Hacker News Reader

Comment by beardyw | Hacker News Reader

I am not convinced that Putin would risk using nuclear weapons and the language is short of that. Using them once becomes pretty much a one way street for much of the world. Also remember that even without nuclear UK is part of NATO and other members are obliged to respond to an attack on another member state.

View on HN

I agree that it is less likely.

OTOH, if history is any guide, contracts may not be worth their paper if survival is at stake. It is an open question if the US or the French will risk losing half of their population and most of their cities over UK.

The invasion of Ukraine was in fear of them joining NATO. If any country reneged on the agreement it would suddenly itself become more vulnerable. The USA under Trump may decide to become further isolationist and leave but that is more internal politics than good sense.

That's what the aggressor says, and would like you to believe.

But it's not the real reason, of course.

What is the real reason and how would you know it is the real reason?

To "Make Russia Great Again" by restoring the conquests of Catherine the Great, basically.

As evidenced by Putin's countless bombastic speeches on the topic (and the simple vacuousness of the claimed NATO threat).

You may also find these pages useful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Karaganov#Karaganov_Doc...

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-Russian_nation

When Putin speaks of "The Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians" -- this is what he's alluding to.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com