Originally Posted by
Big Pistons Forever
The beauty of article 5 is that it has never been used so that the reality of a united agreement on that proportionate response hasn’t been tested. I think there is real doubt about wether NATO would survive the test. Fortunately there is still enough strategic ambiguity that I think Putin won’t risk poking the bear. That instantly changed if NATO blinks
This unfortunately is an example of what should be vs what is. Of course Ukraine should be part of NATO. This is the Wests chance to conclusively demonstrate that Russia, or any country for that matter, can successfully invade another sovereign nation, Weakness here is inviting future conflict.
However the just enough just in time to keep Russia from winning but prevent Ukraine from pushing Russia back speaks volumes about the intestinal fortitude of the Western response.
The US and Allies have been constantly invading Sovereign nations for 40 years and think it’s OK so what’s the difference with Russia and Ukraine?
The only solution is political, give the Russians Crimea and the Donbas and if need be get a demilitarised zone like North and South Korea, removing Putin like this will stir a pile of **** that has far reaching consequences.