If belarus and other states are joining russia's fight in the Ukraine, why isn't the West joining?

[samsingh]

why are we the ones being timid and scared to stop a genocide, while putin can get help from anyone who doesn't have a shred of decency and offers him soldiers to fight in Ukraine?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

1. There's genocide happening?

I'm not going to bother rehashing the same discussions from the past week as to why our sending troops into Ukraine is a bad idea.

[SoonerPride]

2. If NATO troops were to join the fight then you do indeed have WW3

NATO won't intercede directly.

They will supply aid and weapons.

No troops.
No fighter plans patrolling Ukrainian airspace.

That won't happen.

[Bucky]

6. From what I read, Putin's being pretty damn cautious with his air forces already.

He might be anticipating a no-fly zone announcement from Nato, so he's holding back. Or maybe his air forces are not as prepared as we'd expected.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/what-happened-russias-air-force-us-officials-experts-stumped-2022-03-01/

Despite the repeated Hit--r comparisons, Putin's not a balls to the wall aggressor. He's aggressive, but he thinks through when he should hold back. Nato forces being more involved at any level, will force him to step up the attack. He's still only deployed less than half his available forces.

[Chainfire]

3. Perhaps because we think that we must try everything short of a shooting war that would probably

expand to encompass the world? If Putin was able to bait NATO into a shooting war, it is my humble opinion, that China would join in and "liberate" all of the people in the Pacific, beginning with Taiwan. They both watched our Army struggle in Afghanistan and have no respect for our ability to defend ourselves. It could be a replay of WWII, with the US having to defend to the West, and Europe to the East. This time the industrial weapon is on the other foot, China has it, we don't.

I (we) have squandered my (our) resistance
For a pocketful of mumbles such are promises
All lies and jest
Still a man hears what he wants to hear
And disregards the rest, mhmm

Lets try to make it too painful for them economically before we start WWIII. There will always be time for that later.

[CentralMass]

26. That is am interesting assessment of the issue. Great points.

[Bucky]

4. It's not that simple. Besides, Belarus's role is pretty limited.

Our intel has been pretty reliable (this isn't 2001) and currently there's no indication of Belarusian troops moving in Ukraine.

https://www.politico.eu/article/belarus-russia-war-ukraine/

Of course as Putin's puppet in the long run it will do what he says, but they've dragged their feet on full deployment, possibly taking a hint from the puppety Stan nations, who have fully declined Putin's requests to sent in troops. Of course Putin has more control over Belarus's mini-Put, Aleksandr Lukashenko.

Besides, the US & EU have done a bit of pushing back against Belarusian cooperation.

But one doesn't traipse lightly into a direct military confrontation with a nuclear superpower like Russia into their own front lawn. Biden's response has been thorough, proportionate, non-escalatory, and forceful. Already it's certain that Europe, especially Germany, is going to take a HUGE hit to their economy as blowback from the harsh Russian sanctions. But sending in troops on top of that would be dangerously dumb.

=====

I would advise against throwing around the charge of genocide too lightly. What's going on in Ukraine is a tragedy and a war crime, a real war of aggression right out of the 1930s. There are certainly atrocities going on. But please don't dilute the word "genocide." This is bad, but this is not that.

[Javaman]

5. to glow or not to glow, that is the question.

WW3 begins if we enter the war.

we have to wait until the poot attacks a NATO, then we fall upon him like a ton of bricks, but until then; no attacks by us.

[Sogo]

10. Your reply title really did make me laugh out loud....

"to glow or not to glow, that is the question."

[sarisataka]

7. Why do we need to join?

Many posts indicate Ukraine is winning. From what I have read I believe the big convoy has stopped because every Russian in it has surrendered and so much equipment has been captured Ukraine has more than Russia.

Do we need to expand the war?

[Happy Hoosier]

14. Ukraine "won" the first phase.

Small unit ambushes can be very successful against units trying to advance quickly.

