Can you just point out the one where US missiles were used to attack the interior of Russia and then Russia did nothing? Oh..oh..I know. I know. Show me the article when Putin demanded that NATO not expand near its borders and drew the line at Ukraine because he didn't want missiles near his border which Putin obviously considers a direct threat and then Putin did nothing. Oh, wait. I forgot. Putin invaded Ukraine. The entire war is because Putin doesn't want missiles close to his border. So, you honestly think nothing will happen when missiles are put near his border and used in his country.
Reply to your post is inline, below. Formatting of your post has been changed to facilitate quoting: What kind of idiot you are? Haven't you heard of Mutually Assured Idiocy? Russia can totally cripple all the west without any trouble. Indeed. How much of a consolation will that be for you as you search for non contaminated food and water? There is no military might. All those air carriers are sitting ducks waiting to be sunk. How do you feel about the survivability of the Russian fleet? Is there any part of you that does not realize the Russian fleet sails only at our pleasure? NATO couldn't even win in Afghanistan Anyone else you know had trouble in Afghanistan? We are deep into the chain of events that leads to WWIII. For what? Differing perceptions of what constitutes security? We are on our way towards rejoining the apes. I suppose what is considered security will have a whole different meaning. Problem solved? or not? If we can find a way out of our current escalatory path, we can start addressing the issues presented by AI. We succeed at both, we enter an era of unprecedented prosperity for all. Including Russia. I believe even if a peace is reached, if it results in Russia gaining territory, it will be a temporary peace, merely buying us a little time before the seeming inevitable. Further, NATO would likely offer Ukraine a guarantee of sovereignty up to full inclusion into NATO. If you believe otherwise, you underestimate Ukrainian resolve and the resources behind them. Especially considering many in Europe are concerned about becoming another Ukraine, as I understand the situation. Naturally, Russian leadership are well aware of the various scenarios. It seems the best course for all, is to reach a peace under terms reasonably acceptable to all the first time.
Should west and USA think first about mutual destruction? It is the west going to attack Russian territory with missiles It's kind of naive thinking let's destroy Russia and Russia won't do anything because it's afraid of mutual destruction. I think we are still far from nuclear strike but Russia will definitely find a proxy to cause significant damage to USA, including many many dead Americans if USA is brave enough to attack Russia Ukraine will capitulate and Russia will install military bases through Ukraine like USA did in Germany and Japan and will fully control it's politics, military and ideology. This how this war ends
Hey, you figured it out, well done, though it took you a while. Any one of the larger European countries now outmatches Russia in a conventional fight. Russian soldiers are of low quality, and even in the case of a nuclear exchange, Russia would face a Pyrrhic victory. This means the West could directly pound Russia quite severely, and all Russia would do in response is repeat, 'If you do that again!' over and over. The real issue is Putin’s survival. The welfare of ordinary Russians doesn’t matter much to him, just as Netanyahu or Trump prioritize their own power above their people. Even if Western missiles flattened St. Basil’s Cathedral (perhaps Tulsi Gabbard was named after it?), Russia would react like an angry child, running around and then sulking, demanding money to rebuild. You’d be surprised how much punishment Russia would endure as long as it suits Putin’s personal interests.
Reply is inline, below: Should west and USA think first about mutual destruction? Hopefully. It is the west going to attack Russian territory with missiles It appears we are on a path towards escalation. The West brings in F16s, Russia brings in 10,000 North Korean Soldiers, then the West oks targets within Russia, to name a few examples. One, very important issue is the potential for one side to misread the intentions of the other side. The misunderstanding could cause actions that are not easily taken back. It's kind of naive thinking let's destroy Russia and Russia won't do anything because it's afraid of mutual destruction. I was just talking about perceptions and misunderstandings, although I believe you are intentionally going hyperbolic here. Or is it hypergolic? Grin. I think we are still far from nuclear strike but Russia will definitely find a proxy to cause significant damage to USA, including many many dead Americans if USA is brave enough to attack Russia Not so sure any Russian proxy would be easily convinced to attempt to create "many, many dead Americans" without considering the consequences. You are aware of history, no? Further, Russia may be held accountable anyway. Ukraine will capitulate and Russia will install military bases through Ukraine like USA did in Germany and Japan and will fully control it's politics, military and ideology. This how this war ends I believe a hard line approach by Russia, if even agreed to, will ultimately, if not sooner, be counterproductive for her interests. In addition, I wonder if Trump feels Russia will not be reasonable, he might decide to go the path that will make him very popular in Europe, especially Ukraine. Whereas a treaty where both parties achieve long term benefits is more likely to be sustainable. To put it another way, a peace treaty needs to solve major issues between Russia and Ukraine / The west.
Yep nothing will happen. "Missiles are put near his border." We are talking about ATACMS here right? Just so you don't mean nukes and want to invoke Cuba crisis parallels since there are none here. As for Russia's posturing, it's the same story since the start of the invasion. First back in 2022 it would be dangerous to give Ukraine small arms. Then tanks. Then fighters. It makes no difference in Russia's attitude to the West. The limit is nukes, you don't give Ukraine nukes without opening Pandora's box. Although Ukraine have the capacity to build nukes themselves since they were the center of the Soviet nuclear weapons industry. "NATO not expand near its borders" Well Putin shouldn't have started the invasion then. Because Ukraine was neutral and the average Ukrainian rather Russian friendly before that. Instead Sweden and Finland (previously unaligned) already joined as a consequence. Thanks for a concise answer.
I should add BTW that Russia has responded to ATACMS... by cutting Internet cables on the seabed right outside the coast of the island where I live. That's the sort of wretched response you should be worrying about. Edit: An update live is that the ship that did it was shadowed by the Danish navy as it was over the cables and is (registered) Chinese.