Should NATO immediately become directly involved in the Ukraine war?

[ColinC]

44 votes, 2 passes | Time left: Time expired
	Yes
	30 (68%)
	No
	14 (32%)
	2 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[gab13by13]

1. Rhetorical question,

not going to answer.

[Sherman A1]

2. We are involved and have been since before it started.

Those who advocate for NATO forces on the ground in Ukraine directly confronting the Russian are more than free to contact the Ukrainian Embassy and volunteer their services. Beyond that it is simply nothing more than rhetoric from the comfort of a nice armchair l

[True Blue American]

4. Thank you, Sherman Al!

[CrackityJones75]

10. Spot on!

[lagomorph777]

20. Exactly. We are sending weapons and supplies; Ukraine has enough troops.

We should definitely send in MORE and BIGGER weapons though.

[ColinC]

66. Directly is fighting Russia with our own jets and soldiers

We are not directly involved or we would be at war with Russia. We are only indirectly involved at the moment

[Mariana]

82. "We are not directly involved or we would be at war with Russia."

It might be a good idea to reword your poll, then, to say exactly what you mean more clearly. How about, "Should NATO immediately go to war with Russia?"

[ColinC]

111. Kinda afraid to do that in case it would have substantially different results.

I think I will make another poll in a few days with that clarification though...

Might have different results.

[Mariana]

112. If a clearly worded question have would have substantially different results

then the poll with the vague, confusing, euphemistic question isn't really worth much.

[ColinC]

114. No internet poll is worth much imho

That being said, I think most people have a good idea between the difference of "direct" and "indirect" involvement in a war. But I will make a different one later to see if there is much of a difference, cause some folks made solid points about where the vagueness lies -which I understand.

[True Blue American]

3. Depends on what you mean by involved!

Also depends on Europe and what they do. Germany seems to be reluctant to follow sanctions. The war is in Europe, not here, we are now using our stockpile to help.

Are you suggesting we go to war? It is a horrible situation but we are not prepared for another war.

[Mariana]

84. See post #66 by the OP to see what "directly involved" means.

"We are not directly involved or we would be at war with Russia."

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

5. France and Germany and US will veto that kind of talk immediately, so no, not gonna happen

[Emile]

6. They already are!

[marie999]

7. NATO is allowing the rape and torture of children.

Do they really think that Russia will stop with Ukraine? Putin will use whatever weapons he has to win including tactical nuclear weapons. And before you say I should go to Ukraine to fight, I am 78 years old and have wires in my brain because of Parkinson's Disease. I am a disabled veteran.

[CrackityJones75]

11. They are allowing it?

Wow! That is one hell of a mischaracterization if I ever read one. That is just ad bad as if I were to say YOU are allowing rape of chikdren because you are not there fighting it.

NATO has a charter and they have a mission and operating outside of those will have massive implications that very possibly could lead to a very large number of deaths if it escalates the situation.

[Sherman A1]

12. Well, there are those pesky fact things

But, it appears that the poster is on a roll there……..

[Crunchy Frog]

108. Even if it did stop with just Ukraine,

I am not okay with sitting back and watching a 2nd holocaust unfold.

[HAB911]

8. Now or later

and later will be worse

[Tomconroy]

9. NATO should begin an extended bombing campaign

on Russia this afternoon.
We can deal with the war criminals in a little while.

[Sherman A1]

13. You are welcome to head on over to

The Ukrainian Embassy and volunteer. I heard that they are looking for people.

Other than that, sounds like some armchair general stuff.

[Tomconroy]

14. You need a new line. You've overused that one.

[Sherman A1]

16. Perhaps, when should I tell them you will be there to volunteer

or is that armchair just too comfortable????

[Tomconroy]

19. Nope. A slight variation doesn't cut it. Just another repetitive post.

BORING.

[Sherman A1]

21. As are yours

Have a Great National Beer Day......

