Ukraine Watch...

[UndercoverElephant]

If Poland joined the war on Ukraine's side it wouldn't mean that NATO had joined the war. Article 5 couldn't be invoked because Poland hadn't been attacked.

It would be invoked if Russia retaliated on Polish soil, which it surely would if Poland effectively declares war on Russia.

[kenneal - lagger]

I doubt that it could be invoked as it could be said that Poland attacked Russia not the other way round. It would very much depend the level of attack by Russia, nuclear or not, and the attitude of other NATO members. I doubt that many would want to "poke the bear" to much. Poland would certainly not want for materiel support, though.

[clv101]

If there are ever going to be NATO member boots on the ground in Ukraine (and I don't think Russia will be fully repelled without them) then Polish troops will be first in line.

[UndercoverElephant]

I doubt that it could be invoked as it could be said that Poland attacked Russia not the other way round.

I don't think it makes any difference. It doesn't matter who starts it. What matters is where the conflict takes place.

It would very much depend the level of attack by Russia, nuclear or not, and the attitude of other NATO members.

I believe that any Russian attack on Polish soil would prompt a proportionate retaliation on Russian soil. If that did not happen then Russia would conclude that it can attack Polish infrastructure as it has attacked Ukrainian infrastructure. NATO would have to respond to prevent this happening.

It boils down to the mean of "attack". You seem to think it means "who started it"; I think it refers to geography. Look at the wording:

“an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.”

Note the word "in" rather than "on". "Against" applies regardless of who started it.

[PS_RalphW]

I don't think Polish troops attacking Russian Troops in Ukraine would trigger a NATO response. That would require Russian retaliation on the geographic country of Poland or other NATO country. Of course it risks Russia escalating to nuclear in Ukraine, but that is unlikely because Putin knows the response would be lethal to his regime.

[UndercoverElephant]

I don't think Polish troops attacking Russian Troops in Ukraine would trigger a NATO response.

I didn't say it would. There would have to be a Russian attack on Polish soil to trigger a response.

[clv101]

It boils down to the mean of "attack". You seem to think it means "who started it"; I think it refers to geography. Look at the wording:

“an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.”

Note the word "in" rather than "on". "Against" applies regardless of who started it.

I agree that Russia would need to attack the territory of a NATO member to trigger a response. However we shouldn't over interpret the wording. It is no more than a starting point of discussion. For example it was widely accepted that the US was unlikely to respond in kind to a limited nuclear attack in Europe during the Cold War. The US wasn't about to risk New York for the sake of Newbury.

[adam2]

EU promises 2 billion Euros worth of shells and other ammunition. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65018434
That should help a lot. No word on small arms ammunition though which I understand is in very short supply, at least in some areas.

[UndercoverElephant]

The outcome of this war still looks to me like an inevitable Russian defeat. They are literally throwing everything they've got (apart from nuclear) at Bakhmut, and they cannot take it. Some reports say they've lost 30,000 men trying to take it. And even if they do somehow manage to make some significant progress, it is quite clear that this would be met by further increases in military support for Ukraine, coming from many different countries.

Putin looks increasingly old and frail, and the "special military operation" looks increasingly hopeless for Russia. It remains to be seen how effective the Ukrainian counter-offensive is going to be, but I cannot see Ukraine settling for anything less than the restoration of its territorial integrity with perhaps the only exception being parts of the Donbas that were already occupied by Russian separatists before the current war.

[BritDownUnder]

If there are ever going to be NATO member boots on the ground in Ukraine (and I don't think Russia will be fully repelled without them) then Polish troops will be first in line.

I don't see why NATO troops don't go into Ukraine right away and form along the Ukraine-Belarus border and Ukraine-Moldova border as there is no fighting there and the excuse could be used that it will prevent third countries getting involved. They would of course impose a no-fly zone in their areas of operation and shoot down any violators, and free up large number of Ukrainians to face Russian forces elsewhere. They might even describe themselves as "peacekeepers".

[Mark]

I don't see why NATO troops don't go into Ukraine right away and form along the Ukraine-Belarus border and Ukraine-Moldova border as there is no fighting there and the excuse could be used that it will prevent third countries getting involved. They would of course impose a no-fly zone in their areas of operation and shoot down any violators, and free up large number of Ukrainians to face Russian forces elsewhere. They might even describe themselves as "peacekeepers".

Because Ukraine isn't a member of NATO ??
Because Russia would portray it as an equal and opposite invasion of Ukraine ??
Because Russia would send missiles etc. to attack the NATO troops ??
Because it would definitely lead to contagion ??
Because Russia has nuclear weapons ??

NATO and the West need to play it extremely carefully....
You already knew that though...?

[Mark]

Ukraine war: UK defends sending depleted uranium shells after Putin warning:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65032671

Why are we doing this ?
The DU will still be around for generations after Putin and Zelensky are long forgotten...
https://cnduk.org/resources/depleted-uranium/

Not in my name....

[BritDownUnder]

Only fair as the Russians sent radioactive Polonium to the UK a few years ago in case you forgot. The UK should mention this to Russia that all of their actions, however historic, will have consequences.

[PS_RalphW]

I think Mark's point is that the DU will contaminate Ukraine, not the home country of the aggressor nation.

[clv101]

Only fair as the Russians sent radioactive Polonium to the UK a few years ago in case you forgot. The UK should mention this to Russia that all of their actions, however historic, will have consequences.

This DU will be spread over Ukraine, not Russia with long lasting health and environmental impacts on a supposed allie's land. It's a completely indefensible idea, not even the Americans are sending DU. I expect we'll reverse the decision.