Poo tin... Put@in...
Comments
-
I think BP are resigned to losing more or less the entire value of the investment.Pross said:
If you wanted to be cynical, no-one being prepared to buy would suit them. They satisfy the PR side by showing they are trying to offload their share but actually get to keep it and can get out when the market is betterrick_chasey said:
Indeed though I suspect the likely buyer will be Russian anyway. Who else is gonna touch it?pblakeney said:
A bit awkward for BP?rick_chasey said:
No.First.Aspect said:
Will it work?rick_chasey said:
Basically trying to hold back the monster ruble sell off.ddraver said:This needs translation for me, but I get the gist ..
Can’t have a sell off if you can’t sell
But if you’ve got money in Russia you’re stuck as you can’t get your money out
So they can always sell it in rubles and just watch billions burn while the currency tanks.
In the region of $25bn or so. They gambled getting in bed with Putin and Sechin would pay off - it probably hasn't.0 -
Brits used those in afganistan FYI.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.
Russian doctrine says you need 6 to 1 soldier superiority to take an urban area (based on WW2 stats...)
British current doctrine says you need 10 to 1.
That's a big big big operation.0 -
Unless you drop a small nuclear weapon on a city you don't really mind never having and the rest surrender.rick_chasey said:
Brits used those in afganistan FYI.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.
Russian doctrine says you need 6 to 1 soldier superiority to take an urban area (based on WW2 stats...)
British current doctrine says you need 10 to 1.
That's a big big big operation.0 -
Hmm. I am not remotely an expert and most likely talking out my arse but that seems unlikely.First.Aspect said:
Unless you drop a small nuclear weapon on a city you don't really mind never having and the rest surrender.rick_chasey said:
Brits used those in afganistan FYI.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.
Russian doctrine says you need 6 to 1 soldier superiority to take an urban area (based on WW2 stats...)
British current doctrine says you need 10 to 1.
That's a big big big operation.0 -
Sure but at what cost? What outcome when you are financially crippled? What would you gain from acquiring a hostile country whilst being broke?Pross said:
This is the thing that worries me most, if Russia continue taking losses the gloves will probably come off and they won't even bother trying to look like they are aiming to avoid civilian targets.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
What is a route out his opponents can give putin?
"give your enemy a golden bridge to retreat" and all that.
His ego is caught up in this. The worry is he keeps doubling down until it's too late.
0 -
Sberbank bans withdrawals from investment accounts for next 10 days.
Can't have a run if you can't take your money out!0 -
Now he's taking action in Ukraine, I believe he can, constitutionally, take such action relatively easily (this from a Sky news analysis) but it is a little harder to drop a bigger one on Poland (for example).rick_chasey said:
Hmm. I am not remotely an expert and most likely talking out my censored but that seems unlikely.First.Aspect said:
Unless you drop a small nuclear weapon on a city you don't really mind never having and the rest surrender.rick_chasey said:
Brits used those in afganistan FYI.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.
Russian doctrine says you need 6 to 1 soldier superiority to take an urban area (based on WW2 stats...)
British current doctrine says you need 10 to 1.
That's a big big big operation.0 -
Which answers your question on small nukes.rick_chasey said:What is a route out his opponents can give putin?
"give your enemy a golden bridge to retreat" and all that.
His ego is caught up in this. The worry is he keeps doubling down until it's too late.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
You're right that tactical nukes are part of the military doctrine, but I think we'd see more twitchiness from US general types of that was likely.First.Aspect said:
Now he's taking action in Ukraine, I believe he can, constitutionally, take such action relatively easily (this from a Sky news analysis) but it is a little harder to drop a bigger one on Poland (for example).rick_chasey said:
Hmm. I am not remotely an expert and most likely talking out my censored but that seems unlikely.First.Aspect said:
Unless you drop a small nuclear weapon on a city you don't really mind never having and the rest surrender.rick_chasey said:
Brits used those in afganistan FYI.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.
Russian doctrine says you need 6 to 1 soldier superiority to take an urban area (based on WW2 stats...)
British current doctrine says you need 10 to 1.
That's a big big big operation.0 -
It's quite hard to spin tactical nukes in an expansionary war because you feel that Ukraine ought to be part of your country.0
-
Indeed, this is a war without an enemy, which seems to be perplexing to Russians.rick_chasey said:It's quite hard to spin tactical nukes in an expansionary war because you feel that Ukraine ought to be part of your country.
