I understand where you are coming from. However, if your reason for not helping the Ukrainians is a fear of nuclear weapons..... the fear being that the risk of nuclear destruction isn't worth it..... then saying "NATO", that IS arbitrary. Why does a piece of paper signed by countries mean so much if the genuine concern is a nuclear holocaust? You are willing to risk a nuclear holocaust based on a piece of paper signed by a group of countries but not another nation that didn't sign the paper? It is very arbitrary. If the concern is that we seriously believe that Putin will start a nuclear war, IF we engage in troops on the ground or air........ then there is no reason to enforce NATO either, the risk is just too great. We can just let Poland or defend themselves and sit it out.... someone in Europe will stop him, and if they don't, we at least we aren't a parking lot, we can learn to live with three World Super Powers... better alive than dead.
They are NOT thots or hoes...they are entrepreneurs comrade. I would gladly do my part and allow them to come in my home to plow...their trade if my wife agreed.
It's not just that but it waters down the entire alliance if we are going to resist any attack on any European country. That is in fact what would make NATO arbitrary.
No, we can push Russia out of the Ukraine and position troops and armaments on the border. There is no reason we cannot do that. Can things change with a new administration? Absolutely, but it is a lot harder for Russia to attempt to take the Ukraine when there are existing foreign troops in place. It isn't ideal, but that has existed in the past and still does in some parts of the world. Also, a defeat in the Ukraine and continued sanctions would have MASSIVE impacts on the Russian economy. While China can likely do business with them, they are cut off from the rest of the world, and depending on how the CCP and the West handle it.... it is also possible over time that China is cut off from the West.
If the largest concern is nuclear holocaust..... and a direct war with Russia equals holocaust..... then we need to violate NATO and stay out of it..... if honoring a treaty is more important than the risk of nuclear holocaust.... then the risk of a nuclear holocaust must be really low and we should be defending the Ukraine. The idea that the survival of the USA and the world should hinge on NATO is absurd..... if the risk is real, then we need to just stay out of it unless they actually attack our mainland.
The fact that our defense is integrated with NATO and we can act as one military for because of the coordination - the fact that there is article 5 is a massive deterrent. It doesn't put us at more risk, it puts us at less risk because it makes it much much less likely Russia attacks. If Russia attacks, than that is grave and scary, but NATO must respond at that point. It doesn't have to respond with war, but it has to hit back and send a message that the alliance is real and there is no hesitation - the resolve must be ironclad - otherwise it falls apart. It's survival of the jungle. If you are out there on your own, you're dead meat. But if you got friends and strong ones who all group together, then you don't have to worry about becoming prey. Ukraine is prey. Russia is the tiger. Ukraine is attacked because it isn't part of an alliance and its an easier target. We don't shoot the tiger unless it attacks someone in our tribe. Tiger takes a bite, we give it a good hit. Russia won't attack NATO unless he is sure our resolve is weak and he is very confident article five won't be invoked. I have to believe that what he has seen - at how quickly the US and Europe rallied together. At how quickly Finland and Sweden started hitting the oh **** button and looking to get into NATO is telling. I don't think he expected that. And that makes NATO stronger and more intimidating.
I doubt China is happy with how this has played out so far. Think China is watching this and thinking..."oh now we can invade Taiwan and it will be no big deal!"
There will not be a nuclear war or the use of nuclear weapons. NATO will not be getting involved directly. Putin wants to over throw the current Ukrainian government in favor of one who is more pro-russian with less of an influence from NATO.
i have never been a supporter of war. first pr0nhub deletes 80% of its videos and now this. why is the man rushing armageddon upon us?
I don't think that China is happy at how slow the capture of the Ukraine has been, and I believe that they are likely surprised that the atrocities and efforts of the Russians have not been as easily hidden. Concerning Taiwan, I don't think it is coincidence that Russia moved before China... the CCP wants to see what the reaction will be and what problems emerge so that when they attempt to take Taiwan, they can avoid repeating some of the same mistakes. Is the CCP less likely to take Taiwan? Lets wait and see how this all plays out.... if a year from now Russia has the Ukraine and the military is keeping it quiet within reason, and the Russian economy is "okay", then I think the Chinese are more likely than before to take Taiwan..... if a year from now the Russians have left the Ukraine or are still fighting, then the CCP will likely pursue a more long term strategy.
The CCP sees and understands the power that the West wields economically but of course we’re still tied to them and until we can decouple in my opinion they should try to get Taiwan sooner then later…I’m also sure they’re wondering how reliable Russia can be after this shitshow.
You mean that Putin was upset that the Ukrainians did not want a Kremlin bootlicker to be their President and he is very upset... so he is going to kill civilians and risk a world war so that he can install a puppet President that will let Putin rape the Ukraine of it's culture and natural resources to compensate for the absolute corrupt and inept **** show that is the Russian economy.
Destroying Russia in the long-haul does not help save Ukraine today. Sure - that's a debatable point. But that means the question is not "are you willing to risk nuclear war to save Ukraine". Unless you oppose sanctions and everything else and just think the US should completely stay out of it, the answer to that question is already yes. You, me, all of us are willing to risk nuclear war. We just have different opinions on what that level of risk is and what's likely or not likely to cause Putin to do it.
Probably, but China doesn't have the risk taking mentality and adventurism that Putin has showed. Then again, China has put Xi on the same pedestal as Deng and Mao, and he appears to have adopted a more authoritarian power dynamic (especially after removing term limits) so he could be much closer to Putin in terms of his ruling style. In that case, Taiwan is certainly in his sites but again, I doubt he wants to be known as the leader who destroyed China's economy in what history will view as a massive blunder to capture an island 0.37% the size of China. Time is on China's side as it grows ever more powerful and dominant in the world. Meanwhile Russia's economy is stuck in the 1950's and has an economy is one fifth that of China - so yeah, China has a lot more reason to be risk adverse I would think.
