[JumpCrisscross]

If things go wrong, I think the establishment would reassert itself. But there would be a few weeks of chaos. That interval represents a new strategic opening.

It's not enough for a land war in Europe. But a lighting grab for territory? Like Mongolia? Or Taiwan? Or the Baltics or Balkans or a contiguous stretch of the Middle East? If you can secure enough resources to hold strong against non-military retaliations, e.g. sanctions, it might--for the first time in decades--be worth it.

[fowlerpower]

You really think a NATO ally can be hit? With a land war?

You think the Republican Party would need to reassert, the same party that dragged us into two wars in the last 12 years? I have to respectfully disagree.

[pjc50]

A "traditional" war? No. A destabilisation? Absolutely. Why bother to send in your own forces when you can get people to fight their neighbours? To be effective, it must be deniable, like the MH17 shootdown.

This is more or less what's happened in eastern Ukraine (not part of NATO, but supposedly recieving some safety guarantees when it gave up its nuclear weapons).

When the intelligence agencies are openly briefing that the President is compromised to the Russians, things are going to get very strange. http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/12/senior-pentagon-offic...

[acqq]

> This is more or less what's happened in eastern Ukraine

Here's what objectively happened:

"Encircling Russia has never been just a neocon thing. The policy has bi-partisan and trans-Atlantic support, including the backing of America’s old-school nationalists, Cold War liberals, Hillary hawks, and much of Obama’s national security team."

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/03/steve-weissman/the-feds-...

Also, Soros on CNN in 2014:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1405/25/fzgps.01.html

"ZAKARIA: First on Ukraine, one of the things that many people recognized about you was that you during the revolutions of 1989 funded a lot of dissident activities, civil society groups in eastern Europe and Poland, the Czech Republic. Are you doing similar things in Ukraine?

SOROS: Well, I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia. And the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now."

It's already past, but at some moment the foreign organizers of the "colored" revolutions gladly took credit for their activity.

[chrishacken]

That's a real respectable and credible source you have there.

[JumpCrisscross]

> You really think a NATO ally can be hit

No, but the odds don't look as daunting as they used to. It's certainly more bargainable than it ever was. In any case, only the Baltics in my last comment are NATO allies. Lots of American interests aren't covered by Article 5.

> I have to respectfully disagree

My point isn't that confrontation is likely. It's that disrespectful disagreement of the status quo is more likely today than before, in part because of what happened in Crimea and Syria, and in part because we have such an unstable domestic situation with clearly-signaled foreign indeterminism.

Your worst-case for an overreaching autocrat today looks less like Saddam Hussein and more like Assad. That encourages dice rolling.

[konstmonst]

What happened in Crimea? What about a referendum? How is it worse than US annexation of Hawai? As a matter of fact, Crimea was part of Russia since it was taken from Crimean Khanate in the 18th century. I also don't have any emphaty for the treatment of Tatar Culture because it was a culture of pillaging their neigbours and economy based on slaves. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_Tatars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean%E2%80%93Nogai_raids_in...

I also think that the sanctions also brought Russia some good in the long run: instead of buying stuff in europe they now have to make it themselves. The one who really lost were european countries:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/opinion/wh...

I also think even if Putin may be not ideal leader, he handled the situation in the best interests of his country. I also think the fact, that he is an autocratic leader should not be discriminated against. I think Democracy is not for everybody (as US found out in Iraq and Afganistan) and people in Russia still support him, allthough I think Alexei Navalny would a better Candidate.

[PerfectDlite]

> What happened in Crimea? What about a referendum?

Referendum was held _after_ invasion and with numerous violations of international laws.

> How is it worse than US annexation of Hawai?

How's your whataboutism?

> As a matter of fact, Crimea was part of Russia since it was taken from Crimean Khanate in the 18th century.

Russia (as per se) exists only since 1991.

[flukus]

> Referendum was held _after_ invasion and with numerous violations of international laws.

Because they weren't allowed a referendum as part of the Ukraine.

[PerfectDlite]

Does this justify a Russian invasion?

[knz]

> That encourages dice rolling.

I wish more people saw it this way. Many seem to equate the actions of Trump with "shaking things up" and don't realize the potential implications or increased likelihood of conflict due to the ambiguity of the Trump foreign policy.

It's unlikely to impact most Americans or Europeans that are not in the military but good luck if you live in a potential flashpoint.

[huxley]

A political party that dragged the US into two wars with minor countries with insignificant military resources, both of which could be totally dominated with an air war. And the US still had terrible trouble trying to keeping those wars "won".

Not exactly the same sort of conflicts and anyone who thinks they are comparable is a menace.

[justaman]

The US had problems "keeping those wars 'won'" because the US had to attempt to minimize civilian deaths. If there ever is an event where this isnt the case, you can bet it would be wrapped up in a few weeks.

[mkaziz]

Yeesh, minimize civilian deaths?

"The Iraq Body Count project (IBC) figure of Documented civilian deaths from violence is 155,923 – 174,355 as of March 2016. This includes reported civilian deaths due to Coalition and insurgent military action, sectarian violence and increased criminal violence.[19] The IBC site states: "it should be noted that many deaths will probably go unreported or unrecorded by officials and media."[20] The IBC website currently states that, "Further analysis of the WikiLeaks' Iraq War Logs may add 12,000 civilian deaths.""

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War#Ira...

150,000 CIVILIAN deaths, by just one count alone!

[shuntress]

'minimize' not 'eliminate'

I think it's a safe bet that if the strategy in Iraq had been 'Use airborne ordinance to turn the country in to glass' the war would have been 'won' much sooner with far higher civilian casualties.

[vkou]

You can't win against an insurgency by turning the country into glass. Saddam's army was defeated in the first few weeks.

[mcguire]

150,000? Wow, that might even be more than the Al-Anfal campaign.

[dagenleg]

Yeah, remember Vietnam war? Was over in two weeks. Remember Soviet Afghan war? That one was over even quicker!