Recognizing we may be on the edge of WW3, what event would cause you to accept military engagement?

[Stinky The Clown]

Incursion into a NATO country? (actually, that makes engagement automatic)

Imprisoning of Ukrainian citizens?

Assassination of the Ukranian president?

Detonation of a tactical nuke?

Demolition of the Chernobyl sarcophagus?

Something else that is within the realm of the possible?

[True Dough]

1. I have no sense that we're on the brink of WWIII

What Putin is doing is downright terrible, but I don't think there's enough will among the West to intervene militarily, ergo no world war.

[Stinky The Clown]

3. Incursion into any NATO country, even the slightest, is the spark

I don't doubt Putin would risk it if, for whatever reason, he saw benefit in doing so. In fact, maybe just to test NATO's resolve. Will it hold or will it splinter?

No, I think we are, in fact, on the edge.

[True Dough]

5. I'll be back

in a few months to remind you that WWIII never did break out, and worry about the same was wasted energy.

Be well, Stinky.

[Stinky The Clown]

7. What a stupid and insulting thing to say. Why did you need to do that?

Not rhetorical. Really asking.

[True Dough]

12. Just hoping you're not too anxious

As I said, be well. Deep breaths. There's no global collapse around the corner.

[Stinky The Clown]

9. And by the way, I did not predict WW3. I said it is possible.

I also asked a different question.

So, it seems you misread the post and then gave us your interpretation of an answer to an unasked question.

That's kind of a . . . . . . never mind. I have no need of a hide.

[qazplm135]

39. Timeline of escalation

Will be longer than months

[True Dough]

42. That's fine

For you, I'll mark the calendar for 2023. See you back here then!

[CrackityJones75]

82. I mean it is easy for you to act like a jerk.

If you are wrong we are all dead.

[True Dough]

83. I'll find you in the afterlife

and maybe even apologize?

Deal?

[Ohio Joe]

13. So... About NATO...

When I look at NATO's statement, here:

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_192404.htm

I think they end it with a pretty firm 'don't try this in a NATO country'. The exact wording from the end of statement:

Russia’s actions pose a serious threat to Euro-Atlantic security, and they will have geostrategic consequences. NATO will continue to take all necessary measures to ensure the security and defence of all Allies. We are deploying additional defensive land and air forces to the eastern part of the Alliance, as well as additional maritime assets. We have increased the readiness of our forces to respond to all contingencies.

Today, we have held consultations under Article 4 of the Washington Treaty. We have decided, in line with our defensive planning to protect all Allies, to take additional steps to further strengthen deterrence and defence across the Alliance. Our measures are and remain preventive, proportionate and non-escalatory.

Our commitment to Article 5 of the Washington Treaty is iron-clad. We stand united to defend each other.

[Mr.Bill]

88. If we don't fight alongside any NATO country,

NATO might as well disband. The same goes for any NATO country. They must be unified.

[former9thward]

80. Nothing is automatic about NATO.

Article 5 of the treaty has only been invoked once -- after 9/11 happened. Even then the vast majority of NATO countries did not participate in the Afghan war.

[Claustrum]

4. I kind of agree.

That's why I expected Ukraine to be gone by next week (no, I am not cheering for it to happen. I am just not optimistic that there is anything we could do to prevent it to happen).

But I am not confident that Putin isn't crazy enough to attack a NATO country so I think WWIII is still on the table, even though it's still very remote and unlikely.

[left-of-center2012]

6. I agree

As bad as it is we are not going to war over Ukraine.

And I don't think Putin is crazy enough to attack a NATO country.

[Mr.Bill]

27. I'm not all that sure about him not being crazy.

What he is doing right now is pretty fucking crazy.

[ShazzieB]

67. Oh, he's crazy all right. But there are different degrees of crazy.

left-of-center2012 didn’t say Putin’s not crazy. The quote was "I don't think Putin is crazy enough to attack a NATO country."

There's crazy, and there's complete and utter bat shit. Putin would have to be the latter to attack a NATO country. Like left-of-center2012, I don't think he's THAT crazy.

[BannonsLiver]

84. +1

The OTT rhetoric is not helpful. It may be trendy. But it’s not useful.

[Joinfortmill]

2. Not so certain special forces aren't close by.

[totodeinhere]

8. I do not think that we are on the verge of WWIII.

To say otherwise is irresponsible fear mongering. Putin may be evil but he is not stupid. He will not sanction any incursions into a NATO country.

[qazplm135]

38. I think

He very well may. Georgia is probably next. If he takes that too then a Baltic showdown.

