Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: skinowski who wrote (768893)	10/2/2022 1:13:49 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 794231

Maybe so - but only until the moment when Biden - or someone else in his shoes - issues an order to move the nukes East Ukraine doesn't have to be part of NATO for that to happen. The issue is the deployment of the nukes, not Ukrainian NATO membership. Although really neither is that huge of issue, simple because there is close to zero percent chance of either happening since 2014, and not much chance even before that (particularly of nukes stationed in Ukraine). Also because the additional threat represented by nukes in Ukraine would be a tiny fraction of that represented by nukes in Cuba in 1962. The nukes that would have been in Cuba if deployment where not hindered (apparently there were about 100 warheads there already although the US though they were not there yet and more were on the way) would have more than doubled the warheads on Soviet missiles that could hit the US, perhaps even more than doubled the total warheads that could hit the US including bomber flights (that could be shot down, and might be one way even if not hit by US forces) and also bombers with nukes could have been based in Cuba. As for close "brotherly cooperation" they brought that on themselves with their attacks. With cooperation starting after the 2014 attack, increasing as Russia built up to this one, and then even more after they send a massive army across the border. Because of Russia's own actions a neutral Ukraine is close to an impossibility except perhaps with total conquest of Ukraine and a Stalinist level police state over it for a number of years which at this point seems unrealistic. The Ukrainians wouldn't even trust a proposed Finnish type agreement, let alone any agreement that let Russia maintain control of 5 Ukrainian oblasts (or 4 and one "autonomous republic"). Over time both sides could be worn down and there could be some sort of agreement but to get an agreement at very least the 4 would have to be un-annexed. Putin certainly isn't going to want that so I think the war could go on for years (which would have a greater impact on Russian security than just "brotherly cooperation" with NATO, or probably even membership. Answer - for the same reason why their economy hardly grew compared to the Soviet times The Russians have similar levels of corruption, but pre-2014 they had more foreign investment and they have much more oil and natural gas.

To: skinowski who wrote (768893)	10/2/2022 2:47:44 PM
From: greenspirit	5 Recommendations Recommended By John Koligman pak73 THE WATSONYOUTH TimF Triffin Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794231

Provided Ukraine survives with most of its land and energy resources in tack, Russia has ensured that it will be many decades for any sort of neutrality to exist. One doesn't attack another country, bomb their cities, rape their women and torture prisoners of war, then go, "hey, let's just get along and you be neutral now ok?". It's a fantasy. The likely outcome of this Putin mis-adventure is after many more deaths, a cease fire is agreed to. Followed by talks and negotiations, followed by mistrust for decades, unless Russia tosses out those like Putin and actually demonstrates it wants to build a society that values human life. Although the cheering crowds chanting Russia, Russia, Russia with Putin do exist, when more of their sons arrive home in body bags, Putin will lose lose his grip on power. It takes a lot of energy and military firepower to enslave 40 million people and convince them not to fight ever again. They succeeded in the days of the Soviet empire, but Ukraine, like many other former Soviet republics has tasted freedom. Although Putin dreams it daily, there is no going back to the old Soviet days of control, fences and killing with guns to lock people in. We should never have agreed for Ukraine to give up its nuclear weapons. Big strategic mistake. If they had them, Putin and his moronic Chechnya nuclear saber rattlers, would be a lot more humble and quiet about threatening to launch their arsenal. It's difficult for me to believe there are intelligent people who defend the actions of Russia, defend threatening the use of nuclear weapons, all because they are losing the war that they started. That's life for Putin the coward who sends 18 year old healthy men to die for his stupid control of energy resources. Now, his stupidity has turned to insanity, in a last ditch effort to not lose face. For one person, or a small group of Kremlin idiot ego's, it's a sad reason for so many young men, women and children to die.