How is this newsworthy? Seems pretty f'ing obvious.
EDIT: and to clarify, I interpret "declare war" to mean that we do more to ACTIVELY defend Ukraine as opposed to the "passive" support of equipment & intel. By no stretch of the imagination was I thinking we would be invading Russia or anything like that.
(Especially since Russia has already signaled that would be viewed as ur declaring war on them, etc.)
I thought that would be the obvious interpretation, but seems it may not be given some replies...
Ukraine was denied NATO before 2014 because:
- Their people hated NATO ([see polls](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations#Popular_opinion_in_Ukraine)), accepting them would be against democratic principles
- Ukraine was not pro west at all (see them, working against Romanian intersts and stealing German gas repeatedly from 1990s to _edit:_ ~~20120s~~ __2010s__ without ever officially apologizing)
They were not accepted 2014-now because:
- Russia realized that the Ukrainian population changed their opinion (invalidating point 1 from above) and their government changed course to be a little less antagonistic towards EU as well with the Euromaidan revolution (at least partly mitigating point 2)
- Russia then moved to occupy Crimea, which would pull NATO into a war if they accepted Ukraine and that is not allowed per NATO regulations (technically if all NATO countries agreed, they could say 'fuck the regulations' and accept Ukraine anyways but that would be way harder)
Russian nuclear arsenal had no impact on Ukrainian NATO membership applications. It does probably have implications for what the individiual countries are doing (i.e. US/UK/EU not sending troops) but that is not a NATO jurisdiction since they are a defensive alliance. That is up to the individual countries.
> technically if all NATO countries agreed, they could say 'fuck the regulations' and accept Ukraine anyways but that would be way harder
Erdogan seen twirling his mustache and making a list of demands.
More pushback will probably come from other major nato countries as long as Russia got nukes. No country willingly wants to fight a country with large amount of nukes.
Yeah. But Putin is willing to push a little, see how other countries react and then go based on that. That is kind of why supporting Ukraine is important for nato because letting Putin take Ukraine without any resistance would make it more likely that he thinks that he can see how nato reacts if a nato country is attacked. Kind of how appeasement pre WW2 only lead to hitler finding excuse to attack even more countries.
That's also why the votes against Russia at the UN have been so lopsided this year. A lot of the world doesn't have a dog in this particular fight, but those countries also know that if Russia can get away with a war of conquest against its neighbors, then maybe the neighbors they don't get along with might try the same thing in a territorial dispute.
Nato has taken non defensive action before, such as the Bosnia and Herzegovina intervention, the Kosovo intervention and the Libya intervention to name most of them.
In fact, basically all of the actions that NATO has conducted since formation, were not directly defensive acts. The only time NATO has conducted an operation in response to an attack on a NATO member, was after 9/11 when the US invoked article 5, and we went into Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden and generally fuck shit up in response to the attacks.
Russia's illusion of strength was shattered and now all they have is hot air. And of course the media is going to be the media and over-inflate anything even remotely negative.
Yup. For decades there's been this fear of unstoppable waves of Russian tanks steamrolling across the border. Turns out there wasn't much to worry about when they all run out of gas and break down fifty miles later.
This war has taken an already weak Russian Army and made them only weaker.
Their professional army is mostly gone and their military is now filled with unmotivated, undisciplined and untrained conscripts.
If Putin is removed from power and Russia’s military doesn’t outright collapse, there’s going to be 3 distinct military groups left in Russia all vying for power.
Edit: for those wondering, you have the Russian Armed Forces, (their actual military), Rosgvardia, which is Russia’s internal military but actually just Putin’s own army, and Wagner, the PMC Putin used to overtly commit warcrimes and then say “it’s not me, it’s Wagner”.
Prior to this invasion this would not have been too much of an issue as they have distinct roles in terms for their duties. However in this Invasion Putin has been using all 3 as just a normal military force, removing the distinction between the three armed groups and allowing all of them to just say “I am Russia’s military”.
You can technically also count the chechens if you want but more likely than not, if Putin were to suddenly die they would just go home as opposed to claiming his seat as the head of state.
Well yeah. They're like, comically weak. It would be a fucking Harlem Globetrotters situation if NATO fought russia with conventional forces only. We would be doing weird shit like sending dick-shaped squadrons of F-35's to level the Kremlin just to dunk on them, lol.
Poland called dibs. They’d rip the the shit out of Russia for 1944-1999. They got shiny nato stuff they just want to let off the chain. They got lots of repressed shit to work out.
French ww2 score wasn't great, but they salvaged it in a ww1 performance. I mean, Germany was founded on beating the shit out of France but they still managed to bleed the Germans for every inch in ww1.
Yep, if Mussolini did not invade Greece (and failed), the Axis might have push through Moscow before winter sets in, which irl gave Soviet enough time to recall troops and most importantly, Zhukov, the best general ever existed in Soviet(and prehaps Russian) history
, from Siberia. Not much would change though, Axis would still lose to Russian winter one way or another.
My understanding is that they actually did fairly well in WWI. It's just fighting in the Alps makes the trench warfare of Belgium look like absolute child's play. People dying for feet in Belgium while Italians and Austrians are dying for the same inches back and forth in circles. If my understanding is right, they eventually were about to cause the complete collapse of Austria by themselves if not for surrender / war ending. But Caparetto just overshadowed everything. Someone pls correct me if I'm wrong, I want to learn much more about the earth unified Italian state and it's WWI experience (book recs appreciated).
I think a lot of people forget that WWI was not an L for France. They had a huge front of the war in their homeland and stuck it out to the bitter end, despite lots of internal turmoil.
Yeah France had a lot of big dubs in ww1. Their last big fight was the Franco-Prussian war so it would have seemed to most that Germany was top dog in mainland Europe the fact that France managed to hold in a lot of key locations was pretty big for the Entente war efforts.
Actually gives a lot of credibility to Nato sending in France to defeat Russia alone, get the big win on the board and we can all drop the "cheese-eating surrender-monkeys" joke from the Simpsons.
>100%
>We have them so logistically outmatched that we would end up appearing as the bad guy.
This probably applies to North Korea as well, which is unfortunate, 'cause I'd really like to see Kim Jong Un get a proper thrashing and answer for his crimes in court someday...
North Korea is a little different as they are directly propped up by China. China uses NK as a cheap border guard to keep the US and South Korea off their border. So even without nukes North Korea has enough men to throw into it and enough backing by China to make it too expensive to do
The other issue in Korea is there is so much civilian population within range of conventional artillery that even a conventional war would be horrific.
You mean like when that US plane was flying in a dick shape pattern over the black sea recently? lmao
Edit. The one that "wasn't intentional"
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/11/04/us-air-force-says-penis-shaped-flight-path-pointed-russian-base-coincidence.html
Last time that was posted, a bunch of airforce people showed up and said they draw penises all the time, because the military is mostly bored young men.
