168
NATO admiral warns of potential all-out war with Russia
(thehill.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2024
168 points (96.2% liked)
World News
38578 readers
2056 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Based on the show they've put on in Ukraine, and leaving aside nuclear weapons, I don't think the Russian military is a credible threat to NATO.
Even so, NATO wouldn't kerb-stomp Russia.
Completely obliterating its government, industrial capacity, trade, and military would lead to a collapse of that country, fracturing of its territory, and probably heaps more political headaches down the road as the power dynamic is altered.
NATO would aspire to remove Russia from non-Russian territory in most areas, probably including Transnistria but excluding Syria and Africa. They would probably seek regime change, but the old guard of Russian politics would be preserved. They want to return the status-quo ante bellum.
The US and NATO would always seek the Japan option and not the Iraq option. Japan surendered and basically became an autonomous industrial client state of the US for a long time. Iraq dissolved into civil wars and became an unhealing wound that continually sprouted infections like ISIS and became a playground for bad actors like Iran.
Even after the collapse of the soviet union, the US financially propped up some industries in Russia, like their spaceflight industry.
Comparing Iraq to Japan is wild. One is a united country for long time, the other was created based on arbitrary lines on a map.
Nobody wants to own Russia either. As our eloquent former president said, it's a 'shithole country' with few redeeming qualities. But Russia might have a lot to gain in terms of plunder and valuable land in a war with more geographically blessed neighboring countries. Particularly ones with warm water ports. It's good to keep the fight up. Plus, unlike some countries, Ukraine really does want to be a sovereign country with a vibrant democracy. And it has the balls to go for the gold, too.
NATO as a credible threat is mostly article 5, Something that is still intact, but under attack. Russia doesn't want the large European powers or America. They want to control Eastern Europe, the Baltics and the Balkans. Say the political winds change a little, America moves to isolationism. Western Europe decides that it is better to give up on a few smaller states to protect its core countries. Maybe also China decided it is finally time to see if everybody is bluffing over protecting Taiwan. Suddenly NATO seems a lot less dangerous.
Could Russia take on NATO in a one on one conflict, not no not at the moment. Could Russia foment the weakening or break up of NATO and then use that to take on Small Pieces of NATO yeah that has been a plan in the works for a long time now.