Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Twdft]

I believe his calculus is that he thinks he can still win the war of attrition as long as NATO doesn't actually directly intervene.

The longer this goes on the more I think NATO actually should put an end to this with direct intervention.

All this talk of "ruSSia can't win" and then feeding Ukraine just enough to hold up this shitshow a bit longer is becoming increasingly irritating. This is only prolonging the time until NATO has to intervene, because if NATO actually means "ruSSia can't win" we should make sure that'll be the outcome. Ukrainians are fighting and dying for two years now so I can sit at home and play WoW and I'm really sad for them.

[Specialka]

The longer this goes on the more I think NATO actually should put an end to this with direct intervention.

All this talk of "ruSSia can't win" and then feeding Ukraine just enough to hold up this shitshow a bit longer is becoming increasingly irritating. This is only prolonging the time until NATO has to intervene, because if NATO actually means "ruSSia can't win" we should make sure that'll be the outcome. Ukrainians are fighting and dying for two years now so I can sit at home and play WoW and I'm really sad for them.

As soon as NATO directly intervenes, it will feed russian narrative.

[Odinfrost]

The longer this goes on the more I think NATO actually should put an end to this with direct intervention.

All this talk of "ruSSia can't win" and then feeding Ukraine just enough to hold up this shitshow a bit longer is becoming increasingly irritating. This is only prolonging the time until NATO has to intervene, because if NATO actually means "ruSSia can't win" we should make sure that'll be the outcome. Ukrainians are fighting and dying for two years now so I can sit at home and play WoW and I'm really sad for them.

A real good way to escalate this entire thing which is the exact thing NATO wants to avoid! We are staying back to not turn this into a larger war while still clearly being on one side of the conflict

[Gorsameth]

As soon as NATO directly intervenes, it will feed russian narrative.

and we should care about that because?

[Jastall]

As soon as NATO directly intervenes, it will feed russian narrative.

That's not an issue. The Russian narrative exists mostly for internal consumption, with the tankies and US Republican politicians that swallow it hook, line and sinker being useful idiots but not the primary audience. And as we've seen with Putin's interview it is based on a mostly evidence-proof pile of nationalistic tropes. Whenever NATO acts aggressively against Russia changes little to Russia's outlook towards NATO which they see as a bully due to its mere existence stopping them from bullying others into line.

What IS an actual issue, is escalation. No one, neither Russia nor anyone in NATO, wants a conflict taking place in one country to spill over. That's several steps too far, especially when you consider that Russia has nukes. No, I'm not pulling a Yuppie and fapping over them using the things at the slightest provocation out of some morbid fetish. But there's a reason nuclear-armed nations don't enter into armed conflicts directly. And intervention from NATO states against the Russian army is far too close to a direct conflict for comfort. There's a reason Putin hasn't even tried to disrupt weapon shipments to Ukraine, he knows attacking NATO assets is a big no-no, and the reserve is also true.

[Dontrike]

As soon as NATO directly intervenes, it will feed russian narrative.

Oh no? The fuck does the rest of the world care about what some Russian oligarchs say?

[Twdft]

A real good way to escalate this entire thing which is the exact thing NATO wants to avoid! We are staying back to not turn this into a larger war while still clearly being on one side of the conflict

As I see it the only question is when and not if NATO has to directly fight ruSSia. The only case it doesn't happen is if ruSSia says "well it was worth a try we give up" and gets the fuck out of Ukraine. So why wait? Ahh I forgot the arms industry has to squeeze as much profit out of the conflict as possible.

[Jessicka]

The longer this goes on the more I think NATO actually should put an end to this with direct intervention.

All this talk of "ruSSia can't win" and then feeding Ukraine just enough to hold up this shitshow a bit longer is becoming increasingly irritating. This is only prolonging the time until NATO has to intervene, because if NATO actually means "ruSSia can't win" we should make sure that'll be the outcome. Ukrainians are fighting and dying for two years now so I can sit at home and play WoW and I'm really sad for them.

It probably wouldn’t last long, but even without nukes Russia could still hit stuff in the US and Western Europe with their navy and long range bombers. Never mind that they have FSB crawling all over the place to do some terrorism. Suffice to say the damage they could do would be politically unpopular as futile as it might be.

[Specialka]

and we should care about that because?

If NATO was to attack "unprovoked" (because that's what it would be), that would validate one of the arguments that was used to start this shitshow. Like NATO is an aggressive alliance, yada, yada. And that would also escalate the conflict even further (something that no one wants, maybe apart from the Ukrainians given the mess they are in).

[Saradain]

If NATO was to attack "unprovoked" (because that's what it would be), that would validate one of the arguments that was used to start this shitshow. Like NATO is an aggressive alliance, yada, yada. And that would also escalate the conflict even further (something that no one wants, maybe apart from the Ukrainians given the mess they are in).

Russia is a-okay to genocide Ukraine, and that's fine for some nations because of the tinfoil hat level shit they believe, but helping Ukraine to not be wiped out entirely is worse. Yeah, you're right, that's the shit part of the world. Some entities have more leverage than others.

[Specialka]

Russia is a-okay to genocide Ukraine, and that's fine for some nations because of the tinfoil hat level shit they believe, but helping Ukraine to not be wiped out entirely is worse. Yeah, you're right, that's the shit part of the world. Some entities have more leverage than others.

Yes, I am not saying it is ok or not. I am saying that is the reality we live in and how it works.

[Saradain]

Yes, I am not saying it is ok or not. I am saying that is the reality we live in and how it works.

Yep. At least thanks to Russia and their incompetence (and the media-spread looming russian aggression towards other nations in the long run), at least real money can be made out of this...Rheinmetall stocks going their merry way up ever since early 2022...

Which may or may not be an indicator how some...theories...about war being extended as much as possible linger around. Sometimes I wish the civilized world would/could just take over by force instead of trying to educate idiots that russian-like behaviour is not okay. Some people just don't learn. But eh, pipedreams remain pipedreams.

[Gorsameth]

If NATO was to attack "unprovoked" (because that's what it would be), that would validate one of the arguments that was used to start this shitshow. Like NATO is an aggressive alliance, yada, yada. And that would also escalate the conflict even further (something that no one wants, maybe apart from the Ukrainians given the mess they are in).

I repeat, and we should care about validating Russia's rhetoric because?

[Specialka]

Yep. At least thanks to Russia and their incompetence (and the media-spread looming russian aggression towards other nations in the long run), at least real money can be made out of this...Rheinmetall stocks going their merry way up ever since early 2022...

Which may or may not be an indicator how some...theories...about war being extended as much as possible linger around. Sometimes I wish the civilized world would/could just take over by force instead of trying to educate idiots that russian-like behaviour is not okay. Some people just don't learn. But eh, pipedreams remain pipedreams.

And that would be colonialism or imperialism. Then why stop at Russia ? You see how that would be spinned by everyone not aligned with the West.

[Saradain]

And that would be colonialism or imperialism. Then why stop at Russia ? You see how that would be spinned by everyone not aligned with the West.

Yeah, humanity is doomed all the same for me. Can't piss off a random no-name nation, better let tens of millions suffer and be purged or else WE'RE the bad guys. And nuclear armaments making it all worse

Russia has n00ks, they can do anything or we're the ones escalating. Lesson learned, always start wars first if you got n00ks.

[Gabriel]

It probably wouldn’t last long, but even without nukes Russia could still hit stuff in the US and Western Europe with their navy and long range bombers. Never mind that they have FSB crawling all over the place to do some terrorism. Suffice to say the damage they could do would be politically unpopular as futile as it might be.

The only reason that Russia as a state still exists.

[DarkAmbient]

The longer this goes on the more I think NATO actually should put an end to this with direct intervention.

All this talk of "ruSSia can't win" and then feeding Ukraine just enough to hold up this shitshow a bit longer is becoming increasingly irritating. This is only prolonging the time until NATO has to intervene, because if NATO actually means "ruSSia can't win" we should make sure that'll be the outcome. Ukrainians are fighting and dying for two years now so I can sit at home and play WoW and I'm really sad for them.

A lot of people probably sympathise with that, myself included. But it's unlikely to happen, as some cynical but coldly pragmatic realpolitik is at play: Why risk our own necks when we can funnel our scraps to Ukraine and let them degrade the Russian military on our behalf? Privately Zelensky will be begging for our intervention, and he'll have been met with polite smiles and apologetic assurances that we're doing everything we can, and he'll know we refuse because we'd rather his people die than ours.

[Heathy]

I don't think NATO can intervene as an entity, the whole point of a defensive alliance is that it can only act if a member is attacked. I don't think individual nato members declaring war on Russia would drag everyone else into the war either. its pretty interesting to me that aiding one side doesn't automatically mean you've also declared war, seeing as you've openly picked a side you want to win.

there is some merit to Nato expanding though its just doing it through diplomacy without firing a shot, countries feel safer joining NATO it grows stronger. I don't buy the idea that its gearing up to invade Russia though that is obviously being used as an excuse for this invasion. But it is proving its existence is warranted.

obviously, the biggest risk is that this does just end up as a 3rd world war. Because if nato did join in it's pretty likely china would think about making a move on Taiwan and also probably putting more effort into aiding Russia. it's pretty close to the point where one side of the world is ready to start fighting the other side.

North Korea has a pretty big standing army for its size, It's been like that for ages, i'm sure they are itching to whelp themselves into something. Japan is eyeing up the islands Russia stole from them. There is ample tension in the air no one wants to do anything rash but once it starts then so does the opportunism.

[Gaidax]

A lot of people probably sympathise with that, myself included. But it's unlikely to happen, as some cynical but coldly pragmatic realpolitik is at play: Why risk our own necks when we can funnel our scraps to Ukraine and let them degrade the Russian military on our behalf? Privately Zelensky will be begging for our intervention, and he'll have been met with polite smiles and apologetic assurances that we're doing everything we can, and he'll know we refuse because we'd rather his people die than ours.

It's not even that - go sell this idea at home to the voters. UK has elections soon? Plenty of more pressing issues at home.

Heck, I'd bet it's not even easy to justify further resources expenditure on this to the masses, which is in part why this aid is trickling. It's simply pretty damn hard to sell at home those hundreds of millions, if not multiple billions or more spent on Ukraine instead of on, let's say, expanding train network in the country and/or some other pressing infrastructure projects.

Russia is banking on the war of attrition, but in reality, so is the West. Clock is ticking for everyone here - Putin is not eternal and who knows, this problem might just resolve itself in a few years, without having to make unpopular decisions at home, such as dumping too much of those needed $$ on Ukraine or starting an actual war.

There already was Prigozhin bit, who knows what there will be next year. Of course, this all means that Ukrainians keep eating shit, but despite all this chest thumping people do trying to appear better than they are and score them Twitter points - many simply think "whelp, better them than us".

[Cthulhu 2020]

It always baffles me how conservative chuds like to claim that NATO is a force of violence and division in the world when its existence has created one of the most peaceful times in our world's history. I don't get how anyone can see Russia being the aggressor of countless conflicts and go "Yeah those guys that Russia is attacking are the instigators in this for taking countermeasures to prevent Russia from invading them!"