Anyone still glued to this?

[Del.Monte]

This is really going to help: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64992727 ...an International Arrest Warrant for Putin. The only useful outcome might be that Putin dies from a bout of uncontrollable laughing.

[knownunknown]

Yeah ... but why do all the "whataboutNATO" posters insist that it has to be Ukraine that concedes? Given that Ukraine was minding its own business up until Feb '22, why shouldn't it be Russia that gives up territory, even if it's only in the form of a UN-enforced DMZ on their side of the border?

As for Putin's red lines, they're nothing but the irrelevant scribblings of a toddler. We know now that he's not the least bit worried about NATO, because he's pulled all his tanks, troops and artillery systems away from the actual, existing NATO borders and sent them to be vaporised in a non-NATO battlefield. All he really wants is unfettered access to the Black Sea, and after that stupid stunt with the Reaper drone this week, he's demonstrated why that'd be a Bad Idea for everyone.

In any case, the war is already lost for Putin and Russia. He's aggressively depopulating the eastern half of the country and increasingly endebtted to China, and creating the conditions for a land-grab on that side of the Federation.

To reply to your first paragraph it’s because Ukraine are the ones being invaded while having their energy grid and infrastructure decimated. NATO is reluctant to retaliate against Russia due to the fear of nuclear weapons.

[knownunknown]

The war is lost for Russia but nobody in Putin's entourage has the courage to tell him - very similar to Hitler in WW.II. Even if Russia somehow extracts itself from the Ukrainian adventure Putin has succeeded in making his country an international pariah for decades to come. I hope for all our sakes the Chinese are noting what becomes of countries that carry-on in such a fashion.

I wouldn’t say the US are seen as pariahs even though they invaded Iraq under false pretences.

[knownunknown]

In December 1961, only a few months after the U.S.-sponsored exile invasion at Bay of Pigs, Fidel Castro declared himself a Marxist-Leninist, obligating the Soviet Union to protect his new, vulnerable socialist nation. Shortly thereafter he asked the Soviet Union for weapons, advisers, and even Soviet soldiers. The Soviets proposed a different defense -- medium-range ballistic missiles. Castro agreed. When in October 1962 American U-2 spy planes photographed missile sites in Cuba, the world approached the brink of a nuclear confrontation. As the tensions of the Missile Crisis escalated, Castro wrote Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev urging him to use the missiles and to sacrifice Cuba if necessary. Unbeknownst to the Cuban leader, Khrushchev had already reached an agreement with President John F. Kennedy to withdraw the missiles, without consulting Castro. The Cuban leader found out from a friend, the editor of the newspaper Revolución, Carlos Franqui. Castro was infuriated to discover that the Soviet Union would treat Cuba just as the United States had -- as an insignificant island in the middle of the Caribbean.”

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperi ... -cold-war/

If only we had such leaders today.

[CelticRambler]

To reply to your first paragraph it’s because Ukraine are the ones being invaded while having their energy grid and infrastructure decimated. NATO is reluctant to retaliate against Russia due to the fear of nuclear weapons.

That is the weirdest justification I've come across yet.

So you're saying that no country has a right to territorial integrity, and if any other country decides to lob a few rockets at it's schools and hospitals while sending some troops over the border, it should just give up and accept the invasion?

NATO has no reason to retaliate, because Russia hasn't invaded any NATO member. It's not NATO's war. But the Chinese are also scared of Russia's nuclear weapons, and told Putin to lay off the threats ... which he did.

[knownunknown]

That is the weirdest justification I've come across yet.

So you're saying that no country has a right to territorial integrity, and if any other country decides to lob a few rockets at it's schools and hospitals while sending some troops over the border, it should just give up and accept the invasion?

NATO has no reason to retaliate, because Russia hasn't invaded any NATO member. It's not NATO's war. But the Chinese are also scared of Russia's nuclear weapons, and told Putin to lay off the threats ... which he did.

It is NATO’s war. Ukraine applied for the membership action plan (MAP) in 2008. This was shelved in 2010 with the election of Yanukovych. It was the revolution of dignity that eventually saw him removed ( Western supported coup) which led to the outbreak of the Russo Ukrainian war. History matters more than narrative.