Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Surur t1_iu6cyxx wrote

> even from a non-longtermism standpoint he's still right though. How about the risk of nuclear war killing billions of the current population?

Well, the issue is that Putin may kill you if you don't stop him where he is. The example being Hitler of course.

If you appease bullies they become more confident, until someone actually stops them.

If you think that is completely unrealistic, places like Lithuania do not, and remember the whole of Eastern Europe remembers being under occupation by the USSR.

1

FilthyCommieAccount t1_iu6e44h wrote

The Hitler excuse is extremely overplayed. The truth of the matter is far more complicated and nuanced. Russia tolerated nato expansion towards it's borders for 3 decades and putin for more than one after we promised several times in public to the Russians that we would not do that. No nuclear nation is going to tolerate a hostile aligned military aliance with nukes on its borders. Just imagine what the US would do if China convinced Mexico to join a military aliance...

Basically, this is not some fairy tale good vs evil simple story. This is the real world. We should have allowed Russia to have a nuetral buffer zone between it and NATO not for Russia's sake but for everyone's. The world is a safer place when nonaligned nuclear powers have some territory between them. Like what do you think the endgame is here? Russia legitimately sees this as a large national security threat not becuase of it's bullshit Ukrainian nazi propaganda but becuase it doesn't want to be contained/surrounded by nato. What does everyone think is gonna happen when you corner a nuclear armed country?

Edit: Why do idiots try to send a last message after they block you lol? I can't see your weak ass comeback if you block me.

0

Surur t1_iu6fwfi wrote

Ah, sorry, I thought you were a pragmatist, but you are just a vatnik repeating Putin's talking points.

1