Jimmy_D

‘If’ we get into military conflict with Russia? The minute NATO is attacked we already are.

The NATO treaty means that we wouldn’t be making a decision to go to war, we’d be making a decision to break up NATO. That’s something we wouldn’t have an appetite for. All this assumes that Putin thinks he can take on NATO, or gambles that NATO will break up. Even without having to go through Ukraine first, that would be a massive leap.

Defending NATO is something Putin will fully be expecting. If that results in an attack on the UK, it’ll be because Putin is crazy enough to want to attack the UK anyway.

You think Putin is ready to face the consequences of an attack on the UK?

What do you think the world’s response would be to an attack on the UK? What makes you think Putin would think he had anything to gain from an attack on the UK? Biden is currently pledging to defend every inch of NATO territory with the full force of the USA’s military. What makes you think Putin will believe it’s a bluff?

You keep framing the invasion of a NATO country as something small. Surely then, defending said country would also be ‘small’, but then you say that that could result in military action against the British Mainland, an action that would decidedly NOT be small. The invasion of a NATO country would NOT be small, and the breaking of the NATO treaty would be a massively unpopular move. It’s ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Imagine that the level of protesting being reported will have taken Putin by surprise a bit, considering what they’re risking. As for here, I can only speak for myself and the people I’ve spoken to today, but it’s been unanimous that any leader that broke the NATO treaty would lose our support.

Like I said, the ramifications of breaking the NATO treaty would be too big to ignore. If we didn’t want to be obliged to defend them, the time to decide that was when they were admitted to NATO.

I don’t think removal from SWIFT is off the table, but regardless of that, sanctions currently in place are having a massive impact on the Russian economy already.

That’s not a good sign for Ukraine, but it in no way indicates that NATO wouldn’t respond to an invasion of a NATO country.

I don’t think they want to stop at Ukraine. I do think that a united response against Russia over Ukraine is likely to make Putin calculate it’ll cost too much to go up against NATO.

Waiting isn’t going to make NATO any smaller or move its borders though. Invading, and perhaps more importantly, holding Ukraine, will have significant cost as well.

The cost of (possibly) losing some approval ratings with the USA electorate would be far less than every USA ally questioning the worth of any treaty the USA is party to.

Because they don’t want to break a treaty that obliges them to? I’m really not sure why you think it’d be such a small thing to do that.

Putin could probably have occupied the separatist regions in the same way he has Crimea. A full scale invasion of the whole of Ukraine has rapidly put everyone opposing him on the same page.

Obviously very early at the moment, but a long drawn out guerrilla war in Ukraine with Ukraine forces quietly bolstered by Special Forces for the foreseeable future. If Putin still has support after that I think he’ll calculate the risk of invading NATO too high.

Gambling on NATO breaking a treaty and sacrificing member countries is a very different prospect for Putin than invading a country that’s been denied entry to NATO so far, at least partly because of the risk of conflict with Russia. I think Putin has gone too quickly in Ukraine as well. He doesn’t even have the fig leaf of being in conflict in the separatist regions before launching a full scale invasion. The unity shown against that may well be greater than Putin expected, and far more costly than he was counting on, not to mention being far more difficult to justify to the Russian people, even with State Media.

Like I said, boots would be on the ground before an invasion. The danger would be Putin thinking that’s a bluff, but NATO isn’t going to sacrifice a member country in hope that that’s enough for Putin to be satisfied.

So Putin gets to invade whoever he wants because he might just be MAD enough to be the first to use a nuke? The line would have to be drawn somewhere.

No? Neither does the USA by the look of it. He’s stated that he wants to restore the Russian Empire. He’ll carry on doing that unless the cost is too high.

The USA has already deployed the 82nd Airbourne to NATO’s borders.

I think if there were any indication of an imminent invasion of a NATO member, boots would be on the ground before it happened.

It wouldn’t be defending Lithuania or Estonia, it’d be defending NATO itself. Like I said, the bigger risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that. The risk to NATO of Putin thinking any part of NATO would be left undefended would be far too big a risk to ignore.

If any NATO country faced invasion, I firmly believe that there would be a full scale NATO response. The biggest risk is that Putin doesn’t believe that. As it is, I think Putin may have underestimated how big the response will be to invading Ukraine.

Seems unlikely. Can’t see them all staying up either though. Burnley remind me of Saints in the 90’s and none of those three have teams or crowds ready for a relegation battle. On top of that Everton in particular have horrendous form and a scary looking run-in.