Great. There’s no indication that continuing this support in the same manner is going to suddenly elicit a nuclear response, outside of your unfalsifiable oligarch whispering.
Incredible. When Putin says he’s just trying to liberate the Donbas (and also sends tens of thousands of troops to Kyiv to try and capture and seize it), we must take Putin at his word that he only wants to take the Donbas!
Russia is so steadfast in their claim to the Donbas that they can’t even define a border for their claim after they announced annexation. Ukraine has already hit targets in Crimea, resulting in zero escalations. They’ve hit targets in places that everyone agrees is actually Russia and still haven’t generated the escalation you assure us is eminent.
You said that Putin/Russian elites said that all of Ukraine rightfully belongs to Russia. What are you talking about? When did they say this? I’m not taking Putin at his word, I’m just saying I’ve never heard him say what you said he said.
I’m not talking about what Russia would do in response to a missile strike here or a drone bombing there. I’m talking about how Russia would respond if they think they’re going to permanently lose control of Donbas or Crimea. I think that’s when the dangerous escalation might happen.
He gave one address 2/21, and another 2/24. You’re looking only at 2/24, while the NBC article I posted has quotes from 2/21. But even in 2/24:
The problem is that in territories adjacent to Russia, which I have to note is our historical land, a hostile “anti-Russia” is taking shape.
But from 2/21:
I would like to emphasise again that Ukraine is not just a neighbouring country for us. It is an inalienable part of our own history, culture and spiritual space. These are our comrades, those dearest to us – not only colleagues, friends and people who once served together, but also relatives, people bound by blood, by family ties.
Since time immemorial, the people living in the south-west of what has historically been Russian land have called themselves Russians and Orthodox Christians. This was the case before the 17th century, when a portion of this territory rejoined the Russian state, and after.
It seems to us that, generally speaking, we all know these facts, that this is common knowledge. Still, it is necessary to say at least a few words about the history of this issue in order to understand what is happening today, to explain the motives behind Russia’s actions and what we aim to achieve.
So, I will start with the fact that modern Ukraine was entirely created by Russia or, to be more precise, by Bolshevik, Communist Russia. This process started practically right after the 1917 revolution, and Lenin and his associates did it in a way that was extremely harsh on Russia – by separating, severing what is historically Russian land. Nobody asked the millions of people living there what they thought.
People can judge for themselves if the quoted section is different from this:
I think he’s clearly saying that parts of Ukraine next to Russia are Russian. And those regions have the highest concentration of Russian Ukrainians. If you think he’s talking about Western Ukraine? No point in arguing but I really don’t think so.
Like this part is talking about Lviv? I doubt it. Probably the areas that voted for the pro-Russian candidates in past elections. The east and the south.
Since time immemorial, the people living in the south-west of what has historically been Russian land have called themselves Russians and Orthodox Christians. This was the case before the 17th century, when a portion of this territory rejoined the Russian state, and after.
Russia’s actions clearly indicate that they think they’re entitled to Kyiv, and they’ve stated the intention to take the entire southern coast up to and including Transnistria. If you think my statement is falsified because of the possibility that Russia decides to leave alone a fragment that might still end up being called “Ukraine” around Lviv, lol, ok.
I mean, geez Keeed, that Russia can annex the entirety of Ukraine, and no one should do anything about it, except the Ukrainians, maybe, if they want to, is literally your position, and you’re having me dig up quotes?
Biden also challenged Russian nuclear doctrine, warning that the use of a lower-yield tactical weapon could quickly spiral out of control into global destruction.
“I don’t there is any such a thing as the ability to easily use a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon,” Biden said.
It’s problem.
Speaking to Democratic donors, Biden said he was still “trying to figure” out Putin’s “off-ramp” in Ukraine.
“Where does he find a way out?” Biden asked. “Where does he find himself in a position that he does not not only lose face but lose significant power within Russia?”
The above end game put forth as reasonably probable among many is Putin withdrawing the Russian army to defend him against a looming coup seems plausible.
I have to say Im personally pretty terrified about where it looks like we are headed. Seems like we are going to be reliant on Putin just not being enough of a sociopath to end humanity after his fate has been sealed or losing power to more rational actors to avoid nuclear war. Feels like a very uncomfortable bet.
Maybe his face-saving exit scenario is being forced to back down by an overwhelmingly superior force that even the most nationalistic Russian will admit is impossible to defeat.
If Putin is told that a limited war will be tolerated, but even a low-yield tactical nuke will lead to nuclear annihilation of Russia where his death is guaranteed, does he back down?