[MarineCombatEngineer]

49. And yours aren't? nt

[Tomconroy]

61. Please see reply 30. Aspire to do as well.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

63. The thing you seem to forget is that in 1962,

the US had overwhelming military superiority over the Soviet Union, both nuclear and conventional and there was a sane person at the helm of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev, not some maniac like Putin.

Try to keep up.

[Tomconroy]

65. I give your reply a C minus.

Lacking wit and ahistorical.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

67. And yours gets an F. nt

[marie999]

15. So, because some of us want to stop the rape and torture of women and children,

we are called armchair generals and to go over there and fight. 10,000 of us going over there to fight is not going to help and giving more weapons and sanctions are not going to stop the torture and rapes. The only thing that is going to stop the Russian is NATO troops. So you who don't want to send NATO troops you can just sit in your easy chairs and watch the videos of Ukrainians being killed with their hands tied behind their backs and wring your hands and say oh my isn't that horrible. If NATO does not enter this war, I can assure you there will not be peace in our time.

[Sherman A1]

17. A very bad limited war as bad as it seems to be

Is still preferable to a global catastrophe even if it does not go nuclear. You are talking about a war at sea, potential strikes on the North American Continent, a more widespread war in Europe with the potential for horrendous casualties.

As I have stated many times, you are free to go volunteer your services to the government of Ukraine. The Embassy's number is in the book.

[marie999]

24. And if Russia then attacks Estonia, what will NATO do.

Nothing because Estonia's 6,700 troops will be overrun before they can do anything and NATO will say oh, that's too bad nothing we can do now. Putin is not going to stop with Ukraine. And people like you will say NATO can't do anything because that would start WWIII. And as I have stated many times even if 10,000 of us go to Ukraine it won't help nor will more weapons and more sanctions. The killings just keep going on. How many countries does Putin have to attack before you think NATO should stand up to Russia?

[Sherman A1]

27. Perhaps you have not heard of Article Five of the NATO Charter.

In any case as well as the Russian Army seems to be doing these days, I don't foresee them taking on any further adventures in the immediate future.

And I give the Estonians a whole lot more credit as a fighting force than you seem to be doing.

[marie999]

31. I have heard of Article 5 and that does not bother Putin because he sees NATO as cowards.

You might want to look up Estonia's military, it barely exists.

[Sherman A1]

40. I have a good handle on the world's militaries

And you are absolutely certain what is in Putin’s mind? Perhaps you should volunteer to work with the intelligence services as they could probably use your help.

I don’t foresee anyone wanting to take in the full force of the NATO alliance, but apparently you know better than me. So I will yield to your all knowledgeable self there.

Have a Great National Beer 🍺 Day…

[marie999]

88. I never said he wants to take on NATO,

what I said is he doesn't think that NATO will do anything if he attacks a Baltic country. I believe Putin's reasoning is that since NATO won't send troops to help Ukraine, they won't send troops to help a Baltic country. People say that NATO will because of Article 5, but I do believe that Putin believes that Article 5 is meaningless. Sure I could be wrong, but I don't believe that all NATO countries would attack Russia.

[Sherman A1]

96. If they are NATO Members (and they are)

then that is their protection. Ukraine as you well know is not a NATO Member, but is getting all sorts of support from both NATO, Non-Aligned Countries and the EU.

If you believe otherwise that is up to you, I however do not and I trust the Biden Administration to navigate this crisis without the help of a bunch of TV Talking Heads and Internet Armchair Generals.

[Calculating]

91. All you do is call people out saying they should go volunteer over there

I have no military training and haven't shot a gun in like a year, what am I gonna do for them? Am I supposed to go over and take some shots at the Russians? As much as I'd love to shoot at those bastards I don't think that's gonna change much. They need shit like cruise missiles, anti ship capability and offensive weapons to drive out the invading barbarian hordes.

