• Some European NATO members are talking about putting their troops in Ukraine.
  • Estonia’s PM said allies shouldn’t fear that troops doing training there would escalate the war.
  • Some want their allies to consider similar action, saying Russia is a threat to Europe.
  • circuscritic
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s NOT just about what Russia wants…

    This is the type of plan that hawks in the west would draw up because THEY want the casus belli to justify deploying combat troops.

    That’s my point. Those risks are intentionally high, because that’s what they want.

    And no, that’s not okay. Russia has no chance to win a conventional conflict against the West, period.

    What do you think they’ll do to avoid that crushing defeat by NATO forces right on their border, and within their occupied territory?

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I don’t think Russia will do much else than now.

      • Make threats.
      • Send more of their young men to die.

      Using a Nuke is not realistically an option as they would isolate themselves from China and put all countries on the fence in the position that they have to choose.

      I can also imagine that sanctions will be changed to “nothing regardless of potential use”.

      • circuscritic
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        …are you seriously claiming that a direct conflict with NATO forces on their borders, or within their occupied territories, wouldn’t change Russia’s strategic calculus in regards to the use of nuclear weapons?

        Please, tell me what base of geopolitical knowledge, or Russian military doctrine, are you basing this on?

        Because every white paper and analysis of Russian First Strike Doctrine that I’ve read, would seem to fly in the face of your claims. So… please put my mind at rest and show me the sources that I’m missing here.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          No, off course it changes it. But so does it change for other countries if Nuclear weapons are used. And I’ll leave it at that.

          I also believe what you are doing is called concern trolling so I won’t continue this back and forth.

          • circuscritic
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            Ah, so I guess that’s a “no” on you providing a single source to backup your claims, or disprove mine.

            Nice touch claiming that I’m “concern trolling”, but it’s pretty obvious who the troll is here.

            • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              What proof… you don’t have any proof either… except for the statements by a regime that has been outright lying and bluffing this entire war. And was called on their bluf so many times we lost count.

              There is no telling what a power mad dictator will do when threatened. And I agree their calculation on the use of nuclear weapons MIGHT change. But the counterweight to that is that many many more countries will isolate them and the question will be if this moves the needle in any discernible way towards actual use.

              And countering my calling out your concern trolling with “no, you are” does not take away that you are here amplifying Kremlin talking points and trying to Stoke fear on the use of nuclear weapons (without actually saying nuclear) by the evil Z idiots.

              Edit: jeez it seems the trolls of Lemmygrad are leaking again.

              • circuscritic
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                Start here:

                https://www.fpri.org/article/2023/07/russias-nuclear-policy-after-ukraine/

                https://www.ft.com/content/f18e6e1f-5c3d-4554-aee5-50a730b306b7

                https://www.csis.org/analysis/russias-nuclear-doctrine

                Pay close attention to parts that discuss strategy and doctrine regarding the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

                Also, lol at your lame personal attacks. Either get educated on the topics you speak on, or just shut up.

                It seems to me that all your claims are based on a mixture of your feels and "trust me bro".

                • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  In this report, the author argues that the evidence Russia has lowered its threshold for nuclear use is far from convincing. Rather, Russia’s statements and behavior indicate more a desire to leverage its status as a nuclear power—less a lowering of the threshold than a reminder that escalation is possible and that Russia must therefore be taken seriously.
                  From your csis source

                  • circuscritic
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 month ago

                    Next time, open the actual document.

                    "There is also talk that Russia is working to develop low-yield nuclear weapons and/or modernizing its nonstrategic nuclear weapons, perhaps with the intent of creating a class of nuclear weapons less likely to draw a nuclear counterattack and are therefore more “usable.”

                    That paper is from 2016, and those tactical nuclear weapons are now in service.

                    Also, as I’ve already written, I don’t view flooding Ukraine with Western arms as a significant risk to the escalation ladder. That is not the case for force on force conflict with NATO, especially on Russia’s doorstep. Which again, is laid out in their doctrine.

                    To clear, I just said to start with those links. You should definitely branch out and spend a lot more time reading up, because clearly you haven’t yet.

                    Please, finish reading all those documents, and then read some more, and then show me all the white papers, academic articles, or think tank papers that support your position, or disprove mine.

      • ExperiencedWinter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Russia is killing people every day and will continue to do so. When you are afraid to help your neighbor from an aggressor, who will help you when it’s your turn?