Well, if that’s the take, it is very far from “Russia will attack NATO”.
It probably won't, but the whole point is that the current regime is definitely gaslighting the West in regard to its intent (and so therefore it must be treated as a credible threat). And if NATO/EU starts to crumble a few years down (not likely, but if it does) that would raise the probability of some form attack quite substantially.
The very fact that you and I are having a cold, sober discussion about what was once (at least from 1989-2014) more or less unthinkable -- in itself amounts to a form of westward "creep".
This is correct but irrelevant. He would not attack if he could anticipate the consequences.
Again I disagree, because I think his main blinders were primarily ideological / egotistical (and the simple fact that anyone with a differing opinion or assessment was probably too terrified to tell him so), and not the result of simply being fed bad information.
Recall that many of Putin's spiritual compatriots in the West -- both those who concocted all the supposed "reasons" for the 2003 Iraq invasion; and the vastly greater number who passively went along with the obvious, plain-as-day insanity because it seemed "the thing to do", I guess -- also tried to claim afterwards that they were "misled" by faulty intelligence.
My own take is that, if one is taken under the spell of such sophistry and nonsense -- ultimately, it happens through one's own volition.
> And if NATO/EU starts to crumble a few years down (not likely, but if it does) that would raise the probability of some form attack quite substantially.
This is a speculation that leads to even more speculative possibilities. Quite a big distance from alarmist comments „if Ukraine falls they will come to us“. Definitely a topic for NATO analysts, but for us mostly science fiction.
Why aren’t we talking about more probable scenarios?
> My own take is that, if one is taken under the spell of such sophistry and nonsense -- ultimately, it happens through one's own volition.
Fully agree on that, yet this is not explaining why would Putin attack NATO.
It probably won't, but the whole point is that the current regime is definitely gaslighting the West in regard to its intent (and so therefore it must be treated as a credible threat). And if NATO/EU starts to crumble a few years down (not likely, but if it does) that would raise the probability of some form attack quite substantially.
The very fact that you and I are having a cold, sober discussion about what was once (at least from 1989-2014) more or less unthinkable -- in itself amounts to a form of westward "creep".
This is correct but irrelevant. He would not attack if he could anticipate the consequences.
Again I disagree, because I think his main blinders were primarily ideological / egotistical (and the simple fact that anyone with a differing opinion or assessment was probably too terrified to tell him so), and not the result of simply being fed bad information.
Recall that many of Putin's spiritual compatriots in the West -- both those who concocted all the supposed "reasons" for the 2003 Iraq invasion; and the vastly greater number who passively went along with the obvious, plain-as-day insanity because it seemed "the thing to do", I guess -- also tried to claim afterwards that they were "misled" by faulty intelligence.
My own take is that, if one is taken under the spell of such sophistry and nonsense -- ultimately, it happens through one's own volition.