Prices of the electricity we use to charge

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,161
16,784
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
Nobody is going to stop him. All they can do is escalate the war. Russia has never lost a war in their entire history, and they're not losing now.
You know that past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. We have to stall Putin's war, ramp up our capabilities and slowly push him back. Hopefully, the Russian people will see that NATO is for self defense and force Putin out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter.Bridge

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,277
449
You know that past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. We have to stall Putin's war, ramp up our capabilities and slowly push him back. Hopefully, the Russian people will see that NATO is for self defense and force Putin out.
Laudable sentiments but overly optimistic.

Putin sits at the centre of just about every system of communication in Russia. The chance of Russians coming to the conclusion that NATO is defensive is tiny in my opinion. Propaganda is everywhere and is effective. Most of the people who were likely to change their opinion already left - hundreds of thousands of them left over a year ago.

It is possible that Putin's military can be stalled and even slowly driven back, but that entirely depends on halting Russian production and / or deployment of munitions, and having sufficient effective manpower in Ukraine to do the fighting. There are two things at least against this. First, Russia has a very much larger population, many live in distant parts of Russia and are poor. Large numbers of the men in these places will be thrown into a meat grinder war and Putin and the elites in Moscow and St Petersburg won't care how many of them die. Secondly, Putin's military achieves most of its progress with large numbers of crude simple munitions and WW1 type strategy. Artillery that would be recognisable to any man who served in WW1 is the backbone of the advances. It isn't high tech that is winning for Russia. Even the flying bombs are crude dumb bombs hitched onto a guiding set of wings with some control fins guided by radio. These have enabled them to keep their expensive ground attack planes well away from Ukrianian anti-aircraft defences. They drop them high above Russian territory and they glide in to their targets. Russia can make these cruder weapons forever and a day despite sanctions on silicon chips and such. All Russia needs to do, is ramp up production. In such a vast and resource rich country they produce plenty if they get their act together.

The North Koreans gave Putin five million artillery shells just recently. In a production war - Russia has a massive advantage. Only very long range HIMARS type artillery missiles will enable Ukraine to make progress, because if they can destroy Russian troops and resources at longer range than the cruder Russian artillery can reach, Russian advantage in material and men can be destroyed. That depends on whether America is really all that bothered about threats to Europe, and whether they are bothered enough to throw a lot of money at it. It will take a lot more than the $60 Bn Biden eventually managed to get Congress to authorise..
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc

lenny

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 3, 2023
2,303
675
"‘War how it truly is’: Ukrainian director turns accidental footage into a film

Oleh Sentsov’s film Real is 90 minutes of frontline action captured when he didn’t realise his camera was on

He was going through old files on his GoPro camera and realised it had been switched on that day.

“I was about to delete everything when I found this and I realised I had a very interesting imprint of that battle and of war how it truly is – ugly, incomprehensible, twisted and stupid”"

 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc and Woosh

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,110
30,548
Hopefully, the Russian people will see that NATO is for self defense and force Putin out.
You're in a dream world. Of course they won't see that, because it isn't true in any way. NATO, originally intended to be a defensive organisation, changed to being an offensive one very long ago.

The Balkans, Iraqi Gulf Wars to a two NATO member extent, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria were all NATO's illegal attacks on Sovereign countries. And NATO's involvements in Ukraine are also illegal since there is no defence pact involved, Ukraine not being a NATO member.

Remember, without the interference from outsiders like the USA and NATO, there would never have been a Ukraine war. Seeing there was no possibility of support, Zelensky and his ilk would have quietly accepted two decades ago that they couldn't join NATO and they'd still be living in peace in their independent undamaged country to this day.

Instead, as in the above countries mentioned, the USA with offensive NATO have been the indirect cause of countless deaths and immense infrastructure damage in Ukraine, all in the name of stopping Putin, when all he wanted and previously PROVED IT WAS ALL HE WANTED was to have non-threatening neighbours at his borders.
.
 
Last edited:

lenny

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 3, 2023
2,303
675

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,161
16,784
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
You're in a dream world. Of course they won't see that, because it isn't true in any way. NATO, originally intended to be a defensive organisation, changed to being an offensive one very long ago.