[totodeinhere]

91. We would not go to war with Russia Over Georgia.

But if he should decide to go into a NATO countries then it would mean war and I hope to God that that will never happen.

[uponit7771]

57. UKR and Russian people don't agree with you. They think Putin has gone mad here's NYT article

https://archive.fo/RWnWt

[totodeinhere]

93. If Putin were to go batshit crazy and try to start

World III then I think he would be overthrown by his generals and other people in Russia who are not as crazy as he is. At least I hope that is what would happen.

[SWBTATTReg]

10. I disagree. And rather far-fetched and very unrealistic to suggest that a 3rd World War is upon us.

You are listing a list of very remote possibilities that would incur WWIII. The list you bring up is just that, a list that currently, science fiction writers are only working on and no one else. This is disturbing.

[Stinky The Clown]

11. How is it disturbing?

And what on that list seems to you impossible?

[SWBTATTReg]

18. If you have to ask, then you already have my answers. NT

[Stinky The Clown]

21. There ya go, Hoss. Good. Standing by what you say. Brave, too.

[SWBTATTReg]

24. Ohhhh, such a verbal salad. What does being brave have to do w/ responding to your claims that

possible nuclear war is in the picture, with no evidence on your part of such.

[Stinky The Clown]

32. Ooooo boy. Internet slap fight

Too funny

[maxrandb]

14. I was ready for military action

when he installed his puppet in the White House. That was more destructive than Sumpter, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 combined, but...

I would say any attack on any US Forces, or stepping one foot into a NATO country.

Considering how well Afghanistan went for Russia, I think he is going to realize that trying to takeover Ukraine is like trying to swallow a porcupine.

The more likely scenario is that someone in Russia is going to take him out.

I see a Ceaser on the Senate floor moment in Putin's near future.

[Stinky The Clown]

19. "I see a Ceaser on the Senate floor moment in Putin's near future."

That would be wonderful. Even today there are whispers of such a thing coming out of Russia from his political opponents.

[pwb]

15. Reinstate the draft.

Make it everybody's fight. Then maybe.

[Runningdawg]

30. NO draft unless every congress critter with a child or grandchild fighting age sends theirs first.

It's time for the poor people of this country to stand up and say NO we've paid our dues.

[Dial H For Hero]

34. You can't force someone into military service just because of who their parents or grandparents are.

[A HERETIC I AM]

40. Sure you can

The rules can be written any way they like.

“The first to go shall be men, ages 17 to 25 from the families with the highest net worth”

Looks good to me. Let them fight it in court.

[Dial H For Hero]

41. That wouldn't have the slightest chance of being passed. If (somehow) it was, the courts would

throw it out in a heartbeat.

[A HERETIC I AM]

43. Only because this country is bought and paid for by those very families.

The rules are currently such that if a draft was reinstated, mostly poor young men and women would be drafted, because that’s the way they want it.

Whether or not “the courts would throw it out in a heartbeat” however, is up for debate.

[Dial H For Hero]

44. I can't see the courts supporting a law which forces someone into military service because their

grandfather is rich.

[Runningdawg]

45. Yet they have supported drafting people who are poor.

At one time courts even ORDERED convicted persons to join the military. Who gets convicted most often - the rich or poor?

[A HERETIC I AM]

48. This!

[Dial H For Hero]

60. As I recall, convicted criminals were sometimes given the choice of military service or prison.

In any case, that would be someone who was found guilty of a crime. Being the son or grandson of a wealthy person is not criminal.

[ShazzieB]

87. There's a catch, though.

During the Vietnam War era (the last time people were being drafted en masse), they didn't deliberately draft more poor people BECAUSE they were poor. More poor people got drafted because they were less likely to be able to access resources to help them avoid it.

Earlier on, when the student deterrents were widely available, a lot of more well off kids were able to avoid the draft simply by going to college. Later on, when that no longer worked, it was no longer so easy for rich kids to avoid the draft.

If you had a rich, unscrupulous father like Fred Trump, who was willing to pay an unscrupulous doctor to invent a medical excuse, you could dodge the draft that way. But not everyone who could afford that was crooked enough to actually do it. I suspect that the Trumps were a "rare" breed in that respect.

Nowadays, without a draft, a lot more poor kids than than wealthier ones join the military, for sure. That's because the poor kids don't have a wide array of other enticing opportunities at their fingertips, especially those from economically depressed areas whose job prospects are very poor. Recruiters work hard to convince those kids that the military can be their ticket to a better life, and they sign up.

[A HERETIC I AM]

47. They force those into service who's grandfather is poor

Think about it. Back during Viet Nam, the vast majority of those sent over were not from well-to-do families.


