All Things Russia & Ukraine

[MDlaxfan76]

Most problematic, at least to me, is the lack of sufficiently acute appreciation for the imperatives of democracy versus autocracy, but I think that's a reflection of years and years of hard right conservative propaganda from the Russians and their ilk, embraced by many in America, and the West more generally, who find "nationalism", especially 'white christian nationalism' to still be appealing....at least until we see where such takes us by an aggressor nation or dictator.

I try to assess real world threats, regardless of who poses them or why. That is what I was trained to do, ...& did vs the USSR most of my working life.
It is ironic that now those remnants are in play on both sides of this war.

I fear that the emotional cheer leading perspective of our main stream AND social media mask the true danger in our current confrontation with Russia.

Both sides in this war are "White Christian Nationalists". obtw -- the Azov brigade are still bravely defending Mariupol.

And your equating of the sides...

[MDlaxfan76]

Russia should keep Crimea because of....POLLS??

What a wonderful thought! Authoritarians the world over rejoice at the determinative import that polls now (evidently) have...

Because Crimea & the DNR/LNR are now governed by Russia & a majority of the residents want it that way.

It is not without precedent. Consider how the former Yugoslavia has been segmented, & continues to be.
NATO went to war with Serbia to establish independence for Kosovo.

Is it worth a war to return those areas to Ukrainian control if the residents want to be part of Russia again.

You guys are like the Eagle Scout wannabe who needed one more merit badge, so he dragged a little old lady across the street, only to find out she didn't want to cross.

I have not seen a reporting on your statement about large populations in these areas being supportive of becoming part of Russia. Can you share a link/links? Certainly did not appear to be the case in Kharkiv, Dnipro, Mykolaiv or Mariupol.

Those places are not in Crimea & the DNR/LNR -- the areas controlled by Russia since 2014 which were the subjects of my lengthy post above.

Thanks. Then why invade and attempt to destroy all of the other parts of the country?
Unless the real plan was to quickly capture Kyiv, depose the government and replace it with a Russian-backed outfit.

I don't know. Putin may have had grander ambitions, but might settle for less, as a face saving way out.

I was discussing the possibility of a cease fire leading to a negotiated settlement where Zelenskyy would have to agree to cede some territory to Russia. I'm pointing out that there is precedent & rationale for Crimea & DNR/LNR remaining under Russian control, as they have been since 2014.

The land bridge to Crimea, now held by Russian forces, from Mariupol to Kherson, encompassing the entire coast of the Sea of Azov, would then be subject to negotiation. That would still allow Ukraine to retain Odesa & Mykolaiv - the 2 main grain exporting ports & the Black Sea coast line W of Crimea. That might satisfy Putin & would not devastate Ukraine. The land bridge territories transferred are majority ethnic Russian.

That would be a significant gain for Putin, assuring unfetterd access from the Black Sea Fleet homeport of Sevastopol & control of the Sea of Azov, which is part of the connection between the Black Sea & the Caspian Sea. It would afford the Caspian Sea Fleet unthreatened connectivity with the Black Sea, restoring the naval access & freedom of movement to where it was when it was all the USSR & Soviet Navy.

But, hey, you've been consistent about wanting Ukraine to cede its sovereignty.

[MDlaxfan76]

He was shrewd enough that no one was able to deter him before he plunged Europe back into a war to restore Russia's historic borders.

That's not shrewdness. That's because he has nukes, OS.

It's because the EU can't survive, at this point, without Russian gas & oil.
We saw this coming. We warned them. Now we have to pull their chestnuts out of the fire.

Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and gas will come to an end within a decade. Europe is rapidly adopting electric vehicles and the Continent has learned its lesson about relying so heavily on Russian gas exports. Electric HVAC systems and electric appliances will replace gas-based equipment. Tough way to learn the lesson, but it is what it is.

DocBarrister

Within the decade ? BFD. Will there be any Ukrainians still alive by then.

defeatism.

[MDlaxfan76]

Obviously we'd prefer that Putin hadn't done what he did. Yup.

But are you seriously just fine with a world in which 'great powers' annex neighbors simply because they wish to do so?

You'd prefer to appease dictators? Autocracy is your preferred system across the world, perhaps?

