Europe has already been blackmailed by Russia - when they invaded Ukraine last time, in 2014. That's how we know Russia can only be dealt with by force: because we've tried to do it the other way and it failed terribly.

How do you envision "dealing with Russia through force" going down just curiously?

I would imagine there is a similar point of view in many Russians regarding the West (and they can make arguments about abuses and how intrinsically evil the other party is and patriotic jingles and all that too).

So how, on that road, does this end?

I think we know the answer and it really and truly is awful and the end of the world we have previously known.

> How do you envision "dealing with Russia through force" going down just curiously?

FYI, they're "dealing with Russia through force" right now. It's just through proxies, and it's going pretty well.

I'd say Ukraine is dealing with Russia through force quite directly, without any proxies. (The context here is that Russians like to pretend they are fighting against NATO; this is of course not true, they are fighting against Ukraine, which got some help from NATO, but it's relatively small compared to NATOs capabilities.)

Although there might soon be some "proxies" soon, like Azerbaijan (unfortunately) and (hopefully soon) Georgia.

I envision it exactly the same way it's already been going for the past six months: Russia has lost about half of their armed forces.

The road ends the same way it ended last time, 30 years ago - in adjustment of Russian borders.

Unless you claim that a state that can't even manufacture tanks or ordinary cars (or phones; Russia is wholly dependent on technology imports from Europe) is still capable of remanufacturing nuclear warheads, and is willing to sacrifice itself as a state to use them to... not even prove the point, because it would still be a defeat.

Here's what I see happening.

Some back and forth, increasing desperate Neocons with no reverse gear pushing the thing. Western society is over indebted and teetering. Eventually the world explodes in fire, billions die, and some version of MAGA presides over a much reduced United States when it ends. (I'd rather believe your prediction but do not).

There might be a way to avoid the scenario (unlikely at this juncture but possible). It isn't with wishful (Russia has lost half it's armed forces) and hostile thinking though.

Just my opinion.

To the vast majority of the world this is a good thing, if anything - they get oil cheaper, because Russia can no longer sell it to the west. To US this means more money being pumped into the industry, which is good for their economy. EU... EU has already been through something much more hardcore - COVID - and temporarily shutting down some gas-dependent factories will reduce revenues, but it's not the end of the world. None of those are in any way in danger - Russia lost to Ukraine; one can only imagine how many hours it would take them to lose to, say, NATO. Or USA. Or EU alone. The world won't explode, simply because Russia has no capability to make it explode.

To Ukraine, this is about pretty much everything - Russians are quite open with their intention to erase Ukraine as a nation, and hundred thousand civilians killed in Mariupol alone proves they are serious.

And then there's Russia, USSR's retarded offspring. They will likely get a lifeline, but it's unlikely they will be allowed to keep the army.

Well, although I wish it were not so, it's an interesting time to be alive.

We will see.

>>> There is a simple first step towards redemption and that is get out of Ukraine right now. Better yesterday.

>> Simple for you, because you're not the one losing face For example, here's another "simple first step" for Europe "towards redemption" (in the eyes of the Russians): withdraw all military and financial support for Ukraine, and refuse to allow transit for weapons sent to it. How does that one make you feel? Do you think Europe will take it? It's probably only a little less likely than Russia taking your option.

> It works both ways you know. Europe cannot afford to lose face either. Imagine EU can be blackmailed by Russia! Wouldn't stand a chance against the US or China.

Exactly my point.

> The EU clearly believes they can win this fight so why should it withdraw support to Ukraine?

I never said they should. I said that a proposal that Russia unilaterally withdraw is not actually an "easy" one because it would feel to the Russian leadership like the EU withdrawing would feel to your typical Westerner.

The EU doesn’t stand a chance against the US: look how they forced us to wage a proxy war against Russia. And now we’re going to buy liquefied gas from them.

> The EU doesn’t stand a chance against the US: look how they forced us to wage a proxy war against Russia.

America forced the EU into a proxy war with Russia... by having Russia invade Ukraine? Sounds like somebody has been huffing Russian propaganda.

It's a a reasonable assessment if you accept following three (I think easy to accept) items.

- That the US has a long term goal of preventing a "peer competitor" from arising.

- That the US has a financial and strategic interest in causing the collapse of the Russian Federation.

- The US leadership is capable of intelligent long term thinking (so we have to ignore Trump/Biden).

https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1346.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard

https://www.dw.com/en/chinas-rise-and-conflict-with-us/a-550...

https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/nato-versus-russia-in-u...

A quick quote from the last link sounds like classic US policy to me:

"A much more truly ambitious apparent long-term US ambition seems to have been to instigate the breakup of Russia into smaller manageable countries, paralleling the emergence of nations in eastern Europe after 1989. It could then deal with a reconstructed historical Russia of smaller emerging statelets run by competitive elites at odds with each other. These new polities, anxious for revenues, will then, presumably, be eager to sign lucrative commercial deals with US corporations since the entire region is extraordinarily wealthy in raw material resources."

And if we look at the result of the current crisis (I'll quote myself from a post above):

"- Potential collapse of the Russian Federation and the economic benefits this would bring (for the West)

- Solidifying EU support of NATO

- Increased energy sales to Europe at higher prices

- Increased military sales to NATO countries due to new threat

- Increased budget for "the military industrial complex"

- Further the long term goal of preventing a peer competitor from appearing by both weakening Russia and making the EU more dependant on the US both economically and militarily.

- Mutually beneficial German/Russian cooperation is pretty much dead now so no threat of such an alliance appearing in the future."

I think its pretty well played on the part of the US; nothing to be ashamed about. I'm interested to see what happens next.

Except that those aren't really US goals anymore, those are wins for the entire western world.

Still, what matters is who invaded. Russia did. And of course what _really_ matters is who ends up being the loser, and again, it's quite obvious it's going to be Russia.

I dunno maybe? I don’t think the outcome is obvious.

It’s easy to imagine Ukraine coming out just as big a loser as Russia even if they “win”. The EU is in for a tough time too.

I do wonder where we’ll be in 12 months time.

Well, Azerbaijan seems pretty convinced, they wouldn’t risk fighting them otherwise. Georgia sounds interested too. And those are small countries, they are making a colossal bet here.

BREAKING: It appears Kazakhstan might be finally leaving the union they had with Russia; China just acknowledged they will guarantee Kazakhstan's security, which essentially means a huge middle finger towards the "second army of the world".

Unfortunately it also means Armenia is screwed. That's what you get for putting trust in Russia.