Other stuff

[Jowy]

For the sake of comparison. Biden evacuated American ships from the Black Sea right before the invasion, he evacuated American embassy from Kyiv right before the invasion, he told that America will not interfere militarily in case of invasion.
(Even if he had no plans to interfere, think: what could possible have been the purpose in saying it out loud?)

USA knew before the invasion that the invasion was happening without a doubt. Not sure what letting Americans die would accomplish here.

Anyway I can't take anything you say seriously if you think that making someone so incompetent, unhinged, selfish and evil as Trump the president of the most powerful country in the world is a good thing.

Putin is hysterically scared of the idea of a shooting war with USA, so if he thought there is even a slight chance that it would happen, he would have canceled the invasion. As a matter of fact, the simplest thing that would have stopped the invasion short would be Biden sending his vice-president to Kyiv and using her as a living shield until the Russians retreat.
About Trump's character - I think you are blinded by hatred and can't address this matter rationally, so our discussion would hardly be productive.

Likewise, you are so far removed from reality that there's no discussion to be had. It's not very interesting either, as your arguments here are just the usual "Trump is playing 4D chess" the Qanon nuts like to spew out.

[Gavagai]

For the sake of comparison. Biden evacuated American ships from the Black Sea right before the invasion, he evacuated American embassy from Kyiv right before the invasion, he told that America will not interfere militarily in case of invasion.
(Even if he had no plans to interfere, think: what could possible have been the purpose in saying it out loud?)

USA knew before the invasion that the invasion was happening without a doubt. Not sure what letting Americans die would accomplish here.

Anyway I can't take anything you say seriously if you think that making someone so incompetent, unhinged, selfish and evil as Trump the president of the most powerful country in the world is a good thing.

Putin is hysterically scared of the idea of a shooting war with USA, so if he thought there is even a slight chance that it would happen, he would have canceled the invasion. As a matter of fact, the simplest thing that would have stopped the invasion short would be Biden sending his vice-president to Kyiv and using her as a living shield until the Russians retreat.
About Trump's character - I think you are blinded by hatred and can't address this matter rationally, so our discussion would hardly be productive.

Likewise, you are so far removed from reality that there's no discussion to be had. It's not very interesting either, as your arguments here are just the usual "Trump is playing 4D chess" the Qanon nuts like to spew out.

At no point I attributed any unusual competence to Trump, in fact, I said the opposite - that pretty much any US President except Biden would be able to navigate this particular crisis. If you do not see even that, you should probably be less confident in your opinions about who is removed from reality.

[superdeath]

Would be nice if we sent some tactical nukes to Ukraine juuuuuuust incase..

It is my believe that if it wasnt for Nukes, the USA quite possibly would have actually controlled a vast chunk of the world vs just having the ability to project that power. Wonder what kind of a world we would be in if we had nuked/gone to war with the soviets before they got their hands on the bomb.

Ukraine actually had the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world immediately after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. They gave all the nukes to Russia because Russia, USA and UK gave them guarantees that they would protect Ukrainian independence.
I think this little factoid makes the behavior of all the parties involved (Russia primarily but also the two others) way more disgusting.

Ukraine gave up its Nuclear arsenal, and has been invaded several times.



North Korea at one point was open to stopping their weapons program in exchange for various things. Until the bush administration decided to call them an axis of evil.. and NK has since seen what happens when various countries have given up their nukes/weapons of mass destruction. They promptly get invaded. Ukraine, Libya, ect.

I think giving Ukraine some of our extra tactical nukes would be the leverage that would maybe tell Putin to get out of other people's countries.

[Jowy]

Again your saying it was preventable by US bluffing that we are willing to send forces? Would we do so solo? Unlikely. So bluff bad. Would NATO have jumped in. I haven't heard strong support from NATO for said action, so also bluff bad. If an autocrat believes they can get away with something they will try. WWI the Kaiser was told by his advisors that Britain wouldn't jump in. He was FURIOUS after they declared, but the threat of Britain didn't stop him.

Also, assigning blame to anyone other than Putin is folly of the highest magnitude. You can say preventable by x,y, and z, but blame is not a word that can be ascribed anywhere but Putin.

There's a pretty clear line drawn on where they will jump in: Attack on a NATO member. To think that the USA would risk nuclear war to defend a country that isn't even in their alliance is silly. The real "calling the bluff" move would be to attack NATO. Would the USA enter nuclear war to save some country like Estonia? I have my doubts, but at least NATO is credible enough that I believe it will work to deter an attack.

[superdeath]

Again your saying it was preventable by US bluffing that we are willing to send forces? Would we do so solo? Unlikely. So bluff bad. Would NATO have jumped in. I haven't heard strong support from NATO for said action, so also bluff bad. If an autocrat believes they can get away with something they will try. WWI the Kaiser was told by his advisors that Britain wouldn't jump in. He was FURIOUS after they declared, but the threat of Britain didn't stop him.

Also, assigning blame to anyone other than Putin is folly of the highest magnitude. You can say preventable by x,y, and z, but blame is not a word that can be ascribed anywhere but Putin.