Clearly this is extremely complicated stuff, fraught with peril, but unless democracies, including the most powerful nation in the world, stand up to autocrats, the world devolves. Bold is MLaxfan76

We're seeing the limits of sanctions & diplomacy in deterrence & containment.
They are ineffective without a credible military deterrence (which can be used) behind them.

It may be too late to save Ukraine.
We may have to accept that reality & use it as motivation to prevent Putin (& Xi) from grabbing more.

Our challenge is to protect our NATO allies, particularly the Baltics, & deter the taking of Taiwan, Georgia, & Moldova
& propping up any part of Ukraine which survives.

Was to really "too late"??

[MDlaxfan76]

BTW, if we're willing to provide various weaponry and training to Ukrainian insurgents, at what point do we go to drones?

If we were doing so right now, letting Ukrainians operate them, a heck of a lot of tanks could be destroyed.

Weapons carrying drones -- not a capability that can be provided quickly. Requires operator & maintainer training & experience.
They are still combat aircraft.

I guess drones helped?

[MDlaxfan76]

It's not a matter of Russia "owning" Ukraine. It's foolish to discount the historical reality that THE Ukraine was a significant component part of Russia until Russia was dismembered following the Cold War.

We were a significant part of the UK’s empire. And we were also on Native American land, my friend.

Let me know when you’re ready to hand over your home to either party, and I’ll buy what you’re selling here.

So you should be cheering for the Russian separatists in the Donbass fighting for their independence.

No… I should be cheering for everyone to avail themselves of the court system if they have a complaint. “It used to be like this” isn’t a solid legal argument.

Old Salt said Mexico should try to take back Texas…he found it funny.

Texas would have a better chance of survival that the nation of Ukraine will.

hmmm...

[old salt]

So on this premise alone, you agree with Obama's decisions to allow Putin to take Crimea and South Ossetia from Georgia?
Nice of you to change your mind.

and the Finns and Swedes are just being alarmist to want to join NATO?

Jingoist fools? really?

If you recall accurately, I did not criticize Obama when Putin took Crimea. He took South Ossetia when Bush was President.
That's when I first made the argument that THE Ukraine was a part of Mother Russia.
I paid attention to Putin's speech at Munich, agreed with his historical analysis & took it as fair waning of his intentions.
You may also recall that I agreed with Henry the K about the Finland-ization of the Ukraine. Had his advice been heeded,
Finland & Sweden would not feel the need to join NATO.
When Trump came under fire for being soft on Russia, I pointed out that Trump provided lethal aid to Ukraine that Obama did not.
That aid, & the training that came with it, has allowed UKraine to survive.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Salty learned appeasement of war crimes is a good idea...

What do you propose we do about it ? Are you advocating the US intervene militarily to bring Putin, his Generals & soldiers to justice ?
...or do you hope to kill or displace the entire population of Ukraine in your quest ?

There's nothing to do militarily, imho. It's all about how we handle these countries economically. If the EU pulls their act together, and gets other energy sources, and shuts of trade with Putin....that's it. That's the message. It doesn't HAVE to be today. It can be in a few years. But if the world of trade disappears for Putin/Russia? That's all the message that needs to be sent.

But the biggest thing, is the US needs to make Ukraine their #1 trading partner. They do that? The message will be crystal clear as Ukraine catapults to G8 status, and Russia's GDP will continue to be at or below where it was when Putin took power.

Just lay down and surrender the country to Putin.

He can't take the country militarily. And I don't see how he can hold what he has.

Do you see any other option other than: send in US Troops, and annihilate Russian forces, and deal what whatever crazy response Putin chooses?

We had our chance. If our intent was to militarily defend Ukraine from Putin? We should have parked our troops there a couple of decades ago. Problem solved. That was never our intent.

So we're left with: what now? And to me, money is power. Kill Putin and his country financially, and reward Ukraine.....and watch Ukraine sail past the standard of living in Russia. Can't see any other option. Can you?

You don't think he can hold what he has ? Despite the rah rah in our media, everytime you see a map, the red stain in the S & SE is spreading. Russia now holds all the land S of the Dnieper river, including the 2 bridges connecting to the N shore of the Dnieper. They now hold the land bridge connecting Russia & Donbass to Crimea. To expel them, the Ukrainians would have to fight their way across that wide Dnieper river basin, without air or naval support. Our media is not giving us specific casualty figures, beyond grudgingly admitting that casualties are high, on both sides, in the fighting in the E.

