I’m confused about why Russia needs to conquer the entirely of Ukraine if their goal is just to make their side win in Donbas. Wouldn’t they have just invad Donbas if that was the goal?
The “people said mean things about Russia so obviously the Russian military is murdering people now” theory seems to explain too much. People say mean things about a lot countries, but most countries don’t start wars like this. What’s special about Russia here?
I observe a higher correlation between “people said mean things about X” and “X is murdering people now” than you make out? Most countries do go to war after they’re sufficiently vilified/provoked? The difficult question to me seems more direction of causation. IE, the west claims it insults people because they’re villains, I claim that around half our enemies, became so because we insulted them.
The problem with attacking the army in east Ukraine and ignoring Kyiv, is that it doesn’t result in an apology from the west. They physically prevent further acts of terrorism/genocide/ethnic cleansing, but Zelensky runs mean press articles about it every day for the rest of eternity, the west passes massive sanctions, everyone calls Putin Hitler, etc. IE, you get the exact same rhetoric as right now, but the situation isn’t resolved, so the rhetoric keeps going for the rest of eternity. It’s basically a Taiwan situation. Sure, if you arm up, and wave your nukes around, even powerful nations will probably, physically, back down. However, it means China/Ukraine/the West, will from then on write about your “illegal occupation” of Taiwan/Donbas/Crimea and how great it would be if they could kill you.
So, strategically, which plan has the lowest chance of triggering world war three? What scares me is, before the war started I saw a poll that said something like 15% of Americans want war with Russia, given that Russia conquers Ukraine. And now, same source says we’re at something like 40% of Americans want war with Russia. Note: Numbers half pulled out of hat.
I suspect that Putin believed us when we said we wouldn’t start a nuclear war over Ukraine, and, including that, decided that if he could just get a treaty in writing, all of the warmongering would blow over in a few years, and the situation would be resolved.
I should also note, Putin thought war with Ukraine would play well to the press back home, which it did. Russians are lapping this up. Putin’s popularity is at an all time high. I’m pretty sure most of Putin’s decisions revolve around what makes him popular in Russia. But that just punts the issue to, why do the Russians hate us and want to kill us?
Also, Russians are genetically/culturally strongmen who take insults poorly and resort to violence quickly. They’re not unique in this, but if you ascribe Swedish norms to Russians, you’re going to get a bloody nose.
Also, mutually assured destruction has a giant gaping hole in it. That is, Russia gets to wipe out the west, and we get to destroy, basically, just Moscow. China is left untouched. Russia likes China and dislikes us. Punting the victory to China isn’t that bad an option from their perspective.
I’m confused about why Russia needs to conquer the entirely of Ukraine if their goal is just to make their side win in Donbas. Wouldn’t they have just invad Donbas if that was the goal?
The “people said mean things about Russia so obviously the Russian military is murdering people now” theory seems to explain too much. People say mean things about a lot countries, but most countries don’t start wars like this. What’s special about Russia here?
I observe a higher correlation between “people said mean things about X” and “X is murdering people now” than you make out? Most countries do go to war after they’re sufficiently vilified/provoked? The difficult question to me seems more direction of causation. IE, the west claims it insults people because they’re villains, I claim that around half our enemies, became so because we insulted them.
The problem with attacking the army in east Ukraine and ignoring Kyiv, is that it doesn’t result in an apology from the west. They physically prevent further acts of terrorism/genocide/ethnic cleansing, but Zelensky runs mean press articles about it every day for the rest of eternity, the west passes massive sanctions, everyone calls Putin Hitler, etc. IE, you get the exact same rhetoric as right now, but the situation isn’t resolved, so the rhetoric keeps going for the rest of eternity. It’s basically a Taiwan situation. Sure, if you arm up, and wave your nukes around, even powerful nations will probably, physically, back down. However, it means China/Ukraine/the West, will from then on write about your “illegal occupation” of Taiwan/Donbas/Crimea and how great it would be if they could kill you.
So, strategically, which plan has the lowest chance of triggering world war three? What scares me is, before the war started I saw a poll that said something like 15% of Americans want war with Russia, given that Russia conquers Ukraine. And now, same source says we’re at something like 40% of Americans want war with Russia. Note: Numbers half pulled out of hat.
I suspect that Putin believed us when we said we wouldn’t start a nuclear war over Ukraine, and, including that, decided that if he could just get a treaty in writing, all of the warmongering would blow over in a few years, and the situation would be resolved.
I should also note, Putin thought war with Ukraine would play well to the press back home, which it did. Russians are lapping this up. Putin’s popularity is at an all time high. I’m pretty sure most of Putin’s decisions revolve around what makes him popular in Russia. But that just punts the issue to, why do the Russians hate us and want to kill us?
Also, Russians are genetically/culturally strongmen who take insults poorly and resort to violence quickly. They’re not unique in this, but if you ascribe Swedish norms to Russians, you’re going to get a bloody nose.
Also, mutually assured destruction has a giant gaping hole in it. That is, Russia gets to wipe out the west, and we get to destroy, basically, just Moscow. China is left untouched. Russia likes China and dislikes us. Punting the victory to China isn’t that bad an option from their perspective.