Quote from: DaRude on Today at 07:28:59 PM

Quote from: suchmoon on Today at 06:51:10 PM

Quote from: DaRude on Today at 05:47:23 PM

So the solution is to pack the nukes inside a package where its unilaterally optional to one side, after mutual collective defense is established? Now that makes all the difference and not sneaky at all.

Still not making any sense. Sneaky about what? That some countries want to share defensive capabilities? Unlike e.g. Russia and Belarus? That some of those countries don't want to trust Russia and rather turn westward? I wonder why.

Quote from: DaRude on Today at 05:47:23 PM

Ok, so China offering Cuba a pact where Cuba is free to enter into the most beneficial agreements they can choose within their possibilities, and China is obligated to declare war on anyone attacking or blockading Cuba (with an option for China to later bring in nukes to Cuba anytime they want after that pact is accepted) Now you'd be silly not to take up that great offer!

Actually that was the status quo for decades before the Soviet Union collapsed. So your point is still not quite clear here.

Not sure how much clearer i can be. US will never allow Cuba to enter into any defensive pacts (regardless of how lawful/democratic/liberating/profitable... it will be for Cuba) that would allow other countries to bring nukes into Cuba. China will never allow Taiwan to enter into any pact (regardless of how lawful/democratic/liberating/profitable... it will be for Taiwan) that will allow 3rd country to bring nukes into Taiwan. Now you can argue whether it is right/ethical/lawful etc... but it'd be silly to argue the fact itself.

You are assuming that NATO would require Ukraine to have nukes. That is not the case with many other countries even those close to Russia, so there is no real argument.