33 ms·

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukrain

by smoe 5y ago

I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low, due to Ukraine not being a member state. As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine, but made it clear the security guarantees are only for allies. "I think also that we need to realize that Ukraine is a highly valued partner. We support them with military support, with political support, with the cyber defences, with equipment. Different Allies provide different types of support. But when it comes to NATO Allies, we provide absolute security guarantees. Meaning that we make it absolutely clear that an attack on one Ally will trigger a response from the whole Alliance. One-for-all. All-for-one." https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_192343.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_192343.htm

mcguire 5y ago
Additionally, Russia has a significant nuclear arsenal. The word on the tweets is that NATO going head-to-head with Russia would mean two significant nuclear powers fighting directly, making a significant risk of escalation. (NATO contesting air superiority over Ukraine would mean launching attacks on Russian air defenses over the border, for example.)
VoodooJuJu 5y ago
>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low I agree the military intervention risk seems low, but what about economic intervention? Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia?
- nradov 5y ago
  Perhaps, but there are already significant economic sanctions in place since the previous invasion of Ukraine in 2014. Russia has survived those reasonably well. More sanctions will probably come but they can only be incremental. Several key NATO members are highly dependent on Russian energy supplies and can't afford to shut those off indefinitely.
- mlindner 5y ago
  Most certainly. This will end Russia's ability to continue to grow in any way.
  - it_does_follow 5y ago
    Not if Russia takes Ukraine and controls the majority of wheat following into EU. Near term impacts of climate change will very likely leads to crop failures in many of the EU's largest producing regions. When you don't have enough food to feed your people, politics and economic sanctions become extremely flexible. When resources run low controlling food and oil will be a very big deal.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - mlindner 5y ago
      This is delusional.
      - SantalBlush 5y ago
        Yeah, I've already had my fill of hot takes from uninformed people on the internet, and this war isn't even 24 hours old. Links to actual expert analyses, on the other hand, would be much appreciated.
      - it_does_follow 5y ago
        Curious what's delusional about this? Russian and Ukraine combined account for 29% of global wheat exports, much of that to the EU. Near term climate change will most certainly lead to massive crop failures, particularly in currently bountiful parts of the EU. Countries like the UK (I know not EU) already cannot feed their people without imports, something like 50% of the UKs food supply is imported. It is nearly certain that within a few decades, perhaps even sooner, we will be at a point where there is not enough food. We've already see notable crop failures in the EU. Most of us have grown up in a time of plenty, but that time is running short. All of this is fairly well established, so is my "delusion" in that Putin is aware of this and acting on it?
- zx85wes 5y ago
  We're talking about the 2 biggest nuclear powers here. A tiny mistake or misunderstanding is all that's needed. Google Vasily Arkhipov. After the EU sanctions overnight, it seems that Russia felt it had not much to lose, and they launched their attack.
  - mahkeiro 5y ago
    This attack has been planned for months… EU sanctions have nothing to do with that.
    - zx85wes 5y ago
      I don't believe it was inevitable.
      - jacquesm 5y ago
        It was inevitable since 2014. The only thing that is surprising is that it took this long.
        avgcorrection 5y ago
        Whatever is inevitable for eight years is really not.
        CRConrad 5y ago
        Maybe not, if you're young enough to think eight years is a long time.
        jacquesm 5y ago
        Well, if you were looking a bit more closely you would have noticed a lot of little steps all leading to that goal, so as far as I'm concerned it was inevitable, but you are of course entirely entitled to your own worldview.
      - wbsss4412 5y ago
- cobby 5y ago
  > Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia? Russian economy is in decline since 2014. COVID-19 pandemic has increased its decline even further. So it seems that the upcoming EU + US economic sanctions will be used by propaganda as the ultimate explanation of the decline. I mean Kremlin actually looks forward to more sanctions in order to have plausible explanation ("we are at war and our enemies made your life worse; we need to stay strong around our leader mr. Putin" shit).