[Sherman A1]

94. I am suggesting that the armchair generals might want to go find out for themselves

what armed combat is all about before offering up other people both civilian and military to the horrors of war.

If you don't like my responses please feel free to put me on your ignore list, it is really easy to do.

[marie999]

101. I have put people on ignore, but not for disagreeing with me.

Usually, it's because they call people stupid and stuff like that. You are entitled to your opinions just like everyone else. No one should ignore you. If they don't like your opinions on this I am sure that they do agree with you on opinions on other matters.

[yagotme]

103. Yes, they need the hardware to destroy Russian equipment.

However, boots on the ground is how ground is taken. That's the overall point I believe Sherman is making. Thus, the "Sign up and go." replies. We can ship all sorts of gear, but the Ukrainians still have to physically push the Russians back over the border, more or less. Advocating for an escalation (us sending our troops over to get shot at) is what those of us calling for low-intensity conflict are against. Russia IS being driven back, at this time, by the Ukes. A lot of stuff that we are going to ship, hasn't made it yet. When it does, the advantage will be even greater, and they'll have an even easier job. If the Russkies get stupid, and actually attack a for-real NATO country, well, that is a different argument entirely.

[Tomconroy]

30. You are no Jack Kennedy.

[Emile]

18. You are making it sound like everyone but Putin is responsible.

[Sherman A1]

22. Well, there is that, but the poster seems to be on a roll there

never mind those pesky facts and all......

[Emile]

23. That's one hell of a spin!

[Sherman A1]

25. As I said they are on a roll there

not much one can do but sit back and watch....

I did note that they don't seem to be volunteering to head on over to Ukraine...but, maybe I just missed the part where they were doing so.

[marie999]

26. Putin is responsible for starting the war. NATO is responsible for not ending it.

[Emile]

28. Only Putin is responsible, for starting and or ending it!

[marie999]

34. So, Germany was responsible for ending the war in Europe.

[Emile]

36. You are talking about a war before nukes!

No comparison.

[marie999]

37. What if Russia attacks one of the Baltic countries?

Should NATO respond, I mean that could start WWIII. I know Article 5 but if they are afraid of WWIII, will they respond?

[Emile]

39. What if, is that your argument now?

[marie999]

42. I'm just asking you seem afraid of NATO helping Ukraine because it could start a nuclear war.

What if Russia attacks a Baltic country. Do you think that NATO should respond knowing it could end up in a nuclear war? Yes or no.

[Emile]

48. I already told you NATO is helping Ukraine, did that fly over your head?

What if is not a logical argument!

[marie999]

50. NATO is not doing enough and will not do enough to save Ukraine.

[Emile]

52. Well stop complaining and get your ass over there!

Seriously!

[Sherman A1]

29. Really?

It was hard to tell from your previous post.

[marie999]

35. You should take a course in reading comprehension.

[Sherman A1]

41. A course in history and foreign affairs

Might be suggested to you as well.

[marie999]

46. I have kept up with history and foreign affairs

since I was a Russian linguist in the 528th Military Intelligence Company.

[Tomconroy]

56. You just destroyed someone on the internet.

Where should we ship the body?

[Emile]

58. How's that? Just because someone speaks Russian doesn't

make them an expert!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

59. Laughable.

[Sherman A1]

73. Then you should know what the potential consequences are

Of what you are suggesting.

[Mariana]

86. Sounds like Ukraine could really use your expertise and experience. nt.

[Bucky]

79. Sorry, but I never put stock in people who make a beeline for the most hysterical language available

But if we go by your logic that if we don't go directly to war, we don't want to stop rape and torture, then the same logic tells us that you don't want to stop the rape and torture of women and children in Syria.

Conventional war is a terrible thing. Nuclear war would be worse.

The US and NATO are not doing nothing. I agree we should do more. But hystericalizing an argument doesn't help anyone.

