3 ms·
Most of Europe is in NATO. NATO nations committing troops would likely drag all of NATO into war with Russia, increasing the chance of a nuclear war. That's not
by SAI_Peregrinus 3y ago
Most of Europe is in NATO. NATO nations committing troops would likely drag all of NATO into war with Russia, increasing the chance of a nuclear war. That's not something NATO wants.
- troupo 3y ago1. It's really doubtful Russia will commit to nuclear war. 2. If it does, it will do that regardless of whether or not NATO enters the war or not. Russia has signalled it has no intentions of stopping its war of conquest
- gfodor 3y agoTaken together what you wrote here is a convenient framework for all blame of any possible nuclear exchange to be entirely disconnected from NATO.
- watwut 3y agoIf Russia starts nuclear exchanges yes they will be solely responsible. They are being aggressor. Also, they signaled wish to expand beyond Ukraine multiple times last year.
- epistasis 3y agoDescribing it as "convenient" does not make also make it any less true or accurate, which are the true metrics a framework should be evaluated by. We can't disregard frameworks just because we don't want one side to benefit, we must evaluate frameworks on whether they represent reality.
- troupo 3y agoThere's exactly one country threatening its nukes, conducting the largest war in Europe since WWII and showing no willingness to stop. So, the question is: what do you do? Sit back and let it take whatever it wants?
- bumby 3y agoI'd be curious what details you're drawing on to make those conclusions. Regarding #1, do you think this is the case if Ukraine, for example, gains enough traction to attack Russian border cities as a means of preventing a Russian regrouping and counter-attack? Or is the word "commit" doing a lot of heavy lifting here? Regarding #2, I've heard two scenarios that would counter this. If Russia wins in Ukraine, they likely have an interest in further expansion. If they think NATO isn't really as committed as they claim, a nuclear exchange into someplace like Poland would prove that, as well as giving the US a plausible way to back out of NATO commitments. That's a huge win for Russia. The previous statement about Ukrainian success provides the other example. Both cases are conditional on NATO activities.
- cactusplant7374 3y ago> if Ukraine, for example, gains enough traction to attack Russian border cities That has already happened. https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-drones-a9fc4ddad80a906e85aacca7354eb317 https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-war-drones-a9fc4dd...
- troupo 3y ago> Regarding #1 Too much in Russia depends on the West. I'm not even talking about its industrial capacity which can't even produce military equipment without foreign components. Their children study and live in Europe and the US. Their families live in Europe. Their business interests are in Europe. I really doubt any of them will risk a nuclear war. > Regarding #2 They've been quite vocal about this for a long time: they will continue war until stopped. At least until they claim all/most of the former USSR territories. Some of those territories (the Baltic states) are in NATO.
- Horffupolde 3y agoSo paradoxically, by NATO increasing in members, its non-MAD strength decreases.
- notahacker 3y agoNot really, because Sweden wasn't going to send troops to Ukraine as a NATO proxy without a defence pact anyway.