Russia is now switching to a war of attrition. They pound the cities from outside without regard for human life and grind the Ukrainians into a pulp.

Ukraine cannot prevail militarily in a war of attrition. The best they can do is inflict a painful insurgency in a country that has been utterly destroyed.

[CentralMass]

28. IMO Putin is using as much force and brutality as necessary to accomplish

what he wants. He is slowly ratcheting it up and stories of Russian troop incompetence and Ukraine winning shield him from greater outrage of the devastation occurring. It comes down to how far he will go before backing off.

[Deminpenn]

8. CNN reports Gen Milley going to meet with European/NATO

counterparts tonight. My guess is to discuss what other aid options are available and to coordinate that.

[chowder66]

9. Here's an explainer...

snip

Though the US has condemned Russia's actions at every chance, President Joe Biden has gone to great lengths to make clear that US forces will not enter Ukraine and engage Russia directly.
Why's that? As Biden told NBC News earlier this month, "That's a world war when Americans and Russia start shooting at one another." In other words, the US' entrance into the conflict has the potential to touch off a global war.
Retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, a national security and military analyst for CNN, told What Matters on Sunday, "The key to diplomacy is to limit the potential for war. While the current war of Russian illegal invasion into Ukraine is tragic, chaotic and devastating, it is still a regional conflict."
"If NATO or the US sent troops into Ukraine to help them fight the Russians, the dynamic would shift to a multinational conflict with potential global implications due to the nuclear power status of both US and Russia. Because of that, the US and NATO — and other nations around the world — are attempting to influence the success of Ukraine and the defeat of Russia by providing other types of support," Hertling said.


https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/27/politics/us-troops-ukraine-russia-what-matters/index.html

[Happy Hoosier]

12. It's a massive mistake.

Russia right now believes that they can resort to any level of human atrocity and not risk Western intervention. That's a massive mistake.

Ukraine cannot prevail in a war of attrition IMHO.

[kiranon]

15. Agree. If Belarus joins in - so should we.

Can be limited and the russians told it was limited such as control of the air space over Ukraine so supplies can get in. Other suggestions on the limitations - jump in.

[Happy Hoosier]

16. I think a no-fly zone is possible.

I might also suggest that we would target units suspected of committing atrocities, such as artillery units shelling civilian areas.

However, I think there are steps to take before we got there. Massive resupply of military equipment, including staging of Ukrainian forces outside of Ukraine, for example.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

19. No, no-fly zone means hitting enemy air defenses first to protect our jets. Air to air defense next

Many Russian radar and SAM sites in this region are on Russian soil, attack them and WW III would begin immediately.

There is no such thing as a limited no-fly zone, it's all or nothing.

[Happy Hoosier]

21. I'm okay with that.

As long as we aren't willing to step up, Ukraine is doomed to devastation.

Make no mistake.... tens of thousands will die.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

22. Russians could start a full blown attack on civilians in cities, millions would die

Entire cities reduced to rubble. Not sure escalation is the best move right now.

[Happy Hoosier]

24. As opposed to what?

How do you think this ends? I'm not SURE escalation is a great idea, but I AM sure that doing nothing ends badly for Ukraine.

Why do you think Putin is not publicly limiting his options? It's simple. He knows that his threats are informing our response. In other words, he knows his threats are WORKING.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

27. I think Russia going to slow motion grind this out for weeks, months, wear them down

If they want an intact Ukraine to take over in the future their limited air attacks over cities could show that.

Nobody knows the future, least of all me.

This was never going to end well once the tanks started rolling.

[Happy Hoosier]

39. I appreciate your point of view.

I genuinely do.

I'd argue that their willingness to pound Kharkiv into dust with artillery argues against your premise some.

Ukraine is in for a world of hurt no matter what now. I guess I'm just not willing to cede them to Russian domination. It feels cowardly to me.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

29. I'm curious,

have you ever experienced combat?

[Happy Hoosier]

38. No.

But I grew up with my mother's stories of being a child in Berlin as the Russians came in. It includes her vivid memories of watching her own mother being raped by Russian soldiers. My mom was six at the time.