Waiting for your method to work, there won't be much worth left of Ukraine worth saving. Russia can turn all of SE & S Ukraine (the most productive parts) into rubble, like Syria, while driving out the population. He can threaten the entire country with missile & air strikes with impunity. Disrupting global markets in energy, ag & resources.

We might be able to arm Ukraine enough to reach a stalemate on the ground, but it will take a decade to get them to the point where they can contest the airspace or sea access. Even IF our reluctant EU allies were willing to give up all their Migs & S-300's (which they are not), that's still insufficient to deter Russian missile & air strikes, or to provide close air support. It would be a challenge for the US & NATO to enforce a no fly zone, even if we tried to fill the skies with F-35's (which would be based where ?)... & we can't get naval forces into the Black Sea, where they'd be penned up like sitting ducks anyway.

We are playing a cynical game, arming our Ukrainian proxies to degrade Russia's military strength, with no realistic hope of victory.
The West needs to force both Zelensky & Putin to the negotiating table to force a cease fire. Our NATO allies are still reluctantly following our lead, but those closest & most immediately threatened (the EU allies) are not as triumphal or jingoistic as the US & UK.

Your prior defeatism.

Last time I looked, that red stain was contracting faster than an Old Soldier’s gonads into his body cavity!

[old salt]

Salty learned appeasement of war crimes is a good idea...

What do you propose we do about it ? Are you advocating the US intervene militarily to bring Putin, his Generals & soldiers to justice ?
...or do you hope to kill or displace the entire population of Ukraine in your quest ?

There's nothing to do militarily, imho. It's all about how we handle these countries economically. If the EU pulls their act together, and gets other energy sources, and shuts of trade with Putin....that's it. That's the message. It doesn't HAVE to be today. It can be in a few years. But if the world of trade disappears for Putin/Russia? That's all the message that needs to be sent.

But the biggest thing, is the US needs to make Ukraine their #1 trading partner. They do that? The message will be crystal clear as Ukraine catapults to G8 status, and Russia's GDP will continue to be at or below where it was when Putin took power.

Just lay down and surrender the country to Putin.

He can't take the country militarily. And I don't see how he can hold what he has.

Do you see any other option other than: send in US Troops, and annihilate Russian forces, and deal what whatever crazy response Putin chooses?

We had our chance. If our intent was to militarily defend Ukraine from Putin? We should have parked our troops there a couple of decades ago. Problem solved. That was never our intent.

So we're left with: what now? And to me, money is power. Kill Putin and his country financially, and reward Ukraine.....and watch Ukraine sail past the standard of living in Russia. Can't see any other option. Can you?

You don't think he can hold what he has ? Despite the rah rah in our media, everytime you see a map, the red stain in the S & SE is spreading. Russia now holds all the land S of the Dnieper river, including the 2 bridges connecting to the N shore of the Dnieper. They now hold the land bridge connecting Russia & Donbass to Crimea. To expel them, the Ukrainians would have to fight their way across that wide Dnieper river basin, without air or naval support. Our media is not giving us specific casualty figures, beyond grudgingly admitting that casualties are high, on both sides, in the fighting in the E.

Waiting for your method to work, there won't be much worth left of Ukraine worth saving. Russia can turn all of SE & S Ukraine (the most productive parts) into rubble, like Syria, while driving out the population. He can threaten the entire country with missile & air strikes with impunity. Disrupting global markets in energy, ag & resources.

We might be able to arm Ukraine enough to reach a stalemate on the ground, but it will take a decade to get them to the point where they can contest the airspace or sea access. Even IF our reluctant EU allies were willing to give up all their Migs & S-300's (which they are not), that's still insufficient to deter Russian missile & air strikes, or to provide close air support. It would be a challenge for the US & NATO to enforce a no fly zone, even if we tried to fill the skies with F-35's (which would be based where ?)... & we can't get naval forces into the Black Sea, where they'd be penned up like sitting ducks anyway.

We are playing a cynical game, arming our Ukrainian proxies to degrade Russia's military strength, with no realistic hope of victory.
The West needs to force both Zelensky & Putin to the negotiating table to force a cease fire. Our NATO allies are still reluctantly following our lead, but those closest & most immediately threatened (the EU allies) are not as triumphal or jingoistic as the US & UK.

