4 ms·

> Russia sends a few longer range cruise missiles at the base, to destroy the planes that were already part of the war. And kill NATO personnel in the airbase.

> Russia sends a few longer range cruise missiles at the base, to destroy the planes that were already part of the war. And kill NATO personnel in the airbase. Russia has now murdered American and Polish soldiers on Polish soil. It's pretty clear cut what happens next.

mindslight 5y ago
> It's pretty clear cut what happens next. No, it's not. Does NATO let the ICBMs fly? Does NATO switch to conventional war mobilization and march into Ukraine? Shoot some conventional missiles at Russian targets in Ukraine? How about if Russia issues a statement that the strikes were against legitimate Ukrainian targets, they do not intend to attack any more NATO territory, and they will pay reparations for Polish casualties? If Russian military activity demonstrates an adherence to that statement, it technically renders article 5 mutual self defense less applicable. To avoid escalation, there is give and take at any level of aggression, just as when a fighter jet violates airspace. A posteri the destruction of Ukrainian jets at a Polish airfield, the desire to avoid nuclear war remains the same. The best thing is to avoid getting into the situation in the first place - by making attacking the in-transit Ukrainian jets a direct attack on the largest NATO power, the US.
- 323 5y ago
  > desire to avoid nuclear war remains the same If we apply this logic fully, Russia can invade Poland, Germany, France, all of Europe, and nobody will dare defend out of fear of nuclear war.
  - mindslight 5y ago
    If you shoehorn the scenario into binary reasoning, you can justify either extreme, yes.
    - 323 5y ago
      Assuming that Putin will start nuclear war over 30 planes is also binary reasoning.
      - mindslight 5y ago
        Yes, binary reasoning that you're continuing to engage in by framing it as Putin automatically starting a nuclear war. I know we want to think that NATO deterrence is absolute, but when it comes down to it any response will be moderated by possible counter-responses.
  - isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
    Yes minister relevant once again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4
  - MomoXenosaga 5y ago
    This is why France developed nukes. They weren't entirely convinced America would have the balls to commit mass suicide for Paris.
- bcrosby95 5y ago
  It's about plausible deniability from the chain of command. If bombs dropped on an airfield in Poland there is none.
brimble 5y ago
At the very least, NATO would declare anything in the air within a few hundred miles of a NATO border to be a valid target, since they'd then have to assume it's a threat of attack against a NATO state. Instant de-facto no-fly zone over much of Ukraine. No way Russia's gonna do that, since even that kind of minimal response would be disastrous for them.

mindslight 5y ago

> It's pretty clear cut what happens next. No, it's not. Does NATO let the ICBMs fly? Does NATO switch to conventional war mobilization and march into Ukraine? Shoot some conventional missiles at Russian targets in Ukraine? How about if Russia issues a statement that the strikes were against legitimate Ukrainian targets, they do not intend to attack any more NATO territory, and they will pay reparations for Polish casualties? If Russian military activity demonstrates an adherence to that statement, it technically renders article 5 mutual self defense less applicable. To avoid escalation, there is give and take at any level of aggression, just as when a fighter jet violates airspace. A posteri the destruction of Ukrainian jets at a Polish airfield, the desire to avoid nuclear war remains the same. The best thing is to avoid getting into the situation in the first place - by making attacking the in-transit Ukrainian jets a direct attack on the largest NATO power, the US.

323 5y ago
> desire to avoid nuclear war remains the same If we apply this logic fully, Russia can invade Poland, Germany, France, all of Europe, and nobody will dare defend out of fear of nuclear war.
- mindslight 5y ago
  If you shoehorn the scenario into binary reasoning, you can justify either extreme, yes.
  - 323 5y ago
    Assuming that Putin will start nuclear war over 30 planes is also binary reasoning.
    - mindslight 5y ago
      Yes, binary reasoning that you're continuing to engage in by framing it as Putin automatically starting a nuclear war. I know we want to think that NATO deterrence is absolute, but when it comes down to it any response will be moderated by possible counter-responses.
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 5y ago
  Yes minister relevant once again: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o861Ka9TtT4
- MomoXenosaga 5y ago
  This is why France developed nukes. They weren't entirely convinced America would have the balls to commit mass suicide for Paris.
bcrosby95 5y ago
It's about plausible deniability from the chain of command. If bombs dropped on an airfield in Poland there is none.

brimble 5y ago

At the very least, NATO would declare anything in the air within a few hundred miles of a NATO border to be a valid target, since they'd then have to assume it's a threat of attack against a NATO state. Instant de-facto no-fly zone over much of Ukraine. No way Russia's gonna do that, since even that kind of minimal response would be disastrous for them.