NATO responds. Nukes fly. Game over.
NATO doesn't respond, proves itself useless, and dissolves. Putin divides and conquers Europe, marching his army all the way to Portugal. Putin, emboldened, launches an attack on the US. Nukes fly. Game over.

Putin is Hitler with nukes. He's trying to start World War 3. We're trying to stop him before the conflict spirals out of control. If we fail, everybody dies.

We're not supporting Ukraine out of the goodness of our hearts. We're doing it to save our own asses.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

NATO doesn’t respond, proves itself useless, and dissolves. Putin divides and conquers Europe, marching his army all the way to Portugal. Putin, emboldened, launches an attack on the US. Nukes fly. Game over.

That's assuming the EU won't respond, or for that matter Poland being incapable of pushing back Russia all by itself. There's about exactly one single reason why the Poles aren't parading on the Red Square right now: Because they're in NATO, which acts as a leash. Baltics pretty much have the same attitude but are smaller so they'd simply follow Poland. Finland would get pulled into it because of their own attitude and Estonia, and with them, without fail, Sweden. At which point Germany would have a hard time holding back and then it's guaranteed that the French will be in the fray, and that's presuming they wouldn't have been as soon as Poland lets loose because principle.

Now the US in its usual exceptionalism might be blissfully unaware of those dynamics, and the Kremlin because the FSB reports what the Kremlin wants to hear, but it's true nontheless. But in the end once the EU is involved the US will be, too, because the US can't countenance Europe doing something militarily without joining in. Reluctantly and in a limited fashion, probably, just as they're reluctant now. Germany has pretty much stopped trying to bully the US into providing more things because we've reached the limits of what the US will do (that is, Germany could pressure the US to deliver Abrams by tying Leos to the US also delivering tanks, but providing Taurus cruise missiles won't be tied to ATACMS because apparently that's a US red line).

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Since the EU doesn't have a standing army, they cannot respond. Without NATO, Putin can drive straight to the Atlantic and there's not a goddamn thing Europeans can do about it.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

NATO doesn't have a standing army. Like the EU, it has member states. EU joint Command and Control is rather lacking but if you think that means that the EU won't respond even though it is a defensive alliance you're delirious.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s assuming the EU won’t respond, or for that matter Poland being incapable of pushing back Russia all by itself.

Them and what army? The only countries on Earth with enough firepower to stop Putin without launching any nukes are the US and China, and China is on Putin's side.

There’s about exactly one single reason why the Poles aren’t parading on the Red Square right now: Because they’re in NATO, which acts as a leash.

I assume this is some kind of joke.

Finland would get pulled into it because of their own attitude and Estonia, and with them, without fail, Sweden. At which point Germany would have a hard time holding back and then it’s guaranteed that the French will be in the fray, and that’s presuming they wouldn’t have been as soon as Poland lets loose because principle.

Last I heard, Finland and Sweden had been taken over by Nazis, and Germany was in the middle of being taken over by Nazis. I'd expect them to welcome Putin's invasion with open arms. France is too busy fighting itself to fight anyone else.

But in the end once the EU is involved the US will be, too, because the US can’t countenance Europe doing something militarily without joining in.

At which point we're back to square one. The reason we're having this discussion is because, in the opinion of @Roody15@reddthat.com, it is “very sad” that the US isn't going to sit back and let Putin start World War 3.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only countries on Earth with enough firepower to stop Putin

...include Ukraine being drip-fed western surplus. France alone would roll over Russia, the Poles aren't as strong but they're fucking nuts determined because history.

I assume this is some kind of joke.

Then you don't know any Poles. You know it's one of those Eastern European countries where the first line of the national anthem goes "Our country isn't lost yet", referring to centuries upon centuries of Russian imperialism. As the joke goes:

Two Polish veterans meet at a bar. Asks one: "Wawrek, if tomorrow both the Germans and the Russians invade, who do we shoot at first?", replies the other: "Oh that's an easy one. The Germans: Business before pleasure".

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That sure isn't how it went last time Poland got invaded. Their country was lost until the Allies liberated them. Same with France.

Determination does not equal manpower or firepower. If it did, there wouldn't be any Russian soldiers fighting in Ukraine right now; they'd have been defeated already. That's why we're sending Ukraine war supplies.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The polish army isn't using cavalry any more. And France has nukes this time around and just for the record: France's half-surrender was the strategically optimal move in their position.

[–] argv_minus_one@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

If anyone launches nukes, our whole species dies. We're trying to prevent that outcome.

[–] gnuhaut@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

We’re not sending anyone to their death. Ukrainian soldiers are doing the fighting, not American ones.

Mask off moment. Ukrainians aren't even people to you. Most of them are conscripts forced to be on the front line.