Your prior defeatism.

Defeatism my ass ! That's a W for Ukraine & a L for Russia.
All the "experts" were predicting Kyiv would fall within the first few days.
5 mos later, I still stand by my analysis.

[old salt]

Russia should keep Crimea because of....POLLS??

What a wonderful thought! Authoritarians the world over rejoice at the determinative import that polls now (evidently) have...

Because Crimea & the DNR/LNR are now governed by Russia & a majority of the residents want it that way.

It is not without precedent. Consider how the former Yugoslavia has been segmented, & continues to be.
NATO went to war with Serbia to establish independence for Kosovo.

Is it worth a war to return those areas to Ukrainian control if the residents want to be part of Russia again.

You guys are like the Eagle Scout wannabe who needed one more merit badge, so he dragged a little old lady across the street, only to find out she didn't want to cross.

I have not seen a reporting on your statement about large populations in these areas being supportive of becoming part of Russia. Can you share a link/links? Certainly did not appear to be the case in Kharkiv, Dnipro, Mykolaiv or Mariupol.

Those places are not in Crimea & the DNR/LNR -- the areas controlled by Russia since 2014 which were the subjects of my lengthy post above.

Thanks. Then why invade and attempt to destroy all of the other parts of the country?
Unless the real plan was to quickly capture Kyiv, depose the government and replace it with a Russian-backed outfit.

I don't know. Putin may have had grander ambitions, but might settle for less, as a face saving way out.

I was discussing the possibility of a cease fire leading to a negotiated settlement where Zelenskyy would have to agree to cede some territory to Russia. I'm pointing out that there is precedent & rationale for Crimea & DNR/LNR remaining under Russian control, as they have been since 2014.

The land bridge to Crimea, now held by Russian forces, from Mariupol to Kherson, encompassing the entire coast of the Sea of Azov, would then be subject to negotiation. That would still allow Ukraine to retain Odesa & Mykolaiv - the 2 main grain exporting ports & the Black Sea coast line W of Crimea. That might satisfy Putin & would not devastate Ukraine. The land bridge territories transferred are majority ethnic Russian.

That would be a significant gain for Putin, assuring unfetterd access from the Black Sea Fleet homeport of Sevastopol & control of the Sea of Azov, which is part of the connection between the Black Sea & the Caspian Sea. It would afford the Caspian Sea Fleet unthreatened connectivity with the Black Sea, restoring the naval access & freedom of movement to where it was when it was all the USSR & Soviet Navy.

But, hey, you've been consistent about wanting Ukraine to cede its sovereignty.

6 mos later, I still stand by my analysis.

[old salt]

He was shrewd enough that no one was able to deter him before he plunged Europe back into a war to restore Russia's historic borders.

That's not shrewdness. That's because he has nukes, OS.

It's because the EU can't survive, at this point, without Russian gas & oil.
We saw this coming. We warned them. Now we have to pull their chestnuts out of the fire.

Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and gas will come to an end within a decade. Europe is rapidly adopting electric vehicles and the Continent has learned its lesson about relying so heavily on Russian gas exports. Electric HVAC systems and electric appliances will replace gas-based equipment. Tough way to learn the lesson, but it is what it is.

DocBarrister

Within the decade ? BFD. Will there be any Ukrainians still alive by then.

defeatism.

6 mos later, I still stand by my analysis.

[old salt]

Obviously we'd prefer that Putin hadn't done what he did. Yup.

But are you seriously just fine with a world in which 'great powers' annex neighbors simply because they wish to do so?

You'd prefer to appease dictators? Autocracy is your preferred system across the world, perhaps?

Clearly this is extremely complicated stuff, fraught with peril, but unless democracies, including the most powerful nation in the world, stand up to autocrats, the world devolves. Bold is MLaxfan76

We're seeing the limits of sanctions & diplomacy in deterrence & containment.
They are ineffective without a credible military deterrence (which can be used) behind them.

It may be too late to save Ukraine.
We may have to accept that reality & use it as motivation to prevent Putin (& Xi) from grabbing more.

Our challenge is to protect our NATO allies, particularly the Baltics, & deter the taking of Taiwan, Georgia, & Moldova
& propping up any part of Ukraine which survives.

