Comments by "Barry On" (@barryon8706) on "TLDR News EU" channel.

  1.  @yurichtube1162  Negotiations with Russia would be a mistake. When a dog keeps biting people, you don't offer it food in hopes that it'll stop.
    26
  2. If NATO went into conflict with Russia, how much help would Turkey or Hungary be vs. how much help would Finland and Sweden be? Turkey or Hungary's ties to Russia and willingness to play politics this way suggest that Turkey would be reluctant to join military action, and Article 5 doesn't require all member nations respond with military force, and Turkey or Hungary might consider a stern diplomatic rebuke to be enough. In Turkey's case in particular, it has territorial ambitions against Greece, another NATO member, and it's not inconceivable that NATO might be obligated to defend Greece from Turkey.
    19
  3. I think everybody overestimated Russia, including Russia.
    15
  4. The funny part of this (funny in a grim way, but funny) is that this may be giving us the best honest look at Russian casualties.
    15
  5. It happened because the US and Russia signed a treaty with Ukraine that promised to respect Ukraine's territory if Ukraine gave up her nukes. And Putin wants the territory of the USSR back more than he values treaties.
    15
  6. I wonder if Russia will allow Chechnya a vote to determine if it can secede.
    14
  7.  @alioshax7797  Fighting.
    12
  8.  @dsmj7389  Ignoring a rabid dog doesn't turn it peaceful. Ask Georgia and Crimea.
    10
  9.  @peterwaine923  The equipment the Russians left behind suggests that Russian troops left for reasons other than sudden feelings of generosity.
    9
  10. Doesn't it make more sense to hire experts in, for example, Italian politics, than to just hire someone Italian?
    8
  11. I thought "fag" still meant "cigarette" in British slang.
    7
  12. So at this point, Putin's only chances of victory are to hire Will Smith.
    6
  13.  @RealYunoCS  You think Ukraine invaded Russia?
    6
  14.  @bayraak12  It's not just capability that matters. Intent does too. I have doubts as to Turkey or Hungary's willingness to oppose Russia militarily unless they were the one invaded. To be fair, I have the same doubts about Finland or Sweden riding in guns-a-blazin' if Russia invaded Poland, given their historical isolationism. But Turkey and Hungary seem as committed to Russia as to NATO, and Russia is Europe's greatest threat. It's reasonable for every country in NATO to be there for their own benefit, but once in they can't act ONLY for their own benefit.
    5
  15.  @prathamsaxena9503  The U.S. is between Canada and Mexico. You can find it pretty easily on a map of North America, or on most globes. As far as the US obligations under the treaty, the US has respected Ukraine's borders and has raised the issue internationally; those fulfilled the US's treaty obligations. Ukraine wasn't required to be neutral, and after Russia annexed Crimea could hardly be expected to.
    5
  16. Would Chechnya be allowed to vote for independence?
    5
  17.  @troo_6656  They're not incompatible, but one is not required for the other, and if you want expertise then why not just go for expertise? Put it this way: if you want an expert in Italian politics, why not get an expert in Italian politics without worrying about whether or not they are Italian? If the original poster just wants non-White people they could just say they want to racially discriminate, and not try to excuse it with statistically connected but indirect factors.
    4
  18. How does Hungary's sanctuary laws risk the sound financial management or protections of the financial interests?
    4
  19.  @stefannilsson2406  The reason it's spent is the lower proportion of fissionables, not that it's less radioactive. Nuclear fuel becomes a lot more radioactive after its been in a reactor than before.
    3
  20. What do you call a government by lawyers? Esquirocracy?
    3
  21. Biden wasn't really criticized for losing in Afghanistan, but because the withdrawl was a complete mess that left people and materiel for the enemy.
    3
  22. I'm surprised Russia hasn't been losing more people trying to take those towns.
    3
  23. It's good to see Germany dispelling old stereotypes, but did they have to start with efficiency?
    3
  24.  @alioshax7797  Then it's a good thing I didn't say eating or breathing.
    2
  25. I think NATO probably needs Turkey more than it needs Finland or Sweden, even though Erdogan really isn't helping that. I admit there could easily be factors I am not aware of that might make Finland and Sweden more valuable to current NATO members than I think.