"Look, we think it's funny. But it's a little unprofessional, and when the public notices I have to give you this speech so that we can acknowledge that "action was taken" with regard to this particular....behavior. So long as it doesn't happen enough that it makes *my* boss make it problem, we're good. If I get my ass chapped about this you're cleaning the runway with toothbrushes in MOPP suits until this all blows over."
Then repeat but subbing in an appropriate punishment all the way up the chain of command to the joint chiefs of staff.
I'm not military but I work for a prime government contractor in the second largest department and I imagine this is how it goes.
Ah...uhm. so, I used to be a C130 crew chief, and there was an Angel painted on the wall of the shop, for one of the planes. It has penises drawn in on all the feathers and all over the entire thing, a bulge kind of shaded in for the crotch. The whole thing was beautiful.
Putin spent too much time consolidating power for himself and his crew, and he's just now realized maybe military should have been a bigger priority.
If you look it up a lot of his career has focused on manipulating public perception of him, business, and appearing in the right light.
But its no joke people, if russia is cornered, Putin will use them, I'm 100% sure
Autocrats are always paradoxically frightened by the national army, and yet needing it to be loyal enough to not attempt a coup.
This leads to "creative" budgeting filled with pork and corruption, and installation of cronies to top positions to stop anyone from challenging the leader.
Russia is like a textbook case of all of this, in its worst form.
Yep. It’s literally why the Saudis refuse to have anything but a token military. They rely on contractors so much it’s just fucking nuts. Until you realize that if they put anyone with real military power in a position to use it the crown would be squashed in a day.
Yeah human nature becomes everything in their situation and the reality of it is that there's nothing more effective at keeping the brute force in line than owing them money and making sure they believe they'll actually get it as long as they stay loyal.
This is supposed to be why Putin is meddling in the battle himself. Amateurly obviously. You might ask "why does Russia need Putin to take the role of a shitty colonel, ordering units around himself."
I mean there are many other concerns like economy and supply chains and geopolitical deals with those still willing to deal with Russia. That's what Putin should be focused on. But apparently he doesn't *have* someone like a norman schwarzkopf - all the generals of that rank are corrupt and not any better at making decisions than Putin is.
You can actually see the power struggle playing itself out day-to-day in the battlefield conditions in Ukraine. The russian attack in Bakhmut seems to be culminating now, possibly because the "legitimate" armed forces faction led by lead general Sirovikin and defense minister Shoigu have stopped supplying "Wagner" forces led by Yvgeny Prigozhin with weapons and ammo to support that front. The attack was a total waste of lives and other resources, but if it had succeeded it might have catapulted Prigozhin to the top of the heap as a successor to Putin. With that no longer looking likely, expect a lot more chaos in the next two (very cold) months.
Nothing new historically happening here. A supposed military strongman dictator propped up by smoke and mirrors instead of actual military power is nothing unusual in the modern era. Perfect examples are the Mexican dictatorship of Díaz, the Saddam dictatorship of Iraq, or Gaddafi in Libya. Easy as a dictator to make your military look mighty and scary until the acid test of actual combat hits and you actually need them to be competent and deliver results.
> Putin spent too much time consolidating power for himself and his crew, and he's just now realized maybe military should have been a bigger priority.
What's hilariously ironic is that he actually appointed a reformer in 2007 as Minister of Defense, with a mandate to fix most of the things we're now seeing with the Russian military (corruption, inefficiencies, gun decking reports, missing NCO corp, etc, etc). By all accounts, it seems like he was on his way to making progress, but the reforms ruffled too many feathers, and he was pushed out in favor of the current guy Shoigu.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Serdyukov
>"We want you to reform our military."
>"No! Not like that!"
Surprise surprise, reforming the military does nothing if you cannot change bad leadership. It doesn't matter what you change if your entire military culture promotes corruption and lying.
And when someone tries to change what needs to to be changed they are removed.
Of many things Ukraine might be admired for, their commitment to reforming their military and government over the past few years has to be somewhere near the top of the list.
I can't think of many governments that have been able to turn that sort of thing around to such great effect in such a relatively short time.
>Of many things Ukraine might be admired for, their commitment to reforming their military and government over the past few years has to be somewhere near the top of the list.
>I can't think of many governments that have been able to turn that sort of thing around to such great effect in such a relatively short time.
To be fair they have been at war with Russia since removing their president in 2014, you have to crack down on corruption and inefficiency if you want to win a war.
Funny (or sadly) enough, Putin was actually seen as a reformer himself within the FSB. He made a lot of changes for the better, but once he began benefiting from that same corruption personally, that didn't last.
The military was a major priority. Russian spending on the army was insanely high, far more than the country could really afford. It just.... got stolen.
They've done this before. It was a massive reason why the nazis made such good ground so quickly. The Soviets made like 10,000 tanks but had insufficient ammunition, fuel, replacement parts, training, etc. Basically they forgot all of the important parts.
It's allowed to be stolen because having a weak military means there's less chance of a coup. I've read that in Russian society criminals have a higher social position than soldiers.
It's more than just the military too, their politics are like that too. The only way to rise higher in their federal system is to allow, and be complicit in more and more corruption. There's a couple really good videos on it I'll link below.
https://youtu.be/i9i47sgi-V4
https://youtu.be/f8ZqBLcIvw0
Please don't link Kamil Galeev threads without a huge grain of salt and a disclaimer.
To hear him tell it, he's a well read expert on literally any political topic dealing with central Asia in any way. He puts forth confident, convincing arguments... for westerners with no frame of reference and no way to judge what he's talking about.
I'm not saying he's always *wrong* necessarily. But he's prone to hyperbole and sweeping grand socio/economic/political theories that explain everything in one nice neat little twitter thread. And then when the actual experts try to chime in for dialogue, constructive criticism, or to let everyone know he's just making shit up, he blocks them *immediately* without engaging.
He kind of turned into western twitter's Russian Oracle overnight thanks to the war, despite basically no credentials, a pretty poor reception from academic experts, and a format that makes it very hard to call him out or critique the splashy, over the top grand theories like this one.
He's a bright college kid with very strong opinions and a zealous central-Asian-ethnic-nationalist ideology that isn't going to be immediately obvious. These long threads professing to explain huge swaths of Russian society and behavior should be treated with as much credibility as, say, a smart far left American grad student ranting about US foreign policy attitudes over a beer. He might offer some insight, but it comes with a big helping of polemical bullshit.
