The threat on Russian People

@LordSupremeChess said in #29:
> What the holy ----
> Who said that leaders should start wars, for starters?
I meant that leaders can. Sorry I've mistaken

Any sovereign country can start a war. Democracy or dictatorship, doesn't matter. Dependency is what truly makes wars less likely. You would hurt yourself if you attacked a reliable trading partner or an ally.

@Aluminium-27 said in #32:
> You would hurt yourself if you attacked a reliable tradin

And the western countries decided to cut every trade with Russia, instead of putting men in the border of Ukraine and say: Don't pass.

@Cyncko-3000 said in #27:
> No I don't know anyone like that. Yes Putin has done all of that. But still he is NOT a dictator
Lol

What's a dictator by your definition then?

1) He is in power indefinitely, rewrote the constitution for himself to rule longer (original Russian law was 2 terms), and elections are meaningless shams
2) He has 0 checks & balances on his power

Simple; its a dictatorship whether you like it or not.

Also their NATO bid was ruined by their own politics - not NATOs - they weren't going to seriously consider Russia with all of the disputes and wars it started with former USSR countries - and especially not after Georgia... not to mention how Chechyna went down.

No one ever said "No because we exist to fight you" or something dumb like that lol

@Cyncko-3000 said in #27:
> No I don't know anyone like that. Yes Putin has done all of that. But still he is NOT a dictator as he does care about his homeland.

By this definition neither was Hitler.

Putin is no dictator. He is a: suggesting in a friendly way while opening a window.

The notion that we can "nuke them first" and escape unharmed is remarkably wishful thinking.

First, Western democracies have no such blood lust.

Second, any attack would be detected, and there would be a response. Russia would indeed be destroyed. But not before launching.

Nuclear war probably does not absolutely end the species. But it might. And, in any case, most would die and those remaining would suffer. History would reset. We would likely never again rise and reach for the stars.

Nuclear war is madness.

Russia is gambling with the future of mankind. And not even a century has passed since the last time ego and a desire for conquest lit the world on fire.

Communism in the Soviet Union was not a marvel. Unless one finds breadlines and widespread unhappiness to be marvelous. Have you not heard the old Soviet Joke? "We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us." Of course, one had to survive a purge or two to joke.

Poor Russia. They never got it quite right. They could! They have vast natural resources! And many clever people!

Oh, wait. The world is trying to destroy the use of petroleum.

Yeah, Russia needs friends. Is it wise for them to make enemies? Much of Europe trusted them and increased ties with them. Before Ukraine happened.

Military aid to Ukraine was not a very friendly action either. It didn't even help anyone, just took more lives. I think, there was not much of trust after all.

@Aluminium-27 said in #39:
> Military aid to Ukraine was not a very friendly action either. It didn't even help anyone, just took more lives. I think, there was not much of trust after all.
I deplore the logic that we should let larger countries smash smaller ones whenever they feel like it - and deprive them of the ability to defend themselves "because more people will die" - You know what'll make more people die, is if there's no resistance and no punishment so powerful countries just decide to take out their neighbors with impunity - inevitably leading to a larger war.

The world tried the "let them be conquered, and the dictator will be satisfied!" tactic with Czechloslovakia before WW2 - need I remind how that played out?