4 ms·
Peace in Europe benefits everyone—not just the EU, but also the U.S., Asia, and even Russia itself. If we fail to invest in defense, we risk more death and suff
by sirolimus 2y ago
Peace in Europe benefits everyone—not just the EU, but also the U.S., Asia, and even Russia itself. If we fail to invest in defense, we risk more death and suffering from unchecked Russian expansion and bullying.
It’s hard to see where you stand here. You seem unconcerned about Russia taking Ukraine and then the Baltic states, as if that would be a positive outcome.
Is the full surrender and merging of Ukraine into Russia something you desire?
- lazyeye 2y agoWhat happens if Ukraine is given sufficient support to start winning and Putin decides to go nuclear? I don't want Russia to win either but we also have to operate in reality.
- YZF 2y agoIs the threat of Russia using nuclear weapons enough to let it take all of Ukraine? Other countries? Russia is not going to use nuclear weapons.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- sirolimus 2y agoEven if Ukraine starts winning, a nuclear strike by Putin would trigger a catastrophic response from NATO and the international community, causing mutual destruction. Furthermore, with your logic there is nothing stopping Russia from keep chipping away at Europe because everyone is afraid that Russia will use nuclear weapons. With that rational, you might as well annex the entirety of Europe and call it Russia because Europe wants peace.
- lazyeye 2y agoI'm not necessarily disagreeing but we also need to understand what the reality of nuclear war means in the modern era. https://youtu.be/za6tZB19E4c https://youtu.be/za6tZB19E4c
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoWhich is why we can't give in and establish that nuclear powers can do whatever they want. That way just leads to getting closer and closer to nuclear war with every country now having to have their own nukes, not further from the risk of nuclear annihilation.
- lazyeye 2y agoI guess I'm more interested in the how rather than the why. The why is kind of a given. After Ukraine runs out of fodder for the meat-grinder (already on the verge of this now) who's children get sent to Ukraine? If we are not going to give Ukraine sufficient support to win the war, only prolong it, what is the timeline and the actual endgame? To be clear, I'm not supporting Russia, I'm asking in clear terms, what exactly should the response be?
- _DeadFred_ 2y agoWhy are you moving the goalposts? I responded to your comment asking what if things go too good for Ukraine. Not sure how 'but what if things go bad' is a reasoned follow up on your part. : "What happens if Ukraine is given sufficient support to start winning and Putin decides to go nuclear? I don't want Russia to win either but we also have to operate in reality."
- lazyeye 2y agoNot moving the goalposts at all. You completely side-stepped answering my question.
- inverted_flag 2y agoThis has been the excuse for inaction since the invasion of Crimea. Clearly, Russia has no intention of stopping its westward expansion. Eventually we are going to have to bite the bullet.
- marcosscriven 2y agoWhere does that logic end? Doesn’t that mean Putin just keeps going and going because we’re frightened?
- cheema33 2y ago> What happens if Ukraine is given sufficient support to start winning and Putin decides to go nuclear? That is a possibility. But there is a large cost associated with going nuclear. And that is why he hasn't done it, even after losing hundreds of thousands of soldiers. Also, if you give Putin what he wants, because he might go nuclear, then the race to develop nukes will really heat up by all non-nuclear nations. US signed Budapest memorandum. We promised to help defend Ukraine, if it gave up its nukes. Now we are trying to shake them down like a mafia. And also asking them to give in to Putin's demands, without asking Putin to give up anything. We have fallen very far.