(February 25, 2022 at 10:59 am)Anomalocaris Wrote:(February 25, 2022 at 6:29 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I don’t disagree (if Ukraine joining NATO is an existential threat to Russia, then Ukraine as a Russian puppet state is an existential threat to NATO), but it isn’t likely to happen. NATO’s best option right now is a massive deployment of military assets to Poland, which I have a sinking feeling is next on Putin’s hit list.
Boru
no, he does not intend to go beyond ukraine right now. belarus is already in his pocket, ruled as it has since the fall of soviet union by the same former soviet apparatchik. The relationship between russia and belarus now is already the same as what he would want the repkaship between Russia and Ukraine to be when he is done.
in the long run, his next logical target will undoubtedly be the baltic republicans, not poland. Baltic republics were part of the USSR proper, like ukraine, and before that part of the czarist Russian empire, just like ukraine, not just a former warsaw pact satellite or was only partially under czarist rule, like poland. Their being part of the NATO threatens Saint Petersburg, russian access to the baltic, as well as russian acres to kaliningrad, and they are geographically well suited to be taken by a multi prone invasion from several direction.
However, It is unlikely he made up his mind to do this.
As to ukraine being an existential threat to NATO, it is, but only by choice, and not the only existential threat facing it either. Geopolitically nato didn’t need to expand into former warsaw pact at all, as indeed the US and NATO did promise Gorbachev it won’t if they soviet union withdrew from east germany.
the current NATO still has no need for ukraine to ensure safety of existing members. it only wants ukraine to prevent Russia becoming a obstacle to US hegemony in euroasia, but the US hegemony in Euroasia i’m now also face multiple other serious and increasing obstacles.
The reason why russian taking ukraine threatens NATO is simply it shows NATO talks a lot more than it needs to, and if believed, then one might find oneself facing the consequences of it not being able to walk the walk.
Undoubtedly NATO will put on an exhibit of solidarity for next few years. but NATO is damaged goods. It was already damaged goods when Trump dissed it. without the US NATO is worthless because all of the other NATO states combined can’t defend its peripheral states against russia invasion of russia so chooses to invade. While ukraine damaged it some more, the fact that the self same trump remains the lord of one of the two political party in the US and that party is on track to win mid term election, which places trump in good position to put in act 2, in fact suppresses it’s credibility at a much deeper level.
No one will take NATO seriously if there is even odds it will effective dissolve sometime in the next several years.
the pivot by the US to the pacific to confront china also diminishes NATO credibility. ultimately what makes NATO a spent force is the fact all its members combined represents an ever diminishing part of global economy.
(February 25, 2022 at 6:13 am)The Valkyrie Wrote: NATO needs to make it clear that this us unacceptable and there will be consequences.
12 hours to call a cease fire.
24 to begin a withdrawal.
48 to get all forces out of the Ukraine.
After that, remove a couple of Russian military bases from the map and start pushing them out by force.
huh, by force? which force?
they can remove nato bases and cities from map too.
Whatever force is necessary to push the invading force out of Ukraine.
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni:
"You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"
