[Goose]

Interesting development this morning on topic of possible Russian use of chemical weapons in Ukraine...



- UK Armed Forces Minister James Heappey said Russia should think twice about taking such an approach as it could trigger “an international response”.



If this is corroborated by other NATO members - and hard to believe it wouldn't be - we will know the rules of engagement, and can probably assume tactical nuke use will evoke the same international response.

Agree.
<snip>

NATO has already made its choices:

- Hold fast, supply resources to Ukraine to fight and wait out Russia until it implodes

- Only engage militarily if Russia uses chemical or nuclear weapons or attacks a NATO member 

- Expand its membership

- Re-double efforts to move away from fossil fuels that fund Russia



Russia only has losing options for its ambitions, much like Japan and Germany faced in WWII.  Only, unlike Japan and Germany, it only took two weeks after its reckless action in Ukraine for Russia for the dye on its L to be cast. NATO countries will be far better off in any scenario. Even if we all get vaporized, we'll have nothing to worry about anymore :)

Basically agree, but it is more nuanced in terms of NATO's choices. Supplying resources to Ukraine has parameters. What resources are "acceptable" and what ones are not? This undoubtedly is modulated by the situation in Ukraine at any given time and by the political situation in each NATO member.
As far as accepting new NATO members goes, I think NATO would take Sweden and Finland (if they apply) pretty quickly. NATO does not want Georgia or Ukraine. The benefit/cost ratio for NATO just isn't good for either one. They are hard to defend, economically not strong, and have significant corruption problems. The odds of them dragging NATO into a war NATO doesn't want to fight are just too high.
If Ukraine survives, NATO would now pretty much be obligated to take them. Not  a good situation. NATO accepted as many Balkan states as it has in an attempt to prevent them from fighting each other. It didn't strengthen NATO against Russia or any other major powers other than not forcing the Balkan candidates to find protection against their neighbors elsewhere.

[Goose]

Interesting development this morning on topic of possible Russian use of chemical weapons in Ukraine...



- UK Armed Forces Minister James Heappey said Russia should think twice about taking such an approach as it could trigger “an international response”.



If this is corroborated by other NATO members - and hard to believe it wouldn't be - we will know the rules of engagement, and can probably assume tactical nuke use will evoke the same international response.

Agree.
<snip>

NATO has already made its choices:

- Hold fast, supply resources to Ukraine to fight and wait out Russia until it implodes

- Only engage militarily if Russia uses chemical or nuclear weapons or attacks a NATO member 

- Expand its membership

- Re-double efforts to move away from fossil fuels that fund Russia



Russia only has losing options for its ambitions, much like Japan and Germany faced in WWII.  Only, unlike Japan and Germany, it only took two weeks after its reckless action in Ukraine for Russia for the dye on its L to be cast. NATO countries will be far better off in any scenario. Even if we all get vaporized, we'll have nothing to worry about anymore :)

Basically agree, but it is more nuanced in terms of NATO's choices. Supplying resources to Ukraine has parameters. What resources are "acceptable" and what ones are not? This undoubtedly is modulated by the situation in Ukraine at any given time and by the political situation in each NATO member.
As far as accepting new NATO members goes, I think NATO would take Sweden and Finland (if they apply) pretty quickly. NATO does not want Georgia or Ukraine. The benefit/cost ratio for NATO just isn't good for either one. They are hard to defend, economically not strong, and have significant corruption problems. The odds of them dragging NATO into a war NATO doesn't want to fight are just too high.
If Ukraine survives, NATO would now pretty much be obligated to take them. Not  a good situation. NATO accepted as many Balkan states as it has in an attempt to prevent them from fighting each other. It didn't strengthen NATO against Russia or any other major powers other than not forcing the Balkan candidates to find protection against their neighbors elsewhere.