  - caeril 5y ago
    > Russian economy is in decline since 2014. The vast, vast majority of the growth in US and EU economies since 2014 (really, much earlier than that, though) has been in fundamentally non-productive sectors like finance, real estate, entertainment, social media, and hospitality. This is all well and good in peacetime, but the GDP calculation changes dramatically when you're on a war footing and need to produce actual tangible things. Russia looks much, much, much better economically than GDP suggests in the context of its ability to produce theater materiel, power that materiel, and man that materiel. It's going to be a fun day for us when our pathetic "service-based economy" workforce of ad spent optimizers, real estate agents, attorneys, starbucks baristas, ReactJS programmers, UI designers, Buffalo Wild Wings servers, twitch streamers, instagram influencers, and "hustlers" of all kinds get drafted to fight hardened alcoholic roughnecks who've spent the last 20 years actually building things, backed up by Chinese rangefinders, optics, and target acquisition systems. Good luck to us.
    - eecc 5y ago
      You forgot to add some homophobia to your straw man depiction of the West.
    - dgut 5y ago
      You just depicted your world, not the West.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  As an aside, I wonder why more people (especially on this forum) aren't discussing the likelihood of increased cyber attacks, not just on government and military institutions but on private businesses. If we sanction Russia, they might hit our hospitals, banks, etc. Seems like we should start ratcheting up our security.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    I posted a link about that earlier but it got flagged.
  - kbart 5y ago
    I work at the big fintech with a large footprint in Eastern Europe. We have been ramping up our cyberdefence capabilities intensively for over a week now based on various public and non-public advisories. As far as I see from my extended network, we are definetly not alone doing that.
    - unixhero 5y ago
      For a week? You should have been preparing for years. Seriously.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      I guess I was thinking every NATO country and the whole of the EU should be boosting its security posture.
  - cjrp 5y ago
    Agreed, this is a terrifying prospect. Governments, hospitals, transport links.. anything.
    - eecc 5y ago
      Dams, hydro, iron smelters, steel mills… What worries me is the idea that some ex-soviet apparatchik (someone like Vladimir himself) might want to take eye-for-eye, and reduce western infrastructure to the same level of ruin of the Soviet’s, after ‘89. Their industry and economy was struggling and fell apart overnight but the West wasn’t happy to just win, it wanted to Win Big. We rubbed the unproductivity of it in their face, kicked the market wide open to fire sales and mass demobilization… these humiliations create resentment, and you never know who’s the more spitefully determined.
- shagmin 5y ago
  Russia has grown its gold reserves drastically over the last decade, has relatively little debt and is increasingly trading with China without using US dollars at all. I'd say they've anticipated those serious economic repercussions to some extent. But I also suspect Russians may be more willing to tolerate things such as a weak economy if it helps achieve other goals. I kind of see it like a parallel with Russia shooting a bullet at its own economy, while the Soviet Union in the 20th century shot plenty of bullets at its own people...for various reasons.
  - cjrp 5y ago
    Isn't something like 1/3 of their GDP energy exports though? Presumably most of the customers are European.
    - wbsss4412 5y ago
      The flip side of that is that the Europeans are heavily dependent on those exports.
      - cjrp 5y ago
        True, ultimately it comes down to which country is more willing to let their population suffer. I know where my money is.
        wbsss4412 5y ago
        It’s not even about that. It looks like Putin is making the correct calculation that the west would suffer more. Look at the Chinese reaction, it is very unlikely he would be making this move without at least tacit Chinese support. He has an outlet for all of that energy and grain. Where will Europe recover that supply from?
        Fatnino 5y ago
