this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
271 points (100.0% liked)

Ukraine

174 readers
16 users here now

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW

Server Rules

  1. Remember the human! (no harassment, threats, etc.)
  2. No racism or other discrimination
  3. No Nazis, QAnon or similar
  4. No porn
  5. No ads or spam
  6. No content against Finnish law

Donate to support Ukraine's Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lisko@sopuli.xyz
Burstar@sopuli.xyz
271
"If Putin wins in Ukraine, there is real risk that his aggression will not end there. Our support is not charity. It is an investment in our security," - NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg (streamable.com)
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by LaFinlandia@sopuli.xyz to c/ukraine@sopuli.xyz
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Mirror:

Source: https://t.me/pravdaGerashchenko_en/29597

"If Putin wins in Ukraine, there is real risk that his aggression will not end there. Our support is not charity. It is an investment in our security," - NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

"The only way to reach a just and lasting solution is to convince President Putin that they will not win on the battlefield," @jensstoltenberg continued.

"And the only way to ensure that President Putin realises that he is not winning on the battlefield is to continue to support Ukraine."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hyperreality@kbin.social 24 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Here's a not entirely implausible scenario:

  1. Putin 'wins' in Ukraine.
  2. Trump wins or 'wins' the election.
  3. President Trump (again) says he won't protect European NATO allies.
  4. NATO is effectively dead. The US nuclear umbrella no longer protects Europe.
  5. An emboldened Putin, engages in constant provocations and distractions.
  6. Some EU members are forced to drastically increase defense spending. Others come to the conclusion that acquiring a nuclear deterrent is now a necessity. Populist Putin verstehers win elections in some European countries, in part thanks to support from an emboldened Kremlin, promising to reduce defense spending. The EU project effectively dies. Europe is divided.
  7. A large part of the EU now kowtows to China.
  8. Because Europe is weakened, Putin continues to cause provocations and a miscalculation is made OR Russia deliberately invades the Suwalki gap (which is already indefensible now), thereby connect Kaliningrad with Russia. Putin's allies have regularly suggested that this is part of the plan.
  9. Europe is now at war with Russia. The US does not intervene, because of Trump or his isolationist successor.
  10. Europe is weakened from decades of underinvestment, weapons caches are depleted having supported Ukraine, Europe hasn't had enough time (or will) to properly re-arm, Europe is divided, it is not clear who will protect who.
  11. Certain European countries feel existentially threatened. They have no conventional military response to Russian aggression. Russia is making steady gains.
  12. Some European countries still have a non-conventional military response.
  13. A nuclear war starts in Europe.
  14. Most importantly for American readers, this significantly raises fuel prices.
  15. Half the population blames a long dead Biden and soy based diets.
[–] Joncash2@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I almost completely agree with you. Except the last point. We'll blame who's ever in charge at the moment. Just like how Trump's legacy fucked up our current situation, but we'll blame Biden because he's at the helm. Imo American short sightedness is the root cause of all of this.

[–] Hyperreality@kbin.social 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

That's because Americans are dumb. You should be more like us Europeans and blame foreigners, migrants and supranational institutions like the EU which are preventing our magnificent national politicians from putting 'our' people first. /s

sigh

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

\1. I don't see a scenario that would have Putin's win in Ukraine, even if he conquers the whole country, have him in a more geopolitically advantageous position that he was before 2014. Before 2014 Ukraine was a staunch Russian ally, almost like Belarus. The current situation is like if a Russia-aligned PM got elected in Canada, the US declared war, and would still be fighting having lost most of its army over almost a decade.

But aside from that let me go doomer even harder.

2-4. That would almost certainly result in a civil war or a coup in a very short amount of time. As soon as NATO is not keeping the world order, global commerce, thus the value of the dollar as a reserve currency for global trade up, the US economy will enter a never-before-seen recession, possible hyperinflation, which Trump will need to deflect from. My money is war on Mexico or Cuba. Or both.

5-8. There is a big chance that France would make good on their policy of first strike with their nuclear weapons before Russian soldiers would get too comfortable on European soil. China and the US join in since the Russians start shooting everyone out of force of habit. The Earth is now uninhabitable.

[–] Hyperreality@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

France has been ambivalent about deploying nuclear weapons for anything other than defense of La Patrie, perhaps strategically so. There is also a very real chance of a far right take-over in France, they're in the pocket of Russia. The far left likely is too. France is unreliable.

The UK however has been quite explicit about guaranteeing eastern Europe. The problem is that Putin consistently underestimates their resolve, and in the event that Ukraine falls, may make the calculation that the UK wouldn't respond.