Search results

Raise the stakes, deploy US military personnel inside Ukrainian and let putin make the decision if he wants to escalate US could respond in Syria doesn't have to be in Ukraine. Just let President putin know if US personnel comes under attack in Ukraine it could cost him every little gain he...

You misunderstood me, i am just concerned for ordinary Ukrainian civilians (who will loose the most) and certainly not taking any side between us or russia. The thing i have not able to understand is why US been punching WAY below its weight since its directly threatens its interests not only in...

US and NATO has only provided lip service unti now. Sanction won't work at all. Time for preaching is over. Its time walk on the talk.

This is akin to lip service, nothing else. Only US has the conventional capability to deter russia now from war.

Only US is capable of stopping the forthcoming bloodshed in Ukraine. If US doesn't act now its credibility will take a permanent hit. Its time to justify their 700bn defence budget or just have national guard, coast guard and disband every other branches of military, also foreign bases. They...

Us could send its sof advisers and integrate them with Ukrainian forces and if they came under Russian fire then all the gain Russia made in Syria after 2015 will turn into a viable target for US without risking a full blown nuclear exchange. But that will need a little irrationality, like...

I wonder if US can impose cost somewhere else, like taking out assad and his political and military heads in an air & sof led blitzkrieg

If us can't intervene military now how else would you justify a 700bn dollar annual defence budget.

Only US boots on the ground in Ukraine can prevent a Russian military action, nothing else. A Russian military campaign in Ukraine will significantly degrade already shrinking US credibility not only in Europe but also in asia. I don't know what sort of force US can deploy in Ukraine on short...

But how does the countries i mentioned (which doesn't share a land border with mainland Russia) joining NATO becomes existential threat. You haven't presented a case for it other than that west didn't lived up to its word.

Thats it ?

And all I am asking is joining NATO the only way of deterring a Russian invasion.

There is a big difference between joining NATO & not have the capability to defend yourself, Finland did it. Russian border state could have formed a non alignment coalition of there own. It would have been much more acceptable to Russia than to have NATO on its doorstep.

It's self serving and wishful thinking to deny that hard power doesn't had any reward. Infact Russia greatly benefited from its hard power in Syria. US has been wielding it's hard power all over the globe for decades & China wish to follow the same path as well.

I have a few points to make * Did the Soviet union get a written agreement/assurance that eastward expansion of NATO would not happen. If not then its their fault. * Even if a written agreement would have been signed, US could have very well backtrack from it because " जिसकी लाठी उसकी भैंस "...

Wait what is the problem with Poland,romania,hungary, slovakia, Slovenia joining NATO. They don't have border with main land russia. Or am i missing something ?

Much needed sanity, thank you

But do you think India would have been next.

https://www.firstpost.com/politics/how-communists-invented-hindu-nationalists-hitler-connection-to-hide-their-military-alliance-with-nazis-10172001.html ⬆️ thought this was relevant some how

After all the countless Indian lives commies have taken, after complete plunder/revision of our centuries old history & culture, it is simply baffling going through this thread on an Indian forum. Its is one thing to deal with Soviets/Russian in realpolitik but to to sing praises of commies is...