22552

I’d support some aid to Norway if Russia invaded, but only if they were dedicated to finding a peaceful solution. They just don’t have the manpower to defend themselves so what’s the point in trying.

22553

Yeah I don’t think Janster’s replies meet the minimum standard of good faith. I tried, but he won’t even mention Russian aggression. He has displayed no awareness of the underlying reality that Russian aggression is driving this entire mess.

I’ve worked really hard to avoid putting him on ignore but yeah, it’s time.

22554

I think it’s hard to see Europeans not caring so mjuch about other Europeans from an American point of view, but you don’t get 50 countries out of a postage stamp unless everyone involved is extremely tribal by nature.

But for Americans probably the best comparison would be with Haiti. I’m 100% most Americans aren’t willing to die in their millions to save Haiti, and to be honest, most of the time barely care at all how many people are suffering in Haiti, because Haiti is a hell of their own making. I’m not saying Janster sees Ukraine exactly like Haiti, but i’m sure many, many Euros see eastern europe as a kind of european Haiti in many ways. In fact i suspect more Americans would far, far rather die for Ukraine than Haiti, if we had to poll.

Anyway, the point is that there are many countries next door to the USA that Americans feels little affinity with nor responsibility for, so it’s not like we necessary have a high ground to sit on here.

22555

I think that’s a poor comparison - purely from a realpolitik perspective it makes sense for the West to support Ukraine unless you’re of the opinion that a strong Russia under Putin is good for your country

22556

Well, no one is asking Europeans to die by their millions for Ukraine either, right? And there are contingencies. What if Haiti was being invaded by China? I think the US would be very much engaged in that conflict on some level.

22557

That’s the whole point everyone is missing about Janster’s position. For him, supporting Ukraine is creating the conditions for nuclear war. So for him (imo, not necessary the correct understanding of the world) and many on the left on that side of the continent, supporting Ukraine is 1) supporting a country that can’t win, 2) supporting Euro-Haiti, in which case, who cares, and 3) going to cause WW3, in which case Europeans will die in their millions.

22558

Giving carte blanche for nuclear armed nations to invade Europe is also inviting massive war and the death of millions.

I don’t think anyone is missing Janster’s point. People just disagree with it.

22559

Strategic and affinity are different things. I think the US and Americans would go to war to support UK or Australia to defend them even if the ‘strategic’ value of these defenses were marginal. Defending Ukraine makes sense from realpolitik only if you think Russia is going to keep going. I think implicit in Janster’s position is the belief that Russia really is just ‘gathering the Russian lands’ again.

22560

Putin has stated an ambition to restore the ol’ USSR. He has publicly declared an intent to keep going.

Which would include NATO nations at this point.

22561

We actually gave Russia more free bites of the cherry than we ever gave Hitler. When they devastated Chechnya and killed hundreds of thousands, we looked the other way. I guess no one wanted to restart the Cold War when we’d thought it was finally over. When Russia invaded Georgia, there was a strong discourse in the West - including on this forum IIRC - that Georgia had provoked the attack. Then the Crimea, which in retrospect looks like something out of a Tom Clancy novel; and we just stood by with maybe a little bit of light sanctioning. Then the Donbas, where Russia essentially manufactured an armed conflict inside another nation, and when their proxies turned out to be too weak to hold off the Ukrainian Army they simply sent in their own army to finish the job. And still the West both-sided the hell out of the situation, focusing on negotiating a “peace” rather than opposing blatant aggression. If A. J. P. Taylor was still around today, I reckon I know who he’d blame for this war.

22562

Yea, that’s the obvious problem, especially for the Baltics. But, again, there’s no line you can’t withdraw from. I’m sure Putin would like to restore the pre-Russian Federation system of direct control over the Ruthenian states and indirect control over the ‘sphere of influence’ states like Finland and Poland.

22563

I kind of feel this way about North Dakota, to be honest, but I’m sure I’d come around in a pinch. Though, strangely, I feel more strongly about defending Norway.

22564

If you think Russia will stop at Ukraine and Ukraine isn’t worth WWIII, okay.

But what makes Ukraine different from Finland or Poland, or East Germany, or any other place that Russia might consider as legitimate Russian soil / former Soviet State?

You give in to salami tactics, you end up without the whole salami.

22565

But as I pointed out earlier, it’s a foolish position. Appeasement to avoid risk nuclear war leads to proliferation which leads to an even greater chance of future nuclear war. Yes, short term risk of some form of nuclear war increases by supporting Ukraine, but it avoids an even messier future where every country on Russia’s border decides their only hope for survival is to get their hands on a nuclear arsenal of their own.

22566

Sure, but fear doesn’t have to be rational. I think US people see Russia as a corrupt, broken country full of bear cavalry and angry trees, and many in Europe see it as the largest country in population and military capacity by far. That this military capacity has shown itself to be utterly incapable and barely beyond WW2 levels of deployment is the real surprise.

22567

As long as Ukraine is willing to throw their own men against the Russians this is about as close to a ‘free lunch’ the other powers are going to get. Doesn’t really make sense to draw down support unless this breaks.

22568

This is the point of disagreement and there’s nothing else to discuss. If you believe that the nuclear war is around the corner and that giving away Ukraine brings an overall more peaceful world then it’s a question of faith. I don’t even disagree. I don’t believe Putin will ever attack NATO directly. Maybe he or his successor will feed euro-skeptics in border countries making them leave the EU and NATO and then annex them or turn them into puppies. But it won’t be quick. It won’t be bloody. People won’t die of hunger en masse. Well, some will, undoubtfully there will be dissidents or just wrong people. But probably it would be less bloody. If Kyiv was captured in 3 days we’d have fewer deaths and the overall world economy would probably be better. People in Russia don’t starve and don’t seem to protest much so it wouldn’t be a tragedy if you’d find yourself living within Russia’s borders, ain’t it?

It’s not a question of facts or arguments or whatever. It’s about fundamental values.

22569

It’s not just about Russia. It’s about every country seeing that saying “give us this glorious victory or it’s nuclear war” works.

22570

True, but I also don’t believe there are that many countries(certainly not in Europe) that would be aggressive enough to push that. And those that would probably have a heavy overlap with those that are already pursuing nukes to some degree out of fear of the US.

22571

Chicken and egg. There are no countries that would push for that now cause it sounds like madness. If it actually works then who knows? European countries stopped doing colonialism cause they’ve failed at it, what if Russia shows the way forward?