My Dad was a combat a veteran as well. From the Korean war.

I do not relish war, I can assure you. But I am also not willing to sacrifice Ukraine for fear of what it means.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

44. Fair enough.

[mcar]

35. You ready to sign up to fight WWIII?

[Happy Hoosier]

40. I don;t think it has to come to that.

And I think your reaction is EXACTLY the kind of reaction Putin wants to elicit. He depends upon it.

[mcar]

42. I trust Pres. Biden

[Happy Hoosier]

43. I generally do too, but....

it is never a good idea to tell your opponent what you will not do, when they refuse the same. Why do that? All it does is decrease your leverage.

[Wingus Dingus]

18. I agree with Tom Nichols' take on it--

he said NOTHING would fire up the Russian people more than if they saw that NATO is engaged in combat against them. That's what they've been told will happen, all their lives--that NATO was gunning for Russia--and the morale-killing blunder that Putin made by invading Ukraine will be largely consumed by a wider war against NATO and US. It's a gift to Putin. That said, we should walk right up to the line in terms of any aid we can give--my opinion.

[Happy Hoosier]

25. So to be clear... you are willing to sacrifice Ukraine to Russia, if that's what it takes?

I'm not trying to be an asshole here. I just want you to realize that that is a likely outcome here.

[Wingus Dingus]

30. That's most likely what's going to happen.

Not saying it's going to be a real win for Russia, though. It's going to be fraught with difficulty in subduing it to become like Belarus--and Belarus had its own uprisings lately. Its cities and infrastructure are being reduced to rubble day by day. But Putin can't risk being seen as anything less than an invincible savvy genius by his own people, so he's going to keep going no matter how ugly it is. If and when Ukraine falls, they will have to wait out Putin and then reclaim their freedom. We must maintain ties and an outstretched hand no matter what happens.

[Happy Hoosier]

32. OKay, so the answer is yes.

I appreciate you being forthright there. IMHO that would be an EPIC mistake. I mean, massive.

I am not personally willing to do so. I think it would be a political disaster, domestically and globally.

[Gore1FL]

33. The Russian objective is much more difficult to reach than the Ukrainian objective.

Like Ukraine, Russia cannot prevail in a war of attrition, either. They have to for this to work for them. Ukraine doesn't have to win. It merely has to survive.

[Tickle]

13. Now I understand why Ukraine

was never a part of NATO. Ukraine is a democracy facing annihilation and it's devastating to watch.

[chia]

20. +1,000

[Happy Hoosier]

11. Simple: Right now we are more afraid of him than he is of us.

It's a HUGE mistake for the Biden admin to keep saying that we will not use troops under any circumstance. HUGE mistake.

[kiranon]

17. Agree. We need peacekeepers in Ukraine.

It should be with UN and/or NATO support but the US must go in and save Ukraine. Belarus is already talking about going into another country -Moldova. Nothing will stop these invasions but our peacekeepers.

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. There's no peace to keep in Ukraine; what you mean is "we need combat troops"

It would be the equivalent of the Korean War, but without the UN support (because Russia will also use its veto now) - and against a nuclear-armed country. Peacekeepers step in once there's a ceasefire or armistice.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. All of NATO agrees with Pres Biden

The rest of the world has more to lose from a general war than Putin does. He's a psychopath, so Russian deaths don't matter that much to him, let alone foreign ones.

[Politicub]

23. Has the US ever fought directly with Russia since it

became a nuclear power?

I know there have been proxy wars, but I can’t think of any direct engagements.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

31. Russia's mercenaries, The Wagner Group, did engage US forces in Syria

and had their asses handed to them, that's about the only direct engagement I can think of.

[Skittles]

36. when you say we

I am curious if you served in the military

[David__77]

41. It's not going to happen.

The Ukraine government did say it will take in people who wish to volunteer to fight there. So there is that option available to people.