Look, I get your objection and I am certainly playing Devils Advocate here, but the fact remains, if the people had the will to make this a true democracy, and the majority held the position that the any military draft starts with the richest segment of society, we would look at our war making in a completely different way.

[Runningdawg]

86. THIS 100%

[gldstwmn]

54. Lol. This thread is a doozy.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

63. Don't you mean DUzy?

[gldstwmn]

85. Yes that too. 😄

[Best_man23]

16. A couple of these would require NATO and Western military engagement

Incursion by Russia into the Baltic states, Poland, or an attack on any NATO member.

Detonation of any nuke.

Assassination or attempted assassination of any leader of a NATO country.

Proof of "ethnic cleansing" of Ukrainians by Russian forces.

The imprisoning of Ukrainians to me is a given at this point. I think with the Russians getting closer to Kyiv, it may be smart in the near future for President Zelensky to move to an undisclosed location in the Western part of Ukraine.

While the Russians have taken Chernobyl, I doubt they would do something as idiotic as damage or destroy the sarcophagus. Radiation, like Covid does not choose who it kills based on national or political ideology, it just kills and with far greater lethality.

[Hekate]

17. Given that Joe just promised us the US isn't going into Ukraine, but left NATO support wide open...

… I’d say we’re committed to the NATO alliance. Our troops are there already.

Sounds like the sanctions some are pooh-poohing are having an effect on Russia already. A severe effect.

And given that Biden hasn’t released them all at once, I imagine he’s going to keep rolling them out.

[RussBLib]

20. Joe did not promise that

but said we would not.

perhaps sooner we will see how many Putin sympathizers are in our military?

[hamsterjill]

22. Cube rat today

Can you give me a link to something that indicates the sanctions may be working, please?

[Hekate]

25. Apologies. It's been all over DU. The ruble dropped like a stone. Their stock exchange did too....

Biden, in his speech today, said allied nations controlling 50% of the world economy had agreed to sanctions. Would be worth looking up a transcript later, or listening to the speech likewise, which will no doubt end up posted at DU by the time you get home from work. Skip the reporters’ questions — Doocey wasn’t the only one who sounded moronic.

What else. Scanning thru DU earlier, various sourced articles said the oligarchs and their children including college students, would be asked to exit the US. Some bank(s) have been frozen. The stated intention is to cause significant pain to Putin’s inner circle, i.e. the oligarchs, and all their friends and families.

One yacht has been seized, in Norway I think, but Putin’s yacht headed out to sea from Barcelona just before he invaded Ukraine. Other oligarchs have taken their floating assets out to international waters as well.

Russians own significant real estate around the world, not just in Trump Tower. Not sure what’s happening there — yet.

ETA: this is delicious
“Biden has FROZEN 1 TRILLION DOLLARS OF RUSSIAN MONEY & Frozen Five RU Banks”
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216392705

Told ya

[Mr.Bill]

28. Meanwhile, our stock market

made a slight upward turn after Biden's press conference.

Imagine if Trump was still president. His press conference would have been about the "most beautiful phone call" he just had with Putin.

[shanti]

46. If Chump was still in office

he'd be sending OUR troops to help Russia.

[hamsterjill]

50. Thanks.

n/t

[gldstwmn]

53. They were put in place today.

Maybe you want to give them a few hours?

[hamsterjill]

61. Snark much?

What in my post to which you’re replying warrants this type of snark? I was asking for information because I’ve not been able to watch any news today.

Is that a crime? Sheesh!

[AntiFascist]

23. The UK had previously sent elite forces to directly assist Ukrainian military...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/over-100-british-elite-troops-26150282

so a type of cold war may already be under way. If there were a blatant attack on civilians seeking refuge, I don't see how the West could just stand by.

[Buckeyeblue]

26. I'm there...I think waiting will just make it harder

[hamsterjill]

51. I think it is inevitable.

Might as well get it on. Putin will not stop until something bigger stops him.

[Buckeyeblue]

65. Putin is almost daring NATO to stand up to him

[MarineCombatEngineer]

73. NATO is standing up to him. nt

[Buckeyeblue]

75. In some ways yes. But he is going to hurt a lot of people in Ukraine

[boston bean]

29. I am already expecting it. We cannot allow this to stand. It will be harder in a month or a year

from now.

[hamsterjill]

52. Agreed.

I feel it is inevitable.

[Runningdawg]

31. Any NBC attack on Ukraine.

IF he is bold enough to do that, he is bold enough to believe he CAN win and certainly won't stop at Ukraine.

