- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- news@beehaw.org
As a Finn I say this is fine. Every military resource that is tied down and not raping and destroying Ukraine is net positive.
As a Finn I say this is fine. Every military resource that is tied down and not raping and destroying Ukraine is net positive.
Can you expand?
Russia clashing with multiple nuclear powers. What could go wrong?
The claim is that it would be a global fuck up, maybe implying that it wouldn’t be limited to Russia/nato. Not that this wouldn’t be messy in and of itself, if Russia were to invade, I suspect they would be left out on their own by everyone else. They’re already struggling with Ukraine. I doubt anyone is going to want to step up and help them against NATO. They would probably lose a lot of the external but indirect support they are getting right now because countries would be hesitant to support a country against the us.
If it’s just “war is bad” then yeah, kind of a duh statement.
Hopefully everybody else would be sensible and nobody would take Russia’s side. Hopefully Russia wouldn’t randomly nuke other countries in their death throes.
But even if both of those things turn out fine the economic fallout (and other kinds of fallout if it goes nuclear) will be a global problem.
The idea is to set the strategic position such that your opponent knows that any war would be a failure, and therefore they never try it at all. Finland joining NATO is pretty much that.
This is a dangerous assumption when it comes to nukes, though. Not because it doesn’t work on its own, but because small mistakes have disastrous consequences for the entire planet. Works better for conventional warfare.