Sending NATO troops to do their work seems strange, especially considering that we are talking about a relatively small piece of land in Eastern Ukraine. And no, Putin will not go for Lisboa if he still does not manage to occupy the whole of Donetsk.
Do you blame NATO for not recapturing North Korea?
Night vision would be huge. If you've ever seen videos of soldiers with night vision engaging those without, it's slaughter. And that's exactly what we need, kill ratios of tens to one to make Russia really pay for their aggression.
If they wanna send flesh against steel, make them bleed out. And when they start conscripting in big cities, maybe those "poor" "innocent" Russians will finally do something about their government.
no guns. and that's why your benevolent overlords want to take your guns away too.
I see these snarky reddity comments all the time, and you people seriously fail to grasp the difference between authoritarian shitholes like Russia and China and your glorious liberal democracies, where your cities burn while cops stand around doing nothing because the local government is terrified of bad optics. in Russia, civil unrest gets put down with extreme prejudice.
a regime like that can only fail when even its eunuch servants and attack dogs aren't getting paid and fed. otherwise, your imaginary revolutionaries with sticks, stones and molotovs will get mowed down en masse, the survivors will get 15 years in gulag, and all without a peep from the local media.
There is a spectrum between full scale revolution / civil war and targeted assassinations. The number of guns is also a spectrum and Russia is on par with many European countries (according to Wikipedia).
Belarus has fewer guns and they were very close to overthrowing the dictator. Unfortunately, as you said, in the west, it's enough to make yourself look like a victim and the optics will often force the oppressors to cease action. Belarusians chose to imitate the west without understanding why it works. We saw reports of police officers putting down their weapons instead of turning them on the oppressors.
Shinzo Abe was killed using a completely home made shotgun. You don't wanna go to war with one of those but it's entirely sufficient for killing a single target. You will never get close enough to a high profile one but as you said, there are many servile people in the chain of command. Russia no doubt has many parents who lost their only sons and shouldn't have much to live for, yet we don't see targeted assassinations.
I've heard reports that the rebels in Myanmar started with homemade weapons and muskets and they're getting progressively better armed as they steal weapons from oppressors they kill. But they're also predominantly young and willing to act. What I see from Russia is lethargy.
I also don't know how well the serviles in Russia are getting paid, we see reports of soldiers making appeals to Putin after not getting paid (showing that they still believe in their glorious leader).
It's all very hard to judge but the best way to get neutral "apolitical" people to act is to put them between a rock and a hard place and if they still refuse to stand for good against evil, they seeing them mowed down in infrared is a good alternative for me. Better than seeing innocent people killed.
> that's why your benevolent overlords want to take your guns away too
And this is a very worrying trend. What is more sinister is the tabooization of violence. Ultimately all real power comes from violence (usually just the credible threat of it) but the chain of logic seems to be too long for common people to understand. And when one side gives up (or is gradually slowly but systematically deprived of) their access to violence, it will lead to oppression.
False dichotomies like this are very questionable.