Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should simply send in a special ops force or drone, etc. to kill Putin. Cut the head off of the snake. Kill the other oligarchs if necessary. Then take over their government, implement a western style government hold democratic elections, then get out. Potentially, break up their country first between European high population regions and large natural resource areas. Maybe even create the first UN run neutral lands with shared natural resource allocations.

Then systematically do this to all countries run by despots and dictators such as NK, Venezuela, sub-Saharan African countries, Iran, Syria, etc. until western-style governments driven by the people are installed throughout the world. We can all them compete on business and productivity and innovation and not based on a handful of uber-powerful sociopaths or religious zealots. How about that?

We should definitely try to kill Putin. And I’m sure the US is quietly looking at just that. But he has a reputation on for being paranoid and has ridiculous security. It may not be possible.

We should take a long, hard look at Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan before we head into a nation building spree. It costs so much in terms of money and lives and never ends well for us. Russia is huge, has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and shows no signs of wanting a US puppet regime.

This isn't a movie - not Rambo or Iron Eagle. Not happening. Nonstarter.

Agreed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should simply send in a special ops force or drone, etc. to kill Putin. Cut the head off of the snake. Kill the other oligarchs if necessary. Then take over their government, implement a western style government hold democratic elections, then get out. Potentially, break up their country first between European high population regions and large natural resource areas. Maybe even create the first UN run neutral lands with shared natural resource allocations.

Then systematically do this to all countries run by despots and dictators such as NK, Venezuela, sub-Saharan African countries, Iran, Syria, etc. until western-style governments driven by the people are installed throughout the world. We can all them compete on business and productivity and innovation and not based on a handful of uber-powerful sociopaths or religious zealots. How about that?

We should definitely try to kill Putin. And I’m sure the US is quietly looking at just that. But he has a reputation on for being paranoid and has ridiculous security. It may not be possible.

We should take a long, hard look at Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan before we head into a nation building spree. It costs so much in terms of money and lives and never ends well for us. Russia is huge, has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and shows no signs of wanting a US puppet regime.

There’s an executive order forbidding the US from assassinating foreign leaders.

The cool thing about executive orders is the executive can rescind them. We pulled Sadat out of his hidey hole and hung him. We can certainly give Ukraine the drone to do the deed, give them the intelligence and logistical support they need, or have a classified suspension of the EO. What exactly is the recourse after Putin’s dead? Russia sues us citing the EO?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

Sure. NATO could just allow itself to be attacked and not respond and hope that Putin didn’t attack again.

You think that would be a good idea?

I don’t.

DP. I don’t think Putin wants or plans to attack NATO counties.
Not yet, at least.
I think the best way to avoid WW3 is to stop sending weapons to Ukraine (I know it sounds heartless but unfortunately I don’t see a way to win for the Ukraine, it’s only delaying the inevitable).
I hope I am wrong though.

You are wrong. If the west (and not just the US but Poland, Lithuania, etc.) didn’t want to supply weapons to Ukraine, Putin could physically occupy Ukraine but he could never subjugate it. He has already stated that Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, etc. also belong back in the Russian Federation. Something like 75-85% of Russians are OK with Putin invading Poland. That would surely be WW3.

Zelensky also knows that without air defense, i.e. a way to protect Putin from simply broadly shelling Ukrainian cities, the Russian offensive will continue as long as Putin has bombs. The Ukrainians might be able to fight Russia to a standstill on the ground and even push them back, but Putin can still bomb Ukraine from Russian soil. As Putin loses on the ground, he is more and more likely to strike to draw NATO in - in fact, he will have to do this because otherwise he will not only lose the war but he will lose his grip on power and maybe even his head or his freedom. Putin does not care if all of Russia suffers as long as he can maintain power and he has only been able to do that by provoking NATO so that Russians patriotically rush to Putin’s side in fighting the aggressor.

If he strikes first at NATO, it will be at weapon supplies inside NATO countries or at NATO troops that have been re-positioned closer to the border after the Ukraine invasion in order to protect eastern flank NATO countries. He will argue these pose a threat to Russia even though they have never. een used on Russian soil.

What Zelensky means by a failure to properly arm and defend Ukraine ensures WW3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

Sure. NATO could just allow itself to be attacked and not respond and hope that Putin didn’t attack again.

You think that would be a good idea?

I don’t.

DP. I don’t think Putin wants or plans to attack NATO counties.
Not yet, at least.
I think the best way to avoid WW3 is to stop sending weapons to Ukraine (I know it sounds heartless but unfortunately I don’t see a way to win for the Ukraine, it’s only delaying the inevitable).
I hope I am wrong though.

The problem is the “at least not yet.” If you don’t stand up to bullies, they keep beating up kids and taking their lunch money. And it’s easier to stop Putin now than wait until he goes after a NATO country and we have to go all in. And I say that as the mother of a 19 year old son registered for the draft. All appeasement does is create an even bigger problem next year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should simply send in a special ops force or drone, etc. to kill Putin. Cut the head off of the snake. Kill the other oligarchs if necessary. Then take over their government, implement a western style government hold democratic elections, then get out. Potentially, break up their country first between European high population regions and large natural resource areas. Maybe even create the first UN run neutral lands with shared natural resource allocations.

