This "don't reward bad behavior" argument, which I've heard countless times now, is super weak. Because Russia has lost hundreds of thousands of men. They paid dearly so far for this war (but not as much as Ukraine). You think that they will say "that was easy we didn't get punished, so let's go do it again?" No, the cost of this war was so high already that we don't have to make it even more costly to avoid moral hazard. I'm sure it is already clear to all would-be aggressors that the cost of aggression is super high.
Discussion
Free will has a price. Wisdom pays *before* the fire.
You seem to care very little about how Putin works. Putin at no point cared about russian people nor ukrainian people. He cares about restoring the great Russia Stalin has built.
Perhaps. But how is that relevant? If you can predict that Russia will take all the land and win, what then should you do? Fight and lose? That just does not make sense to me. Just because Putin is evil and wrong and expansionary and aggressive... that doesn't mean you will win if you fight him.
A lot of people think that if the US with all it's military might stood behind Ukraine fully, moved in forces, that Russia would fold. And I think they are probably right. I think the US probably could stop this war by taking aggressive action aganst Russia.
But probably isn't good enough. Because if they are wrong we get nuclear armageddon. So instead of hundreds of thousands of people die, billions of people die.
And so in a "less death" kind of calculus, I'd rather that Russia win, even if he does "keep going" into Moldova and right up to NATO's border.
He won't attack NATO, that would be suicide, and if he did I 100% support starting WW3 and putting him down. But not until he attacks NATO.
What is the advantage of the west stopping him later instead of stopping him early?
And how in the world should Russia win, when Ukraine just has far superior weapon?
manpower? The idea of fighting Russia to the last Ukrainian doesn't seem right.
This is barely something that is the decision of defending forces if like this or not.
Defenders at most can decide how hard it will be to kill them. But if they gonna be killed or not is the offenders decision when it is within their powers. But it is clear, that the united west has the means to empower the Ukraine to defend their lives and their freedom. The question is only if we are willing to help.
Or they could negotiate a ceasefire and not die at all. But I don't want my country to do everything in it's power to ensure that doesn't happen, which seems like what the US and Europe have been doing, at least up till Trump.
Ukraine doesn't have superior weapons, and they barely have soldiers left, they are having to conscript 18 year old boys and elderly men.
Quit talking out your ass.
The BBC wouldnt lie would they?