The War in Europe

Couldn't embed this, but here's a link, might not work without a subscription to the NYT:Opinion | How Putin Weaponized London’s Greed - The New York Times--Percy

Fun facts.Russia has the 11th biggest economy in the world, but the 57th in per capita terms behind Kazakhstan, Trinidad and Tobago (one country for those geographically challenged), and Oman.The US has the world's biggest economy, but the 13th in per capita terms behind Switzerland, Ireland and Luxembourg.--Percy

I don't feel as if the US government has decided whether it wants to save the Ukraine or just punish Putin. If the former or both, we're failing. If just the latter, we're succeeding but not in a way that will accomplish the former.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

Those are good questions, but it feels to me that if we were trying to save Ukraine then we'd be doing more, like send fighter jets or put our own armed forces in harm's way. It's been argued that we're already trying to save Ukraine through sanctions against Russia and smaller armaments to Ukraine, but I don't believe those are sufficient myself.I believe Ukraine will fall in another month or two if current aid levels remain the same, but there are many who believe Putin has bitten off more than he can chew. I hope they're right.--Percy

Putin is counting on the west flinching from the possibility of escalation and just letting him take what he wants. But what if after Ukraine Putin wants some other country, say Moldova? And then the Baltic countries. And then Poland? At each step along the way wouldn't Putin count on us applying the same logic, that any assistance that could possibly thwart his intentions would be considered a declaration of war? Is all we can do is just hope he stops after Ukraine, the way he did after Chechnya, Georgia, the Crimea and the Donetsk region? Is there a place where we should draw the line? If so where, and why that place and not some other place prior?We saw the answer to that in the years leading up to WWII. Where we should have drawn the line then was the Sudetenland. Where we eventually found we were able to draw it, just barely, was the British Channel.Hitler wasn't stopped early on because the thought of war was unthinkable, and as long as we also think that way Putin will just keep taking. Putin is playing a game of brinkmanship where he carefully balances taking against provoking, and so far we're falling for it.--Percy

This was addressed in my previous message. The nuclear issue is encompassed by the term "escalation", which at a lower rung also includes fighter jets apparently.Since you answered with a rhetorical question already addressed in the message you replied to, I'll be brief. Where do you draw the line of conquest on Putin before you risk nuclear conflict? Your own doorstep? No, of course not, someplace much further away than that, right? At the Ukraine? Modova? Poland? Germany? Britain? Where do you draw the line after which you'd risk nuclear war and why there?For other issues you didn't address see my previous Message 362.--Percy

Once he has Ukraine he'll begin pecking away at other countries, likely Moldova and the Baltic states. (Even though they're NATO members, Putin will open political cracks to cause pretexts for going in to restore stability, or maybe he'll make up more NAZI stories, or he'll come up with something new. Once Russia controls those countries politically they'll withdraw from NATO.) Now Poland is surrounded, and Putin will again pressure NATO to back away from Poland, citing it as a threat to Russian security. And a Russia able to turn Ukraine's industrial power toward its own interests will be a more powerful Russia.How does Russia peck away at Poland. Easily. In negotiations with NATO and the EU, missiles and troops in eastern Poland are cited as a security threat to Russia, so they're moved to western Poland. In the next negotiations Russia asks the number of missiles and troops in Poland be reduced and moved west to other countries. Russia begins pecking away at the Polish political order. As Russia threatens to go in to restore order, NATO is reluctant to intervene because of the risk of antagonizing Putin and because NATO strength in the region is now so diminished.But let's go back to your answer. You'd draw the line at Poland and any other NATO member. So Putin can have Ukraine, Belarus (already gone) and Moldova. Boy, I wouldn't want to be Moldova right now, what with Ukraine in its current situation. Finland and Sweden (and Ireland, but they're too far away) aren't NATO members, but presumably you'd draw the line there, too?I'm getting the sense that some people believe Putin's expansion has a natural stopping point and so doesn't represent a real threat to us. But the actual principle is similar to a game of Risk, where more power and territory only makes expansion easier. We will eventually have to stand up to Putin (what we're doing now is akin to whipping him with a hand towel), and the sooner we do it the less costly it will be.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

Incoherent is the word I would use, too.--Percy

I have a subscription to the Washington Post. I could find no such article using their search facility and supplying it with a variety of combinations of those search terms, including both singular and plural forms. The term Azov is mentioned only once, when referring to the Sea of Azov. Rita Katz appears to be only an occasional contributor.But the Washington Post's search facility must be seriously flawed, because it proved unable to find articles even in today's paper. Using Google I was able to find this article by Rita Katz: Neo-Nazis are exploiting Russia’s war in Ukraine for their own purposes. It's an opinion piece. It says in part:

quote:

---

The would-be militants have been recruited by groups like the Azov Battalion, a far-right nationalist Ukrainian paramilitary and political movement. Azov was absorbed into the Ukrainian national guard in 2014 and has been a basis for Putin’s false claim that Ukraine’s government is run by neo-Nazis. Though Azov remains a fringe movement in Ukraine, it is a larger-than-life brand among many extremists. It has openly welcomed Westerners into its ranks via white-supremacist sites. Azov stickers and patches have been seen around the globe: from a bookbag at a July 2020 neo-Nazi counterprotest in Tennessee to the motorcycle of an attempted mosque bomber in Italy.

