two things: first, listen to Putin. he does not want "just the Sea of Azov coastline." he wants all of Ukraine. Second, even if the first were true, look at a map. Ukraine could still have Black Sea access west of Crimea. and third, how do you propose "neutralizing Russian nukes?"
Were the Chechens a democracy? Were they trying to join NATO? Each situation is different....and now we know that Russia is actually weak, where we didn't know that before. I think we will have to fight him eventually......and right now he is reeling. DD
I don't think he will use his nukes, don't believe the Generals will follow his orders......but again, I would want to see the intelligence of how it is all setup etc...first..... I don't have any particular information, I just don't think people will press that button now that it is known everyone would die. DD
The state of Russian ground forces has made me really curious about their nuclear arsenal -- nukes are far more costly than trucks and tanks to keep in a state of readiness.
Social media war, literally. Things are so fast so by the time I type this, it might be outdated. First, the tweet is from the US embassy. I'm pretty sure the US gov owns that account. Using that tweet to say Ukraine 'Lie and Provoke nuclear war'... JFC, way over the top. Ukraine officials have also reported that none of the nuclear power plants are in danger, cooling the acute concern from yesterday. I think we all understand the enormous pressure they are under and most of us would use a more appropriate understandable way to phrase things. With that said, Zelensky has been pushing hard for a no-fly zone for days. NATO has said no, that's WW3. He said, then gives up planes, at least. I'm sure he's under tremendous pressure to keep pushing for the no-fly zone. Ukraine, rightfully, will keep asking for a no-fly zone. NATO won't do it. This is the first real serious war with world wide attention through social media. It's crazy to witness. The fog of war has now extended to everyone through social media. I think people should be careful about material coming out of Ukraine (and of course, never trust from ProPutin sources) - don't immediately accept and wait for more independent sources.
We wouldn't ever really know one way or the other. They either suck and wouldn't do what they're intended or they will melt the skin off of your children as they violently die in a nuclear holocaust. The only way to find out is for Russia to push the button.
Would the same apply to the US? If Russia invaded the US, should we prefer being a Russian vassal state and surrender rather than risk having nukes fall on us? The arguments for Ukraine to just accept their fate would be hilarious in their ridiculousness if people weren't dying.
I hate to say it but Russia isn't weak. They have had some missteps and embarrassments in the early days of the war but in the South of the country they are advancing faster than we did when we invaded Iraq.
The whole point of our nuclear arsenal is that we don't have to make that choice. Our arsenal is meant primarily as a deterrent. No one is saying Ukraine should just accept their fate. The argument is we shouldn't get involved regardless of their fate. I don't understand why this is our fight vs all the other fights we pass on. All I've heard is "the Ukrainian people are fighting for their country!" or "Putin is the next incarnation of Hitler" or "It's Europe!! War will spread!" I don't buy any of that. We don't interfere in the Congo, we don't interfere with the Uyghurs, and I don't think we should get involved here more than what we've done.
Because there isn't a massive Russian army piled up on its border ready to invade. That's the difference. If you want to contain Putin that's how you do it. Get in there before it becomes a target. Honestly my preference is not. NATO was created to be the line against Russia. It's as simple as that.
