Recent comments in /f/worldnews

Okbuddyliberals t1_j6ntjds wrote

Reply to comment by TaiwanBandit in Lithuanian president: NATO countries should supply Ukraine with all the weapons it needs by Tayo826

> although the next leader may not be any less of a threat.

This is very important to remember

In the event that the current Russian government falls and sees some sort of return to democracy, freedom, and respect for neighbors, there will be a desire among some in the west to embrace this, to trust Russia, to expand trade with them and be friendly. But this already happened before and then Russia went back to the bad old days. And it can happen again. If Russia sees a change in leadership and a turn inward, the west mustn't get overly trusting - instead it should keep decoupling from the Russian economy, expanding NATO up to Russian borders as much as possible, and investing not in rebuilding Russia but in boosting the neighbors bordering Russia. If Russia still tolerates it, then a slow cautious thaw in relations can occur, and if Russia seethes with rage and quickly goes back to the bad old days again in response, well, the west will be more ready and more of Russia's neighbors will be defended by the NATO nuclear MADman umbrella

51

frostygrin t1_j6ntj3k wrote

Reply to comment by Ramboxious in Brazil's Lula cold-shoulders Germany's Scholz on Ukraine support by Available_Hamster_44

> They can discuss a whole bunch of different things once Russian troops leave Ukraine.

Again, what would they be, and why wouldn't Zelensky just say no to everything? Why would Putin willingly give up his leverage for nothing?

> The answer is obviously yes, an attack from Ukraine would trigger MAD. Why do you think NATO is not sending troops to Ukraine right now?

I don't think there's just one reason. It can quickly become an unpopular quagmire, for example. And it's not actually clear that Russia would use nukes at the first sight of NATO troops in Ukraine. Fundamentally that was my point about Cuban missile crisis. The point wasn't that the situation is exactly the same. The point was that MAD doesn't give you peace of mind. Or any kind of certainty.

2

choose_an_alt_name t1_j6nt9eu wrote

Reply to comment by 420trashcan in Brazil's Lula cold-shoulders Germany's Scholz on Ukraine support by Available_Hamster_44

I never said peace at any price, i said negotiations are needed and that total victory or defeat aren't the only opitions and that you may need to conceed something to avoid excessive bloodshed, Brazil could have continued to conscript men and take more loans to buy weapons in order to not let Uruguay be independent, but we didn't, it simply wasnt worth it. Solano Lopes did it, he keept not surrendering untill he died, and that ruined his country untill this day, had he started negotiations after being pushed back into his land paraguay would be on much better shape going foward

0

mmm__donuts t1_j6nseuo wrote

Reply to comment by REOreddit in Haavisto: Finland has patience to wait for Nato membership — with Sweden. by parandroidfinn

>If NATO attacks Russia without Russia attacking them first, I wouldn't expect any help from any country outside of NATO, but of course any country could join the war if they wanted.

And Finland would be one of the most exposed countries in NATO should that happen without Sweden being a member. It's a good reason for them to wait.

>If Finland ends up in a war with Russia for other reasons than self defense, any help from Sweden would depend on the circumstances, and the potential threat to Sweden. Yes, I agree that mutual defense pacts don't cover every eventuality, but I don't see a problem with that. Otherwise you are bound to blindly follow any stupid decisions from your allies.

Being in NATO vastly increases the chances of a war for reasons other than self defense. As you point out, that's the risk of joining any alliance. Being in NATO without Sweden makes that war much more difficult for Finland to fight.

>Having said that, if Russia were to attack Turkey, that would be such a crazy move that no country in Europe would be safe, and it would probably be in Sweden's interest to intervene, at least to defend Finland, if not in a more active role.

Sweden's military isn't going to be the deciding factor in that war. It makes far more sense for them to hold back and let other people do the fighting.

1