- cross-posted to:
- news@hexbear.net
- genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
- cross-posted to:
- news@hexbear.net
- genzedong@lemmygrad.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
In an op-ed for the New York Times, former British diplomat Nigel Gould-Davies claimed “Putin has no red lines” and that, far from being deterred by fear of escalation, the West should call Putin’s bluff and threaten Russia with nuclear retaliation if he overreacts to western support for Ukraine.
Nigel Gould-Davies? More like Nigel Ghoul-Davies.
West should call Putin’s bluff and threaten Russia with nuclear retaliation
Pretty sure they did already
I see the point about escalation, but I wonder how seriously Russia takes it. Unless the West sends troops with their national badges and flags, Russia can ignore it. There may be a political and ideological function in ‘allowing’ the West to arm Ukraine (i.e. not being provoked into attacking an imperial core state directly).
For as long as this war goes on, Russia is simply embarrassing NATO. Western press tends not to show this embarrassment, although some stories come through the cracks. But in the rest of the world? It’s emboldening countries to break away from the Anglo-European empire.
That empire is aware of the danger it’s in. But it only knows how to double down. The contradictions of capital won’t let it do anything else even as they watch sanctions have the opposite effect as intended.
Russian analysts will know that this is a dangerous beast, which will at some point lash out to save itself (which could mean nuclear war – and we’ve seen some taste for it already). So Russia is likely to be ‘content’ with letting the conventional war continue, without Russia itself escalating things, however much it’s provoked.
Fairly sure our government is already ignoring a great deal, despite the fiery speeches.
I also get the impression that the status quo is currently working in Russian favour. Russia has the dominance on the battlefield, and the war is costing the west far more than it is costing Russia. The west is currently propping up the entire Ukrainian economy, and supplying all the weapons, ammo, and any other supplies needed to keep Ukrainian army functioning. This is costing over a billion a month every month. These are just the direct costs of keeping the war going. There are also secondary economic effects resulting from the trade war and the need to allocate increasing amounts of existing resources towards the military.
On top of that, Russia does weekly strikes across Ukraine that result in millions of dollars of damage. It’s much easier for Russia to destroy Ukrainian infrastructure and supplies than for the west to rebuild them creating further asymmetry in the cost of waging this war.
On the other hand, Russian economy is strengthening while European economies are starting to run into problems. As a Belgian MEP recently quipped the effect of sanctions on Russia ‘less than 0’.
Given all that, I imagine that Russia is perfectly happy with the west slowly depleting its arsenal in Ukraine because the west lacks the industrial base to replace what is lost. The war of attrition favours Russia in the long term because Russia has a stronger military industrial base.
Removed by mod
Go pick up a gun and fight in the war instead of cheering for other people die for your ideology. Go fight with your banderite brothers.
We’ve heard it like 999 times in the last year. Comical.
What an utter imbecile one has to be to find the possibility of a nuclear holocaust comical.
deleted by creator
@yogthos What escalation is the West risking from a country asking for security guarantees from a country 28 times smaller than it?
On a side note, reading OP’s other comments, I see 2/3 rules broken here. Not good, not good!
Hey, could someone tell me what this comment says? I just can’t quite make it out with this much shinning.
@sovietsnake Oh, I’m sorry, the light must be from that ammo depot someone smoked a cigar next to. Must feel so bad being struck by those HIMARSes, rite?
Wadda ya got? 2 HIMARS? Oh, no, Russia is shaking with all the so many HIMARS you are providing to the new US puppet regime, by the way you should call it Israel 2.0 because it is the same story of invading a country to use it as a military base in order to justify the genocide of minorities in the name of freedom or some shit like that. The only difference is that this time you didn’t fuck around with some tiny third world country where you were able to bomb their children to death, you fucked around with the biggest country on earth who has a pretty big military and you are oblivious to see reality. The only ones who cry about this are Euronazis and the Anglo-proud-boys. No one in Latin America cares about your shit, no one in Africa cares about your shit, no one in Asia cares about your shit, if there’s a country that does, it’s because you invade them and you forced them to be your slaves. Samo, samo, my friend, they call 'em strangers, anybody talk to him end up in some danger. Can’t reform 'em.
Removed by mod
You really should follow your own advice.
Removed by mod
If you don’t understand what escalation the west is risking from a nuclear super power what else is there to say about you. Not good, not good!
Removed by mod
LMAO nice of you to remind us all how US army lost to a bunch of peasants in Vietnam. Life is gonna get real hard for people like you going forward. Enjoy being smug while you can little buddy.
@yogthos yea, sadly it failed to turn all reds into good commies, but no nuclear war started despite Moscow’s best efforts in pushing North Vietnam to do it, so you can keep coping