    2
  26. Sweden and Finland have reasons to be quiet if Russia or the USA did it, but even then we'd only be talking about Sweden and Finland's suspicions. The USA has the motive, but it would be all kinds of stupid to do. Which doesn't mean we didn't do it.
    2
  27. I was hoping they'd been doing better since they got rid of Vigo the Carpathian.
    2
  28.  @deforged  Correction - the signatories never promised to defend Crimea with anything but diplomacy.
    2
  29. You might look to insulating your pipes where you can, and draining them if possible and necessary.
    2
  30. Because accidents happen and usually don't lead to wars. The Spanish-American War being a possible exception.
    1
  31.  @randydrew66  It means an attack on one is considered an attack on all. Accidental missile strikes need not be considered an attack. Also, article 5 doesn't actually require an armed response, just "such action as [the member state] deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area." So if a member of NATO doesn't consider armed force necessary, they could just write a strongly-worded letter and be done with it.
    1
  32.  @randydrew66  Not the nation attacked -- every member nation decides how they react to an attack on another. They have to do something, but maybe not force. So if Russia invades Poland, France could say, "We're going to protest and stage mass die-ins under the Eiffel Tower until Russia surrenders," and the US could decide, "Time to send in all the nukes at Putin personally."
    1
  33.  @randydrew66  Because they probably will attack in defense of a member, if it's in Europe or North America, if that member hasn't initiated it. If Poland decided to invade Belarus and Russia responded in Belarus's defense, NATO would probably do little more than it has for Ukraine. But if Russia tried to annex Poland it'd probably be WW3.
    1
  34.  @randydrew66  Russia does have reason not to use nukes; they're not the only ones who have nukes. Russia may have more nukes than anyone else, but a lot of nations have enough nukes to run Russia into The Area Formerly Known as Russia. Russia can lose in Ukraine without using nukes, too. It lost in Afghanistan without nuking anyone. So did the U.S.
    1
  35.  @randydrew66  Ukraine isn't vital to Russia. And, again, Russia having more nukes doesn't mean much. Say you shoot me with 20 guns and I shoot you with 12. We're both pretty dead regardless, right?
    1
  36.  @randydrew66  Taiwan isn't that important to China, either. China has survived without Taiwan for decades and will continue to do so. China just doesn't have the dollar reserves to tank the dollar. The US ran a $1 trillion deficit already just last year. And if the US just canceled all debts to China, it'd probably end up better off than before. And many countries have reserves in dollars -- it's the de facto standard global reserve currency. So almost everyone take s a hit.
    1
  37.  @randydrew66  Almost no other country uses the dollar as their currency. They have reserves of the dollar.
    1
  38.  @randydrew66  You just keep reaching for that win.😃
    1
  39.  @randydrew66  If you say so.
    1
  40. Makes me think Brittney Griner got off a lot more easier than I thought.
    1
  41.  @ashleylittle6776  "mainly" is not the same as "all".
    1
  42. We could try Agression, but skate punk only goes so far on the international stage.
    1
  43. This might be a smart strategic move on their part. How will Ukraine treat ethnic Russians who remain behind in Kherson? If there's any sign of payback against ethnic Russians in general --- which I think is a real possibility -- Ukraine might lose the western support that it relies on.
    1
  44. I've seen a bit of back and forth about how much impact (no pun intended) the HIMARS has had. Perhaps we're going to get a more definitive answer.
    1
  45. Taiwan is part of China, but has never been part of the People's Republic of China. You might as well say that mainland China should be recognized as part of the Republic of China.
    1
  46. If Ukraine can hit airbases that far into Russia then the supply lines feeding Crimea might be interruptable -- depending on the accuracy of the weapons. An airfield is a bigger target than a bridge or a set of railroad tracks.
    1
  47. What are the odds that Ukraine was going to pay this money? And if your title were true, what are the odds that Russia would pay it?
    1
  48. Climate change can be real while still being used as a tool for social and economic change. Look at the "Green New Deal," which pushed for generally leftist goals outside of ecological aims.
    1
  49. Is this going to make FInland and Sweden reconsider NATO membership?
    1
  50. Regarding Crimea: say Mexico took California. And at the time, California was ethnically mostly Mexican (and that Mexican was an ethnicity). Then a lot of people who weren't ethnically Mexican moved out. How much blood and treasure do you expend to re-take California? and what do you do with it if you get it?
    1