Silver Cat
Gold Member
You see, Neo-Nazi Ukraine (in it's old borders) in NATO means, for starters, discrimination, abusing and genocide of fifteen-twenty ethnic Russians and other Russian speaking people (like Jews, Hungarians and Greeks). Then, losing Sevastopol means losing control of Black Sea which means severe economic crisis. But what is most important, American medium-range missiles near Kharkov are more dangerous for the Russia than Soviet missiles on Cuba were dangerous for the USA. Back in 1962 the USA have a simple choice:So up to 20 million dead Russians is acceptable but a Ukraine in NATO is not? Sorry, not buying it.
1. Persuade the Russians to remove those missiles from Cuba (by the combination of military and diplomatic means).
2. Fight and win a nuclear war against Cuba and, may be, the USSR (suffering severe but acceptable losses).
3. Wait until 1963, and then fight and lose a nuclear war against Cuba and the USSR (suffers terrible and unacceptable losses, or even extinction).
The situation is quite similar, for exception that there is no sea between Russia and Ukraine, as well as there were not millions of WASPs in Cuba.
Just imagine Mexico, under control of Russia and China backed anti-American Junta, who declared as their first goal - returning to the borders of 1821 and final goal - total decolonisation of the Northern America (which means genocide of all White, Black and Yellow Americans). What would you prefer - to fight and win (paying terrible price) a war against such regime, or do not fight and allow them kill you without fighting? There is no much of choice, isn't it?