        From wherever China is buying it now.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  > Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia? Russia's been sanctioned for nearly a decade. They're probably the most resource-rich nation on earth and have a nearly fully self-sufficient economy. What little they need they can get from China. Also, when people look at Russia's GDP, they need to look at REAL numbers (ie. Adjusted for PPP). Russia's real GDP is ~3x higher than their nominal GDP (because sanctions drive down currency trade and make the nominal number basically useless).
  - stepnovij 5y ago
    > Russia's been sanctioned for nearly a decade. They're probably the most resource-rich nation on earth and have a nearly fully self-sufficient economy. What little they need they can get from China. It might look so like we have a self-sufficient economy, but it's not true. We have lots of resources, but to mine them and produce things you need technology. We're mostly importing needed technology and it's not something that can be changed fast. And things didn't change much for the last 10 years. China is a good partner, they can produce and export all needed tech things, but I doubt that in the current world is a good option to depend on one partner. I'm Russian and I don't understand the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine. And I don't agree with our country leaders' decisions. It doesn't look the peace could be brought by war and aggression. And I'm feeling that we already lost. We lost opportunities to partner with Ukraine and other countries. We lost momentum to grow our own economy.
    - posix_me_less 5y ago
      > I don't understand the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine. I think I do. It seems to be the same as the reason for invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. Ukraine also started a transformation, slipping away from Russia's influence and opening to West. Russia's rulers (whether that is Putin or whomever) understandably got pissed by this loss of influence "in their backyard" and they decided they have to do something. It was clear to Russians for a long time now that NATO was fractured on Ukraine and that even the hawkish Western powers won't go into direct war with Russians because of Ukraine. It's not that important to anybody in the West. Considering the fact West won't fight in Ukraine, and it did not provide any real concessions to Russia's demands, it is not surprising that Russia has taken initiative. It makes perfect sense, for Russians it is the only way to make sure NATO/EU won't happen and also win control and resources in Ukraine at the same time (which may be a substantial reason as well, despite the fact Putin does not talk about it). Considering the disproportion in military powers, I think now it would be best for Ukrainians to capitulate, admit defeat and avoid unnecessary deaths. Also, the West bears some responsibility for this misery in Ukraine. Even from western point of view, West should have never started this overture process with false promises and predictable bad results. Unless the Russian invasion was actually a desired result in some secret mastermind plan made in the West... which does not seem likely.
- dangerface 5y ago
  Russia does 5 times more trade with China than the US. Most of the west is reliant on Russian oil or Russian allies oil making it difficult to put down hard sanctions as Russia holds more power that the west would like to admit. Military intervention is the best solution Russia has a large army but its old and would be unable to deal with western military, but there is no real path for that to happen.
- AlexCoventry 5y ago
  Russia has been preparing for severe Western sanctions for the better part of a decade. Sanctions are obviously not a sufficient deterrent.
jacquesm 5y ago
Think for a moment about the signal this sends to all the other non-NATO members around the world.
- TheCoelacanth 5y ago
  What signal? That NATO is a defensive alliance and not the world's police?
  - mcguire 5y ago
    That having nuclear weapons is literally the only way to prevent a neighbor from annexing your country.
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    No, that for instance China is free to take Taiwan and that we won't do a thing about it. The world's police has abdicated a while ago. This is the kind of thing that happens in the vacuum left behind.
    - adamsmith143 5y ago
      >No, that for instance China is free to take Taiwan and that we won't do a thing about it. This was already the case though this does make it clear to me that Taiwan will likely fall in short order.
      - Slippery_John 5y ago
        I wouldn't be so sure. Taiwan is different in that they have TSMC which is definitely of extreme strategic interest to NATO.
        segfaultbuserr 5y ago