There's a pretty clear line drawn on where they will jump in: Attack on a NATO member. To think that the USA would risk nuclear war to defend a country that isn't even in their alliance is silly. The real "calling the bluff" move would be to attack NATO. Would the USA enter nuclear war to save some country like Estonia? I have my doubts, but at least NATO is credible enough that I believe it will work to deter an attack.

Even if the USA didnt join in, the utter of the Russian army means that almost any combo of NATO allies would be enough to roll thru Moscow.

[Gavagai]

Would be nice if we sent some tactical nukes to Ukraine juuuuuuust incase..

It is my believe that if it wasnt for Nukes, the USA quite possibly would have actually controlled a vast chunk of the world vs just having the ability to project that power. Wonder what kind of a world we would be in if we had nuked/gone to war with the soviets before they got their hands on the bomb.

Ukraine actually had the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world immediately after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. They gave all the nukes to Russia because Russia, USA and UK gave them guarantees that they would protect Ukrainian independence.
I think this little factoid makes the behavior of all the parties involved (Russia primarily but also the two others) way more disgusting.

Ukraine gave up its Nuclear arsenal, and has been invaded several times.



North Korea at one point was open to stopping their weapons program in exchange for various things. Until the bush administration decided to call them an axis of evil.. and NK has since seen what happens when various countries have given up their nukes/weapons of mass destruction. They promptly get invaded. Ukraine, Libya, ect.

I think giving Ukraine some of our extra tactical nukes would be the leverage that would maybe tell Putin to get out of other people's countries.

Nuclear non-proliferation is extremely high on the list of US priorities - and rightly so. However, recent actions by US and Russia greatly increased the value of nukes for non-nuclear countries. Pretty much, it was demonstrated that if you have nukes, you can do anything but if you don't - you are at the mercy of any great power that bothers to take interest in you.

[Mjmd]

Again your saying it was preventable by US bluffing that we are willing to send forces? 

I am not saying that, I am saying that if Biden didn't say that he would not send forces and maintained ambiguity it probably would be enough. At the very least, it certainly would not make things worse, there was no gain whatsoever in committing publicly to not sending forces but a very great deal of harm. This is, I think, the third or fourth time in this discussion when you attribute a very weird meaning to my words.
My predictions of Putin's behavior are grounded in long and careful observations, so I would rather trust them than a random analogy with WWI that happened between leaders of a different kind and under very different circumstances.

How many times has Putin threatened Nukes. Does the global community still believe him? There is harm in bluffing. 

Biden was the first president to say troops would be deployed to defend Taiwan. Now state department walked that back, but I find the comparison interesting none the less.

[Gavagai]

Again your saying it was preventable by US bluffing that we are willing to send forces? Would we do so solo? Unlikely. So bluff bad. Would NATO have jumped in. I haven't heard strong support from NATO for said action, so also bluff bad. If an autocrat believes they can get away with something they will try. WWI the Kaiser was told by his advisors that Britain wouldn't jump in. He was FURIOUS after they declared, but the threat of Britain didn't stop him.

Also, assigning blame to anyone other than Putin is folly of the highest magnitude. You can say preventable by x,y, and z, but blame is not a word that can be ascribed anywhere but Putin.

There's a pretty clear line drawn on where they will jump in: Attack on a NATO member. To think that the USA would risk nuclear war to defend a country that isn't even in their alliance is silly. The real "calling the bluff" move would be to attack NATO. Would the USA enter nuclear war to save some country like Estonia? I have my doubts, but at least NATO is credible enough that I believe it will work to deter an attack.

Even if the USA didnt join in, the utter of the Russian army means that almost any combo of NATO allies would be enough to roll thru Moscow.

I suspect Russians did better in Ukraine than any NATO army except the US would. And this is given the fact that their entire initial strategy was based on a false assumption they would meet no resistance.

[Mjmd]

The thing other NATO allies would struggle with if they did anything without the US is supply chains, which among other issues is what hurt the Russians.

[Jowy]

Again your saying it was preventable by US bluffing that we are willing to send forces? Would we do so solo? Unlikely. So bluff bad. Would NATO have jumped in. I haven't heard strong support from NATO for said action, so also bluff bad. If an autocrat believes they can get away with something they will try. WWI the Kaiser was told by his advisors that Britain wouldn't jump in. He was FURIOUS after they declared, but the threat of Britain didn't stop him.

Also, assigning blame to anyone other than Putin is folly of the highest magnitude. You can say preventable by x,y, and z, but blame is not a word that can be ascribed anywhere but Putin.

There's a pretty clear line drawn on where they will jump in: Attack on a NATO member. To think that the USA would risk nuclear war to defend a country that isn't even in their alliance is silly. The real "calling the bluff" move would be to attack NATO. Would the USA enter nuclear war to save some country like Estonia? I have my doubts, but at least NATO is credible enough that I believe it will work to deter an attack.

Even if the USA didnt join in, the utter of the Russian army means that almost any combo of NATO allies would be enough to roll thru Moscow.

When you have nukes, any attack will end in nuclear annihilation. That is why I think even NATO is more or less a bluff. If you have to choose between essentially killing everyone on Earth or letting Estonia fall to Russia, you let Estonia fall.