[Calculating]

92. We have no idea who the good guys are in the middle east

I'm Ukraine it's easy. Good vs evil, clear as night and day

[malaise]

32. Huh?

NATO is already involved

[Mariana]

102. The OP has explained elsewhere in the thread

that when he said "direct intervention" he meant "war with Russia".

[sarisataka]

38. There are a lot of brave people

Who want to see other people go to war to stop crimes against civilians in Ukraine.

It reminds me of the Second Congo War (3,000,000 dead), Syria (500,000), Darfur (300,000), Tigray (still counting and documenting systematic rapes of women and girls). All of these had untold war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The only difference is entry into those conflicts was either opposed or not discussed.

Why is it some are willing to run into a fight against the largest nuclear power when we didn't want to interfere in these much more manageable wars?

[marie999]

43. This war has White people dying.

[sarisataka]

45. I commend your honesty

[Emile]

51. Bam, there is your reason!

[wanda4rafi]

47. Skin color of the victims would be one guess.

Rwanda anyone?

[sarisataka]

55. Rwanda was pre-DU

All the conflicts I listed occurred/ are happening since DU formed. I cannot recall one poll about how much support should we provide or a single demand we step in to stop the conflict.

Tigray is ongoing with far more deaths, planned sexual assault campaigns and using food supplies as a weapon against civilians. Yet 99% of those who read this will have to look up where in the world is Tigray.

[wanda4rafi]

64. I'm simply citing the atrocities that occurred there and the difference in the

level of the outrage about what was happening. It has nothing to do with a few dozens of posts on DU.

[Calculating]

93. We actually know who the good guys are in this one

I have no idea who the good guys are in some third world civil wars.

[sarisataka]

97. We could use the benchmark of

The side using systematic programs of rape and starvation against the civilian population is the bad guys.

At the very least we could protect the civilians by setting up safe zones.

I believe third world lives are not less valuable than European lives, so shouldn't they get the same support?

[Sympthsical]

44. Is the internet viewing growing too dull for some people?

Guys, give it a few more episodes. The writers are still working out the kinks.

In the meantime, fan forums are open to discuss favorite characters, villains, and plot developments.

I think it's called social media.

[ripcord]

53. As another war in Europe begins

Americans send aid while sitting on the sidelines and watching the atrocities until we are directly affected, history repeats itself.

[Emile]

54. What's your recommendations on how to fight a nuclear armed country?

[ripcord]

62. The same way we will when Putin attacks a NATO country

I was hoping that the America First crowd would be impressed to action by seeing the atrocities as they are happening but I guess some people are just more calloused than others.

[Emile]

69. I'm an old man, the end of my life is not to far off! I would like think my granddaughters

can have the chance to live as long as I have. What you are suggesting is the end of the world and that no matter how many people have died in Ukraine has no appeal to me. Call me calloused I really don't care as long as my granddaughters have a chance!

[ripcord]

70. These is no guarantee Putin will use nukes

But it is a sure thing that he will continue to push and harm people because no one stand ups to him, this is the same mistake we made pre WW2. I have never understood the America First mentality that has the U.S. watching war crimes and massacres while thinking as long as it is them and not us.

[Emile]

72. I don't like it anymore than you! One thing I do know is, Putin

said if we get involved nuclear war will happen! Will Putin follow through with his threat? I'm not willing to take that chance!

[Calculating]

95. He's obviously bluffing

He's a goddamn mafia boss. Those guys keep power through threats and count on nobody standing against them. The nukes might come out if we try invading Russia for regime change, but he is very unlikely to end the modern world because he gets driven out of Ukraine.

[sarisataka]

57. Are we now in favor of the US being the world's police force?

I thought that was one of the reasons we wanted out of Afghanistan. That we should not be getting involved in conflicts that do not directly affect us.

It is so hard to keep up.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

60. It would seem so to a few here. nt

[ripcord]

71. No we are one of the countries who doesn't have the moral strength to stand up for what is right nt

[sarisataka]

74. I can think of four major conflicts

In which we could intervene on moral grounds. Ukraine is one, should we step into the other three as well?
Why or why not?

