(03-22-2022, 05:56 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(03-21-2022, 02:42 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: I don't know. It sucks because there is no easy answer. No one wants WW3 but at the same time how much longer can world leaders let Putin destroy a country? And if/when he succeeds and decides to invade another country will NATO (or anyone) else deal with him?

The war in Ukraine so far reveals to me that the Russian military is no threat to Nato, and Nato would kick their [BLEEP] fairly easily in a conventional war if it came to that.   

The real threat is that Putin is crazy enough to use those 6,000 nukes he has.  

It's tough to watch what's happening to Ukraine's civilians, but it seems like the best course is to arm the Ukrainians, like we're doing.  It's a horrible choice to make, and it seems like we're sacrificing hundreds of thousands of civilians, but right now, whatever is worst for Putin is what is best for us.  And what is worst for Putin is that this war drags on with no end in sight.  

The worst outcome is that the Russians win this war.  The second worst outcome might be that the Ukrainians win the war.  Because that could lead to Putin doing something really crazy.  MAYBE the best outcome is that the war drags on, because that would lead to Putin's downfall.

You don't think Putin would be leery of mutually assured destruction? Because that's what would happen. He may get a nuke or two off but Russia would be decimated. Sadly other European countries would also suffer straightaway. Heck, the world would suffer. 

Is Putin really that determined? I'm finding it hard to believe even though I know I shouldn't. We know of some pretty evil SOBs just in recent history. Hussein and bin Laden and their ilk come to mind immediately. For some reason ranking Putin along with them seems extreme but I admit I don't know much about him. I guess I should do some research.

---