A lot of people only seem willing to fight to the last Ukrainian

[bluewater]

But object to the US and NATO being directly involved militarily.

Sad but true.

The US and NATO should intervene militarily to save Ukrainian lives and Ukrainian democracy now, before it's too late.

And, please, don't try the "but Ukraine is not in NATO" excuse.

NATO has intervened militarily to save innocent lives in non-NATO countries like Libya and Serbia. In fact, in the case of Serbia, NATO served to change the map of Europe by facilitating the Kosovo province breaking away from Serbia and recognizing it as an independent country.

Does NATO only stand up to little countries?

Are we that afraid of Russia?

[lame54]

1. It's not that we object...

We don't know enough to make that call

[TygrBright]

2. When it comes to a cognitively-impaired nutter with nukes, being scared isn't a bad thing. n/t

[bluewater]

4. But it injects doubt in NATO's willingness to act to defend NATO members in the future.

"It's only Bulgaria, and, besides, Putin is unstable and has nukes. Is it actually worth starting WWIII over Bulgaria?"

That's the worrisome follow on.

[herding cats]

30. Get back to us when the nutter with nukes actually lays a foot in NATO territory

Treaties do matter. Putin has most likely committed war crimes (which is going to The Hague even as I type) but he's not yet escalated on a NATO nation.

The thing is, he wants us to react here. He's calculating what horrific things he can do to try to get an overt reaction. Ukraine knows this, NATO knows this, the UN knows this. The world knows this.

We're all in a position where we have to cripple him, excluding his allies, in this, The world is reacting as fast as we can without serving the bastard WWIII on a platter with a pretty parsley garnish.

[A Clearing]

3. A lot of people seem willing to risk nuclear war from behind a keyboard. NT

[bluewater]

5. But we will risk that nuclear war if Putin invades, say, Bulgaria, right?

Bulgaria is a NATO country and we are sworn to defend it.

So, basically, Bulgarian lives and Bulgarian democracy matter more than the Ukraines?

Got it.

[A Clearing]

6. It's a disingenuous argument.

If Russia invades a NATO member, it’s a de facto attack on NATO. Russia is playing by the established rules…attacking a non-NATO country, not retaliating against nations who supply that nation directly (again, a direct attack on NATO).

Pretending that it’s as simple as Bulgarians > Ukrainians disregards the risks of what’s at stake. If Russia promised to nuke your hometown if the U.S. intervened militarily, I suspect you’d think differently.

[58Sunliner]

9. If Russia promised to nuke your hometown if the U.S. intervened militarily, I suspect you'd think.."

Sorry, that is truly a disingenuous argument. "Russia is playing by the established rules" Oh really? I think established rules say you have to have a valid reason for invading a country, like an act of war.

[bluewater]

10. It's a totally consistent argument

Pretending that the Ukraine wasn't an ally is what's disingenuous.

We sent them tons, literally, of arms. We sent them military advisors. The UK was even planning on helping to build a naval base for Ukraine right next to Russia on the sea of Azov.

But now that Russia has invaded our ally, all of a sudden it's all about "the risk of nuclear war'?

How convenient.

Raise the specter of nuclear war about defending the Ukraine than minimizing the same risk involved in defending small NATO countries is what seems disingenuous to me.

WWIII is WWIII whether an ally is "in NATO" or not.

It's that simple.

Either we stand up to Russia to stop their invasion of an ally or we don't.

Weak excuses won't cut it.

[stopdiggin]

16. Ukraine is NOT an ally (in any meaningful sense)

certainly not militarily. (no matter how loudly somebody shouts that it IS so) And the U.S. and it's (true) allies made it quite clear from the beginning that they were NOT going to engage in a shooting war with the Russians.

You're the one that is engaging in revisionism here. And I don't need any excuses to follow the foreign policy that has been clearly articulated.

[stopdiggin]

11. +1. The situation is NOT analogous

and the EU and NATO have pretty much had their cards out on the table throughout this entire affair. It's the people that have suddenly emerged to "go, fight, now!' - that are changing the rules and moving the goalposts.

[bluewater]

14. Ukraine was invaded simply for being our ally. It's totally analogous.

The fact that Ukraine was requesting to join NATO, was accepting our military advisors to help upgrade their military, was receiving literally tons of defensive weaponry from the US and Nato is exactly the reason Russia has given for invading Ukraine.

