3 ms·
> Eg. a non-NATO EU army could get more involved in Ukraine, That would trigger a nuclear bomb from Russia, the same as with NATO's involvement. When a nuclear
by paganel 5y ago
> Eg. a non-NATO EU army could get more involved in Ukraine,
That would trigger a nuclear bomb from Russia, the same as with NATO's involvement. When a nuclear power gets involved (and an EU army would posses nuclear weapons) then we enter the MAD scenario even if we want it or not. Re-labelling the Europe-based part of the NATO forces as "EU Army" I'm afraid won't foul the Russians.
- ISL 5y agoA nuclear power is already involved.
- paganel 5y agoI meant a nuclear power (EU, in my example) against another nuclear power (that would be Russia).
- xdennis 5y ago> That would trigger a nuclear bomb from Russia There is no reason for Russia to do so. Ukraine is not part of Russia. There already is a precedent for military operations in a country occupied by Russians (when Trump bombed Syria).
- gpt5 5y agoYou could claim that Putin was bluffing, but he recently said that if NATO tries to take back crimea, he will use nukes and it will be bad for everyone.
- _dain_ 5y agoThe Russians were there at the request of the Syrian government.
- t-3 5y agoSyria is a proxy war that's been ongoing since 2011. Russians were invited in by the government of that country. We are thus supporting the rebels.
- AbrahamParangi 5y agoYou must accept that your adversary is rational if you aim to avoid nuclear war because if you believe that they're mad and can't behave rationally then you have only one logically-consistent option remaining.
- chimprich 5y ago> You must accept that your adversary is rational if you aim to avoid nuclear war In practice, humans are neither entirely rational nor entirely irrational. Humans occupy different positions on this spectrum according to genetics, culture and circumstance. If we want to avoid triggering escalation events that may lead to an eventual nuclear episode it seems sensible to avoid certain emotionally-charged and chaotic situations such as having the armed forces of nuclear-armed states or their close allies in direct combat with each other.
- js8 5y ago> Re-labelling the Europe-based part of the NATO forces as "EU Army" I'm afraid won't foul the Russians. That's true, yes. But in an alternate reality, where NATO doesn't exist after Cold War, the European countries have built up their own defense (maybe shared to an extent to allow compatibility), and they create an ad-hoc pact based on situation presented, this would, I believe, give us better options to help defend Ukraine. And maybe, who knows, Putin wouldn't even go crazy being paranoid about NATO.
- Armisael16 5y agoI think it’s far more likely that Europe would’ve continued down the path it had been on for centuries - war against itself.