Post

Imperial states of duotona wrote:

If we send troops to Ukraine, we may be sparking a much larger conflict with more bloodshed than what is going on now. I believe sanctions are the correct idea, but they need to be very severe if they're going to have a lasting effect on Russia.

See, that's actually why I'm in support of not-too-extremely-crippling sanctions. We do want the Russian oligarchs (well, namely Putin and the military) to be drained of resources and make sure the cost of war is not worth it. It's definitely economic warfare, but at least no (or at least very few) lives are lost. Frankly, I think many of the actions taken that specifically hurt the wealthier Russian population is actually impressive in today's world, and frankly I may've underestimated the strategic lengths they'd truly be willing to go.

But I definitely recommend not having any "lasting" impact on their economy - at least for no longer than Putin's out of office. That said, economy's a tricky thing to calculate and predict. Then again, whatever sanctions they hold will probably compound with a probable economic crash up and coming so time will tell.

Einswenn wrote:

Also I was against fearmongering about nuclear warfare until the recent Putin's order to put missiles on the alert mode.

This is sort-of why I'd rather not see Nato get involved with Ukraine, and I think the governments around the world (thankfully) darn well know this. A military escalation that involved any of Nato will see to it that, by law, it involved all of Nato. And if Russia's threatening nuclear devices now, could you imagine what'd happen if he had the entirety of the western powerhouses on his doorstep? (And lets not even get into what might happen should China get involved.)

Personally, I do believe this nuke statement is a flex of power to say to the west, "Don't get involved." It's also probably a bargaining chip for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine that will hopefully happen shortly! Does that make the threat of nuclear war justified? Heck no! But who knows? Maybe he does somehow think it's on par with Russia's (or at least his) own existential threat from the west - especially when western leaders start calling him a Hitler - which, no, he's not. To say he is (at this point in time anyway, heaven forbid ever) is disgraceful both to Russia and to history, and western leaders should frankly know better than that.

However, if he's really willing to go to all of these lengths to "show power"... I think we do need to see this thing through, very methodically and carefully, which is not the easiest thing when things happen quickly and are somewhat unpredictable (as they have been so far).

~~~~~~~~~~

For what it's worth, I watched two really interesting videos that further shed light on some of the events that led up to all of this, and I'd be very interested to see your stances on this. (Particularly you Einswenn ;p)

The first is an extremely recent upload by some guy named RealLifeLore, who frankly made this before the invasion but still uploaded it to help give some context for today. It's about half an hour long. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=If61baWF4GE

The second was made in 2018, so Trump was still president. It's a 2-hour talk at the Yale University from this person named Vladimir Pozner. He has a lot of interesting things to say about Russian history (and Putin) as well as the US. Edit: Forgot the video xd https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ

Put these two together, I'd still argue Russia's not justified. But at the same time, I don't particularly sympathize with how the non-Ukrainian west handled things after the Cold War, and frankly if you and your entire nation were struggling and constantly put under an existential threat (like Ukraine is now), you might be willing to do unjustified things. Which, if I may be so bold, is in large part why I'm still quite concerned about the nuclear threat - thus far, common sense and logic from my perspective has proven to be wrong.

~~~~~~~~~~

For what it's worth, if nukes are used, I think a military invasion will also be moot. tl;dr I'm really not in favor of moving troops out to Ukraine unless absolutely necessary without fear of existential levels of cataclysmic destruction, which I'm not entirely sure exists as a criteria at this point.