So, if the war has any validity at all, then the 'enemies' in question would be interested in stabilizing the conflict for the next few years.
At the current pace, there is no question we are in a state of global war in its infancy, as the criminals at the helm continue to pound on the war drum and provide endless hostile inputs where diplomacy should be the norm.
With no provision for diplomacy, the only choice for Russia would be to remove the leaders if they can.
So, lets hold a convention in a tiny little ineffective country, let's configure all the air defense of types already proven useless, practically right next to this so called belligerent global threat.
So, in my opinion, if Russia does not decapitate nato at this stage, then the whole thing is being orchestrated by the controlling factors and both parties in the conflict have no intention of being at 'war'
I would do it. Given the stage and intention of the group, it is the only logical course of action.
You have no logic. You're worried because you're the CIA offering some other geopolitical strategy. It amounting to what if it costs more? Or were you genuinely concerned about all those taxes buying a proxy war. It constantly trading in dead Ukrainians.
In either event nothing has changed. It ultimately won't unless they fully engage.
There is no decapitation, because there's no direct warfare. Politicians come and go. It won't affect anything else. Decapitation can occur with Putin or Zelenskyy and perhaps the conflict might change strategy. But that's also problematic because Russia has adopted it into law. Ukraine are funded by Nato. Ukraine are also tyrants, there is no election, no dissent against conflict. They die because they were free and now they're told to die. It's the price of Nato.
Nato aren't going anywhere even if Ukraine doesn't ascend. The conflict is otherwise inconsequential unless it escalates, or Russia's military is defeated. Nato's isn't fighting.
Constant stream of useless retort, you are honestly pretty pathetic.
nato is finished, nato is the culprit in many wars, nato has overstepped once and for all, the powers collecting against nato and the other khazarian devil worshippers is more than ever before, history in the making.
Your useless incorrect mental state is inline with your standard leftism protocols. You are basically fully entombed in lies.
No you are. You're a fucking dumb moron. Literal ignorance. Then you prove it. It's about what you want Nato to do. Factually that isn't happening. Nato aren't taking the hit. They're not fighting. Has it caused a shift in geopolitics, of course. But it makes zero difference. Trade continues until it stops. It stops with all out war. Polarised the Globe has always been. Veto. It won't change.
You expect people to believe whatever you say. I don't it's bullshit. You make a stupid little topic with decapitation. It is impossible without warfare between the two. The risk is in those fighting it. But it doesn't make that much difference. Russia has signed into law the acquisitioned territories in Ukraine. So if Putin dies, any conflict continues, it's Russian law. Zelenskyy is debatable, it could also crush morale an untimely death, but he's a puppet.
Nato however, politicians make no difference to an alliance chaired by monarchs and military, leaving it hasn't occurred. The closest was an EU alternative. Instead Nato has solidified.
Whatever bleeding hearts propaganda you dance too. Believe what you want. It's mostly inconsequential. It makes almost no difference to anybody else, outside of dumb narratives used for prolonging any warfare. Where it possibly risks inciting larger war. Then perhaps. But until then it's nothing but a dumb narrative that runs into fatigue on both sides.
Hah, made me chuckle, so here we go.
This goes far beyond your language barrier, this is a deeply seeded lack of understanding of any of the inputs that have defined the current so called unipolar order of how the world is managed.
Speaking of ignorance, no shortage here. This statement alone suggests you have no idea how an incremental situation is developed. This stuff does not happen from a single event.
This has never really happened, whose trade for example? In any wars to date trade has continued to flow, what is your point? You are mixing an understanding of where systems would need to be divided in order to stop this trade you speak of.
Butthurt leftism here? not even sure, lets carry on.
Clear evidence of yet further ignorance in your understanding of what an action is, what it means in both history and media, state of mind all of the human state.
There are plenty of nato troops and equipment on the ground in ukraine, the only thing stopping this from being a full out nato conflict at this stage is basically cowardice and dishonesty.
Since at least 2014 there has been nato boots on the ground training and equipping the ukraine people. Well before then the staging was setup all by the same parties. To ignore all the inputs is beyond ignorance it makes you an open liar.
This is irrelevant it is not the point of scoring a specific brain out of the deal, these people are useless as has been indicated, but they hold a chair and that chair has a title, it is the title that would take the hit and the message would be clear.
What a preposterous claim, not only are they practically completely depleted, but most of them count of absolutely nothing. It is an old mental thought form that real people do not even acknowledge as you eluded to previously.
Without such a move the war will continue into the next stages quicker, this would be a stopping block and would indeed cement the war but it would be off to the only logical start for the Russians.
Anything less would be just more of the same bullshit as the statement originally suggested.
Do not think that I believe this is the case, I think everyone involved is way too deep to pull off such a crazy move. It is a fantasy, relax.
Russian pussies would never put a stop to it, they like to be the butt end of the aggressive decades already, why stop now.
Constant stream of bullshit. In a topic you seek to convince everybody else about. Who actually cares, nobody expect those fighting. They expect to win something. Trade continues regardless. In a topic written by morons all eating each other's crap and agreeing. I don't. There is no decapitation. How does that word and concept actually occur. Go look at the definition. Dumbass, retard. Surely you read it somewhere and confused the terminology, because you're a retard. Where a narrative was used, so this conflict continues, or it becomes a larger war. All it's used for. It isn't peace.
But you've expected some other globe off the sacrifice and attrition. Nope. It doesn't care. It trade's how it does, and almost always has done. Veto. Patnerships. Allies. It stops trading in all out war. Nothing changes, because it doesn't agree.
You think Rome falls. Look it's still Rome. Dumbass. It falls when it's completely destroyed, and that is also utterly debatable.