Russia - threadbanned users in OP

How many is that?

So why does it need to worry about what Ukraine as a free country does. Nobody is going to invade nuclear armed Russia. It doesnt need Ukraines people or resources. It already borders NATO countries.

It is not a small country that could be overrun in days.

It has already been shown it cannot be trusted in its hegemony in Soviet times and its actions in Ukraine.

If it has legitimate security concerns about what missiles / offensive weapons systems NATO would put in Ukraine that could negotiated looking at the wider picture of Kalingrad etc

Taking Mariupol will be key to free up troops. When that happens they will move North fast.

The poles were looking at more F16s to replace their migs altogether , that was the plan for the last few years , be interested to see what the Americans give them now

So to the best of your knowledge a nuclear missile once its launched cannot be intercepted, destroyed, or deflected?

Look i studied IR - and yes that is a classical Realist position. (hint of Defensive Neo Realism actually, which is interesting considering John is an Offensive NeoRealist - big Stephen Walt and Kenneth Waltz aficionado here)

The main problem with your thesis is it assumes Rationality on the part of Russian Leadership - i dont think im out of line to question that, at this stage.

Look i dont know. Im in a long chat over in Politics forum on this topic - and certainly there is a lot of back and forth - and disagreement - Its all in good faith. I worry about the rationality of Putin though. I agree RE red lines but

• Ukraine was NOT 'about to join NATO' - fears could have been addressed at the summit as opposed to this madness
• The Russians (whether Rational or not) are not behaving 'in good faith' - they have effectively created a fake civil war, and used it as justification for their actions.
• The diplomatic statements from Kremlin actors is staggeringly (BEWILDERINGLY) Ridiculous -

Maybe we are entering a New Cold War - a new 'bi-polar power structure' might certainly be on the cards - but is less obvious given the rise of China

Your 'Irish-Sino' alliance analogy is, well made - i wont dispute it

I do think Soft Power is having a massive impact here (i went into it in my previous post to you, so wont bog down on it again here) - and will ultimately play a part in resolving this conflict - Pretty soon it will be a near impossibility to 'go back to a month ago' in terms of Russo-Western relations. They will have a choice soon. Insulate, and repress - or Slow normalization. You may say the former is obvious at this stage (looks that way i will grant you) but it is by no means as easy as it was in the 80s.

ALL IMHO - happy to chat - LLAP

Depends how many are launched. You have dummy missiles also to overload defences.

The problem is, and I see this in the way Mearsheimer describes the situation as well, is that there's a lot of talk about what the West is doing to breach Russia's red lines, but very little about what Russia is doing to the same effect, and that's very significant because if Russia does not address its problems as a country, it's always going to have a difficult time maintaining a stable sphere of influence and this geographical buffer zone it appears to so desperately crave. In other words, we talk about what the West is doing to pull countries like Ukraine away, but not what Russia is doing to push them away and exacerbate the situation.

Russia's government has had a long, long history, now, with corruption and political repression, and it is again showing its colours in that regard in this particular episode of history through which we are living. It can't be much wonder that the people of Ukraine, particularly the younger people, look east and what that offers. Then they look west, and see what's offered there, and think that the relative freedom and economic opportunity offered by the west is preferable at this point in time. It's not 'social engineering', as Mearsheimer puts it in his essay, it's simple pragmatism. They want the best life possible, as anyone does. Countries like Poland, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania left the Eastern bloc, turned west and never really looked back, because what the east was offering, and had previously given them was, as they say in Yorkshire, 'fooking shite'.

Smaller nations, as you say, may only exist at the pleasure of the greater powers in the world, but until Russia gets its house in order, it's 'children' will always aspire to be prodigal, where a more attractive alternative exists.

Yes .

Looks like Poland has asked for aircraft of similar capabilities from the US in return for sending their migs to Germany,

There wouldn't be a big supply of modern migs in Europe the 29 is the most modern and capable other are still using mig 21s around since Vietnam

It does not border Germany. Before the sanctions it economy is only 3.5x Ireland's. The economy will be a lot smaller after this war. It is a poor country per capita. Its death rate is 50% higher than its birth rate. It is now a has been world power and being a world arsehole country that seems to spend any of its money on trying to get in wars and look like a world power rather than creating a prosperous economy for its people.

I can categorically confirm they can cook 😉

Rzezow airport in Poland is only across the border too ,and it's been the distribution hub for deliveries of Nato weapons for the last 2 weeks ,

This is where we could be looking at ww3 sooner rather than later ,we are essentially already there , just need someone to declare it

But this is an irrational, anachronistic view of the world. If Russia was attacked by The West/NATO using 'conventional' forces the thrust of that attack would be aerial bombardment; the forces would only come rolling across the steppes once Russia was already effectively defeated. Should Russian paranoia be entitled to dictate what alliances the sovereign independent states of Eastern Europe join?