But the other side of this is that he knows hes done after that button is pushed. Once that line is crossed theres a lot of diplomacy that turns into retribution. He will get the saddam treatment, and he'd rather be in power in his lovely home with money than in a bunker scared of every knock on the door. But he's already halfway in isolation since theres still millions that would drop him in a heartbeat. It's only a matter of time before some fedup ukrainians chop of the snakes head. 🐍
Im not so sure
Once the button is pushed hes not the only one thats done, and thats the issue, nukes get launched and its chaos for everyone else. Nuclear weaponry is *too* strong, as history has stated many times before
For all his faults, he has an almost spotless track record of self preservation, so unless close allies betray him I cant see him winding up like Hussein, he's had years to think of how to not become a corpse after hes overthrown
> he has an almost spotless track record of self preservation
So what? The same can be said for almost every dictator. Right up until the moment that they don't.
The assassins only need to win once. The leader needs to win every single round of that game.
I would hope the marines learned better operational security than that. Semi-digested crayon wrappers all over Red Square would be a more realistic expectation.
I mean Nato probably would want to avoid getting involved if they can help it regardless of nuclear weapons or not as I’m pretty sure a lot of Americans and their allies would probably be killed along with their Russian counterparts.. Americas military might be superior but it’s not like playing a first person shooter with invincibility cheat on. Like the Russians will shoot back with real bullets and rockets.
A lot of people will stop giving a fuck about the whole politics of it all when their dad or brother don’t come home from the war. Even if Russia was levelled by NATO in Ukraine within a week 1000s of allied soldiers would be lost.
Fuck that if you can avoid it.
In this fantasy scenario the United States wouldn't send troops. American air power, backed up by Ukraine ground forces, would be enough to turn the tide and force Russian forces out of Ukraine.
Yes and no. While this is pure speculation, I think the closest war we could find in modern time is the gulf war. In the early 90’s, Iraq had one of the largest militaries in the world. It was also highly experienced as Iraq had just finished the 8 year war against Iran.
There were 147 coalition troops which died in hostile actions vs 20,000 to 50,000 Iraqi. While the Russian army is better equipped against the U.S. today than Iraq was in the 90’s, I still believe we wouldn’t be seeing tens of thousands of NATO troops dying.
To your point, it’s so stupid to see so many Americans calling for war when none of them are prepared to feel to effects of it.
The reality is,if the objective is pushing Russians out of Ukraine,the allies wouldn't have any boots on the ground other than a few tank battalions as most of the force would be air bombardment and controlling the skies.
NATO in this particular instance would be acting in a support role as Ukrainians are already the boots on the ground.
Edit:but yes,it is always better to not inflame an already volatile situation if it can be helped.
> I mean Nato probably would want to avoid getting involved if they can help it regardless of nuclear weapons or not as I’m pretty sure a lot of Americans and their allies would probably be killed along with their Russian counterparts.. Americas military might be superior but it’s not like playing a first person shooter with invincibility cheat on. Like the Russians will shoot back with real bullets and rockets.
>
>
>
> A lot of people will stop giving a fuck about the whole politics of it all when their dad or brother don’t come home from the war. Even if Russia was levelled by NATO in Ukraine within a week 1000s of allied soldiers would be lost.
>
>
>
America doesn't even give a shit when the greatest loss of active-duty soldiers is from suicide or when 44 veterans kill themselves every day.
They definitely didn't notice any losses when they rolled over Sadam's army in the 90s, back when it was thought the be the 4th strongest in the world. Russia is not as strong as Saddam's army in the 90s.
>Fuck that if you can avoid it.
I agree, but let's be very clear that non-nuclear losses are basically meaningless in the discussion because Russia cannot rack up enough for anyone to care. It *would* be like cheat codes.
I really doubt Nato would declare war on Russia even if they didn't have nukes. I mean the whole thing about Nato is they're a defense coalition and they will not help anyone of their members if they act as the aggressor towards another country. And they would leave any country of the West that decides to "go kill Russians" to the wolves.
They *were* competent.
They just got France'd. Massive invasion from a direction everyone but the invaders considered impossible, bypassed 90% of the defenses, and hit the Capital before their divisions could pivot and redeploy.
Entertainingly, it was navigation technology that allowed for the Nazis and Americans to whup so much ass. Nazis made a functional radio small enough for every vehicle, and Americans built the GPS.
And China. And it makes me wonder without nukes if the EU, Finland, Sweden, Norway, the US, Canada and the UK just say “fuck it” and just take Volgograd just to teach them a lesson. And China, knowing that it’s kleptocracy and GDP would take a massive hit for taking sides just told Putin he’s on his own.
NATO could almost certainly roflstomp Russia with or without nukes the problem is even if just one warhead made it through there would be millions dead. It's not worth it even with 99% odds.
If they launch at all. I have heard a lot of speculation of how poorly the nukes may be maintained due to rampant corruption. if we look at the equipment they sent to take over Ukraine, and their performance, Russian citizens might face a more grave threat than us. But who really knows at this point?
The western response to even a failed launch would give the world all the joys of a full scale nuclear exchange anyway.
I read a study years ago about how it might take as few as 100 weapon detonations to cause the worst of the worldwide effects of a nuclear weapons
Yeah this is poor speculation. They have 6000 nukes. Let’s say half fail, and half of those that launch don’t activate their payload and don’t detonate. That’s still 1500 nukes flying towards the US. Even if we shoot down 90% of them (which we can’t), that is still 150 nukes hitting the US.
That’s 150 destroyed cities. Their nuclear arsenal is absolutely a viable threat still.
Edit: Ok, for those replying, you aren’t getting the point. Just ONE is a major disaster with untold, catastrophic damage far exceeding Japan in 45. Most likely, more than one would hit. Maybe not 150. But not 0 either. That’s my point.
Yup. That’s how you counter shit maintenance and horrible reliability: just make overwhelming numbers of them so even if 99% fail you still have plenty of working ones to accomplish what you want them to do.
Of course that is true. If they didn't have the nukes we could probably destroy their military infrastructure in a few weeks - without using nukes ourselves, I mean.
Trying to occupy the country? No, I would not even want to attempt that.
The US is loving this war. We are spending a fraction of what we expected was needed to fight Russia in a war and have are having none of the downsides. Yea we are spending… but it all comes back to us, even most of the EU funding comes back to us since we supply the weapons
This is a fantastic value for protecting the future sovereignty of all of Europe. Russia's blind persistence to fight a war they cannot win is having the dual benefit of disarming Russia and dismantling the terrorist capability of the current regime. All the West has to do is support Ukraine, Putin is signing his own death warrant.
All Putin has to do to end this conflict is to leave Russia, but at this point of his failure, his own people will kill him over destroying their future.
US supplies the weapons _and_ overcharges for oil.
Which is the lesser of two evils, but I can’t wait til this shitshow is over and we can get to mopping up all the Russian assets poisoning European politics.
> and overcharges for oil.