[Stinky The Clown]

33. All good points

[wiggs]

35. I don't personally know how crazy Putin is, but if half the world's countries with backing of

UN would have stood up military defense in Ukraine to make a successful invasion hopeless I think Ukraine might still be independent.

Perhaps half the world isn't interested. Perhaps those in the know realize that we would have come too close to nuclear war.

Or...optimistically, perhaps there's a longer term plan to cripple putin and he stepped in it with this invasion? Does Russia think we'll just go back to being friendly? Have TPTB (the adult ones, not the former administration) recognized the havoc Putin has created in the US (coup) and elsewhere and have set in motion a coordinated longer term response that results in re-establishment of world order?

I have to think that responsible world leaders don't just react to the week's crisis but take a longer more prudent, proactive view which we may not see for a while? Lots of smart powerful people all over the world and especially in Europe can't have liked Russia's rise over the last decade and would have created wise, effective plans. Hopefully

[Dial H For Hero]

36. Attacking NATO forces. No to the rest.

[qazplm135]

37. I mean I would have sent in

NATO troops to Ukraine a month ago so don't ask me.

[Hortensis]

49. That some here seem to accept WWIII as practically

inevitable and some feel we should precipitate WWIII if it's the right thing to do (!) strikes me as mind boggling. Maybe WWIII's the name of a band I haven't heard of or a new ice cream flavor?

I'm with those who believe we won't be seeing WWIII, bottom line for much same reason each of us is extremely unlikely to die in car pileups this week, or this year. People take their lives in their hands every time they speed down the road and choose life every time.

That goes for Putin. He wants to restore the Russian empire, not destroy Russia and himself. There is no "win" for him in a world war, and he's neither crazy nor stupid.

Btw, regarding going to war to save lives in another country, various wars and atrocities are ongoing every year without fail and without our sending in troops or people here angrily insisting we should.

[boston bean]

55. History is repeating itself. Ignore at one's own peril.

[Hortensis]

62. Actually, no, there are big differences. As for the peril of "ignoring"

(which I think we're obviously not doing, but whatever), if it's true that we should do WWIII this month because it's just going to be harder next month, my vote is to "ignore" and hold onto life as we know it for just as long as possible. We can plunge into misery, loss of what was precious to us, and survival become much harder and less likely next month. Who knows? Maybe we can then manage to clutch onto another precious month before WWIII.

[boston bean]

64. There are many many parallels.

Because ignoring it strengthens Putin.

[Hortensis]

66. Yeah, we could smash Russia if we had to. I'm trying, and failing

I guess, to invite touching earth on this subject. I can just imagine what someone hiding from missiles in Ukraine might thnk of frivolous discussion about let's get WWIII out of the way while it'll be easier.

Some people apparently imagine WWIII's something they'd watch on TV.

Anyway, to me a silly thread to begin with. Should have passed on by and let those who disagreed indulge. Have a nice evening, Boston.

[boston bean]

68. No it is not watching a ww3 TV movie. It is knowing the absolute horrid

violence of ww2 and how it all started and not making the same mistakes.

No need to be insulting to me.

I’m on edge I assume you are too.

[Hortensis]

69. Not on edge because care is being taken to keep this contained.

Similarly, we haven't started a giant war in Asia with China, Burma, etc, to stop genocide of the Rohingya.

I'm no historian, but I've read some about WWI and II and I think that helps. My exasperation is with a number of people, Boston.

I do not see expressing facile acceptance of mass deaths from a giant war -- waged because we're so caring and responsible! -- as evidence of being caring and humane -- entirely to the contrary.

But again, imo a silly premise to begin with that hasn't advanced.

[boston bean]

72. If it is a potential reality people must face it.

It really has ww3 potential. I am not going to stick my head in the sand over it.

I hope not. But sanctions are not going to stop Ukrainian suffering either.

Russia is gonna skate on this if we let them. Then he is more emboldened. He sort of has us over a barrel right now. Not a good place for us or the world to be.

[ShazzieB]

71. I agree with every word you've said in this thread.

IMNSHO, people really need to stop with the WWIII catastrophizing. It serves no useful purpose and just puts people even more on edge.

I think it's way premature to insist that WWIII has already started. Why some people want to insist it has is beyond me. It hasn't, and it's NOT a foregone conclusion.

[Hortensis]

78. Way beyond me too. Maybe insisting world war is inevitable

and/or necessary is a way of dealing with anxiety.

Oh, well. My heart goes out to the people in Ukraine in their first night at war. A bunch of those evacuating the cities must be in their cars tonight, not exactly ideal evacuation weather, and staying warm burns gas.

