Quote:
Originally Posted by Ducay
I don't get it - if Ukraine is so desperate for direct support, is there something holding back any western (Nato) nation from sending soldiers to Ukraine as 'peacekeepers'? I know there is the Minsk monitors there, but I'm talking a real amount of soldiers.
Certainly having "allied" armies present would deter and piss off Russia all the same (hence their desire to have Ukraine banned from NATO); but isn't that the perfect solution? Or why not just admit them to NATO, post up a few battlegroups and let Russia deal with it. Not like they'd attack a NATO country.
|
I think the issue is that no country wants to risk getting sucked into war. Even sending “peacekeepers” in has the ability to escalate if Russia somehow kills them.
Unfortunately, Ukraine is in a bit of a tough spot. While NATO is In Ukraine’s aspirations, secretly, I don’t believe the West has a large appetite for it. They know it will rile Russia up. Look at what is happening now, and NATO membership wasn’t even on the horizon.
At the same time, having Ukraine fall into Russia’s sphere again would be disastrous. We’re talking about a sovereign nation potentially being invaded here. If Russia is able to do this with almost zero material consequences, it’s making the entire alliance look weak.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk