4 ms·

I agree but my devil's advocate response = I suspect that without enough incentive for a peaceful resolution, the more right thing (=seeking peace) falls out of

I agree but my devil's advocate response = I suspect that without enough incentive for a peaceful resolution, the more right thing (=seeking peace) falls out of favor. I know we've been told that Putin doesn't want to negotiate but I find it naive to take that message at face value, similar to how the US claims Russia blew up the pipeline while the US is the biggest beneficiary. Without going tinfoil hat, there is enough precedent for US lies (WMDs in Iraq, Libya etc) that I would question the messaging even though I agree Putin sucks.

lmm 4y ago
Pursing peace at any cost is not the right thing. If the US has more incentive to encourage Ukraine to defend vigorously rather than paying Danegeld, well, that's no bad thing for the long term stability of the world as a whole. The only case I'd worry about the kind of thing you're suggesting is if the US were pushing Ukraine to counteratack hard into Russian territory and turn down an offer of a return to pre-2014 borders, and that seems unlikely so far - if anything so far it seems to be the US holding Ukraine back.
- silentsea90 4y ago
  Maybe. Russia's population is falling and Putin is getting older to the extent that such a war may not have happened 5-10 years from now. I am more worried about escalation, nukes, forever wars etc. Ukraine fighting for pre 2014 borders is one case that triggers this, among many others I bet you the rebuilding phase will also involve American cos.
  - lmm 4y ago
    > Maybe. Russia's population is falling and Putin is getting older to the extent that such a war may not have happened 5-10 years from now. We've been trying the "wait them out" strategy with North Korea and it's gone very badly IMO. At some point it's better to grasp the nettle, especially when you're lucky enough to get as clear-cut a conflict as this. There will probably never be a better time to draw the line and hold it. > I am more worried about escalation, nukes, forever wars etc. Ukraine fighting for pre 2014 borders is one case that triggers this, among many others Accepting peace on anything less than a return to pre-2014 borders would doom the world in the long term. It would set a clear precedent that anyone with nuclear weapons can take what they want with no downsides, and there's no coming back from that. > I bet you the rebuilding phase will also involve American cos. It probably will, and there will probably be corruption and looting and backhanders. It's going to suck, but there's no scenario in which the next ten or twenty years of being Ukraine doesn't suck. Kicking out Russia quickly and getting on with the rebuilding, ideally with international support for all the waste that that will involve, is the least-bad future.
caskstrength 4y ago
> I agree but my devil's advocate response = I suspect that without enough incentive for a peaceful resolution, the more right thing (=seeking peace) falls out of favor. I know we've been told that Putin doesn't want to negotiate but I find it naive to take that message at face value Well, you are right that cutting off military assistance to Ukraine would force it to "negotiate" (quotes because result would be more like a capitulation, considering the list of Russian demands). However, what would be the motivation for Putin to commit to peaceful resolution in such case instead of continuing the conquest of (weakened, out of arms and ammo) Ukraine?

lmm 4y ago

Pursing peace at any cost is not the right thing. If the US has more incentive to encourage Ukraine to defend vigorously rather than paying Danegeld, well, that's no bad thing for the long term stability of the world as a whole. The only case I'd worry about the kind of thing you're suggesting is if the US were pushing Ukraine to counteratack hard into Russian territory and turn down an offer of a return to pre-2014 borders, and that seems unlikely so far - if anything so far it seems to be the US holding Ukraine back.

silentsea90 4y ago
Maybe. Russia's population is falling and Putin is getting older to the extent that such a war may not have happened 5-10 years from now. I am more worried about escalation, nukes, forever wars etc. Ukraine fighting for pre 2014 borders is one case that triggers this, among many others I bet you the rebuilding phase will also involve American cos.
- lmm 4y ago
  > Maybe. Russia's population is falling and Putin is getting older to the extent that such a war may not have happened 5-10 years from now. We've been trying the "wait them out" strategy with North Korea and it's gone very badly IMO. At some point it's better to grasp the nettle, especially when you're lucky enough to get as clear-cut a conflict as this. There will probably never be a better time to draw the line and hold it. > I am more worried about escalation, nukes, forever wars etc. Ukraine fighting for pre 2014 borders is one case that triggers this, among many others Accepting peace on anything less than a return to pre-2014 borders would doom the world in the long term. It would set a clear precedent that anyone with nuclear weapons can take what they want with no downsides, and there's no coming back from that. > I bet you the rebuilding phase will also involve American cos. It probably will, and there will probably be corruption and looting and backhanders. It's going to suck, but there's no scenario in which the next ten or twenty years of being Ukraine doesn't suck. Kicking out Russia quickly and getting on with the rebuilding, ideally with international support for all the waste that that will involve, is the least-bad future.

caskstrength 4y ago

> I agree but my devil's advocate response = I suspect that without enough incentive for a peaceful resolution, the more right thing (=seeking peace) falls out of favor. I know we've been told that Putin doesn't want to negotiate but I find it naive to take that message at face value Well, you are right that cutting off military assistance to Ukraine would force it to "negotiate" (quotes because result would be more like a capitulation, considering the list of Russian demands). However, what would be the motivation for Putin to commit to peaceful resolution in such case instead of continuing the conquest of (weakened, out of arms and ammo) Ukraine?