Yes, sure. But what you're betting on here is that when Sweden says "on three JUMP HIM!", the rest will follow. And when you have multiple countries now refusing to take Russia out of SWIFT, which is a relatively benign measure, compared to an all-out war, how confident are you that they will come in your defense in case of an actual war against a nuclear power?
Not anymore. It takes a little bit to organize independently run republics, but once things get rolling…
Also, there was this 1994 accord called the Budapest Memorandum…
Mr P bit off more than he can chew, this time.
There will be more NATO…
Just when we thought it was all getting rather irrelevant and dated…
Nothing like a “master strategist “ to galvanize the entire world against him suddenly when he had a substantial reserve of social capital in the leadup to this…
> > Game theory says “on three JUMP HIM!” > Yes, sure. But what you're betting on here is that when Sweden says "on three JUMP HIM!", the rest will follow
Which is precisely what NATO provides
Multiple entities need to act with force in non economic ways that render collective bullying impossible.
Game theory says “gang up now instead of letting your strongest get picked off first and your collective force diminished “
The old “first they came for the xyz but I wasn’t an xyz so I didn’t say anything “ story.
Or surely Ukraine will not be the last victim.
Putin has apparently and obviously thrown all caution and concern for domestic approval etc to the wind. What is his rush? He’s moving quickly. Best to act now.
Nuclear war is a multifaceted weapon, hence the ‘M’ in MAD
it’s not automatic or known what the trigger threshold is for this, and engagement has indeed occurred between nuclear powers is recent times…