[ripcord]

80. If this were happening here would you want someone to save your grandaughters? nt

[Calculating]

98. The afghan people didn't even fight for themselves

They practically wanted the Taliban back. Meanwhile Ukraine seems intent on fighting to the last against actual evil.

[uponit7771]

104. There's not a war in Europe now? tia

[MineralMan]

68. Involved How? NATO is already involved.

I can't vote on this poll. It makes no sense to me, and is not a binary question.

[ColinC]

76. Directly involved means fighting Russia.

We are currently indirectly involved.

[MineralMan]

77. Well, then, I say NO. I don't think that's going to happen.

Not soon, at least, and only if Russia attacks in a NATO country.

[ColinC]

78. Fair enough

[Bucky]

83. Putin certainly has a plan for Estonia & probably Latvia

But it probably involves a lot more subterfuge, like what he did in Hungary, Armenia, and the RNC.

[uponit7771]

105. +1, it should've said "more" involved via different weapons systems that NATO hasn't sent yet ...

... like cruise missiles to take out Russia's railways in western Russia that carries most of their supplies.

[Kaleva]

81. It's easy to be brave when there is little to no risk for the individual

I concede that some may have already considered loved ones and friends to be expendable.

[ColinC]

87. I am still in the military

I would likely be one of the first to go. And yes, I voted "yes."

[Kaleva]

89. I wonder how many who voted "Yes" would be the 1st to go?

And how many who voted the same wouldn't go themselves but are fine with others going?

I'm too old and decrepit to go my self so I'm not going to vote to send others. 30 years ago when I was in the military, I'd follow lawful orders of course.

[ColinC]

100. I think to have a moral opinion is different from whether one is willing or able to be directly

involved in every action that is a consequence of those opinions.

[brooklynite]

85. I trust the people who say "yes" will be the first in line at the enlistment office?

[yaesu]

90. I think instead of boots on the ground, jets in the sky we should start with boats in the water

Pootie has taken over the Black Sea with his war ships & aggression. Several NATO countries border the Black Sea. I think the best place for NATO to get "in it" is here, a no sailing zone & back it up with both ships & air. The US has zero ships operating there so cruise missiles & aircraft would have to back it up for now.

[uponit7771]

106. +1, even better than jets cruise missiles would do the job of bombing Russia's AFBs and supply ...

... lines

[Crunchy Frog]

109. So are you going to suit up and take your own nuclear sub to the Black Sea?

[ColinC]

110. Exactly!!

[Polybius]

99. No!

[Crunchy Frog]

107. Russia's stated goal is the genocide of Ukrainians.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/tvc9kq/russian_state_news_agency_published_a_piece/

Official Russian military policy is to reject all international rules, laws and norms of warfare by committing mass atrocities against civilian populations. They are carrying out policies of mass murder, torture, and rape.

So my answer has gone from a no to a yes.

[BlueTsunami2018]

113. Go to open, total war? No.

As much as I sort of hate life, I kind of like being alive. Call it caution or cowardice or whatever you like. If we were to go in and attack Russia, the world ends.

I’m sorry but I believe them when they say “a world without Russia is not a world worth keeping” or whatever that guy said.

I wonder why the other wars going on get no mention at all. That the atrocities that have been going on daily for years on end are never spoken of but this one is so significant. The Chechen war was every bit as brutal but no one gave a fuck. Syria, Yemen, Congo, Darfur and so on, not a blip on the radar. But this is the hill we have to die on. Why?

I’m as appalled and sickened as anyone by what’s happening but I’m just not willing to risk the world over it. Keep on supplying Ukraine with weapons and money and food and all that. Give them the means to fight for as long as they can but I’m not interested in getting into a war that ends in nuclear holocaust.

It doesn’t matter what I think anyway. What’s going to happen is going happen regardless.