Then systematically do this to all countries run by despots and dictators such as NK, Venezuela, sub-Saharan African countries, Iran, Syria, etc. until western-style governments driven by the people are installed throughout the world. We can all them compete on business and productivity and innovation and not based on a handful of uber-powerful sociopaths or religious zealots. How about that?

We should definitely try to kill Putin. And I’m sure the US is quietly looking at just that. But he has a reputation on for being paranoid and has ridiculous security. It may not be possible.

We should take a long, hard look at Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan before we head into a nation building spree. It costs so much in terms of money and lives and never ends well for us. Russia is huge, has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and shows no signs of wanting a US puppet regime.

This isn't a movie - not Rambo or Iron Eagle. Not happening. Nonstarter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We should simply send in a special ops force or drone, etc. to kill Putin. Cut the head off of the snake. Kill the other oligarchs if necessary. Then take over their government, implement a western style government hold democratic elections, then get out. Potentially, break up their country first between European high population regions and large natural resource areas. Maybe even create the first UN run neutral lands with shared natural resource allocations.

Then systematically do this to all countries run by despots and dictators such as NK, Venezuela, sub-Saharan African countries, Iran, Syria, etc. until western-style governments driven by the people are installed throughout the world. We can all them compete on business and productivity and innovation and not based on a handful of uber-powerful sociopaths or religious zealots. How about that?

We should definitely try to kill Putin. And I’m sure the US is quietly looking at just that. But he has a reputation on for being paranoid and has ridiculous security. It may not be possible.

We should take a long, hard look at Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan before we head into a nation building spree. It costs so much in terms of money and lives and never ends well for us. Russia is huge, has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and shows no signs of wanting a US puppet regime.

There’s an executive order forbidding the US from assassinating foreign leaders.

Anonymous wrote:We should simply send in a special ops force or drone, etc. to kill Putin. Cut the head off of the snake. Kill the other oligarchs if necessary. Then take over their government, implement a western style government hold democratic elections, then get out. Potentially, break up their country first between European high population regions and large natural resource areas. Maybe even create the first UN run neutral lands with shared natural resource allocations.

Then systematically do this to all countries run by despots and dictators such as NK, Venezuela, sub-Saharan African countries, Iran, Syria, etc. until western-style governments driven by the people are installed throughout the world. We can all them compete on business and productivity and innovation and not based on a handful of uber-powerful sociopaths or religious zealots. How about that?

We should definitely try to kill Putin. And I’m sure the US is quietly looking at just that. But he has a reputation on for being paranoid and has ridiculous security. It may not be possible.

We should take a long, hard look at Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan before we head into a nation building spree. It costs so much in terms of money and lives and never ends well for us. Russia is huge, has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and shows no signs of wanting a US puppet regime.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

We could just not honor our responsibility. How do you feel about that?

Pretty good.

Do you still feel good when you think about all of our NATO Allie who sent troops into Afghanistan after 9/11? We had Swedes dying for our absent WMDs. There has only been one serious invocation of NATO— by the US, after 9/11. Someday, we might need NATO again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

Baltic states or the former Soviet -Stan countries.


We could just not honor our responsibility. How do you feel about that?

+1. Ask history what happens when the US shrugs and says: it’s just Poland, it’s got nothing to do with us. We’re staying out of it. (Hint: a World War).

Plus, Putin is targeting women and children and now forcibly relocating Ukrainians to Russia where no one is sure what is happening. Annexing the Crimea is one thing. An ethnic cleansing campaign is another.

Plus, as things escalate, the odds of something we can’t ignore happening increase. They are already intentionally bombing civilian shelters. So, Ukraine gets a no fly zone and a NATO member is shot down. There is a miscalculation on the Polish border. It goes nuclear because of crossed wires, or intentionally. We end up with a genocide. Putin heads towards the Balkan states or the former Soviet -stans.

And, Putin seems more than a wee bit unhinged.

It’s all a recipe for a War.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

Sure. NATO could just allow itself to be attacked and not respond and hope that Putin didn’t attack again.

You think that would be a good idea?

I don’t.

DP. I don’t think Putin wants or plans to attack NATO counties.
Not yet, at least.
I think the best way to avoid WW3 is to stop sending weapons to Ukraine (I know it sounds heartless but unfortunately I don’t see a way to win for the Ukraine, it’s only delaying the inevitable).
I hope I am wrong though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

Sure. NATO could just allow itself to be attacked and not respond and hope that Putin didn’t attack again.

You think that would be a good idea?

I don’t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Others have speculated the same thing—he is not saying anything new or revelatory. He’s using rhetoric to bring more attention.

This. Ukraine is very good at that.

Right - it’s his role and his training in media communications, but it’s not exactly realistic nor wise to be in allied nations and act like his rhetoric damns us into WW3 at this moment. Weird it’s getting portrayed that way by some here.

Anonymous wrote:Others have speculated the same thing—he is not saying anything new or revelatory. He’s using rhetoric to bring more attention.

This. Ukraine is very good at that.

Others have speculated the same thing—he is not saying anything new or revelatory. He’s using rhetoric to bring more attention.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because he’s worried Putin will be emboldened to attack a NATO country, in which case we would have no choice but to get involved.

This is the saddest thing I have read. So we literally would not be able to get out of going to war? Is there any slim chance, loophole, etc?

Do you understand what NATO is and why it exists? I would start there if I were you.