3 ms·
I can only offer speculation. During those visits you mentioned, combat was taking place far (for some definition of distance) away from the place of visit, whi
by ggeorgovassilis 4y ago
I can only offer speculation. During those visits you mentioned, combat was taking place far (for some definition of distance) away from the place of visit, which sets the base risk. I understand that NATO has fairly good intelligence on all troop movements in the area which further quantifies the actual risk. Lastly: a prominent casualty might sway public support further in Ukraine's favour which probably isn't in Russia's interest.
- sonotathrowaway 4y agoSupport would be the least of their worries. Triggering a direct NATO response would mean fighting first class armies, not their deprecated weapon systems.
- ggeorgovassilis 4y ago> Triggering a direct NATO response would mean fighting first class armies Agreed. However a political casulty probably would not provoke a military response, yet.
- troglonoid 4y agoHistorically, political leader assassinations have triggered wars or military responses. What would be the difference in this case? I suspect the death of the German Chancellor or French President, caused by a direct attack by Russia, wouldn’t be taken lightly.
- ggeorgovassilis 4y ago> Historically, political leader assassinations have triggered wars or military responses Because everyone involved was looking for a pretext to war. So far NATO members shy away from confrontation.