Simply put, we are unwilling to use the overwhelming military might of the US and NATO to save Ukrainian lives and Ukrainian democracy.

If we are so afraid of Russia staring a nuclear war now over the Ukraine, why would anyone believe we would be willing to risk a nuclear war if Russia invades a small NATO country?

The credibility of our resolve and deterrence is the issue.

[stopdiggin]

18. "Ukraine was invaded simply for being our ally."

You really have no idea what you are talking about. I am undecided whether you are disingenuous - or just that poorly informed.

[ruet]

19. Wait, What Do You Think They Invaded For?

They invaded precisely to keep Ukraine from joining the EU and/or NATO. They said as much.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2022-02-24/explainer-why-did-russia-invade-ukraine

What does Russia want when it comes to Ukraine?
A principal demand of Russia is to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, a military alliance between 28 European countries and two North American countries dedicated to preserving peace and security in the North Atlantic area. The former Soviet state is one of just a few countries in Eastern Europe that aren’t members of the alliance. The Kremlin in general views NATO expansion as a “fundamental concern,” according to a translated readout of a Jan. 28 call between Putin and French President Emmanuel Macron.

It’s noteworthy, however, that NATO likely has “no intention right now” to admit Ukraine to the organization, says William Pomeranz, the acting director of the Kennan Institute at the Wilson Center, a non-partisan policy forum for global issues.

“I think NATO, and the invitation for Ukraine to join NATO at some point in the future, is simply just a pretext to potentially invade Ukraine,” he says, referring to Russia. “Ukraine is not a member of NATO, it doesn't have any of the NATO guarantees, and so there is no hint that Ukraine will become a member of NATO soon.”

Putin, specifically, does not want Ukraine to join NATO “not because he has some principled disagreement related to the rule of law or something, it's because he has a might makes right model,” adds Bradley Bowman, the senior director of the Center on Military and Political Power at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a non-partisan research institute focused on national security and foreign policy.

[stopdiggin]

22. don't be ridiculous. both of these things were very remote

and, even then, distant possibilities stretching out into the future. Quite simply - pretext. (and among several that Putin has spun out as a rationale for his 'motherland' imperialism) Have you really not been paying any attention at all?

[herding cats]

31. Read this below (the full article) and learn of Putin's true agenda.

It's not this fluffy reporting. Why would Putin give a flip about things more than a decade down the road, which might happen, maybe, to do this now? Think. This narrative bargains on us not knowing how long and hard these processes are to to achieve. Ukraine wasn't even close to meeting either metric. Zelenskyy wasn't even actively working on meeting the metrics, if we're being honest. He was walking a tightrope to avoid Putin (or the next insane US President) from using him as a stepping stone in their ultimate goals.

An article by the propaganda publication RIA Novosti, which was to be published after the occupation of Ukraine, is preserved in the Web Archive. The Kremlin’s propaganda publication RIA-Novosti accidentally published an article that was to be published after the rapid occupation of Ukraine. It was quickly removed, but the Internet Archive web service managed to save it.

It describes Putin’s imperial plans for the total Russification of Ukraine and Belarus and change of the world order.

RIA Novosti is a Russian state-owned domestic news agency, known for its systematic support of the Kremlin, violation of journalistic standards and work according to so-called “temnik” (directives and agendas from the government).

Brave new world of Putin: An article by the propaganda publication RIA Novosti, which was to be published after the occupation of Ukraine

The beginning of Russia and the new world

A new world is being born before our eyes. Russia’s military operation in Ukraine has ushered in a new era – in three dimensions at once. And of course, in the fourth, internal Russian. Here begins a new period both in ideology and in the very model of our socio-economic system – but this is worth talking about separately a little later.

Russia is restoring its unity; the tragedy of 1991, this terrible catastrophe in our history, its unnatural dislocation, has been overcome. Yes, at a great cost, yes, through the tragic events of a virtual civil war, because now brothers, separated by belonging to the Russian and Ukrainian armies, are still shooting at each other, but there will be no more Ukraine as anti-Russia. Russia is restoring its historical fullness, gathering the Russian world, the Russian people together – in its entirety of Great Russians, Belarusians and Little Russians.

If we had abandoned this, if we had allowed the temporary division to take hold for centuries, then we would not only betray the memory of our ancestors, but would also be cursed by our descendants for allowing the disintegration of the Russian land.

