by AgentR11 » Sun 07 Apr 2024, 15:26:51
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'F')unny, I would have said it the other way round.
No matter, we agree that a confrontation seems inevitable.
Are you suggesting Putin thinks NATO would somehow disintegrate over the foreseeable next few years? Seems hard for me to even consider such a thing; he'd have to be blind and foolish, and I don't think he's either. Malevolent or paranoid towards the West, more like, but he knows how dependent the alliance is on the US and each other...
Incomprehensible to me.
Even his suggested "diplomatic" resolution envisages the continuing existence of NATO.
I think we do agree that in the end it won't matter who's fault it is. In Annie's words after launch, "what's done is done." My cushy life comes to an end, as does that of hundreds of millions of Americans.
I think she's wrong though in thinking there could be disarmament of some sort; the weaker party (Russia) can't afford to give up its Nuclear deterrent for fear of being destroyed in a conventional war with NATO. The strays like Pakistan and North Korea similarly, have local issues that lock them into keeping Nuclear weapons, ready to launch, again being the conventionally weaker party.
So I don't know of a solution, it seems horrifically locked in, as if by fate. And I despise the entire concept of "fate"...