Was to really "too late"??

I said "may". Most of Ukraine can be saved, at great cost, as an open ended US protectorate.
I'm not confident that ALL of Ukraine's ersatz previous territory can be recovered, especially Crimea.

[old salt]

BTW, if we're willing to provide various weaponry and training to Ukrainian insurgents, at what point do we go to drones?

If we were doing so right now, letting Ukrainians operate them, a heck of a lot of tanks could be destroyed.

Weapons carrying drones -- not a capability that can be provided quickly. Requires operator & maintainer training & experience.
They are still combat aircraft.

I guess drones helped?

Somewhat. Small Turkish drones. Primarily for ISR. Limited strike payload.
We still haven't even sent our obsolete Army version of the Predator.
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/09/mq- ... e-problem/
Switchblades are ok for an insurgency but not enough for a combined arms counteroffensive.

[MDlaxfan76]

You're still missing the big picture, OS. If Putin want's this headache? Go right ahead.

How'd Afghanistan work out for both the US and the Soviets, OS?

Ukraine does NOTHING to move the ball forward for Putin.

Oleksiy Danilov, secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, said in a recent interview that despite the roughly 127,000 Russian forces encircling the nation, Moscow would need a million troops to occupy and hold a country as big as Ukraine.

Hodges said he was skeptical of the Russian military’s ability to sustain operations in a full-blown war against Ukraine, with the demands of fuel and ammunition, and a possible insurgent pushback by large numbers of Ukrainians.

Best of luck, Putin. You have my blessing if you're this stupid.

And Ukraine's already ruined economy? What the F does Putin think will happen if he starts throwing bombs around?

....so what are you arguing about ? Putin is going to win. It's just a matter of how much of Ukraine he seizes &/or how much he can extract in concessions from NATO/EU/US.

I'd happily trade corrupt, faux democratic Ukraine for a viable Finland-ized neutral DMZ buffer between EU/NATO & Russia restored to it's historic borders, IF it allows us to draw down our NATO commitment, maintain our critical NATO bases & convinces our NATO allies to join us in containing China.

uh huh...

[a fan]

]If you recall accurately, I did not criticize Obama when Putin took Crimea. He took South Ossetia when Bush was President.
That's when I first made the argument that THE Ukraine was a part of Mother Russia.

Clearly, plainly, the Ukrainians disagree. So guess what? That makes them right. If they wanted to join Russia? They could have followed whatever the laws are in Ukraine, and followed the laws to dissolve....vote, whatever. They've been their own country for decades now.

They didn't do that, so you either think Russia gets to invade whatever country they feel like, or you understand that Russia is 1000% in the wrong here. Pick one. You're trying to have it all in your arguments, and that's not how logic works.

I paid attention to Putin's speech at Munich, agreed with his historical analysis & took it as fair waning of his intentions.

This is the literal definition of a Putin apologist. Putin doesn't get to make up reasons why something is his, any more than you can walk up to someone else's dog and say "well, historically, I've owned basset hounds. That's a basset hound, therefore it's mine for the taking." Your made up reasoning is irrelevant to the conversation.

Or, if you prefer: picture a Native American showing up at your door, telling you that this was his land for centuries, and he's taking your house.

Now what would you say to that, OS? You'd close the door in their face, and go right on catching BBC news.

You may also recall that I agreed with Henry the K about the Finland-ization of the Ukraine. Had his advice been heeded,
Finland & Sweden would not feel the need to join NATO.

Again---this isn't your call. We let Turkey into NATO FFS, and yet here you are telling us that sovereign nations-----fully grown adults-----aren't allowed to apply for membership. And to top it off? You DEFENDED Turkey's membership, even AFTER they were getting arms from freaking Putin. Your reasoning is crispy crackers, and never follows one line of thought.

When Trump came under fire for being soft on Russia, I pointed out that Trump provided lethal aid to Ukraine that Obama did not.
That aid, & the training that came with it, has allowed UKraine to survive.

You forgot to blame Trump for prolonging the war, and being a warmonger as a result. That doesn't apply to him, right?

Look, you keep bobbing and weaving with your assertions. But underneath it all, your advice is, and has been, for Biden to stand down, stop helping Ukraine, and let Putin do what he wants, because you're certain that this will force Zelensky to negotiate. Oh, and also force Putin to stop what he's doing, and negotiate. You've been saying the same thing for months.