Vladimir Putin has assumed, without a drop of exaggeration, a historic responsibility by deciding not to leave the solution of the Ukrainian question to future generations. After all, the need to solve it would always remain the main problem for Russia – for two key reasons. And the issue of national security, that is, the creation of anti-Russia out of Ukraine and an outpost for the West to put pressure on us, is only the second most important among them.

The first would always be the complex of a divided people, the complex of national humiliation – when the Russian house first lost part of its foundation (Kyiv), and then was forced to come to terms with the existence of two states, not one, but two peoples. That is, either to abandon their history, agreeing with the insane versions that “only Ukraine is the real Rus,” or to gnash one’s teeth helplessly, remembering the times when “we lost Ukraine.” Returning Ukraine, that is, turning it back to Russia, would be more and more difficult with every decade – recoding, de-Russification of Russians and inciting Ukrainian Little Russians against Russians would gain momentum. And in the event of the consolidation of the full geopolitical and military control of the West over Ukraine, its return to Russia would become completely impossible – we would have to fight for it with the Atlantic bloc.

Now this problem is gone – Ukraine has returned to Russia. This does not mean that its statehood will be liquidated, but it will be reorganized, re-established and returned to its natural state as a part of the Russian world. Within what boundaries, in what form will the alliance with Russia be consolidated (through the CSTO and the Eurasian Union or the Union State of Russia and Belarus)? This will be decided after the end is put in the history of Ukraine as anti-Russia. In any case, the period of the split of the Russian people is coming to an end.

Read much more at link: https://mil.in.ua/en/news/brave-new-world-of-putin-an-article-by-the-propaganda-publication-ria-novosti-which-was-to-be-published-after-the-occupation-of-ukraine/

[Skittles]

13. yes

and many of them did not serve in the military

[A Clearing]

21. Thanks.

I appreciate that people are frustrated, and I am too, but escalation between nuclear powers has to be a last resort.

[Celerity]

25. [phone]

[58Sunliner]

7. I agree. Putin knows he does not have the resources to survive a drawn out war.

So he makes some noise about getting even and putting on a bluff over nuclear weapons. I think NATO should recognize the threat to all countries in the area and act on the intelligence that Russia is threatening NATO over Bulgaria and Romania. We can hope that the Russian military gets rid of Putin when they realize what he has incited.

[ibegurpard]

8. I've heard people are travelling to Ukraine to join the fight

So I guess that's an option for those who seem to think we should immediately jump to sending in troops that have been stuck in decades-long quagmires elsewhere instead of applying maximum economic pressure while providing material support to Ukraine

[stopdiggin]

12. good point. and a better option

than volunteering somebody else's son, or daughter to the fray.

[ruet]

15. We Could've Saved Ukraine the Trouble and Just Told Them to Surrender.

Much pain, blood and treasure would have been spared. Insted we can say, "well, we gave it the old college try".

[bluewater]

17. That's the crux of the matter, indeed.

Tragic, but true.

[Sogo]

20. Actually, we did tell President Zelinsky to save himself and get out,

which led to his famous quote, “I need ammunition, not a ride.”

[enki23]

23. NATO is the Doomsday device from Dr Strangelove

Last edited Fri Mar 4, 2022, 01:02 AM - Edit history (2)

It only makes sense, so far as these things can, if the rules are crystal clear about what sets it off.

If Putin attacks a NATO county, it indicates that he has chosen to take that risk, and we have to assume he may be willing to end life on the planet anyway. If we change the rules midstream, we risk creating that situation where it didn't already exist. We would be the ones who assumed that risk. And the consequences are more unthinkable than even a genocide. Possibly this wipes out most complex life on earth. (Hopefully not? Probably not? Not worth finding out. The best scenarios are still the worst thing humanity has ever seen.)

We have a responsibility to everyone, including the Ukrainians, not to risk that. Galling and heartbreaking as it is, being a nuclear superpower limits our ethically available options.

[Celerity]

24. De rec.

[PortTack]

26. This is President Biden's and all of NATO's FDR moment

An island nation alone, Churchill begged FDR for troops, more supplies but could not act until provoked. FDR wanted badly to help but his hands were tied

I don’t think it’s Putin’s threat of nuclear war, that keeps us from acting, and President Biden as much as said so. 2 things, one, we cannot act alone in this, we have to act with all of NATO and the E.U. the E.U. is not willing yet, but is preparing. We, being all of NATO are using this time judiciously to train, reinforce and prepare ppl for the prospect of a war. If it comes, NATO will bury Russia and the Putin era will end..and putin knows this, so he threatens. That’s all he’s got when it comes to war against NATO.