        And I once again asking the age-old question: Are you really sure that the people in power would choose a military conflict with China to stop the invasion, when simply destroying TSMC can be the alternative? Surely, if the fabs are destroyed, half of the world’s semiconductor market would evaporate, but the cost of a military conflict with a superpower like China is extremely high as well. There have been unsubstantiated rumors for years that the Taiwanese military has outfitted TSMC fabs with explosives that can be rigged to go off in the event of a mainland invasion in order to deny China access to TSMC capabilities. Even physical destruction may be unnecessary. Due to the complexity of the semiconductor supply chain, many say that an embargo of materials and the removal of experts are enough to paralyze the fabs for many years.
throwaway894345 5y ago
Not only is Ukraine not a member state, but Russia is a military power and NATO countries have a very low appetite for war (which is good so long as there are other options for resolving conflict).
- sharken 5y ago
  For sure Putin has thought most scenarios through and have guessed correctly that the West will not intervene. The West however cannot be seen to do nothing, so sanctions are the logical next step. A part of me thinks that Putin at 69 years old, senses that he have to create a great legacy for himself and invading Ukraine seems like a perfect opportunity. I sincerely hope that the sanctions will include removing Russia from all sports and excluded from as much trade as possible.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    I agree. I definitely think Putin wants to be the hero who re-established the Russian empire or something. I really hope we hit hard with sanctions and they aren't just for show like various European weapon contributions (never mind Canada sitting on its hands in that regard and Germany actively blocking Estonia's weapons and instead sending helmets ffs). That said, I'm worried that the sanctions will be weak/ineffectual as I doubt NATO countries will want to risk economic harm, especially in Europe where they've allowed themselves to become so dependent on Russian natural gas. Personally I think Ukrainian lives are worth an increase in energy prices.
    - sharken 5y ago
      Same here, but in Denmark many house owners are already struggling with prices on electricity going from DKK 2.000/month to 5.000/month. And this is before Putin invaded Ukraine. And now gas and oil prices seem to be rising, triggering Biden to state that these increases will be dealt with. So no, I'm not optimistic about sanctions even though I also think Ukraine must come first. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/ukraine-russia-war-biden-economy-sanctions-inflation-2022-2 https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/ukraine-russ...
cies 5y ago
> As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine With words. EU has also supported Ukraine with words recently. I've seen ads on the telly making an emotional statement that "Ukraine is Europe". Europe as a continent does not exist: it is a small corner of Asia. Eurocentricism needs to stop. This us-vs-them game needs to stop. This invasion is terrible for normal people, Ukrainian (bombs), Russian (sanctions) and everyone else (instability, high prices). It could have been prevented if the "west"/NATO was not "pulling on" (arming) Ukraine. The NATO already have plenty places to make bases on Russian border. See what happened to Cuba. The US/NATO also do not like bases on their border. They should have understood Russia also does not like that. But then I believe NATO is more into the business of war then the business of peace.
- bhelkey 5y ago
  > With words. According to Wikipedia, many NATO members are either Arms or non-lethal aid suppliers. """ Arms suppliers: Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States Non-lethal military aid: Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Sweden, European Union, Belarusian opposition """[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Alleged_clashes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukrai...
  - posix_me_less 5y ago
    Yeah but it's symbolic. It won't stop Russians, just prolong the suffering of people.
    - bhelkey 5y ago
      > Yeah but it's symbolic. The US alone provided $2.5 Billion of aid [2]. That doesn't include Biden's $200 Million military aid package in 2022 [2]. [1] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/can-jaw-jaw-in-the-west-really-stop-putin-rolling-into-ukraine-269ckjvcp https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/can-jaw-jaw-in-the-west-r... [2] https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2022/01/25/200m-in-javelins-other-anti-armor-systems-grenade-launchers-and-more-to-ukraine-dod/ https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2022/01/25/200m-in-jave...
abc789654567 5y ago
>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low. Because Joe Alzheimer is the weakest dictator in the US history.