Otoh, seemingly separatists in the south who were supposed to be moved to Russia (Russia claimed up to 700,000 would be evacuated) don't want to leave, and most are presumably in their homes tonight.

[peggysue2]

56. I think anything involving a nuclear event would bring us to the edge of the abyss

Be it exploding Chernobyl or an actual nuclear strike.

Which is why having wise, clear-headed and compassionate leadership is so essential during times like this. We can thank our lucky stars that Joe Biden and his team are at the helm and that we have the support of the Western Alliance to sort things out.

Putin may be on his last legs or not. But pushing this incursion into Ukraine beyond the country's borders would be a sign of genuine madness. I don't think everyone inside Russia is suicidal, so I simply don't buy into the inevitability of WWIII.

Could it happen? Yes. Devastating wars (in this case, a war of annihilation) have started on less pretext. But the very fact that global annihilation would be the ultimate outcome, makes it less likely.

People like to breathe in and out, laugh, love, live. I'll put my money on our survival instincts and the majority of human beings who want peace and are of good will.

Doesn't mean I won't be praying. Which is saying a lot for this lapsed Catholic!

[AntiFascist]

58. To me, WWIII would mean...

the formation of an axis of powers similar to the WW2 axis between Italy, Germany and Japan. It could possibly include China and North Korea. Other authoritarian regimes might also take advantage. A war with NATO would hopefully not become this broad.

[Stinky The Clown]

74. I have not seen anyone "accepting" WW3. Can you point out some threads where it is true?

Thanks.

[DFW]

59. Tactical Nuke/Incursion into NATO territory

I don't think we'll see the nuke. Putin MIGHT just think he could get away with the Baltics. He MUST know we're waiting for him to do just that. They are tiny, full of ethnic Russians, and right on his doorstep. He could overrun all three, starting after breakfast, and complete the job before dinner. He wouldn't like the consequences, though. That would be like Saddam overrunning Kuwait, except we wouldn't stop with just a "get lost" counter attack" stopping at the Russina border unless Putin were ousted by his own people--something I expect would happen within hours of our counterattack. We would make immediate peace with the next leader of Russia, and I fully expect that to end up almost as problematic as Putin himself was. But I think we'd get a breather, and some time to talk some sense into the new guy(s).

[Takket]

70. i would support using American troops under these circumstances.......

An attack on a NATO ally

The use of any WMD against any target

Any credible evidence or ethnic cleansing/genocide of civilians

[ecstatic]

76. If putin does anything on that list, just take him out.

No war needed. For his own safety, he should want rules to apply to all leaders, but apparently he doesn't. Please proceed.

[EndlessWire]

77. Bridging of the Bug River n/t

[kiranon]

79. I'm 80 years old and I'm ready to go back into service

Transportation Corps here I come. I am half Finnish and half Ukrainian.

[Stinky The Clown]

81. Children of the Cold War

I feel the very same way. I'd go back in for this if they'd have me.

[Voltaire2]

89. We cannot save Ukraine.

There is no military solution to the Russian invasion short of a nuclear strike. If Putin attacks NATO members NATO is obliged to respond, but again we end up with the nuclear problem.

The ‘eastern front’ has had this dynamic since Russia acquired a deterrent nuclear capability 70 years ago. The first problem is the logistical advantage Russia has across most of the region. If we overcome that, if we start succeeding in conventional warfare we face nuclear escalation. Note that our own military doctrines for the region include (or included, not sure they still do) nuclear escalation if conventional engagement goes south for us.

This mess is very real and had no good answers.

[muriel_volestrangler]

90. Do you mean "accept, morally", or "accept, pragmatically?"

Morally, I'd accept military engagement right now. Defending Ukraine by attacking Russia's invading forces would be morally OK. Pragmatically, it's still a bad idea, because Putin would then attack other countries, and it might swing Russian public opinion firmly behind him. And I'm aware that I am effectively appeasing an evil psychopath, and that the NATO leaders are doing the same.

In your list, assassination of the Ukrainian president would be about the tipping point. Tactical nukes are definitely a reason to depose Putin by any means possible, while imprisonment of Ukrainians is already inevitable.

[roamer65]

92. Incursion into NATO or use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine.

[Meowmee]

94. I hope someone takes care of p stat

So none of this comes to pass. He has been a dictator and crazy for years, and this has most likely been his plan, to take back what he sees as part of Russia, for a long time now with help from dump. He thinks things are destabilized enough to go ahead with it. He has had no real or effective checks for what he has done for years, including murdering people in other countries. These monsters go as far as they are allowed to. If it happens, hopefully the replacement will not be as crazy as he is.