The Balkans, Iraqi Gulf Wars to a two NATO member extent, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria were all NATO's illegal attacks on Sovereign countries. And NATO's involvements in Ukraine are also illegal since there is no defence pact involved, Ukraine not being a NATO member.

Remember, without the interference from outsiders like the USA and NATO, there would never have been a Ukraine war. Seeing there was no possibility of support, Zelensky and his ilk would have quietly accepted two decades ago that they couldn't join NATO and they'd still be living in peace in their independent undamaged country to this day.

Instead, as in the above countries mentioned, the USA with offensive NATO have been the cause of countless deaths and immense infrastructure damage in Ukraine, all in the name of stopping Putin, when all he wanted and previously PROVED IT WAS ALL HE WANTED was to have non-threatening neighbours at his borders.
.
I like to see the UN charter, international borders and the right to asylum of all human beings are properly respected.
I am convinced that Putin, Trump, Orban and quite a few other populists are bad. I would like to see them leave and we'll never agree on populism. Time will tell.
 

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,110
30,548
I like to see the UN charter, international borders and the right to asylum of all human beings are properly respected.
Which excludes the USA and NATO, both repeatedly treating international borders and the human rights of many in other countries with utter contempt.

I am convinced that Putin, Trump, Orban and quite a few other populists are bad. I would like to see them leave and we'll never agree on populism. Time will tell.
A misunderstanding there, I am absolutely not a populist.

I agree they are bad, often appalling, and have never disagreed with that. But they have the right to exist and the right to have the political systems of their choice, human rights being universal and not reserved for those we like and politically approve of.

Our personal opinions should never be given illegal military force.
.
 

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,277
449
Yeah yeah yeah - It is all America's fault. They should have sat on their hands....


58367

Afghan and Taliban doings

58368

Balkans concentration camp victims

58369

Genocide of Muslim men by Mladic's forces.

58370


58371

Saddam Hussein's Nerve Gas victims

58372

58373


Corbyn's Labour fans always see NATO and the USA as the bad guys. It must be genetic.

Reason and logic play no part. They don't see the world as it really is.

Big bad USA is always the real problem. Mullah Omar, Saddam Hussein, and Ratko Mladic are the good guys - Oh and don't forget that nice Chap Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. He's a victim of the USA too.......

Bonkers.

Corbyn's greatest fan is on here. Corbyn was on record saying that he would never use force to defend this country or its interests. My name for them is, 'The treacherous Left'.
 
Last edited:

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,277
449
I like to see the UN charter, international borders and the right to asylum of all human beings are properly respected.
The problem with this naivety is that there are potentially limitless numbers in Africa and the Middle East who want, or will want to come to Europe if we don't stop them. The definitions of some regarding who needs asylum extend as far as people who are simply not that well off or live in what would be an uncomfortable situation.

Slimy, hard left lawyers will weave, and sell any tale of woe to get anybody in here and their fees get paid by the UK taxpayer. Phil Shiner - now an ex-lawyer, trawled the souks of Iraq looking for and manufacturing tales of ill treatment by British soldiers. He was struck off over false abuse claims. There are plenty just like him.

What 'Do-Gooderism' fails to understand, is that by decanting the worlds poor and the world's problems into our own countries, all we will achieve, is the ruining of our own countries.

I am utterly convinced that mass migration to the UK and particularly England, is the main driver of ever increasing costs of housing.

In 1995 we had officially 58 million people when Blair started mass migration into the UK. Now we have ten million more here at a time when the birthrate has all but collapsed and is certainly well below replacement rate. Almost all of that growth is due to migration.

What impact do you think this has had on services and housing costs? We actually have many more than ten million more because the waste water people know how much solid matter a person excretes and the food industry knows how much they eat. Illegal migrants don't fill in census forms. Both waste water and supermarket giants say that we have nearer 78 million than 68 million people living here. All of these need homes. They use services, consume energy and we are ruining our country.

Wake up do gooders. You are wrecking your own children's future.

Look at England's development density and compare with the rest of Europe and the world as shown. Where should the migrants go?