0 -
You know as well as I do that rational thought was the first victim of this exercise/war.rick_chasey said:It's quite hard to spin tactical nukes in an expansionary war because you feel that Ukraine ought to be part of your country.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
"We love your country we want you to be part of us - hang on, let me wipe you out first so we can have the smoldering remains instead".
Nah.
I think the nukes are just to ensure the rather feisty EU and NATO response doesn't get a bit too c0ck-sure.0 -
Flicking through this thread brought me to this small clip I found of Rick when he joins the Army as opposed to being a keyboard warrior/dinner party military expert/operator
.The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
rick_chasey said:First.Aspect said:
the truest thing Rick has ever said, especially when it comes to this thread.rick_chasey said:
I am not remotely an expert and most likely talking out my censored.The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
It's not looking like the walk in the park you said it would be for Russia though is it?MattFalle said:
the truest thing Rick has ever said, especially when it comes to this thread.rick_chasey said:
I am not remotely an expert and most likely talking out my censored1 -
Can you guys sort out your quoting?1
-
I'm not pretending i'm an expert - I’m posting and sharing stuff I read from analysts which is certainly filtered through a whole load of confirmation bias - and I have never pretended I’d be either brave or a good fighter.MattFalle said:Flicking through this thread brought me to this small clip I found of Rick when he joins the Army as opposed to being a keyboard warrior/dinner party military expert/operator
You could just explain why I’m wrong which would be more additive to the thread 🙂0 -
I did already. You're welcome.kingstongraham said:Can you guys sort out your quoting?
1 -
Reports on R4's today programme that they're hearing of pockets of Russian surrenders and refusal to carry out orders. Moral beginning to crumble? The Ukrainians are also causing havoc to the Russian communication lines.0
-
I'm hoping the 5 km convoy of Russian vehicles shown on yesterday's satellite pictures has been hit hard by Ukraine.
I suspect there an open line of communication from western agencies to Ukraine'sd military intelligence telling them where Russian supply lines are badly exposed.0 -
We're not missing anything.kingstongraham said:Can you guys sort out your quoting?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
There's a lot of keyboard warriors, that's true. And i am
not sure how comfortable i am with posts that make it sound like following uodates from the latest test match.
However cut people some slack MF - the world is as scary right now as at any time since Regan was in charge. (Which is before RC was born). Think of this thread as people trying to make sense of it all.3 -
never was going to be a walk in the park and i don't believe i said so. nothings a walk in the park nowadays as we all know.TheBigBean said:
It's not looking like the walk in the park you said it would be for Russia though is it?MattFalle said:
the truest thing Rick has ever said, especially when it comes to this thread.rick_chasey said:
I am not remotely an expert and most likely talking out my censored
Tbh, I'm actually quite surprised at really how rubbish the Russians are. This how thing has, amongst other things, destroyed the Russian military's reputation..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
you suspect very correct.Dorset_Boy said:I'm hoping the 5 km convoy of Russian vehicles shown on yesterday's satellite pictures has been hit hard by Ukraine.
I suspect there an open line of communication from western agencies to Ukraine'sd military intelligence telling them where Russian supply lines are badly exposed..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
Putin doesn't exactly seem to be behaving rationally though or he wouldn't have invaded to start with. The danger now is that his ego will mean he will have to be seen to win in some way and if that means simply turning the country to rubble I doubt it will bother him.pinno said:
Sure but at what cost? What outcome when you are financially crippled? What would you gain from acquiring a hostile country whilst being broke?Pross said:
This is the thing that worries me most, if Russia continue taking losses the gloves will probably come off and they won't even bother trying to look like they are aiming to avoid civilian targets.DeVlaeminck said:Somewhat worrying how Putin will react to things apparently (hard to know the truth) not going to plan.
CNN had footage of a thermogenic (I think) rocket launcher in Ukraine. Googling this thing if they chose to use it against urban areas it'd be horrific.0 -
Seals?pblakeney said:In the Hollywood version Seals would have dealt with Putin already.
*Gallows humour. Even more "humour". Just told the wife about Putin preparing nukes. "But what about our Christmas vouchers?"
eh?
how they going to hold their guns? Seals don't have opposable thumbs - all they can do is flop around, eat fish and look cute.
if anything, they'd never make it up the stairs, so they'd be like flubbering daleks..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0 -
operators gotta operate.rick_chasey said:You’d have thought the special forces of all major nato players are already causing trouble for the Russians no? Or the stakes too high?
They won't be doing shooting and blowing up and stuff but target recce, dicking, analysis, etc.
It'll be the 22, SRR, D Force, lads, if they were there at all not your regular SF..The camera down the willy isn't anything like as bad as it sounds.
0
