Political Crossfire Forums

Country has divisive civil issues. US backs the side wanting democracy and pro-Western ties. Communist Asian country backs the side wanting socialist and pro-Eastern ties. Both sides appeal to their bigger allies for help. Both allies send aid, both military and otherwise. A civil war ignites. Suddenly, the two larger allies are fighting a proxy war inside that country.

Sound familiar? I don't think we'll see another Korea, Vietnam, or Afghanistan (circa 1980s) anytime soon, especially in Europe.

nukes are exactly the reason why the US and UK have to protect ukraine. they made a promise to do so, in exchange for ukraine giving up nukes.

if they do not, lesson learned: don't trust the us and uk when they say that "it's a good idea to give up/not pursue nuclear weapons because don't worry, we got your back"

ukraine won't be allowed in to NATO. you can't have on-going land disputes and you have to be able to politically, economically, and militarily able to contribute to NATO.

this wasn't the plan of the west because they have no intention of allowing them in.

swiss have been neutral for 200 years next year. they are not seriously debating membership

ukraine declared their neutrality 4 years ago as well (although, to be fair, that was the ousted president who did that, in order to stay out of nato really)

finland... finland yes, this could nudge it towards membership. finland has a long history of killing russians so nato makes sense for them

Finland maybe. Especially considering how Russia keeps barging into their airspace, lately.

I can't see Ukraine being allowed in at this point. Other than a massive defense liability, what would NATO gain?

It would be one step down from a declaration of war by NATO. It'd be nice for Ukrainians, obviously...but it would also obligate everyone else to fight Russia on Ukraine's behalf. How much of NATO thinks Ukraine worth fighting Russia over?

how far is the north atlantic away from ukraine, anyway?