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TxRover Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 38 minutes ago, virginton said: If that were the case then militaries (starting with the US) wouldn't have developed battlefield nukes in the first place. They were designed to be a tactical option below the level of a city-scale attack. The temptation to use them combined with the high risk of escalation is precisely what makes them dangerous. There can be no justification for having them. They were designed to be usable in situations where your opponent didn’t have WMD’s and you might need something with a little more “umph”…also to fit smaller warhead buses on IRBMs and artillery shells. It was considered stabilizing to have the same small weapons as the USSR, etc, as it would remove the need to lob a larger nuke back to show you were serious in response to a pony nuke. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 (edited) 52 minutes ago, yoda said: The "escalate to de-escalate" logic has been discussed in the past. I don't know if it has ever been official Russian policy but I wouldn't say it's necessarily unrealistic logic. I remember reading that Soviet policy on day 1 of an offensive against NATO was to nuke Denmark, principally because it wasn't a nuclear power and they would, as you say - escalate things to show the Western nuclear powers they were serious but not enough to get a retaliation. Wouldn't have worked under article V - likely a flexible response where NATO nukes something similarly sized back. On the other side of the hill, BAOR commanders reckoned they had 48 hours before they started lobbing tactical nukes at Soviet bridgeheads. Imagine if the first wave is successful enough to incinerate Soviet shock forces en masse, causing a pause in the a Soviet offensive and NATO plans a second wave - as well as retaliating with it's own nuclear weapons to stop NATO forces exploiting the big radioactive crater where 3rd Shock army used to be, they launch air attacks against likely NATO tactical nuclear delivery sites - airbases, back in the day. To be sure of destroying their targets, the Soviets naturally use nuclear warheads against NATO airbases. They don't get them all because a wave of NATO aircraft were already on the way to try and pre-empt this exact issue. Meanwhile, Soviet forces nuke likely entry ports for US reinforcements so Portsmouth and Southampton are gone because Royal Navy forces are a tactical nuclear threat, and Hamburg, Broken and Rotterdam get fucked to try and stop US entry. Glasgow gets killed in order to pre-empt UK Polaris use. That's already likely enough for NATO to consider retaliation against Warsaw pact civilian populations. Of course, carrier groups also have tactical nukes and there are a lot of airbases close to civilian populations. So, 72 hours in and Germany is a radioactive crater, forward airbases on both sides are gone and civilian populations in Eastern Europe, the low Countries and the UK are already suffering grave casualties. All of which has been done to maintain tactical, military objectives. We haven't even gotten into the strategic city killers yet. That's coming though, as Soviets attempt to catch US carrier forces in Port using the only weapons they have with the range required, which they know will look like a full on first strike to the US so might as well make it one, so Soviets are now targeting US ICBMs... who launch in order to save their missiles and hit back. I am probably talking out my arse but there is, as far as I can see, no way of stopping escalation once you are on the nuclear ladder. Edited March 2, 2022 by renton 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 1 minute ago, Day of the Lords said: He should probably avoid touching door handles for a bit Full frontal unpixellated version. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 3 minutes ago, Day of the Lords said: He should probably avoid touching door handles for a bit As long as he has sent the tee shirts I ordered from him last week, I don't really care.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 10 minutes ago, Ross. said: If you have twitter, Jim'll Paint It done a cracking Vladimir Putin effort that highlights just this. Unfortunately I am at work right now and the firewall won't let me find it and link it. Wow, Switzerland doesn't f**k about with this neutrality shit, huh? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 4 minutes ago, renton said: , as far as I can see, no way of stopping escalation once you are on the nuclear ladder. You could just've said that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 30 minutes ago, BFTD said: I'm 6' 3". Think it might help if I offer to go over and give him a hug, while apologising on behalf of all the big lads who gave him swirlies at school? There are many good reasons to send you to a dangerous part of the world. To give Putin a hug comes very low on the list. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 1 minute ago, Granny Danger said: There are many good reasons to send you to a dangerous part of the world. To give Putin a hug comes very low on the list. Pretty sure I'd be safer in the Kremlin than here! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 2 minutes ago, BFTD said: Pretty sure I'd be safer in the Kremlin than here! Alloa? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 41 minutes ago, Thistle_do_nicely said: Are they part of the arsenal for use against combatants that dont have any nukes at all? Even just as a threat maybe? If the other side has them then i guess MAD applies, plus any nation using them in a conflict has the stigma of using a nuke, even if its a low megaton yield one, so maybe they're pointless tbf. A few conventional big bombs can be pretty devastating in their own right. The other side in this conflict isn't a nuclear power, so MAD doesn't apply. They were absolutely designed to give Cold War generals tactical 'options' to win an all-out war without going to the levelling cities stage. I'd like to think that they're pointless, but so long as they exist there is a temptation to use them, if nothing else to get out of a potentially disastrous situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairnardo Posted March 2, 2022 Share Posted March 2, 2022 Genuinely think it's time that civilians stopped dying at the whim of rich and powerful politicians and dictators. Back to the Ancient times, your hardest v our hardest.My money goes on Vitali FWIW. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.