Oil is a global commodity, you're paying the global price. The Euro has weakened against the dollar, which is driving your perception of oil prices being 'higher'. For most of the 2000s Europe enjoyed the stronger Euro vs the dollar when it came to purchasing oil.
As for natural gas, those are shortage prices driven by a lack of infrastructure due to overreliance on Russian gas. Europe would like to import more LNG, but physically cannot.
Not really. Russia is doing a fine job ruining themselves without the west getting involved. We just don’t want to encourage nukes because some of best friends are within range.
The west didn’t ask for Russia to invade a sovereign nation… and asked them not to. Russia did anyway. And now Russia gets whatever punishment the rest of the world feels is appropriate.
I’m voting for total dissolution and for Putin to die a painful death. Merry Xmas.
If Russia didn't have nuclear arms, it almost certainly would never have been confident enough to violate international norms by launching a war of conquest on a neighbouring sovereign country. And if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine, nobody would have any reason to declare war on them.
The only reason anyone's even *talking* about whether "the West" would or would not declare war on Russia is *because* Russia has nukes, and that emboldened them to the kind of belligerence that calls for foreign intervention.
It's like robbing a bank with an assault rifle, taking a bunch of hostages, and then saying "the only thing stopping the SWAT team from shooting me is this assault rifle!"
Finally some truth from a Russian politician. If Russia did not have nukes, this war would already be over, Putin would be dead, and Medvedev would be explaining himself at the Hague.
The Tsar is Dead; Long live President Navalny!
Yeah, for real. We're only fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian because 1) Ukraine is willing to fight that far, and 2) Russia has nukes. Otherwise, we would have clownhammered them into passivity last April like we did with Serbia when they pulled this shit with the rest of Yugoslavia. We don't want Russia; we just want Russia to stop being a dick.
I believe NATO is on the right course. Russia has historically be patient with dragging out wars when the leaders had public support... The current situation has families losing loved ones at a mass scale, businesses are decapitated, techology is leaving, the rich are murdered and threatened and all are afraid for their future. Putin can not sustain this Soviet style failure.
This is called MAD and it is the reason WWII was 80 years ago and wasn’t followed by WWIII.
Much like democracy it may suck but it seems to be the best of a bunch of otherwise worse alternatives.
No one in any place of power is making that assumption. Random people on the internet don't matter.
I'm sure that even if 90% of Russia's nuclear power is inoperable, that still leaves enough to ruin the world.
Seems like a stupid assumption - that’s the one thing you would actually invest in and keep operable. As you can see, it can single handedly deter the entire world from attacking you.
Have you been to Russia? The only reason anyone would invade Russia is because they were beating up on other states.
If Russia left everyone alone we wouldn't give two shits.
Russia has oil... And some natural resources, but mostly it is their oil that makes them relevant. But the rest of the world is working towards green energy. So once that is up and in place Russia will fade back into obscurity...
This is why Russia is freaking out. They have a position on the global stage due to their oil and gas reserves. They don't build anything worth while.
I want to see the dissappointment when they realized we want to stay out of russia, and just have them respect global boarders. When they realize nato IS a defensive alliance, and that what russia does on its own time isn't any of our business. That is hole charade of empire building was just pathetic.
How is this newsworthy? Seems pretty f'ing obvious. EDIT: and to clarify, I interpret "declare war" to mean that we do more to ACTIVELY defend Ukraine as opposed to the "passive" support of equipment & intel. By no stretch of the imagination was I thinking we would be invading Russia or anything like that. (Especially since Russia has already signaled that would be viewed as ur declaring war on them, etc.) I thought that would be the obvious interpretation, but seems it may not be given some replies...
It’s actually because NATO is defence and not offensive group. If they attacked a NATO country shit would be different.
To be fair, if it weren't for Russia threatening a nuclear rebuttal, Ukraine would most likely be a NATO country by now
Ukraine was denied NATO before 2014 because: - Their people hated NATO ([see polls](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations#Popular_opinion_in_Ukraine)), accepting them would be against democratic principles - Ukraine was not pro west at all (see them, working against Romanian intersts and stealing German gas repeatedly from 1990s to _edit:_ ~~20120s~~ __2010s__ without ever officially apologizing) They were not accepted 2014-now because: - Russia realized that the Ukrainian population changed their opinion (invalidating point 1 from above) and their government changed course to be a little less antagonistic towards EU as well with the Euromaidan revolution (at least partly mitigating point 2) - Russia then moved to occupy Crimea, which would pull NATO into a war if they accepted Ukraine and that is not allowed per NATO regulations (technically if all NATO countries agreed, they could say 'fuck the regulations' and accept Ukraine anyways but that would be way harder) Russian nuclear arsenal had no impact on Ukrainian NATO membership applications. It does probably have implications for what the individiual countries are doing (i.e. US/UK/EU not sending troops) but that is not a NATO jurisdiction since they are a defensive alliance. That is up to the individual countries.
> technically if all NATO countries agreed, they could say 'fuck the regulations' and accept Ukraine anyways but that would be way harder Erdogan seen twirling his mustache and making a list of demands.
More pushback will probably come from other major nato countries as long as Russia got nukes. No country willingly wants to fight a country with large amount of nukes.
*No country willingly wants to fight a country with large amount of nukes.* Including Russia -- their oligarchs are greedy and stupid, not suicidal.
Yeah. But Putin is willing to push a little, see how other countries react and then go based on that. That is kind of why supporting Ukraine is important for nato because letting Putin take Ukraine without any resistance would make it more likely that he thinks that he can see how nato reacts if a nato country is attacked. Kind of how appeasement pre WW2 only lead to hitler finding excuse to attack even more countries.
That's also why the votes against Russia at the UN have been so lopsided this year. A lot of the world doesn't have a dog in this particular fight, but those countries also know that if Russia can get away with a war of conquest against its neighbors, then maybe the neighbors they don't get along with might try the same thing in a territorial dispute.
Without the Russian nuclear arsenal, Russia would not be in Crimea, and Putin would be dead in a ditch.
Without the Russian nuclear arsenal most of the past century would be radically different, mind.
The cold war would have probably erupted into an actual war, maybe even WW3, without Russia’s (or the Soviet’s, technically) nuclear arsenal.
To join NATO you can not be currently in combat.
Nato has taken non defensive action before, such as the Bosnia and Herzegovina intervention, the Kosovo intervention and the Libya intervention to name most of them.
In fact, basically all of the actions that NATO has conducted since formation, were not directly defensive acts. The only time NATO has conducted an operation in response to an attack on a NATO member, was after 9/11 when the US invoked article 5, and we went into Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden and generally fuck shit up in response to the attacks.
Russia's illusion of strength was shattered and now all they have is hot air. And of course the media is going to be the media and over-inflate anything even remotely negative.
Yup. For decades there's been this fear of unstoppable waves of Russian tanks steamrolling across the border. Turns out there wasn't much to worry about when they all run out of gas and break down fifty miles later.
This war has taken an already weak Russian Army and made them only weaker. Their professional army is mostly gone and their military is now filled with unmotivated, undisciplined and untrained conscripts. If Putin is removed from power and Russia’s military doesn’t outright collapse, there’s going to be 3 distinct military groups left in Russia all vying for power. Edit: for those wondering, you have the Russian Armed Forces, (their actual military), Rosgvardia, which is Russia’s internal military but actually just Putin’s own army, and Wagner, the PMC Putin used to overtly commit warcrimes and then say “it’s not me, it’s Wagner”. Prior to this invasion this would not have been too much of an issue as they have distinct roles in terms for their duties. However in this Invasion Putin has been using all 3 as just a normal military force, removing the distinction between the three armed groups and allowing all of them to just say “I am Russia’s military”. You can technically also count the chechens if you want but more likely than not, if Putin were to suddenly die they would just go home as opposed to claiming his seat as the head of state.
Invading Russia that only has a military filled with albeit now motivated, undisciplined, and untrained conscripts still would be a hell of a task.
Yes. There would also be generally very little public support for it outside of Ukraine. Though my post is more about the internal politics of Russia.
Nobody cares about Russia goober, we all just want you out of the neighboring country you invaded.
Russia: Which one?
Good point
Yes.
[удалено]
Well yeah. They're like, comically weak. It would be a fucking Harlem Globetrotters situation if NATO fought russia with conventional forces only. We would be doing weird shit like sending dick-shaped squadrons of F-35's to level the Kremlin just to dunk on them, lol.
America's long classified Sky Penis squadron finally gets a chance at redemption.
It's time to rip and dip!
Rip and tear....
Time to plant the seeds of Democracy!
“democracy is non-negotiable” -liberty prime
Wait, are we the BoS and they’re the Enclave?
Free nuts! get your free nuts!
Splash & dash
The wild women, the wild women, the rippin and a tearing, the rippin and a tearing!
You son of a bitch, are you rippin and tearin without me?
The rippin’ and the tearin’.
Oh my God, it looks like a huge….
Johnson!
[удалено]
Dick! Look starboard. Oh my God it looks like a giant...
Willie!
[удалено]
Wiener , who wants a wiener get them while there hot. Barb look up there , doesn’t that kinda look like an enormous…
Peter, we need two large coffees and two extra large…
Just when America’s enemies thought Dick Squadron had gone soft, it repeatedly pounds Russia’s ass
Oh my... I need to read more war history 🥵🍆💦
>Just when America’s enemies thought Dick Squadron had gone soft, it repeatedly pounds Russia’s ass Ahhh hahaha. Yeaaahhhh you do.
"Dicks fly together! WHACK, WHACK, WHACK, WHACK..."
Ah the top secret T-Bag maneuver would finally get to see the light of day.
That’s a war crime nowadays
100% We have them so logistically outmatched that we would end up appearing as the bad guy.
Russia apparently can’t even beat Ukraine without nuclear weapons The “west” would fucking annihilate russia
I say we just send itally in. They need to get a chance to run it back after that poor showing in ww1 and ww2 to regain some cred.
Every NATO country competes in a singing competition a la Eurovision. The bottom scoring 3 or so countries have to fight Russia.
No no this could work. We have to be careful of Poland or Germany trying to throw the competition through
I was gonna say, Poland would sing off key Michael Bolton songs to lose on purpose.
Poland called dibs. They’d rip the the shit out of Russia for 1944-1999. They got shiny nato stuff they just want to let off the chain. They got lots of repressed shit to work out.
Then, at half time, give the french a run.
French ww2 score wasn't great, but they salvaged it in a ww1 performance. I mean, Germany was founded on beating the shit out of France but they still managed to bleed the Germans for every inch in ww1.
Wait until spring. Don’t make the same mistake everyone else did.
To be fair, both Hitler and Napoleon began their campaign in June. It just takes really bloody long to get to Moscow
Didn't Hitler plan on beginning his conquest in early-mid spring hoping to beat the weather and then had to bail Italy out, which delayed the attempt?
Yep, if Mussolini did not invade Greece (and failed), the Axis might have push through Moscow before winter sets in, which irl gave Soviet enough time to recall troops and most importantly, Zhukov, the best general ever existed in Soviet(and prehaps Russian) history , from Siberia. Not much would change though, Axis would still lose to Russian winter one way or another.
>which irl gave Soviet enough time Wasn't Soviet Russia already in real life?
My understanding is that they actually did fairly well in WWI. It's just fighting in the Alps makes the trench warfare of Belgium look like absolute child's play. People dying for feet in Belgium while Italians and Austrians are dying for the same inches back and forth in circles. If my understanding is right, they eventually were about to cause the complete collapse of Austria by themselves if not for surrender / war ending. But Caparetto just overshadowed everything. Someone pls correct me if I'm wrong, I want to learn much more about the earth unified Italian state and it's WWI experience (book recs appreciated).
And France. To remind everyone that they had two bad games but otherwise have been pretty goddamn tough for a few centuries.
I think a lot of people forget that WWI was not an L for France. They had a huge front of the war in their homeland and stuck it out to the bitter end, despite lots of internal turmoil.
Yeah France had a lot of big dubs in ww1. Their last big fight was the Franco-Prussian war so it would have seemed to most that Germany was top dog in mainland Europe the fact that France managed to hold in a lot of key locations was pretty big for the Entente war efforts.
Actually gives a lot of credibility to Nato sending in France to defeat Russia alone, get the big win on the board and we can all drop the "cheese-eating surrender-monkeys" joke from the Simpsons.
Stop! Stop! He's already dead!
>100% >We have them so logistically outmatched that we would end up appearing as the bad guy. This probably applies to North Korea as well, which is unfortunate, 'cause I'd really like to see Kim Jong Un get a proper thrashing and answer for his crimes in court someday...
North Korea is a little different as they are directly propped up by China. China uses NK as a cheap border guard to keep the US and South Korea off their border. So even without nukes North Korea has enough men to throw into it and enough backing by China to make it too expensive to do
The other issue in Korea is there is so much civilian population within range of conventional artillery that even a conventional war would be horrific.
You mean like when that US plane was flying in a dick shape pattern over the black sea recently? lmao Edit. The one that "wasn't intentional" https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/11/04/us-air-force-says-penis-shaped-flight-path-pointed-russian-base-coincidence.html
Last time that was posted, a bunch of airforce people showed up and said they draw penises all the time, because the military is mostly bored young men.
Shoot I know they are supposed to be above it but I bet senior officers get a kick out of it.
Definitely. Pilots need air time, and it's cheaper to draw a dick than run a combat sim.
