(06-21-2025, 01:51 PM)gortex Wrote: Seems we are two sides of a coin mate , I support our defence of Ukraine as a Russian victory has grave consequences for us all , Peter the Great 2.0 , Putin , won't stop at Ukraine indeed he is already massing forces at the border with Finland.
Israel's war is a war of religious ideology in my opinion as specified by the codename Rising Lion , there are also dangerous players in Russia and China to take into account who are allied to Iran just waiting to use an American attack on Iran to their own advantage , if America launches an unprovoked attack Iran why shouldn't China take Taiwan , they're ready to go ... this conflict could ignite WWIII proper.
Dangerous times my friend.
Yeah, it seems we may have variant views, but that's ok. If everyone agreed on every thing, there wouldn't be anything to talk about. What a boring world that would be!
I've been hearing the refrain about Ukrainian war "grave consequences" and "Putin wouldn't stop at Ukraine" ever since the war started. I dunno. Maybe. They seemed pretty well satisfied to stop at Ukraine when it was the Soviets running the show, with the Warsaw Pact nations as buffer states... which wouldn't have been a thing if Germany hadn't attacked Russia in WWII. That's what gave the Soviets the pretext to "influence" the Warsaw pact nations, so siding with the Ukraine - which was a Russian state before it broke away - might not have a very different set of dangers vis-a-vis threats to Europe. I'm of the opinion that leaving them be to sort out their own differences would provide less of a pretext, by demonstrating a willingness to not attack them.
Finland has always been at odds with Russia, just as they've been at odds with Sweden. There too, giving them a pretext to establish more buffer states - in this case Finland - would be rapidly undercut by not demonstrating belligerence against them. Since Finland has been admitted to NATO, that could get pretty nasty if Russia decides to take them for a buffer state because of belligerence against Russia being shown already.
Religious fanatics make the best attack dogs. They tend to go all in, balls to the wall. That's why I think the US picked Israel as the attack dog against Iran, and then unleashed them. Over here in the US at least, folks have been going on forever about how "dem jooz" are running everything and calling all the shots. I've not seen it, but I've seen a lot of folks claiming it.
What I've seen is a people who are mostly powerless, but who carry a big chip on their shoulders. If they'd had any power, they'd probably not have allowed most of their own to get X-ed out in WWII. The only power I've seen them wield over here since then is from Hollywood... but Israel is a different story. They have a habit of handing their enemies own asses to them, but that might not be the case without US support, so I have to question just how much of their "power" is really theirs, and how much of it they get from other sources.
":Unprovoked" may be in the eye of the beholder. From where I sit, the US has had plenty much provocation from Iran, and I can't for the life of me figure out why we've not settled their hash long ago.
Russia and China are gonna do what they're gonna do, but I note that Putin has stopped shipments of weapons to Iran (he seems to think he needs them worse than Iran does), so that "alliance" may not be as strong as Iran had hoped. China will likely just sit around until they think the US is all tied up with Iran, and then pounce on Taiwan when they think we're not looking, but if they miscalculate that, well hoo-boy! That'll get real ugly real quick.
I agree with you that these are dangerous times, mate, but then I can't recall any times during my lifetime that haven't been. That seems to be a part of the human condition.
.
“Trouble rather the tiger in his lair than the sage among his books. For to you kingdoms and their armies are things mighty and enduring, but to him they are but toys of the moment, to be overturned with the flick of a finger.”
― Gordon R. Dickson, Tactics of Mistake
― Gordon R. Dickson, Tactics of Mistake