Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (763607)	6/5/2022 4:26:19 PM
From: skinowski	6 Recommendations Recommended By Ben Smith garrettjax Hoa Hao lightshipsailor pak73 and 1 more member Read Replies (3) of 793674

My read of the issue is different - more along the lines of realpolitik. The same way the US can insist on the Monroe doctrine - Russia can insist that NATO doesn’t penetrate to a point Southeast of Moscow - which would be an enormous danger for the future. Let’s imagine that at a future point Ukraine decided to move forward with their “reconquista” of Donbas and Lugansk. If by then they had more nato bases (or membership) - and if in the course of the war they turned very brutal towards the locals (as they’ve been, at times, in the past) - and if Russia came to help them - NATO would be very, very close to being dragged in. Cool little end of the world scenario. It could have been a different dynamic. What’s important is that in the future, any conflict close to Russia's border could have triggered an apocalyptic sequence. Our geopolitical think tankers should have their heads examined. I don’t expect you to agree - and I respect your opinion. That’s what makes a pluralistic society.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next