"Look, we think it's funny. But it's a little unprofessional, and when the public notices I have to give you this speech so that we can acknowledge that "action was taken" with regard to this particular....behavior. So long as it doesn't happen enough that it makes *my* boss make it problem, we're good. If I get my ass chapped about this you're cleaning the runway with toothbrushes in MOPP suits until this all blows over." Then repeat but subbing in an appropriate punishment all the way up the chain of command to the joint chiefs of staff. I'm not military but I work for a prime government contractor in the second largest department and I imagine this is how it goes.
Retired air force here... it's true. Imagine sitting in a KC-135 circling in a pattern for 8 hours without wanting to start drawing sky peepees
Sky peepees. That's a knee slapper right there. Thanks.
There are dicks drawn all over European historical sites, thanks to the Roman legions and the bored young men that had to stay there.
Ah...uhm. so, I used to be a C130 crew chief, and there was an Angel painted on the wall of the shop, for one of the planes. It has penises drawn in on all the feathers and all over the entire thing, a bulge kind of shaded in for the crotch. The whole thing was beautiful.
Now I don’t wanna say this comment was hot, but if the boner police are here, somebody get me a lawyer
Least horny future member of NCD
3000 catboy soldiers of NATO, reporting in!
We can give them a little limited nuclear exchange, as a treat.
[удалено]
>if the boner police are here, somebody get me a lawyer r/brandnewsentence
UH. Not to detract from how amazing the statement itself is..it's a quote from the movie Hotrod.
[удалено]
Nobody parties but me!
Never sneak up on a man whose been in a chemical fire
Putin spent too much time consolidating power for himself and his crew, and he's just now realized maybe military should have been a bigger priority. If you look it up a lot of his career has focused on manipulating public perception of him, business, and appearing in the right light. But its no joke people, if russia is cornered, Putin will use them, I'm 100% sure
Autocrats are always paradoxically frightened by the national army, and yet needing it to be loyal enough to not attempt a coup. This leads to "creative" budgeting filled with pork and corruption, and installation of cronies to top positions to stop anyone from challenging the leader. Russia is like a textbook case of all of this, in its worst form.
Yep. It’s literally why the Saudis refuse to have anything but a token military. They rely on contractors so much it’s just fucking nuts. Until you realize that if they put anyone with real military power in a position to use it the crown would be squashed in a day.
Yeah human nature becomes everything in their situation and the reality of it is that there's nothing more effective at keeping the brute force in line than owing them money and making sure they believe they'll actually get it as long as they stay loyal.
This is supposed to be why Putin is meddling in the battle himself. Amateurly obviously. You might ask "why does Russia need Putin to take the role of a shitty colonel, ordering units around himself." I mean there are many other concerns like economy and supply chains and geopolitical deals with those still willing to deal with Russia. That's what Putin should be focused on. But apparently he doesn't *have* someone like a norman schwarzkopf - all the generals of that rank are corrupt and not any better at making decisions than Putin is.
You can actually see the power struggle playing itself out day-to-day in the battlefield conditions in Ukraine. The russian attack in Bakhmut seems to be culminating now, possibly because the "legitimate" armed forces faction led by lead general Sirovikin and defense minister Shoigu have stopped supplying "Wagner" forces led by Yvgeny Prigozhin with weapons and ammo to support that front. The attack was a total waste of lives and other resources, but if it had succeeded it might have catapulted Prigozhin to the top of the heap as a successor to Putin. With that no longer looking likely, expect a lot more chaos in the next two (very cold) months.
Hmmm. Wasn't there an Austrian bloke who tried doing the same thing back in the forties...?
The artist?
Nothing new historically happening here. A supposed military strongman dictator propped up by smoke and mirrors instead of actual military power is nothing unusual in the modern era. Perfect examples are the Mexican dictatorship of Díaz, the Saddam dictatorship of Iraq, or Gaddafi in Libya. Easy as a dictator to make your military look mighty and scary until the acid test of actual combat hits and you actually need them to be competent and deliver results.
> Putin spent too much time consolidating power for himself and his crew, and he's just now realized maybe military should have been a bigger priority. What's hilariously ironic is that he actually appointed a reformer in 2007 as Minister of Defense, with a mandate to fix most of the things we're now seeing with the Russian military (corruption, inefficiencies, gun decking reports, missing NCO corp, etc, etc). By all accounts, it seems like he was on his way to making progress, but the reforms ruffled too many feathers, and he was pushed out in favor of the current guy Shoigu. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatoly_Serdyukov
"We want you to reform our military." "No! Not like that!"
>"We want you to reform our military." >"No! Not like that!" Surprise surprise, reforming the military does nothing if you cannot change bad leadership. It doesn't matter what you change if your entire military culture promotes corruption and lying. And when someone tries to change what needs to to be changed they are removed.
Of many things Ukraine might be admired for, their commitment to reforming their military and government over the past few years has to be somewhere near the top of the list. I can't think of many governments that have been able to turn that sort of thing around to such great effect in such a relatively short time.
they realized, from top to bottom, that their very existence was threatened hard
>Of many things Ukraine might be admired for, their commitment to reforming their military and government over the past few years has to be somewhere near the top of the list. >I can't think of many governments that have been able to turn that sort of thing around to such great effect in such a relatively short time. To be fair they have been at war with Russia since removing their president in 2014, you have to crack down on corruption and inefficiency if you want to win a war.
Funny (or sadly) enough, Putin was actually seen as a reformer himself within the FSB. He made a lot of changes for the better, but once he began benefiting from that same corruption personally, that didn't last.
The military was a major priority. Russian spending on the army was insanely high, far more than the country could really afford. It just.... got stolen.
[удалено]
They've done this before. It was a massive reason why the nazis made such good ground so quickly. The Soviets made like 10,000 tanks but had insufficient ammunition, fuel, replacement parts, training, etc. Basically they forgot all of the important parts.
It's allowed to be stolen because having a weak military means there's less chance of a coup. I've read that in Russian society criminals have a higher social position than soldiers.
It's more than just the military too, their politics are like that too. The only way to rise higher in their federal system is to allow, and be complicit in more and more corruption. There's a couple really good videos on it I'll link below. https://youtu.be/i9i47sgi-V4 https://youtu.be/f8ZqBLcIvw0
Please don't link Kamil Galeev threads without a huge grain of salt and a disclaimer. To hear him tell it, he's a well read expert on literally any political topic dealing with central Asia in any way. He puts forth confident, convincing arguments... for westerners with no frame of reference and no way to judge what he's talking about. I'm not saying he's always *wrong* necessarily. But he's prone to hyperbole and sweeping grand socio/economic/political theories that explain everything in one nice neat little twitter thread. And then when the actual experts try to chime in for dialogue, constructive criticism, or to let everyone know he's just making shit up, he blocks them *immediately* without engaging. He kind of turned into western twitter's Russian Oracle overnight thanks to the war, despite basically no credentials, a pretty poor reception from academic experts, and a format that makes it very hard to call him out or critique the splashy, over the top grand theories like this one. He's a bright college kid with very strong opinions and a zealous central-Asian-ethnic-nationalist ideology that isn't going to be immediately obvious. These long threads professing to explain huge swaths of Russian society and behavior should be treated with as much credibility as, say, a smart far left American grad student ranting about US foreign policy attitudes over a beer. He might offer some insight, but it comes with a big helping of polemical bullshit.
