4 ms·

I don’t think this is the full picture. Post-Vietnam the US hasn’t engaged in large scale active combat against communism or Russian-backed forces. It has inst

by awb 5y ago

I don’t think this is the full picture. Post-Vietnam the US hasn’t engaged in large scale active combat against communism or Russian-backed forces. It has instead favored selling weapons to Eastern European states and building the NATO alliance. Putin has been clear about the breakup of the USSR being a mistake in his eyes. He’s been annexing territories (or in his eyes, re-annexing) since 1999. He looks for countries with strong Russian cultural and linguistic backgrounds and props up allies that will take over. If that doesn’t work he ratchets up the pressure until he feels comfortable using military force. See: Chechnya, Georgia, Crimea and now Ukraine. The US is far stronger militarily than Russia, but with nuclear weapons in the equation, no one wins. It’s easy to be an arm chair hawk and say we should go fight, but it’s another thing to look you kids in the eye and explain they’re going to die from radiation fallout. Instead, the US will likely prop up the resistance once Ukraine falls and try to make occupation as costly as possible just like we did in Afghanistan.

chii 5y ago
> Instead, the US will likely prop up the resistance once Ukraine falls and try to make occupation as costly as possible just like we did in Afghanistan. a band-aid solution at best. The fact that putin has desires to resurrect the soviet superpower, is the problem, and i doubt there would be any possible diplomatic solution to that. Nobody likes war (least of all nuclear war), but if the threat of such weapons is shown to be a bluff, the peace brought about from it's use in WW2 would all but be in vain. Somebody must back down, and i would say putin and his ambitions must be the one to back down, or the US & allies must escalate. Otherwise, the next authoritarian country is going to want in.
- awb 5y ago
  The moral of this era seems to be: no one attacks a country with nuclear weapons. France has nukes, so this isn’t going to be Hitler 2.0 with Putin posing by the Arc de Triumph. There are several ex-Soviet countries that are NATO members, so that’ll be the real hot spot if it gets there as the US et. al. will be required to act militarily in their defense (in theory).
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > The moral of this era seems to be: no one attacks a country with nuclear weapons. Though, now that the invasion has started (again),
  - raxxorrax 5y ago
    Doesn't even make sense for Putin strategically because the alliance will get consolidated by this. On the other hand there are just few diplomatic tools. They were all used up more or less.
    - chii 5y ago
      > the alliance will get consolidated by this. the alliance is already pretty consolidated. I think putin sees a NATO ukraine as more dangerous imho - esp. if ukraine becomes more and more democratic. The invasion would be successful if the west does not deploy troops and intervene. I say the west has already failed, and this sets a precedent to which china would follow. And if the west waits for too long, the military edge that the west has would diminish. Unfortunately, the public is reluctant to commit to war, because in the minds of those who are used to peace, diplomatic solutions seems to be the only cost they're willing to pay.
      - SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
        The West has failed at what, though? All wars are tragedies, but nobody promised they were going to protect Ukraine in the first place, and it’s a long standing international precedent that two countries can go to war without everyone on the planet sending troops.
        zdragnar 5y ago
        That was the whole point behind ukraine giving up their nukes- they thought they got guarantees of security, but merely got assurances.
        5y ago
graphpercolator 5y ago
This is a total turn of the page of history. A Russian break with the West to focus East. We have no will to fight a war over this in the US. Any talk of that is absurd. I keep thinking about the Scorpions song Wind of Change. That spirit is now completely dead. I just can't believe it.

by awb 5y ago

chii 5y ago

> Instead, the US will likely prop up the resistance once Ukraine falls and try to make occupation as costly as possible just like we did in Afghanistan. a band-aid solution at best. The fact that putin has desires to resurrect the soviet superpower, is the problem, and i doubt there would be any possible diplomatic solution to that. Nobody likes war (least of all nuclear war), but if the threat of such weapons is shown to be a bluff, the peace brought about from it's use in WW2 would all but be in vain. Somebody must back down, and i would say putin and his ambitions must be the one to back down, or the US & allies must escalate. Otherwise, the next authoritarian country is going to want in.

awb 5y ago
The moral of this era seems to be: no one attacks a country with nuclear weapons. France has nukes, so this isn’t going to be Hitler 2.0 with Putin posing by the Arc de Triumph. There are several ex-Soviet countries that are NATO members, so that’ll be the real hot spot if it gets there as the US et. al. will be required to act militarily in their defense (in theory).
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > The moral of this era seems to be: no one attacks a country with nuclear weapons. Though, now that the invasion has started (again),
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  Doesn't even make sense for Putin strategically because the alliance will get consolidated by this. On the other hand there are just few diplomatic tools. They were all used up more or less.
  - chii 5y ago
    > the alliance will get consolidated by this. the alliance is already pretty consolidated. I think putin sees a NATO ukraine as more dangerous imho - esp. if ukraine becomes more and more democratic. The invasion would be successful if the west does not deploy troops and intervene. I say the west has already failed, and this sets a precedent to which china would follow. And if the west waits for too long, the military edge that the west has would diminish. Unfortunately, the public is reluctant to commit to war, because in the minds of those who are used to peace, diplomatic solutions seems to be the only cost they're willing to pay.
    - SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
      The West has failed at what, though? All wars are tragedies, but nobody promised they were going to protect Ukraine in the first place, and it’s a long standing international precedent that two countries can go to war without everyone on the planet sending troops.
      - zdragnar 5y ago
        That was the whole point behind ukraine giving up their nukes- they thought they got guarantees of security, but merely got assurances.
        5y ago

graphpercolator 5y ago

This is a total turn of the page of history. A Russian break with the West to focus East. We have no will to fight a war over this in the US. Any talk of that is absurd. I keep thinking about the Scorpions song Wind of Change. That spirit is now completely dead. I just can't believe it.