3 ms·

What do you think would stop him invading another country again tomorrow if there was a compromise? If each time he invades he knows he’ll get some compromise t

What do you think would stop him invading another country again tomorrow if there was a compromise? If each time he invades he knows he’ll get some compromise that is a little win, why would he not do it again and again? Your solution extends the human suffering indefinitely. Not only the fighting - but because citizens of Russia are less free than others countries.

kcplate 4y ago
There may be nothing to stop him. But I don’t think that is a valid argument against attempting de-escalation for this conflict.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  Why attempt it again when it failed every other time and always led to new violence and suffering?
  - kcplate 4y ago
    Because every other time it avoided worldwide apocalypse.
    - chrisseaton 4y ago
      How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? When he comes for your family and home are you handing them over without any fuss? Bizarre.
      - kcplate 4y ago
        > How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? That phrase assumes that we have the power to stop him without creating a greater loss of life than the death he would create in the areas he wants to subjugate. It also assumes that if we do enter into a worldwide conflict to remove him and we succeed, that whatever and whoever is left will be less tyrannical, less expansionist and less likely to create suffering. And to answer your question…if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely, because I will likely have not yet been nuked off the bloody planet by some “well intentioned” warmongering jackass from halfway across the globe who thinks he is doing the world a favor by killing it. For all of human history borders shift, leaders shift, some are tyrants, some are not…however 2022 by engaging in an apocalyptic war over Putin and Ukraine will not resolve the human nature and eliminate suffering.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        > if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely But why not compromise instead? It’d be less violence for your family.
        kcplate 4y ago
        You seem to be misunderstanding the scope in my argument. My choices for my family are at a local level, but i would not expect/demand someone in say, Singapore to make a decision that would result in the death of someone in Denmark, on behalf of my family.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        But if you can understand why you wouldn’t want to compromise, can you not understand why the Ukrainians don’t want to compromise either?
        kcplate 4y ago
        Of course I understand why they don’t want to compromise. Their scope is local, but my scope is global. The problem is the level of sacrifice required in a worldwide conflict that may include nuclear to “take Putin out” only solves the problem of a single man. It doesn’t create a lasting solution because it doesn’t correct human nature. It doesn’t prevent the next worse tyrant. In fact it makes tyranny much more likely because the possibility of many tyrants that will come from the one.
cpleppert 4y ago
I don't agree with the premise of that hypothetical. Nuclear blackmail is only an effective strategy if it seems credible i.e. if the blackmailer is really in a desperate situation. If putin is faced with a situation where he would lose control if he doesn't use nukes (which we are not anywhere close to being) then by definition he probably doesn't want to be in a situation where blackmail would be effective. There just isn't a lot of incentive for an autocratic ruler to destabilize his regime and crash his country's economy to grab a piece of territory at a massive price that the world will never recognize. Putin wanted to annex six eastern provinces of ukraine and create a client state in central Ukraine; not be in a position where he needs to threaten to lob nuclear weapons. Putin was able to grab Crimea precisely because there was no military resistance not because he was able to create a fait accompli that he was able to blackmail the world into accepting. Yet the sanctions imposed after Crimea was annexed dramatically weakened the civilian economy and putin's military buildup. To be clear, I don't think Ukraine should negotiate or be forced to negotiate but that isn't because I believe Putin would not be deterred in the future.

kcplate 4y ago

There may be nothing to stop him. But I don’t think that is a valid argument against attempting de-escalation for this conflict.

chrisseaton 4y ago
Why attempt it again when it failed every other time and always led to new violence and suffering?
- kcplate 4y ago
  Because every other time it avoided worldwide apocalypse.
  - chrisseaton 4y ago
    How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? When he comes for your family and home are you handing them over without any fuss? Bizarre.
    - kcplate 4y ago
      > How much of the world do you think we should let him subjugate? That phrase assumes that we have the power to stop him without creating a greater loss of life than the death he would create in the areas he wants to subjugate. It also assumes that if we do enter into a worldwide conflict to remove him and we succeed, that whatever and whoever is left will be less tyrannical, less expansionist and less likely to create suffering. And to answer your question…if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely, because I will likely have not yet been nuked off the bloody planet by some “well intentioned” warmongering jackass from halfway across the globe who thinks he is doing the world a favor by killing it. For all of human history borders shift, leaders shift, some are tyrants, some are not…however 2022 by engaging in an apocalyptic war over Putin and Ukraine will not resolve the human nature and eliminate suffering.
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        > if he comes for my family and home, I will fight for them fiercely But why not compromise instead? It’d be less violence for your family.
        kcplate 4y ago
        You seem to be misunderstanding the scope in my argument. My choices for my family are at a local level, but i would not expect/demand someone in say, Singapore to make a decision that would result in the death of someone in Denmark, on behalf of my family.
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        But if you can understand why you wouldn’t want to compromise, can you not understand why the Ukrainians don’t want to compromise either?
        kcplate 4y ago
        Of course I understand why they don’t want to compromise. Their scope is local, but my scope is global. The problem is the level of sacrifice required in a worldwide conflict that may include nuclear to “take Putin out” only solves the problem of a single man. It doesn’t create a lasting solution because it doesn’t correct human nature. It doesn’t prevent the next worse tyrant. In fact it makes tyranny much more likely because the possibility of many tyrants that will come from the one.

cpleppert 4y ago

I don't agree with the premise of that hypothetical. Nuclear blackmail is only an effective strategy if it seems credible i.e. if the blackmailer is really in a desperate situation. If putin is faced with a situation where he would lose control if he doesn't use nukes (which we are not anywhere close to being) then by definition he probably doesn't want to be in a situation where blackmail would be effective. There just isn't a lot of incentive for an autocratic ruler to destabilize his regime and crash his country's economy to grab a piece of territory at a massive price that the world will never recognize. Putin wanted to annex six eastern provinces of ukraine and create a client state in central Ukraine; not be in a position where he needs to threaten to lob nuclear weapons. Putin was able to grab Crimea precisely because there was no military resistance not because he was able to create a fait accompli that he was able to blackmail the world into accepting. Yet the sanctions imposed after Crimea was annexed dramatically weakened the civilian economy and putin's military buildup. To be clear, I don't think Ukraine should negotiate or be forced to negotiate but that isn't because I believe Putin would not be deterred in the future.