4 ms·
> I am yet to see a clear articulation of 1. What those critical interests are The critical interest of the US is in avoiding direct war of the US with Russia
by bad_username 2y ago
> I am yet to see a clear articulation of 1. What those critical interests are
The critical interest of the US is in avoiding direct war of the US with Russia when it invades Poland or Estonia. Russia _will_ invade a NATO country if it conquers Ukraine, and the US will be obliged to defend it. So if the voluntary support of Ukraine allows to avoid that scenario today, it obviously is critically interesting.
> Why they are worth pursuing at the risk of a/ destruction of European economies b/ alienating China,
Because it is much better to risk the destruction of European economy (btw, how exactly?) or alienate China than risk sleepwalking into a potentially civilization-ending NATO-Russia war.
- richrichie 2y ago[flagged]
- friend_and_foe 2y agoSeriously. This is just scaremongering. Could it happen? Anything can happen. Will it happen? I dunno, but acting like it is a foregone conclusion as justification for escalation is nothing more than pro war propaganda.
- bdjsiqoocwk 2y agoYou're the kind of person who said that Russia invading Ukraine wasn't a serious argument. Sorry.
- mint2 2y agoYou forgot to mention, if the US didn’t back Europe’s stance on Ukraine (yes Europe’s stance), then China would have a green light to invade Taiwan, and most certainly do it. And once that precedent is set of invading neighbors like that, neither Russia nor China would stop with just Ukraine and Taiwan.
- richrichie 2y agoNot quite. Europe has been bullied into a war with its principal commodity and energy supplier. Wish there were leaders like Jacques Chirac who had the balls to put their own national interests first.
- sham1 2y agoOh, we certainly do have leaders here in the EU that put their countries' national interests first. That's why we're supporting Ukraine and sanctioning The Russia (well, the sanctions could be even harsher, but it is what it is).
- rasz 2y agoYou mean more leaders like 'No tanks/ammo/planes/cruise missiles we want the gas pipeline running again' Scholz and his two predecessors.
- richrichie 2y agoNo, exactly what i said: like Jacques Chirac, who was correct about the illegal Iraq war that killed a million Iraqis, and had the balls to back it up.
- mint2 2y agoYeah so in this case Russia is the one invading places for baseless reasons, and all nearby European states fear they are next. Europe also remembers how appeasement went for Europeans before wwii when another country though it would be cool to take over some neighbors. I think you’ve advocating for Neville chamberlain’s appeasement policy.
- richrichie 2y ago> Russia is the one invading for baseless reasons That is a very short-term and one sided view of the conflict that has been on since at least 2014. BTW, we had peace agreements guaranteed by France and Germany before Russia invaded Ukraine. It is naive to think Ukraine can be "taken over". The objective of the military operation is to prevent Ukraine from joining the NATO and US building nuclear capable bases right on Russia's border.