111–120 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited. Russia intends to use Chernobyl as a deterrent to NATO, according to the report (how, I do not know). It is also not straightforward to put a NATO ally right on Russia's vulnerable flank (it's endless plains and flat ground from Ukraine to Moscow, which has always been a source of strategic vulnerability for Moscow), so admitting Ukraine to NATO was ne…
> Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited Ukraine not being in NATO means we aren’t obligated to intervene. We regularly intervene in various things without a treaty requiring it.
The US is not obligated to intervene in Ukraine, plain and simple. The US has a strategic partnership with Ukraine, I think, but it's not an ally. https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/Story/Article/1... https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partn...
I can't really tell what's going on here. Is the EU and America supposed to be helping out but it's all promises without real counter attacks? Is this just the calm before the storm as russia places their troops in the right spots while everyone looks on? Anyone who's smarter than me who could enlighten me?
I can't really tell what's going on here. Is the EU and America supposed to be helping out but it's all promises without real counter attacks? Is this just the calm before the storm as russia places their troops in the right spots while everyone looks on? Anyone who's smarter than me who could enlighten me?
EU and US will use every diplomatic and financial weapon against Russia, but they've long since decided Ukraine and the Ukrainian people aren't worth actual war over. That call was made in 2014 and stopping Russia then would've been easier than it would be now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is actually deviously brilliant. No one wants to shell the area because it would release all the dust and radionuclides that were buried during the cleanup. It is a perfect staging area because the downside to attacking it is so high. No allied forces in Europe want to deal with the fallout - literally. This is so genius I'm genuinely in awe. This is right out of Sun Tzu: “The art of war teaches us to rely not on…
Well he invented fighting, and he perfected it so that no living man could best him in the ring of honour. Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal on Earth, and then he herded them onto a boat, and then he beat the crap out of every single one...
I think this is mainly a psychological move. It has people talking about nuclear fallout, radiation etc. That's the point.
I can't really tell what's going on here. Is the EU and America supposed to be helping out but it's all promises without real counter attacks? Is this just the calm before the storm as russia places their troops in the right spots while everyone looks on? Anyone who's smarter than me who could enlighten me?
Ukraine is not a member of NATO, so options are somewhat limited. Russia intends to use Chernobyl as a deterrent to NATO, according to the report (how, I do not know). It is also not straightforward to put a NATO ally right on Russia's vulnerable flank (it's endless plains and flat ground from Ukraine to Moscow, which has always been a source of strategic vulnerability for Moscow), so admitting Ukraine to NATO was ne…
In taking Ukraine, Putin just put Nato on Russia’s border.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US will defend NATO. They will nuke Russia's forces if they try to enter Poland. There is no doubt in my mind that is a red line.
There should always be plenty of doubt in your mind if you're saying that the US will use nukes in any situation short of someone else using them first.
I think they've taken the nuclear plant because it is a defensible point along their shortest line of advance. They wouldn't want to move past it without controlling the site.