But you have no clue what Putin wants, or what he would do if Ukraine literally ran out of arms. And no clue if and when Zelensky would surrender, regardless of conditions. Those "tiny" details are entirely immaterial in your mind. You're trying to lay this all at the feet of Joe Biden...and you don't need a secret decoder ring to understand why.

[MDlaxfan76]

I think we know that Putin, if unopposed, would annex all of Ukraine, wiping out its existence as a sovereign country...and we know that he's perfectly willing to destroy the civilian population to do so, destroy the infrastructure and housing, and green light the worst of atrocities in the effort to intimidate Ukraine to capitulate and to punish any who dare oppose the conqueror. Genocide. All for ego.

And that's what Salty says is perfectly reasonable to not oppose.

[MDlaxfan76]

BTW, if we're willing to provide various weaponry and training to Ukrainian insurgents, at what point do we go to drones?

If we were doing so right now, letting Ukrainians operate them, a heck of a lot of tanks could be destroyed.

Weapons carrying drones -- not a capability that can be provided quickly. Requires operator & maintainer training & experience.
They are still combat aircraft.

I guess drones helped?

Somewhat. Small Turkish drones. Primarily for ISR. Limited strike payload.
We still haven't even sent our obsolete Army version of the Predator.
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2022/09/mq- ... e-problem/
Switchblades are ok for an insurgency but not enough for a combined arms counteroffensive.

mmm, pretty sure the Phoenix Ghost drones, along with precision targeting, have decimated Russian military assets. PG is similar to switchblade, but next gen.

2,000 drones.
The surveillance and precision targeting drones are especially useful for the HIMARS targeting.

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-has- ... ine-2022-9

I do think that longer range weaponry would be helpful, as I've said over and over. The deeper the Ukrainians can strike Russian supply lines, arms caches, and command centers, the better.

[MDlaxfan76]

I do agree that an open ended, continuous threat of Russian aggression to Ukraine and any other neighbors would be very costly to the US and the West.

I don't see any end of that threat that is "negotiated" with Putin or any other Russian leader until Russia completely withdraws from all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea. There's no limit to Putin's ambition, so the threat will be continued until Russia is either forced out or withdraws under new leadership.

Which is why all this constant defeatism and Putin apologia is so misguided.

[old salt]

Look, you keep bobbing and weaving with your assertions. But underneath it all, your advice is, and has been, for Biden to stand down, stop helping Ukraine, and let Putin do what he wants, because you're certain that this will force Zelensky to negotiate. Oh, and also force Putin to stop what he's doing, and negotiate. You've been saying the same thing for months.
...& that's exactly what is happening. We're still holding back the weapons that Ukraine needs to mount an effective counteroffensive. Putin is concentrating his forces in the south to defend the landbridge & the southern Donbas. That's allowing the Ukrainians to take back territory in the NE near Kharkiv.

But you have no clue what Putin wants, or what he would do if Ukraine literally ran out of arms. And no clue if and when Zelensky would surrender, regardless of conditions. Those "tiny" details are entirely immaterial in your mind. You're trying to lay this all at the feet of Joe Biden...and you don't need a secret decoder ring to understand why. Ukraine won't run out of arms. We're carefully calibrating what we're providing. Far from everything they want & what they will need to drive Russia out of ALL the territory taken since 2014, but enough to prevent Russia from taking the entire country. Biden is in a position to determine the outcome -- he is in control of what military & financial aid Ukraine receives.

[old salt]

I do agree that an open ended, continuous threat of Russian aggression to Ukraine and any other neighbors would be very costly to the US and the West.

I don't see any end of that threat that is "negotiated" with Putin or any other Russian leader until Russia completely withdraws from all Ukrainian territory, including Crimea. There's no limit to Putin's ambition, so the threat will be continued until Russia is either forced out or withdraws under new leadership.

Which is why all this constant defeatism and Putin apologia is so misguided.

...& I think your idealistic, triumphalism is unhinged from reality, ....& is dangerous.

If Putin is driven from power, can you guarantee what will follow, collateral damage, unintended consequences. ?

Putin is contained. NATO is the limit to Putin's ambition. That is being demonstrated. That's why the Vikings are rushing to join.