32
Why won't they send in more NATO countries, after these months, to help Ukraine regain land from Russia? (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by to c/asklemmygrad@lemmygrad.ml
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It makes sense that they won't allow their own skin to be ravaged (United States, Britain, Germany, France etc), but why not the Baltics and Poland, at this point?

I'm surprised they haven't done so, after these long months

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 3 years ago (4 children)

Because that would be looked down on. You can't just send in an army to take part in a war you are not a part of. That is only allowed if you have a defensive pact with said country. If NATO could just join any war it felt like it would have directly joined the chechen war in the 1990's.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 10 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Then what part of the defensive pact did Libya violate to get a reprisal by NATO?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    NATO didn't send troops. Infact if you look at who supports who in the civil war, there are NATO members on both sides

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago

    Nonsense. They could and would if they thought they could get away with it. The real reason why they haven't is because they know they would get absolutely wrecked and take horrendous casualties that their countries are simply not prepared for.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent