Like Tree10Likes

Ukraine - "Peace talks" in Belarus ...

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Original Post Deleted
    No. I don't think this should be an East / West issue. It is a dictator / democracy issue. Should the UN have more powers against the permanent members of the security council that abuse their privilege - Yes

    Which countries should / could be called up by the UN to avert a humanitarian crises?


    Fighter aircraft
    1 United States 3,318
    2 Russia 1,900
    3 China 1,500
    4 India 1,080
    5 Egypt 900
    6 North Korea 661
    7 Pakistan 502
    8 Turkey 465
    9 South Korea 458
    10 Germany 423
    11 Israel 420
    12 Iran 407
    13 Libya 385
    14 Japan 374
    15 Taiwan 360
    16 Syria 335
    17 Italy 320
    18 Greece 308
    19 France 306
    20 Saudi Arabia 287

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,768
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    No. I don't think this should be an East / West issue. It is a dictator / democracy issue. Should the UN have more powers against the permanent members of the security council that abuse their privilege - Yes

    Which countries should / could be called up by the UN to avert a humanitarian crises?


    Fighter aircraft
    1 United States 3,318
    2 Russia 1,900
    3 China 1,500
    4 India 1,080
    5 Egypt 900
    6 North Korea 661
    7 Pakistan 502
    8 Turkey 465
    9 South Korea 458
    10 Germany 423
    11 Israel 420
    12 Iran 407
    13 Libya 385
    14 Japan 374
    15 Taiwan 360
    16 Syria 335
    17 Italy 320
    18 Greece 308
    19 France 306
    20 Saudi Arabia 287
    And how do you think Russia would react?

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,452
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    And how do you think Russia would react?
    Putin would probably mention his nuclear weapons, he hasn't done that in the last 10 minutes.

    I don't think folding to threats of nukes is a viable strategy, in the long term. If threatening to use nukes gives you basically the same advantage as using nukes, then you’re going to be pretty loose with those threats. At what point does Russian expansion, in and of itself, become de facto as problematic a risk, as the risk of nuclear war. Put differently, it's both undesirable to engage in nuclear war and to allow your nuclear opponent to just endlessly expand undeterred.

    If you aren't able to "risk" nuclear war, then you might as well give all of Europe (or at least all the former Soviet states) to Putin. That's what he wants. And he's happy to threaten us with nukes along the way.
    EnglishGamified likes this.

  4. #14

    In my opinion, If the narrative: 'Ukraine is a democratic country being unlawfully and illegally annexed' is true, then it is our, NATO's, moral duty to intervene militarily.

    For me, it's embarrassing that we're hanging back and watching. Being in NATO means we have each others back, not that we're unable to help non-members.

    This reminds me of those stories you hear of some girl being raped on a train and bystanders either ignoring it or filming it on their phones. If we don't intervene now this will be a disgusting stain on our collective memories.

    What else? If we don't intervene then any nuclear country can invade their neighbours at gunpoint without fear of military consequences.

    I'm pretty sure we're being geed up for boots on the ground anyway so the point will probably be moot.

    mrgoodkat and Sith like this.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by hullexile:
    And how do you think Russia would react?
    You're right, and believe me, I am terrified, but can we live like that? Russia and China should never have been allowed to become this powerful. We can't just kick the can down the road. Putin is a bully and he won't stop until we stop him.

    That's my worry hullexile, we let this happen and he's emboldened, but I really get your point, what if he starts firing nukes? I think that's what you mean?

    To me, it's so mental that I almost can't think about it clearly.
    hullexile likes this.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    29,768
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgoodkat:
    Putin would probably mention his nuclear weapons, he hasn't done that in the last 10 minutes.

    I don't think folding to threats of nukes is a viable strategy, in the long term. If threatening to use nukes gives you basically the same advantage as using nukes, then you’re going to be pretty loose with those threats. At what point does Russian expansion, in and of itself, become de facto as problematic a risk, as the risk of nuclear war. Put differently, it's both undesirable to engage in nuclear war and to allow your nuclear opponent to just endlessly expand undeterred.

    If you aren't able to "risk" nuclear war, then you might as well give all of Europe (or at least all the former Soviet states) to Putin. That's what he wants. And he's happy to threaten us with nukes along the way.
    That is fine as long as you are willing to accept the consequences, as long as some thought has gone into it. Just saying we, the world, should act militarily is not right unless we accept Putin is unhinged and has control of 6500 nuclear weapons. It could be the last decision we make but it might be worth the risk.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Original Post Deleted
    Unfortunately you are correct.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652

    If the highly aligned comments in the comments section of the SCMP are any indication of the official stance of the local powers that be it is very concerning reading

    https://www.scmp.com/news/china/dipl...uspicion-china