by smoe 5y ago

mcguire 5y ago

Additionally, Russia has a significant nuclear arsenal. The word on the tweets is that NATO going head-to-head with Russia would mean two significant nuclear powers fighting directly, making a significant risk of escalation. (NATO contesting air superiority over Ukraine would mean launching attacks on Russian air defenses over the border, for example.)

VoodooJuJu 5y ago

>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low I agree the military intervention risk seems low, but what about economic intervention? Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia?

nradov 5y ago
Perhaps, but there are already significant economic sanctions in place since the previous invasion of Ukraine in 2014. Russia has survived those reasonably well. More sanctions will probably come but they can only be incremental. Several key NATO members are highly dependent on Russian energy supplies and can't afford to shut those off indefinitely.
mlindner 5y ago
Most certainly. This will end Russia's ability to continue to grow in any way.
- it_does_follow 5y ago
  Not if Russia takes Ukraine and controls the majority of wheat following into EU. Near term impacts of climate change will very likely leads to crop failures in many of the EU's largest producing regions. When you don't have enough food to feed your people, politics and economic sanctions become extremely flexible. When resources run low controlling food and oil will be a very big deal.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - mlindner 5y ago
    This is delusional.
    - SantalBlush 5y ago
      Yeah, I've already had my fill of hot takes from uninformed people on the internet, and this war isn't even 24 hours old. Links to actual expert analyses, on the other hand, would be much appreciated.
    - it_does_follow 5y ago
      Curious what's delusional about this? Russian and Ukraine combined account for 29% of global wheat exports, much of that to the EU. Near term climate change will most certainly lead to massive crop failures, particularly in currently bountiful parts of the EU. Countries like the UK (I know not EU) already cannot feed their people without imports, something like 50% of the UKs food supply is imported. It is nearly certain that within a few decades, perhaps even sooner, we will be at a point where there is not enough food. We've already see notable crop failures in the EU. Most of us have grown up in a time of plenty, but that time is running short. All of this is fairly well established, so is my "delusion" in that Putin is aware of this and acting on it?
zx85wes 5y ago
We're talking about the 2 biggest nuclear powers here. A tiny mistake or misunderstanding is all that's needed. Google Vasily Arkhipov. After the EU sanctions overnight, it seems that Russia felt it had not much to lose, and they launched their attack.
- mahkeiro 5y ago
  This attack has been planned for months… EU sanctions have nothing to do with that.
  - zx85wes 5y ago
    I don't believe it was inevitable.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      It was inevitable since 2014. The only thing that is surprising is that it took this long.
      - avgcorrection 5y ago
        Whatever is inevitable for eight years is really not.
        CRConrad 5y ago
        Maybe not, if you're young enough to think eight years is a long time.
        jacquesm 5y ago
        Well, if you were looking a bit more closely you would have noticed a lot of little steps all leading to that goal, so as far as I'm concerned it was inevitable, but you are of course entirely entitled to your own worldview.
    - wbsss4412 5y ago
cobby 5y ago
> Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia? Russian economy is in decline since 2014. COVID-19 pandemic has increased its decline even further. So it seems that the upcoming EU + US economic sanctions will be used by propaganda as the ultimate explanation of the decline. I mean Kremlin actually looks forward to more sanctions in order to have plausible explanation ("we are at war and our enemies made your life worse; we need to stay strong around our leader mr. Putin" shit).
- caeril 5y ago
  > Russian economy is in decline since 2014. The vast, vast majority of the growth in US and EU economies since 2014 (really, much earlier than that, though) has been in fundamentally non-productive sectors like finance, real estate, entertainment, social media, and hospitality. This is all well and good in peacetime, but the GDP calculation changes dramatically when you're on a war footing and need to produce actual tangible things. Russia looks much, much, much better economically than GDP suggests in the context of its ability to produce theater materiel, power that materiel, and man that materiel. It's going to be a fun day for us when our pathetic "service-based economy" workforce of ad spent optimizers, real estate agents, attorneys, starbucks baristas, ReactJS programmers, UI designers, Buffalo Wild Wings servers, twitch streamers, instagram influencers, and "hustlers" of all kinds get drafted to fight hardened alcoholic roughnecks who've spent the last 20 years actually building things, backed up by Chinese rangefinders, optics, and target acquisition systems. Good luck to us.
  - eecc 5y ago
    You forgot to add some homophobia to your straw man depiction of the West.
  - dgut 5y ago
    You just depicted your world, not the West.
throwaway894345 5y ago
As an aside, I wonder why more people (especially on this forum) aren't discussing the likelihood of increased cyber attacks, not just on government and military institutions but on private businesses. If we sanction Russia, they might hit our hospitals, banks, etc. Seems like we should start ratcheting up our security.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  I posted a link about that earlier but it got flagged.
- kbart 5y ago
  I work at the big fintech with a large footprint in Eastern Europe. We have been ramping up our cyberdefence capabilities intensively for over a week now based on various public and non-public advisories. As far as I see from my extended network, we are definetly not alone doing that.