58375
 
Last edited:

lenny

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 3, 2023
2,303
675
"Nigel Farage told blaming the NHS for losing your testicle is 'b*****ks'

Doctor challenges Ukip leader to NHS debate: ‘Head-to-head, one-ball to one-ball, let’s hammer out what Nigel is selling British public and why it's *******’"


"Hitler really did have only one testicle, German researcher claims"

 
  • Like
Reactions: Woosh

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,277
449
  • Like
Reactions: Woosh

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,110
30,548
Yeah yeah yeah - It is all America's fault. They should have sat on their hands....

Corbyn's Labour fans always see NATO and the USA as the bad guys. It must be genetic.

Reason and logic play no part. They don't see the world as it really is.

Big bad USA is always the real problem. Mullah Omar, Saddam Hussein, and Ratko Mladic are the good guys - Oh and don't forget that nice Chap Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. He's a victim of the USA too.......
The usual distorted misrepresentation, not at all reflecting the expressed views and replacing them with your own warped bias.

They are ALL the bad guys, the USA and NATO as well, and all have the right to be bad guys in their own countries or if truly in defence of their own countries. That is the balanced rational and legally correct view.

The trouble, present and past, is always started by illegal right wing Western interference, thus it has ever been. Remember who created the crusades? Until those no Islamist had ever considered attacking the West.
.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: robert44

Ghost1951

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jun 2, 2024
1,277
449
I suppose the apologists for non intervention would have sat by while Hitler murdered millions. After all, we all have the right to be bad guys in our own countries, don't we? It's nothing new though. Eighty four years ago there were people who took exactly the same view that it was nothing to do with them what the Nazis did in far away countries.

It is because of the revolting aftermath of putting an end to that barbarism which killed millions, that NATO was set up and has determinedly intervened to put an end to such crimes. The results of appeasement were so disgusting that we stopped turning our backs and shrugging about evildoing in far away places.
 

Woosh

Trade Member
May 19, 2012
20,161
16,784
Southend on Sea
wooshbikes.co.uk
The problem with this naivety is that there are potentially limitless numbers in Africa and the Middle East who want, or will want to come to Europe if we don't stop them.
it's wrong to put economic migrants and asylum seekers in the same group. Just look at our own statistics, asylum seekers constitute less than 10% of total immigration. Surely they cannot be the source of all the things that have gone wrong in our society.

I am quite happy to leave this subject but please read the UN charter on human rights that we helped to write and accepted into our laws a long time ago.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights | United Nations
 
  • Like
Reactions: flecc

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,110
30,548
I suppose the apologists for non intervention would have sat by while Hitler murdered millions. After all, we all have the right to be bad guys in our own countries, don't we? It's nothing new though. Eighty four years ago there were people who took exactly the same view that it was nothing to do with them what the Nazis did in far away countries.
Misrepresentation again.

I haven't said that and we legally came to Poland's aid with our declaration of war when Hitler invaded, since we had a prior defence agreement with Poland.

It is because of the revolting aftermath of putting an end to that barbarism which killed millions, that NATO was set up and has determinedly intervened to put an end to such crimes. The results of appeasement were so disgusting that we stopped turning our backs and shrugging about evildoing in far away places.
And now distortion again with false information. No, it was the United Nations we internationally set up, replacing the former failed League of Nations, to try to end such wars. And in Europe we commenced the creation of a united single country of Europe, starting with the Coal and Steel Federation, for exactly that same declared purpose, to end the constant chain of European wars by making them impossible.

NATO came later, nominally and specifically as a defence organisation to protect European countries from Russian attack, despite there being no hint that such an attack could or would take place. The USA's real reason for forming NATO was their intense hatred of communism or any form of left wing politics and their frustration at the United Nations refusals to adopt their views.

Hence their true intent being revealed later when they turned NATO into an offensive organisation which they use to attack those they don't like, wherever they are. Even to the extent of creating fictions to justify such actions, such as Iraq's WMDs and other myths.

Of course a key reason you will never agree with me on these issues is that you obviously share the USA's extreme hatred of socialism in any form.
.
 
Last edited: