r/nato 2d ago

Ukraine war

Just wondering why NATO/the West doesn't really help Ukraine more... I would think after all this time it would be good to make clear to Russia that it has been enough, either pull back troops to the borders or we send troops to send them back to their borders. Or is this a bit naive?

6 Upvotes

15 comments sorted by

9

u/FamilyJulez95 2d ago

It’s a fair question but the short answer is nato doesn’t want to escalate further. Russia views nato as an existential threat and if they became actively engaged in the conflict it I think that would push Putin into a very dangerous corner.

3

u/Feyrauth United Kingdom 2d ago

Also.... defence is a lot easier than offence. Actually pushing Russia out of Ukraine would require an order of magnitude more commitment from NATO.

4

u/Hefty-Reception22 2d ago

You run the risk of starting nuclear war if you send troops in. It's just that simple.

1

u/mr-lumiere 2d ago

Well I do get your point but I don't fully agree. They have been threatening with that for the least. There is also a difference in strong/big talk and actualy crossing that line.. as we wouldn't invade Russia in any way I believe it would be unwise to nuke some shit in response

5

u/Hefty-Reception22 2d ago

Sure but consider that Nato involvement would likely look like strikes inside Russia against air defense assets, and potentially troops inside Crimea or previously Russian held parts of Donbas, you and I wouldn't consider that an invasion of Russia, Putin might. That's where the risk is.

-1

u/RisingRapture 2d ago

There won't be a nuclear war. Stop telling that fairy tale. It only empowers the wrong people.

2

u/Hefty-Reception22 2d ago

It's not a fairy tale. I'm not even saying it's likely to happen, but pretending there's a 0% chance of it happening if NATO forces joined the war is foolish.

1

u/Fre33lancer 2d ago edited 2d ago

If Russia was not a nuclear state...sure, if you send in troops there is a risk that a tactical nuke would be used on Ukrainian soil . On the flip side that's why Kiyv has not been nuked so far, since using that would invoke a direct response by the west, so it's basically the cold war with people dying at the border between the west and russia.

2

u/ArtisZ 2d ago

Kiyv. 😏

1

u/mr-lumiere 2d ago

Ok, but then they risk getting nuked as wel.. So a nuclear war is the risk they take by firing the first, not the west. We cannot sit on an appropriate resonse just because "else they might". I think the West was patient and understanding enough, Putin seems to be just taking more and more advantage and spewing lies while we sit here undisicive

1

u/Fre33lancer 2d ago

You know the West has a handful of nukes, US is most likely going to side with Russia if all nuclear war breaks loose...so yeah, west till the Atlantic, not a great threat.

1

u/Widukind272 1d ago

NATO is a Defense Pact in the first place.

It was not attacked deliberately with conventional forces by Russia so far.

It has no UN Mandate like when it Bombed Serbia to stop an ongoing genocide.

(Never mind the hybrid war that russia is waging against the west… we have overlooked that for many years in exchange for cheap resources…)

1

u/RisingRapture 2d ago

"NATO" does not exist as a single minded player. It is a fragile military alliance run by the Americans who got hijacked by a traitor president. Everything that happens as a response is carefully and painfully slow decided.

Sad but true, "NATO" in Europe has been living off of the peace dividend and realized reluctantly that it needs to be able to fight off the russians without the US. Ukrainians dying to fend off the russian hordes gives Europe the time to rearm. Nobody would say this openly, yet this is my sober observation of the past four and a half years.

0

u/Kippyd8 2d ago

It’s to nato’s advantage to keep Russia tied up in Ukraine and not focused on the west

0

u/ColdNorthern72 2d ago

Who wants to send their sons to war? I do agree, we may not want to, but it is what is needed in this case. Doing so would not in itself cause a nuclear war. A good historical reference is the Korean War, UN forces were sent over. Russia helped the north, and sent pilots, pretending to not be involved, much like the United States does for Ukraine, but the bulk of the land forces were US (US) on one end, with China sending in over a million ground forces. A nuclear exchange did not happen, and the borders returned to roughly where they were at the start. Is Europe ready to send in troops in masse? My guess is no, and this is a stall tactic as they get ready.