In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Press review: Ukraine gets ready to host foreign troops as US prepares for trade war , pierrem15 wrote: Russia can't even defeat Ukraine on the ground. How will they do so if the Europeans intervene directly? They can't nuke France or Britain because -each- has about 500 deliverable warheads for Russian consumption. Trump has been pushing the Europeans to bear more the burden. He may get them to do so, but not in the way he expected.
NATO has been directly fighting Russia in Ukraine; that's why there are no journalists authorized to film the war - too many foreigners. Russia is fighting the combined forces of NATO in Ukraine, and Russia is winning. Even the New York Times admits the role of NATO in Ukraine and that Russia won.
Russia doesn't want to nuke anyone. It's zelensky who urged proactive strikes on Russia. NATO is trying to get a war started between US and Russia. The US will not intervene. You seem unaware that NATO allowed its military to completely atrophy because it expected to pit the US against Russia. Should Russia turn it's attention to NATO nations, those nations will regret it.
I don't want war or anyone striking anyone else. Let there be peace despite NATO's push for WWIII.
The only participation has been indirect by providing intel or instructions on how to target weapons from US bases in Germany. That's what the NY Times talked about. Not troops on the ground.
The constant refrain that "NATO is already in Ukraine" is copium for the fact that the Russians are incapable of defeating the despised hohols and justification for continuing the war.