peacefan
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #21
we just have to retain the ability to say 'no' to applicants we can't or shouldn't (according to our values *and* a set of equality-based world-order rules) support.I have to admit, I'm not crazy about NATO accepting new members mid-war. Even if it works out this time, it seems as if it is an invitation to abuse in the future.
we first stalled the negotiations into perpetuity, then shoved referendums aside (let the Russians organize a few so we could dismiss them based on the absence of independent monitors), and now we're engineering a perpetual war.I am absolutely for support for Ukraine, but boots on the ground is a big step that should not be considered without a clear exit strategy. I'm apprehensive of approaching this idea as if we're trying to fulfill video game victory conditions; it's a long and perpetual process, and lend-lease was working until our hand was forced.
perpetual simply meaning 'longer than a decade'.
Russia is ruled by their oligarchs and intel and military, in my opinion.I am inclined to think that we probably won't have to hold the line for too long before Russia solves the problem for us by completely imploding.
so i think it has a very robust government which is only vulnerable to short-duration upheavals.
Last edited: