@sonhouse saidThe headline sounds dangerous, but if you read the article, you'll see that they only mean non-combatant peace keepers sent only after a cease-fire deal.
https://www.reuters.com/world/turkey-ready-send-troops-ukraine-if-necessary-source-says-2025-03-06/
Sounds dangerous, anyone else hear about this?
The headline is click-baity.
@sh76 saidTurkey is a NATO member; deployment of NATO troops as peacekeepers to deter future Russian aggression would be a de facto admission of Ukraine into NATO. I doubt the Russians would accept that; it would be better to find troops from non-NATO sources for such a mission (maybe South America who's armed forces do little these days since they haven't overthrown their own governments lately).
The headline sounds dangerous, but if you read the article, you'll see that they only mean non-combatant peace keepers sent only after a cease-fire deal.
The headline is click-baity.
@no1marauder saidSounds perfect. Admit Ukraine to NATO, call Russia's bluff and watch Putin collapse. 😆
Turkey is a NATO member; deployment of NATO troops as peacekeepers to deter future Russian aggression would be a de facto admission of Ukraine into NATO. I doubt the Russians would accept that; it would be better to find troops from non-NATO sources for such a mission (maybe South America who's armed forces do little these days since they haven't overthrown their own governments lately).
@spruce112358 saidAdmitting Ukraine to NATO at this point commits the alliance to open war with Russia under the treaty's provisions. Besides the fact it would require unanimous approval from all member countries which isn't going to happen, is that what you really want?
Sounds perfect. Admit Ukraine to NATO, call Russia's bluff and watch Putin collapse. 😆
@no1marauder saidRussia needs an extremely bloody nose, and NATO is just the fist to do it.
Admitting Ukraine to NATO at this point commits the alliance to open war with Russia under the treaty's provisions. Besides the fact it would require unanimous approval from all member countries which isn't going to happen, is that what you really want?
Doesn't really matter if it is now or later. It is going to happen eventually, so might as well get on with it. 😆
@spruce112358 saidSure, if you want to take the risk of Russia using a fist full of nuclear weapons to avoid defeat.
Russia needs an extremely bloody nose, and NATO is just the fist to do it.
Doesn't really matter if it is now or later. It is going to happen eventually, so might as well get on with it. 😆
@no1marauder saidWe should declare that Ukraine is under our nuclear umbrella. Any nation attacking Ukraine with nuclear weapons will receive the full US nuclear response. 😆
Sure, if you want to take the risk of Russia using a fist full of nuclear weapons to avoid defeat.
Then, we join Ukraine with NATO, and kick the Russian's azzes back into Russia.
See, I'm a problem solver! 😆
@spruce112358 saidYeah, that might solve all the world's problems.
We should declare that Ukraine is under our nuclear umbrella. Any nation attacking Ukraine with nuclear weapons will receive the full US nuclear response. 😆
Then, we join Ukraine with NATO, and kick the Russian's azzes back into Russia.
See, I'm a problem solver! 😆
If we were willing to risk WWIII for Ukraine, we should have let them in NATO a long time ago. Since we didn't, your proposal is incredibly reckless; I'd like my grandkids to avoid living in a post-apocalypse movie.
@my-king-and-i removed their quoted postThere's no way I'd get my Social Security payments if there was a global nuclear war, so I'd like to avoid one after paying into it for about 50 years.
@no1marauder saidLMAO! 😆
There's no way I'd get my Social Security payments if there was a global nuclear war, so I'd like to avoid one after paying into it for about 50 years.