Real life is not a Chuck Norris movie.
Terrible idea. Any attack on NATO forces would require a declaration of war by all NATO nations. Any slackjawed idiot in the Russian military could attack those NATO forces and kick off WW3 before anybody figured out that he did it. This is the reason that buffer states exist between great powers. (This is an edit. Technically, all NATO nations are required to assist if asked, and only if asked via Article 5. But. That is a bad idea)
This is the perfect place to quote the old joke.
“You don’t have to run faster than the bear to get away. You just have to run faster than the guy next to you.”
Russia just has to keep it up for one moment longer than Ukraine. That might be much shorter than ten years.
Russia IS weak, and being slowly backed into a corner. And they have thousands of nukes. That is an incredibly dangerous combination. I am shocked by how many former peace protestors and nuclear freeze advocates and such have turned so bloodthirsty and reckless that they are openly inviting a war between nuclear powers.
Has anyone noticed that the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists’ doomsday clock is closer to midnight than it’s ever been? It used to be big news when they moved that clock forward a minute or two.
If a nuclear war breaks out, it will make climate change look like a piddlin’ event in terms of utter human destruction. I can’t understand how people who are terrified about climate change can be so blase’ about the prospect of a nuclear war.
I had some doubts about this conflict last year. I hope I don’t come across as a “tankie” to point out that it is no where close to over, despite massive arms shipments from the West. I would like to remind everyone of the stunning success of US intervention in foreign wars recently, of which the creation of ISIS is the crowning achievement.
What do you base this on?
You think the Greens want to see this goddamn war escalate? That is utter bullshit.
Putin is playing the scariest game of chicken ever. Destroying the lives of how many thousands of Russians and Ukrainians? All while threatening much of the world with possible nuclear Armageddon.
I wasn’t around for Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis, but this shit today seems worse.
I see people saying they want NATO involved, that they hope a NATO country is attacked so they can get into the fight. I see people saying that there can be NO negotiation with Putin until Russia has been completely removed from all of Ukraine, including Crimea, despite the fact that this would mean unambiguous failure and humiliation for Putin and is likely a bridge too far. People in this thread advocating for U.S. B-2 strikes inside Russia.
In general, I’m seeing the kind of bellicose rhetoric that hard-line cold warriors used to use - and get criticized heavily for by the left.
You might be seeing that, but it is unlikely they’re Greens. Far less likely to be those trying to fight Climate Change.
Those calling for NATO escalation are fairly crazy to my mind.
It is insane. The media feeds it, and it comes from the people who would be at least nominally on the liberal end of the spectrum. It reminds me more of the run up to the 2nd Iraq War, where Saddam Hussein was guilty until proven innocent and we will sort it out once he and his army are dead. Turns out it was all false, oh well. This is a description of US media coverage, not a description of my opinions. I am against the Russian war of aggression but I have uncomfortable feelings about the way the US has dealt with it
And the West just has to keep up support for one moment longer than Russia can keep up the war. That also doesn’t seem like it will take anywhere near 10 years.
My point was merely that if A) You think climate change is a dangerous risk that requires massive effort to fix and that you seriously worry about, and B) You think that the Ukraine war should continue until Russia is utterly defeated and completely pushed back into its borders and out of Crimea and that the U.S. should be more involved, Russian nukes be damned, your risk assessment skills may need a calibration.
I was not talking about ‘greens’ or the Green Party. I should think there are more people worried about climate change than just ‘the greens’.
I say that. Russia illegally, and without provocation, occupied Crimea. Russia illegally, and without provocation, launched a war in Ukraine. Once Russia is removed from Ukraine, negotiations on reparations can begin.
The only person I see saying this is @Velocity, and AFAIK he’s rather conservative. I’m not sure how he feels about global warming specifically.
Iraq is not the Topic, WE?
Just like the UN swooped in and negotiated with the US about Iraq?
Yes, because letting Putin get away with taking Crimea would drastically increase the risk of nuclear war. That’s the whole point.
If Putin gets to keep any of the land he stole, then that’s incentive for him to do it again. And again. And again. And every one of those “agains” makes it more likely, not less, that he launches nukes in one of them.
Oh, is Iraq involved in the Russian invasion and genocide?
I don’t think the Venn Diagram of those worried about Climate Change and those looking for NATO to bomb Russia is what you think it is. It was odd to bring it up.
Modding: Keep this to Russia and the Ukraine please.
Yes, Crimea.
‘If you just let us have the Sudetenland, we will be satisfied.’
There’s a saying: ‘Those who do not remember history are condemned to repeat it.’ I don’t want to see NATO directly involved in the Russian war in Ukraine, but Russia (Putin) cannot keep what he has stolen.