Ya thnk?First, you've made it clear that you are not familiar with common English phrases. "like Rats from a sinking ship" is a very common phrase, the fact that you saw such significance in it shows your lack of familiarity with English. Canadian you are not.
The applicable debate is on article 5. I'm suggesting that it doesn't apply when the threat of nuclear war has been elevated. And further to that I've mentioned the consequences of an aggression by one is going to be an aggression to all. Putin has hinted at that today on RT.comSecond, your concept of article 5 is all wrong. NATO and Article 5 are strictly for defensive purposes. NATO integration means that no one country can act aggressively. It would take all NATO members to agree for any one of them to make an aggressive action. That's not likely. I know that Russians are raised on the belief that NATO is an aggressive threat, but it's not. That's just Russian government propaganda to generate paranoia among the Russian people.
That's quite a stretch to say that Nato prevented war between the big 3 in Europe, but I haven't got the time to disprove it, nor the interest.One example of how NATO integration has prevented aggressive actions by it's members is that there has not been a war between France, the U.K. and Germany since NATO was conceived. That's historically amazing. Those countries have never gone this long without a war. (Same could have been said about the Warsaw pact countries).
The current situation is becoming close to Russia's use of nuclear weapons. Sweden and Finland would be wise to wait at least until this current war has ended. On nuclear hit on any of the world's smaller countries would be intolerable.After Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Sweden and Finland would have to be fools not to join NATO. Russia has proven it's willingness to invade it's neighbors.
Remember, even if it's painful to do so, Russia will not accept a loss. And apparently there's no defense possible against Russia's most modern weapons.
Of course we'll have to disagree. China's rise and the predicted alliance has cause the urgency for America. China's current stance is exactly what should have been expected.China has no love for Russia. There are even some theories that if Russia is weakened, China will invade outer Manchuria. China needs it's commercial relationships with the West. China may have been interested in an alliance with Russia if the invasion of Ukraine had gone well - it would have seen a weakened West as unable and unwilling to defend Taiwan.
There's little value in just stating your opinion, without talking points to back it up. I don't have time to entertain that unless you include some sort of proof of your claims. "Sour grapes"? That's a good place to start!Russia pretending that they really didn't want to take Kyiv is just "sour Grapes" - another English expression - look it up on Wikipedia.
I'll just say that Kiev was barely touched, when in fact the destruction could have been complete.
That's a good rundown on the West's talking points because it's quite thorough. And it's sticking to predictions that exclude Russia's use of unlimited warfare.This war is going terribly for Russia and Russia sees no honorable way out. Russia expected Ukraine to fall in a matter of a few weeks. That did not happen. They are making very little progress in their offensive in Eastern Ukraine. They know that massive shipments of a whole new category of heavy weapons is on it's way to Eastern Ukraine. They can not control the skies over Ukraine, so they can't stop those shipments. They know that the Ukrainians are planning a major offensive very soon. It will be a disaster for Russia.
If it all happens to prove true, it's a prediction of WW3.
I don't get involved in arm chair wars.
You've backed off your lie or your wishful thinking. It might have been a fire or it might have been missiles. Remember, no arm chair war with me!I know that your access to independent news reports is limited, but Russia did retaliate for the sinking of the Moskva by hitting a Ukrainian missile factory and has been hitting a lot of railroad stations.
Russia had valid reasons.Funny thing is that I believe that most of Russian's grievances against Ukraine are valid, but that this invasion, from a military point of view was the stupidest military decision since Hitler invaded Russia.
Whether it was stupid or not will eventually be decided.
Something for us to consider together: If Russia uses a nulcear weapon on the Ukraine or Poland, will America hit Russia and start WW3?
I think that article 5 for Nato is past serving any useful purpose and Europe could be having second thoughts about supporting America's war against Russia. What do you think?