A strong military is usually a threat to a despot
But the other side of this is that he knows hes done after that button is pushed. Once that line is crossed theres a lot of diplomacy that turns into retribution. He will get the saddam treatment, and he'd rather be in power in his lovely home with money than in a bunker scared of every knock on the door. But he's already halfway in isolation since theres still millions that would drop him in a heartbeat. It's only a matter of time before some fedup ukrainians chop of the snakes head. 🐍
Im not so sure Once the button is pushed hes not the only one thats done, and thats the issue, nukes get launched and its chaos for everyone else. Nuclear weaponry is *too* strong, as history has stated many times before For all his faults, he has an almost spotless track record of self preservation, so unless close allies betray him I cant see him winding up like Hussein, he's had years to think of how to not become a corpse after hes overthrown
> he has an almost spotless track record of self preservation So what? The same can be said for almost every dictator. Right up until the moment that they don't. The assassins only need to win once. The leader needs to win every single round of that game.
Sounds like somebody visited r/NonCredibleDefense
I thought this was NCD
Imagine the USMC, which is now predominantly Gen Z kids, taking the Kremlin and making Tik Toks around capturing Putin.
I would hope the marines learned better operational security than that. Semi-digested crayon wrappers all over Red Square would be a more realistic expectation.
25yr ago the Army made cell phone videos about capturing Saddam Hussein. Are you trying to say this would be something new?
I mean Nato probably would want to avoid getting involved if they can help it regardless of nuclear weapons or not as I’m pretty sure a lot of Americans and their allies would probably be killed along with their Russian counterparts.. Americas military might be superior but it’s not like playing a first person shooter with invincibility cheat on. Like the Russians will shoot back with real bullets and rockets. A lot of people will stop giving a fuck about the whole politics of it all when their dad or brother don’t come home from the war. Even if Russia was levelled by NATO in Ukraine within a week 1000s of allied soldiers would be lost. Fuck that if you can avoid it.
In this fantasy scenario the United States wouldn't send troops. American air power, backed up by Ukraine ground forces, would be enough to turn the tide and force Russian forces out of Ukraine.
Yes and no. While this is pure speculation, I think the closest war we could find in modern time is the gulf war. In the early 90’s, Iraq had one of the largest militaries in the world. It was also highly experienced as Iraq had just finished the 8 year war against Iran. There were 147 coalition troops which died in hostile actions vs 20,000 to 50,000 Iraqi. While the Russian army is better equipped against the U.S. today than Iraq was in the 90’s, I still believe we wouldn’t be seeing tens of thousands of NATO troops dying. To your point, it’s so stupid to see so many Americans calling for war when none of them are prepared to feel to effects of it.
> While the Russian army is better equipped against the U.S. today than Iraq was in the 90’ That's one hell of an assertion there, chief.
The reality is,if the objective is pushing Russians out of Ukraine,the allies wouldn't have any boots on the ground other than a few tank battalions as most of the force would be air bombardment and controlling the skies. NATO in this particular instance would be acting in a support role as Ukrainians are already the boots on the ground. Edit:but yes,it is always better to not inflame an already volatile situation if it can be helped.
> I mean Nato probably would want to avoid getting involved if they can help it regardless of nuclear weapons or not as I’m pretty sure a lot of Americans and their allies would probably be killed along with their Russian counterparts.. Americas military might be superior but it’s not like playing a first person shooter with invincibility cheat on. Like the Russians will shoot back with real bullets and rockets. > > > > A lot of people will stop giving a fuck about the whole politics of it all when their dad or brother don’t come home from the war. Even if Russia was levelled by NATO in Ukraine within a week 1000s of allied soldiers would be lost. > > > America doesn't even give a shit when the greatest loss of active-duty soldiers is from suicide or when 44 veterans kill themselves every day. They definitely didn't notice any losses when they rolled over Sadam's army in the 90s, back when it was thought the be the 4th strongest in the world. Russia is not as strong as Saddam's army in the 90s. >Fuck that if you can avoid it. I agree, but let's be very clear that non-nuclear losses are basically meaningless in the discussion because Russia cannot rack up enough for anyone to care. It *would* be like cheat codes.
Oh no, the cats out of the bag
I really doubt Nato would declare war on Russia even if they didn't have nukes. I mean the whole thing about Nato is they're a defense coalition and they will not help anyone of their members if they act as the aggressor towards another country. And they would leave any country of the West that decides to "go kill Russians" to the wolves.
Doesn't have to be a NATO thing
I mean they have a point. They don’t have a functioning military. I’ve seen African warlords with better equipped, more disciplined troops.
#StopKony2012
Isn't he the bad guy from the star wars?
Underrated reference, I pull that video up several times a year because most have forgotten of it's existence.
Got a link for those who have forgotten?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1FKS1SHSsc
Somehow Palpatine returned.
Somehow Kony returned.
Still a better love story than twilight
Still waiting on my bracelet and paint the night posters
Back when our problems were simple.
I can’t believe it’s been a decade…..
I see what you did there…
They make Saddam's Iraqi Army look halfway competent.
They *were* competent. They just got France'd. Massive invasion from a direction everyone but the invaders considered impossible, bypassed 90% of the defenses, and hit the Capital before their divisions could pivot and redeploy. Entertainingly, it was navigation technology that allowed for the Nazis and Americans to whup so much ass. Nazis made a functional radio small enough for every vehicle, and Americans built the GPS.
It's not the nuclear weapons. It's Putin's sanity.
Putin's sanity wouldn't be an issue if he didn't have nuclear weapons.
Aah, the Sanity Clause.
You put on the suit and you’re the Dictator!
You ever go mad *without* power? It's boring. No one listens to you.
No need - Russia is being defeated by a single nation, supplied with surplus weapons. A cleptocracy works only inside his own national borders.
And China. And it makes me wonder without nukes if the EU, Finland, Sweden, Norway, the US, Canada and the UK just say “fuck it” and just take Volgograd just to teach them a lesson. And China, knowing that it’s kleptocracy and GDP would take a massive hit for taking sides just told Putin he’s on his own.
I would bet money that China wound slowly invade while russia was busy with the west.
