Comment by The_Colonel
4 years ago
> Russia starts "testing" nukes and a deal is brokered that pisses off both Ukraine and Russia but allows them both to claim "victory", save face and not start a thermonuclear war (this is Henry Kissinger's take); or
That seems like a bad precedent - nuclear blackmail and aggression works, you get rewarded with territory/concessions.
It is certainly a possibility, but in a way loss of credibility for US/West.
> US loses its taste of financing and completely backing the Ukrainian war if a big recession hits here (hard to support Ukraine when we start "really" feeling a economic hit at home and politicians are on TV everyday talking about how much is being sent to Ukraine); or
I think the monetary help might decrease, but the military help rather not. Sending old weapon stocks don't really produce any economic hit.
> Putin has a health/life issue and a Western-friendly replacement is installed in Russia (Putin is no Spring chicken!)
This is very unlikely to happen. Putin might be replaced one way or another, but the replacement won't be particularly friendly to the West. They might be slightly less (or more) antagonistic.
>That seems like a bad precedent
We do it all the time with North Korea.
>... - nuclear blackmail and aggression works, you get rewarded with territory/concessions.
I don't think the concession would be territory, more likely a treaty to block NATO membership for Ukraine (say no Ukraine NATO membership for 20 years, or something like that). Possibly also deny access to join the EU (even though that idea has heavy steam right now).
> We do it all the time with North Korea.
Some food help is not comparable.
> I don't think the concession would be territory
If Russia "loses" Crimea, then it's an undeniable Russian fiasco and Putin has no way to claim the war as a success.
It sounds like a weird scenario where Russia threatens to use nukes and then leaves satisfied with no NATO membership. (worth reminding that this war wasn't about NATO at all)
>If Russia "loses" Crimea
I think Crimea is gone to Russia for good. It is out of play. I am talking about the Northern regions of Ukraine. In fact, I think the whole invasion of the northern regions was to eventually play that into a DMZ. Which it might still end up becoming.
>It sounds like a weird scenario where Russia threatens to use nukes and then leaves satisfied with no NATO membership. (worth reminding that this war wasn't about NATO at all)
I mean, Putin claims is was. So from his perspective, he can call that a win, right? If you take him at his word (I know!) then all he wanted was to not have NATO military bases on Russian borders. From that perspective, everything he has done so far can make a sort of sense, including nuclear threats. So, again, from that perspective, if he gets what he is publicly asking for, why would he not tout it as a win?
2 replies →