comment: >
  
  Shut up! Do NOT tell Putin!!!
context: "De Facto" literally means not in accordance to law, but effectively the same.  Nearly every single NATO member is providing military assistance to Ukraine.  The effective difference between the aid they are retrieving and full NATO membership could be debatable since NATO doesn't require member nations to send ground forces or control airspace or even declare war with the invading nation. >
  
  I accept that it is debatable in the sense that anything could be debated, but hardly in any realistic sense.
  If Russia invaded an actual Nato member the response would be vastly different. Russia would not have military assets capable of threatening missile strikes against Nato members within hours. After any first strike effect, Russia would only be able to retaliate with nuke subs and similar mobile, hard to track assets.
  Russia would not have a port in the Baltic Sea. Given how thoroughly Russian internet presence was torn to shreds in the first months of 2022, Russia would likely not have any internet facing military adjacent systems still online.
  The only way it wouldn't escalate to nuclear war would be if Russia started with nukes.
  We stand with Ukraine, and we give them support, but painting this as the same thing as Russia directly fighting Nato only helps Russia see itself as a peer.
  Fuck Russia for every Ukrainian child, civilian, soldier who has died in this idiocy. >
  
  He said it just to troll Putin.  For the lulz! >
  
  I mean, yeah, they're doing our dirty work, field testing the new toys. >
  
  They haven’t tested anything much. Everything we’ve given is super old. Javelins are old. M777s are old. HIMARS are old. The only relatively new thing is the switchblade suicide drones. >
  
  Wow that was a great read. Thanks for sharing. I stand corrected! >
  
  Sorry, no. But we really really want you to win. Russia’s invasion is an obscenity - horrific, unnecessary, unjustified, an affront to the modern world, society and people everywhere. >
  
  Unfortunately, despite what a lot of western commentators/Reddit is saying, UKR is in a bit of a dire situation. Unless they get some serious firepower…last month, it’s going to be a pretty rough couple of months for them. >
  
  Bahahaha, they've been saying that since the war started. >
  
  And it’s always been true. Russia has underperformed and Ukraine has overperformed. But Ukraine has still taken a lot of casualties, lost land, totally cut off from Sea of Azov, economy down by >30%, and is now entirely dependent on the west for survival. It’s not a rosy picture. 
  And right now, Russia is preparing to mobilize another 500,000 men. They’ll be shit quality, badly trained and badly motivated, but they’re still a big problem. Ukraine is also gearing up, lots of troops being trained, new weapon deliveries soon, including all the captured Russian stuff being repaired. So March to July is probably going to be ugly. >
  
  Are you being paid by the Ukrainian government to get more money? Not an insult, legitimate question. I respect your work ethic if that's the truth. >
  
  Everyone in the military analyst community (not reddit) is laughing at you. >
  
  With not a single NATO soldier in Ukraine.  De facto nada. >
  
  Membership with NATO would mean the west would officially declare war on Russia and they’d be challenged on multiple fronts. 
  I wish they were in NATO though. This slow meat grinder war does nobody (but Putin) any good. >
  
  It actually only requires the other members assist in whatever manner they deem reasonable and are able, this can be anything from humanitarian aid to full blown declaration of war. Funny enough the EU has stronger military defense terms than NATO does. >
  
  
  It actually only requires the other members assist in whatever manner they deem reasonable and are able, this can be anything from humanitarian aid to full blown declaration of war.
  
  What's stopping every nation, then, from sending "Thoughts and Prayers"? >
  
  Nothing >
  
  Holy shit! >
  
  In a way, one could argue Ukraine is protecting NATO instead of NATO protecting Ukraine…. >
  
  Yep, hence why NATO countries are supporting Ukraine. They see the threat that Russia poses. It's good that helping Ukraine is aligned from both the strategic defense and moral points of view. >
  
  True, but at the same time- by not allowing Ukraine to join NATO, it’s a bit like having your cake and eating it too. So maybe we award a gold star for strategy but half a gold star for that other thing. >
  
  Ukraine is not an anything member of NATO and the fact that the Russian soldiers in Ukraine are still alive makes that obvious. Your application for NATO was rejected years ago, we are being nice and helping but don’t confuse this for something that it’s not. Not being a dick but we’re not friends with Ukraine we just really don’t like Russia >
  
  When Germany and the UK give you a tank division to literally fight the menace that NATO was formed to oppose, yeah, you're pretty much in the alliance. >
  
  This is just get embarrassing....like watching a guy chasing after a girl that has rejected him multiple times. >
  
  That was pretty specific, experience?