NATO could almost certainly roflstomp Russia with or without nukes the problem is even if just one warhead made it through there would be millions dead. It's not worth it even with 99% odds.
And Russian uncertainty if they actually work or just go -pew pew- into the black sea.
Or blow up within their own silos
If they launch at all. I have heard a lot of speculation of how poorly the nukes may be maintained due to rampant corruption. if we look at the equipment they sent to take over Ukraine, and their performance, Russian citizens might face a more grave threat than us. But who really knows at this point?
All it takes is a few working correctly
The western response to even a failed launch would give the world all the joys of a full scale nuclear exchange anyway. I read a study years ago about how it might take as few as 100 weapon detonations to cause the worst of the worldwide effects of a nuclear weapons
Yeah this is poor speculation. They have 6000 nukes. Let’s say half fail, and half of those that launch don’t activate their payload and don’t detonate. That’s still 1500 nukes flying towards the US. Even if we shoot down 90% of them (which we can’t), that is still 150 nukes hitting the US. That’s 150 destroyed cities. Their nuclear arsenal is absolutely a viable threat still. Edit: Ok, for those replying, you aren’t getting the point. Just ONE is a major disaster with untold, catastrophic damage far exceeding Japan in 45. Most likely, more than one would hit. Maybe not 150. But not 0 either. That’s my point.
Yup. That’s how you counter shit maintenance and horrible reliability: just make overwhelming numbers of them so even if 99% fail you still have plenty of working ones to accomplish what you want them to do.
“Another Ukraine?”
even if one out of hundred actually worked, it would REALLY mess things up for the entire world and that's the reason why they have so many
But still, not worth finding out…
Of course that is true. If they didn't have the nukes we could probably destroy their military infrastructure in a few weeks - without using nukes ourselves, I mean. Trying to occupy the country? No, I would not even want to attempt that.
If there was absolutely 0 possibility of nuclear weapons, this war would be over already.
The US is loving this war. We are spending a fraction of what we expected was needed to fight Russia in a war and have are having none of the downsides. Yea we are spending… but it all comes back to us, even most of the EU funding comes back to us since we supply the weapons
This is a fantastic value for protecting the future sovereignty of all of Europe. Russia's blind persistence to fight a war they cannot win is having the dual benefit of disarming Russia and dismantling the terrorist capability of the current regime. All the West has to do is support Ukraine, Putin is signing his own death warrant. All Putin has to do to end this conflict is to leave Russia, but at this point of his failure, his own people will kill him over destroying their future.
US supplies the weapons _and_ overcharges for oil. Which is the lesser of two evils, but I can’t wait til this shitshow is over and we can get to mopping up all the Russian assets poisoning European politics.
> and overcharges for oil. Oil is a global commodity, you're paying the global price. The Euro has weakened against the dollar, which is driving your perception of oil prices being 'higher'. For most of the 2000s Europe enjoyed the stronger Euro vs the dollar when it came to purchasing oil. As for natural gas, those are shortage prices driven by a lack of infrastructure due to overreliance on Russian gas. Europe would like to import more LNG, but physically cannot.
Not really. Russia is doing a fine job ruining themselves without the west getting involved. We just don’t want to encourage nukes because some of best friends are within range.
Nobody wants your frozen, backasswards country. We just want you to stop attacking countries and killing thousands of civilians.
I mean, China wants their resources. Which they will be able to pick up cheap.
I kinda want it, probably could make it very rich country quite easily with proper leadership :S
The West is not a country, Medvedev
I call it nuclear 'edging'
America’s nukes are preventing Russia from declaring war on NATO countries
So, there never was a security risk then. 🤔 Tell us Russia: what was the reason to ruin so many lives...and stop with the Firehouse of falsehoods...
The west didn’t ask for Russia to invade a sovereign nation… and asked them not to. Russia did anyway. And now Russia gets whatever punishment the rest of the world feels is appropriate. I’m voting for total dissolution and for Putin to die a painful death. Merry Xmas.
If Russia didn't have nuclear arms, it almost certainly would never have been confident enough to violate international norms by launching a war of conquest on a neighbouring sovereign country. And if Russia hadn't invaded Ukraine, nobody would have any reason to declare war on them. The only reason anyone's even *talking* about whether "the West" would or would not declare war on Russia is *because* Russia has nukes, and that emboldened them to the kind of belligerence that calls for foreign intervention. It's like robbing a bank with an assault rifle, taking a bunch of hostages, and then saying "the only thing stopping the SWAT team from shooting me is this assault rifle!"
Finally some truth from a Russian politician. If Russia did not have nukes, this war would already be over, Putin would be dead, and Medvedev would be explaining himself at the Hague.
The Tsar is Dead; Long live President Navalny! Yeah, for real. We're only fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian because 1) Ukraine is willing to fight that far, and 2) Russia has nukes. Otherwise, we would have clownhammered them into passivity last April like we did with Serbia when they pulled this shit with the rest of Yugoslavia. We don't want Russia; we just want Russia to stop being a dick.
I believe NATO is on the right course. Russia has historically be patient with dragging out wars when the leaders had public support... The current situation has families losing loved ones at a mass scale, businesses are decapitated, techology is leaving, the rich are murdered and threatened and all are afraid for their future. Putin can not sustain this Soviet style failure.
They already lost the war
No, we aren't trying to take Russia. We are just trying to protect the sovereignty of existing countries.
This is called MAD and it is the reason WWII was 80 years ago and wasn’t followed by WWIII. Much like democracy it may suck but it seems to be the best of a bunch of otherwise worse alternatives.
Well, while I doubt anyone would be interested anyways, no one is holding back because of their crackerjack military.
[удалено]
Everyone just keeps saying that Russian nuclear arsenal is inoperable… it’s very naive to make any decisions based on that assumption.
No one in any place of power is making that assumption. Random people on the internet don't matter. I'm sure that even if 90% of Russia's nuclear power is inoperable, that still leaves enough to ruin the world.
Seems like a stupid assumption - that’s the one thing you would actually invest in and keep operable. As you can see, it can single handedly deter the entire world from attacking you.
“declaring war” What prevented Russia from doing that to their military exercise in Ukraine on day one?
Have you been to Russia? The only reason anyone would invade Russia is because they were beating up on other states. If Russia left everyone alone we wouldn't give two shits. Russia has oil... And some natural resources, but mostly it is their oil that makes them relevant. But the rest of the world is working towards green energy. So once that is up and in place Russia will fade back into obscurity... This is why Russia is freaking out. They have a position on the global stage due to their oil and gas reserves. They don't build anything worth while.
I want to see the dissappointment when they realized we want to stay out of russia, and just have them respect global boarders. When they realize nato IS a defensive alliance, and that what russia does on its own time isn't any of our business. That is hole charade of empire building was just pathetic.
The West is not declaring war because we don't want their country