| You're missing Kissinger's point (or perhaps I'm artificially seeing my point in Kissinger's argument). Let's continue to refuse to deny Russia at various world forums. And Russia just burns it's fossil fuels intensely. The damage from climate change is catestrophic and WE LOSE. Let's say we continue to shun Russia economically bringing it to it's knees. How does it make money if no one will buy it's goods on the open market? It sells what it can on the black market moving oil is hard. What about selling DPRK and Iran nuclear and ballistic missile secrets? WE LOSE. Let's say a nuclear attack is carried on on Russia and it's surrounded by a ballistic missile defense system. So it nuclears Siberia to oblivion with purposefully dirty nuclear weapons. WE LOSE. Let's say we enter conventional war with Russia and it just blasts ITS OWN satillites out of space directly above it staring Kessler cascade that wiped out all satillites and ends the prospect of space travel for hundreds of years. WE LOSE. How will we prevent all these things? They are all born of Russia considered themselves no longer part of the world community? TL;DR Kissinger knows NATO can trounce Russia ina war maybe even a nuclear one. But he realises the cost would be too great even from a complete victory with civilization ending potentials. |