Being the vain small man he is just like the tfg, he cares very deeply about his image and how he will be viewed. Here in lies his conundrum, if he withdraws without a win, in his mind he will be seen as weak. If he uses nukes, he knows he will be forever hated by the world, so he ignores the situation and pushes forward with his mythical dream of Russia the great and powerful empire. He really is living in an alternate reality. Just like Hitler...or Stalin, his personal hero.

Secondly, President Biden at this point has the hearts and minds of the American ppl and even some gqp politicians. If he were to press for this and it ended badly..OMFG they would bury him and all Dems saying he directly caused WWIII. To say nothing of how Putin, possibly his oligarchs and maybe even China would ramp it up claiming the west really is the aggressor, and, play right into Putin’s hand. JMHO: I wouldn’t be surprised if some incursion by some Russian pilot or Chechen thugs doesn’t bring an attack at the border of a NATO nation therefore invoking article 5

[Samrob]

27. Even though Putin has nukes and gives the impression that he would use them

he has to give the order to unleash the destruction of the world. Would his military brass actually push the button? I am thinking that they would kill him first. Using nukes would not serve any of Putin's goals for re-establishing his perceived notions of glory for Russia. This not our grandmothers' world.

At some point, someone on the inside is going to take Putin out. I feel sure about that unless he commits suicide first. There is no climbing back from this Ukrainian atrocity.

Western nations should be sending all visiting Russians and students and government officials back to Russia now or at least expelling them from their country.

[herding cats]

29. Look at his inner brass. I just don't see any heros there. Just career Putin sycophants.

Sergei Shoigu: Minister of Defense

He was credited with the military seizure of Crimea in 2014. He was also in charge of the GRU military intelligence agency, accused of two nerve agent poisonings - the deadly 2018 attack in Salisbury in the UK and the near-fatal attack on opposition leader Alexei Navalny in Siberia 2020.


Valery Gerasimov: Chief of General Staff of the
Russian Armed Forces

He has played a major role in Vladimir Putin's military campaigns ever since he commanded an army in the Chechen War of 1999, and he was at the forefront of military planning for Ukraine too, overseeing military drills in Belarus last month.
Described as an "unsmiling, craggy bruiser" by Russia specialist Mark Galeotti, Gen Gerasimov also played a key role in the military campaign to annex Crimea.


Nikolai Patrushev: Secretary of the Security
Council

Few hold as much influence over the president as Nikolai Patrushev. Not only did he work with him in the old KGB during the communist era, he replaced him as head of its successor organisation, the FSB, from 1999 to 2008.
It was during a bizarre meeting of Russia's security council, three days before the invasion, that Mr Patrushev pushed his view that the US's "concrete goal" was the break-up of Russia.
The session was an extraordinary piece of theatre, showing the president holding court behind a desk as one by one his security team walked up to a lectern and expressed their opinion on recognising the independence of Russian-backed rebels in Ukraine.
Nikolai Patrushev passed the test. "He's the one who has the chief battle cry, and there's a sense in which Putin has moved towards his more extreme position," says Ben Noble.


Alexander Bortnikov: Director of the Federal Security
Service (FSB)

Another old hand from the Leningrad KGB, he took over the leadership of its replacement FSB when Nikolai Patrushev moved on.
Both men are known to be close to the president, but as Ben Noble points out: "It's not as if we can say with complete confidence who is calling the shots and who took the decisions."


Sergey Naryshkin: Director of the Foreign
Intelligence Service (SVR)

Completing the trio of old Leningrad spooks, Sergei Naryshkin has remained alongside the president for much of his career.
What, then, should we make of a remarkable dressing down he was subjected to when he went off-message during the security council meeting?
When asked for his assessment of the situation, the intelligence chief became flustered and fluffed his lines, only to be told by the president: "That's not what we're discussing."
The lengthy session was edited so the Kremlin had clearly decided to show his discomfort in front of a big television audience.
"It was shocking. He's incredibly cool and collected so people will have asked what's going on here," Ben Noble told the BBC. Mark Galeotti was struck by the toxic atmosphere of the whole occasion


https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60573261

[Emile]

28. President Biden is doing the right thing. eom