Running North Korea freakout thread

All our hopes depend on Putin being a rational actor. I'd like to believe he would not chose to openly confront a NATO nation. The inevitable outcome is nuclear exchange.

 

Putin has no need to outright occupy the Baltic states. Russia exerts influence there through economic power and political meddling.

 

Well, the reason to do it would be to shatter NATO.

If he thinks there will be no response, he'll do it.

The taking of Crimea was a test, as are his actions in Eastern Ukraine.

 

Those are not NATO countries. It is far easier to weaken NATO through the internal issues of its countries (all three Baltic states have to some extent ethnic Russian minorities and their status is both contentious and something in which Russia can claim a legitimate interest) and especially internal disputes within both NATO (think Turkey) and the EU. It takes longer, but it offers Russia significant rewards without one-thousandth as much risk.

 

What makes you think there would be no response if Russia invaded a NATO country?

 

I made no such suggestion.

 

Fair enough.

Seems like we agree, though: Putin's not invading the Baltics, because he knows NATO isn't going to sit quietly and let it happen.

 

This is exactly right. They've already done this at least once that I know of, in Crimea. Crimea was one of the SSR's in the USSR back in the day, then it was made a part of Ukraine. Crimea and Ukraine became autonomous countries after the fall of the USSR, but Crimea contains Sevastapol, a huge Russian naval base, and they wanted it back. Years ago they began to encourage retiring Russian military to settle in Crimea, particularly those stationed there. These, added to the existing Russian minority, became a significant voting block in the referendum to rejoin Russia.

 

Russia was never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to let a pro-Western government control Sevastapol. It's wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too important to the Russian navy.

 

1. Crimea was NOT a former Soviet republic. It was an oblast (like an American county) within the Russian Soviet Socialist Republic (today's Russia). In 1954, Khruschev --- a Ukrainian --- made a gesture of ceding Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic to help consolidate his power after a civil war (it was just one year after Stalin's death, and there was still some jockeying for power in the Kremlin). All the SSRs were under the umbrella of Moscow anyway, so it didn't mean anything.
2. Crimea did NOT become an independent country after the fall of the USSR. It simply became an oblast within Ukraine.
3. Putin made NO MOVE on Crimea for the first 14 years of his time as president/prime minister. Even after another NATO-led color revolution (this one Orange) helped pro-Western Viktor Yushchenko become president in 2005, Putin did nothing. Only after the 2014 coup installed a violent, fascist government in Kiev did Putin feel a need to act.

Wrong. A pro-Western government controlled it from 2005-2010. It just wasn't a violent, fascist government like the one we installed in 2014.

This is Ukraine today. This is what Putin protected Crimea from.
(the man honored is Stepan Bandera, a former Nazi collaborator. His birthday is celebrated with marches in the country today.) Who Was Stepan Bandera?

 

I should have been more specific.

Russia is never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to willingly concede access to Sevastopol.

 

Only an elite would prepare for such a meeting.

President Trump Isn't Prepping Much for the North Korea Summit