  - unixhero 5y ago
    For a week? You should have been preparing for years. Seriously.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    I guess I was thinking every NATO country and the whole of the EU should be boosting its security posture.
- cjrp 5y ago
  Agreed, this is a terrifying prospect. Governments, hospitals, transport links.. anything.
  - eecc 5y ago
    Dams, hydro, iron smelters, steel mills… What worries me is the idea that some ex-soviet apparatchik (someone like Vladimir himself) might want to take eye-for-eye, and reduce western infrastructure to the same level of ruin of the Soviet’s, after ‘89. Their industry and economy was struggling and fell apart overnight but the West wasn’t happy to just win, it wanted to Win Big. We rubbed the unproductivity of it in their face, kicked the market wide open to fire sales and mass demobilization… these humiliations create resentment, and you never know who’s the more spitefully determined.
shagmin 5y ago
Russia has grown its gold reserves drastically over the last decade, has relatively little debt and is increasingly trading with China without using US dollars at all. I'd say they've anticipated those serious economic repercussions to some extent. But I also suspect Russians may be more willing to tolerate things such as a weak economy if it helps achieve other goals. I kind of see it like a parallel with Russia shooting a bullet at its own economy, while the Soviet Union in the 20th century shot plenty of bullets at its own people...for various reasons.
- cjrp 5y ago
  Isn't something like 1/3 of their GDP energy exports though? Presumably most of the customers are European.
  - wbsss4412 5y ago
    The flip side of that is that the Europeans are heavily dependent on those exports.
    - cjrp 5y ago
      True, ultimately it comes down to which country is more willing to let their population suffer. I know where my money is.
      - wbsss4412 5y ago
        It’s not even about that. It looks like Putin is making the correct calculation that the west would suffer more. Look at the Chinese reaction, it is very unlikely he would be making this move without at least tacit Chinese support. He has an outlet for all of that energy and grain. Where will Europe recover that supply from?
        Fatnino 5y ago
        From wherever China is buying it now.
Mikeb85 5y ago
> Isn't this going to have some serious economic repercussions for Russia? Russia's been sanctioned for nearly a decade. They're probably the most resource-rich nation on earth and have a nearly fully self-sufficient economy. What little they need they can get from China. Also, when people look at Russia's GDP, they need to look at REAL numbers (ie. Adjusted for PPP). Russia's real GDP is ~3x higher than their nominal GDP (because sanctions drive down currency trade and make the nominal number basically useless).
- stepnovij 5y ago
  > Russia's been sanctioned for nearly a decade. They're probably the most resource-rich nation on earth and have a nearly fully self-sufficient economy. What little they need they can get from China. It might look so like we have a self-sufficient economy, but it's not true. We have lots of resources, but to mine them and produce things you need technology. We're mostly importing needed technology and it's not something that can be changed fast. And things didn't change much for the last 10 years. China is a good partner, they can produce and export all needed tech things, but I doubt that in the current world is a good option to depend on one partner. I'm Russian and I don't understand the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine. And I don't agree with our country leaders' decisions. It doesn't look the peace could be brought by war and aggression. And I'm feeling that we already lost. We lost opportunities to partner with Ukraine and other countries. We lost momentum to grow our own economy.
  - posix_me_less 5y ago
    > I don't understand the reasons for the invasion of Ukraine. I think I do. It seems to be the same as the reason for invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. Ukraine also started a transformation, slipping away from Russia's influence and opening to West. Russia's rulers (whether that is Putin or whomever) understandably got pissed by this loss of influence "in their backyard" and they decided they have to do something. It was clear to Russians for a long time now that NATO was fractured on Ukraine and that even the hawkish Western powers won't go into direct war with Russians because of Ukraine. It's not that important to anybody in the West. Considering the fact West won't fight in Ukraine, and it did not provide any real concessions to Russia's demands, it is not surprising that Russia has taken initiative. It makes perfect sense, for Russians it is the only way to make sure NATO/EU won't happen and also win control and resources in Ukraine at the same time (which may be a substantial reason as well, despite the fact Putin does not talk about it). Considering the disproportion in military powers, I think now it would be best for Ukrainians to capitulate, admit defeat and avoid unnecessary deaths. Also, the West bears some responsibility for this misery in Ukraine. Even from western point of view, West should have never started this overture process with false promises and predictable bad results. Unless the Russian invasion was actually a desired result in some secret mastermind plan made in the West... which does not seem likely.
dangerface 5y ago
Russia does 5 times more trade with China than the US. Most of the west is reliant on Russian oil or Russian allies oil making it difficult to put down hard sanctions as Russia holds more power that the west would like to admit. Military intervention is the best solution Russia has a large army but its old and would be unable to deal with western military, but there is no real path for that to happen.
AlexCoventry 5y ago
Russia has been preparing for severe Western sanctions for the better part of a decade. Sanctions are obviously not a sufficient deterrent.