---

My guess as to the reason LNA was unable to provide a link is that he doesn't have one. He probably read something online about the Washington Post article. Unless he has a Washington Post subscription he's unable to actually read the article itself.If anyone's interested I don't mind posting the text of the entire article. WaPo owes me one (several, in fact) for halting a dialog I'd invested some time in pointing out bugs in their web presence.--Percy

I hope you find the help you need.--Percy

Earlier I said that once Putin has Ukraine then he'll begin pecking away at other nearby countries like Poland. He's already begun: Russia Threatens Poland in Lengthy Letter Days Before Joe Biden's Visit, written by deputy chairman of the Russian security council Dmitry Medvedev and former Russian president and prime minister on his Telegram channel:

quote:

---

"The interests of the citizens of Poland have been sacrificed due to Russophobia of 'mediocre politicians' and their 'puppeteers from across the ocean' with clear signs of senile insanity.
...
"Everything that Poland could lose due to its long-term pathological Russophobia has already been lost.
...
"Poland forgets Soviet Army liberated it from Nazi occupation—instead, Soviet 'occupation' is equated with Nazism—this is a deceitful and disgusting rhetoric. [Abandoning Russian fossil fuels has] already caused serious damage to the economy of this country.
...
"The same applies to many other steps, which are based not on the economy, but on politicking under the guise of 'de-Russification'. But now it is much more important for the Polish elites to swear allegiance to their overlord - America than to help their own citizens, so they will constantly support the fire of hatred for the enemy of Russia. [Poles will gain] absolutely nothing [by doing this].
...
"Hatred of Russia [doesn't] contribute to well-being and tranquility."

---

Medvedev seems to think Poles have forgotten about the Soviet Union dividing Poland between itself and Germany at the beginning of WWII, and how Poland suffered under years of Soviet communist domination.Just wanted to note this for anyone who believes Putin will stop at the NATO countries.--PercyEdited by Percy, : Correct some bad editing.

I think NATO might be your Maginot Line. Don't underestimate Europe's willingness to seek accommodation with a resurgent and expanded Russia after tempers and rhetoric have cooled.--Percy

It's an attempt to influence political attitudes within Poland, just as they did during the 2016 presidential election in the US. Russia does not really know what the endgame will be at this point. They're just stirring the pot and will react to what happens in ways that manifest to their advantage. Things that Russia will encourage to happen in Poland is causing unrest and influencing the election of politicians less pro-NATO. Russia doesn't have to militarily move on Poland if its elected leaders choose to reduce NATO's presence in their country or even withdraw from NATO.And what precisely is the resolve of NATO? Right now? Pretty strong. A couple years from now when Ukraine has settled in as a Russian satellite, Europe's need for fossil fuels continues, and the influence of Putin fellow travelers like Orbán in Hungary and Erdoğan in Turkey, both NATO members and friendly with Russia, has increased? Probably not so much.--Percy

It's a terrible example, because it's not an example but an analogy. You hold up NATO like it was some kind of shield of invincibility, just as the French held up the Maginot Line. What's not going to happen? A Russian frontal assault on NATO? Now? No, of course not. No one suggested that.Whatever happens will be preceded by years of maneuvering and undermining and strategies not yet imagined that are informed by the mistakes Putin made this time around in underestimating NATO resolve.Putin's goals are clear, and we shouldn't fool ourselves into believing we're safe as did the French behind their Maginot Line and the British across their channel. You're only thinking militarily. This is geopolitic on a grand scale, and the military is only a small part of it. You're not considering other aspects, the kinds of things that cause something to happen like Navalny getting sentenced to nine more years today, or like Donald Trump possibly getting elected again. How hard do you think Donald Trump will make it for NATO to oppose a Russian takeover of Moldova or Poland? There are many things yet undreamt of that could happen that don't involve firing a shot, and Putin is over there plotting while we say to ourselves, "What, me worry? We've got NATO!" Now add the economies of Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, either as puppet states or allies. Suddenly Russia is the 9th biggest economic block in the world.--Percy

This just repeats your original argument, which wasn't necessary. I understood you the first time, and since I disagreed I presented a counterargument, which you ignored.I don't think even you believe what you just said about analogies. I'm glad you weren't my English teacher. You're using a form of fallacious argument: if you can't attack the idea, attack the way it was presented, though preferably in a way that doesn't redefine how English works. Even as you wrote this you must have experienced misgivings about claiming something to be invincible. That's the kind of bellicose claim worthy of Putin or Trump. You're repeating the same military argument, you're arguing statically in time, and you're ignoring the political and propaganda elements. NATO has a significant political component, its membership won't remain static, and the resolve of individual members won't remain static. NATO isn't even a contiguous block. 95% of the Baltic states border is with Russia (the Kaliningrad region to their southwest is a discontinuous Russian region). Finland and Sweden aren't members, Norway's off by itself, and Hungary and Turkey have significant military ties to Russia. Since no NATO member was attacked or defended today (or yesterday), no NATO action today (or yesterday) was a demonstration of their "all for one and one for all" commitment.Raising the point about undermining NATO unity and resolve yet again in the hope it might be addressed this time, here are two articles from today's Post describing a couple of Putin's efforts to undermine resolve in the west:

• Americans may be greatly underestimating the impact of 10 years of Putin’s propaganda
  
• Russia's Attack on Truth in Germany

Even as you wrote this you must have experienced misgivings about claiming something in an absolute manner. You sound like someone in a sports bar: "No way St. Peter's can beat Kentucky." Or to use a sport you're more familiar with, "No way Sheriff Tiraspol can beat Real Madrid."This message didn't need to be so long. Most of the the answers to your comments are contained in the parts of my message that you ignored.--Percy