jacquesm 5y ago

Think for a moment about the signal this sends to all the other non-NATO members around the world.

TheCoelacanth 5y ago
What signal? That NATO is a defensive alliance and not the world's police?
- mcguire 5y ago
  That having nuclear weapons is literally the only way to prevent a neighbor from annexing your country.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  No, that for instance China is free to take Taiwan and that we won't do a thing about it. The world's police has abdicated a while ago. This is the kind of thing that happens in the vacuum left behind.
  - adamsmith143 5y ago
    >No, that for instance China is free to take Taiwan and that we won't do a thing about it. This was already the case though this does make it clear to me that Taiwan will likely fall in short order.
    - Slippery_John 5y ago
      I wouldn't be so sure. Taiwan is different in that they have TSMC which is definitely of extreme strategic interest to NATO.
      - segfaultbuserr 5y ago
        And I once again asking the age-old question: Are you really sure that the people in power would choose a military conflict with China to stop the invasion, when simply destroying TSMC can be the alternative? Surely, if the fabs are destroyed, half of the world’s semiconductor market would evaporate, but the cost of a military conflict with a superpower like China is extremely high as well. There have been unsubstantiated rumors for years that the Taiwanese military has outfitted TSMC fabs with explosives that can be rigged to go off in the event of a mainland invasion in order to deny China access to TSMC capabilities. Even physical destruction may be unnecessary. Due to the complexity of the semiconductor supply chain, many say that an embargo of materials and the removal of experts are enough to paralyze the fabs for many years.

throwaway894345 5y ago

Not only is Ukraine not a member state, but Russia is a military power and NATO countries have a very low appetite for war (which is good so long as there are other options for resolving conflict).

sharken 5y ago
For sure Putin has thought most scenarios through and have guessed correctly that the West will not intervene. The West however cannot be seen to do nothing, so sanctions are the logical next step. A part of me thinks that Putin at 69 years old, senses that he have to create a great legacy for himself and invading Ukraine seems like a perfect opportunity. I sincerely hope that the sanctions will include removing Russia from all sports and excluded from as much trade as possible.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  I agree. I definitely think Putin wants to be the hero who re-established the Russian empire or something. I really hope we hit hard with sanctions and they aren't just for show like various European weapon contributions (never mind Canada sitting on its hands in that regard and Germany actively blocking Estonia's weapons and instead sending helmets ffs). That said, I'm worried that the sanctions will be weak/ineffectual as I doubt NATO countries will want to risk economic harm, especially in Europe where they've allowed themselves to become so dependent on Russian natural gas. Personally I think Ukrainian lives are worth an increase in energy prices.
  - sharken 5y ago
    Same here, but in Denmark many house owners are already struggling with prices on electricity going from DKK 2.000/month to 5.000/month. And this is before Putin invaded Ukraine. And now gas and oil prices seem to be rising, triggering Biden to state that these increases will be dealt with. So no, I'm not optimistic about sanctions even though I also think Ukraine must come first. https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/ukraine-russia-war-biden-economy-sanctions-inflation-2022-2 https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/ukraine-russ...

cies 5y ago

> As the Nato secretary said, they will support Ukraine With words. EU has also supported Ukraine with words recently. I've seen ads on the telly making an emotional statement that "Ukraine is Europe". Europe as a continent does not exist: it is a small corner of Asia. Eurocentricism needs to stop. This us-vs-them game needs to stop. This invasion is terrible for normal people, Ukrainian (bombs), Russian (sanctions) and everyone else (instability, high prices). It could have been prevented if the "west"/NATO was not "pulling on" (arming) Ukraine. The NATO already have plenty places to make bases on Russian border. See what happened to Cuba. The US/NATO also do not like bases on their border. They should have understood Russia also does not like that. But then I believe NATO is more into the business of war then the business of peace.

bhelkey 5y ago
> With words. According to Wikipedia, many NATO members are either Arms or non-lethal aid suppliers. """ Arms suppliers: Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States Non-lethal military aid: Germany, Italy, Slovakia, Sweden, European Union, Belarusian opposition """[1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine#Alleged_clashes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukrai...
- posix_me_less 5y ago
  Yeah but it's symbolic. It won't stop Russians, just prolong the suffering of people.
  - bhelkey 5y ago
    > Yeah but it's symbolic. The US alone provided $2.5 Billion of aid [2]. That doesn't include Biden's $200 Million military aid package in 2022 [2]. [1] https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/can-jaw-jaw-in-the-west-really-stop-putin-rolling-into-ukraine-269ckjvcp https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/can-jaw-jaw-in-the-west-r... [2] https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2022/01/25/200m-in-javelins-other-anti-armor-systems-grenade-launchers-and-more-to-ukraine-dod/ https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2022/01/25/200m-in-jave...

abc789654567 5y ago

>I think the risk of direct NATO military intervention is very low. Because Joe Alzheimer is the weakest dictator in the US history.