Dulfite said:
Yeah, invading another country you just have professional militaries and mercenaries, but being invaded unlocks militias and other citizens being able to contribute. The total amount of armed Ukrainians defending their country greatly outnumber that of the Russians invading them. I've said it before and I'll say it again, armed citizenry is the greatest deterrent to someone invading you and doing so successfully. People always think it comes down to missiles, but countries like Russia or China don't invade to just wipe out entire cities and populations, they want to capture that nations economy and absorb the profits. You can't do that by blowing everything up and killing everyone, you have to do a land invasion. This is why the USA is so protected. In 2018, a survey showed there were over 1 billion guns in the world. Of that number, 85% were in the hands of citizens, not militaries. Of that number, 46% are in the hands of the US citizens. The safest thing humans could do to deter invasions, school shootings, hostage situations, the list goes on, is to issue every legal adult a gun that passed a mental screening. This isn't the wild west, where many had guns, they could shoot someone and ride off never to be caught. We have cameras everywhere, the internet, satellites. Arming people isn't going to cause sane people to start shooting randomly at people. It will prevent those already with murder on their hearts from killing as many, if any other people because ideally any room they step in with a gun pointing at someone will have numerous people pointing a gun right back waiting for the police to show up to arrest the would-be murderer. There would be fewer massacres every year and a lot less international tension and ears if every legal citizen that is mentally stable had a gun. Do mental screenings annually to be safe. |
I disagree completely with your assessment and cause to effect relationship here but that's a discussion for another thread so I won't entertain this discussion here.
But I kind of agree and disagree when it comes to applying this mentality to Ukraine. The unique situation of Ukraine might just make the benefits overtake the drawbacks. Giving that since 2014 Russia represent a clear threat to Ukraine let's pretend Ukraine then decided to arm it's population. in this context it :
- would be a lot harder for Russian to invade
- It would be a lot harder for Russian to occupy
- It would be harder for Russian troops to loot house and assault civilians.
- It may have empowered many more Ukrainian including more women to fight for there land (if that's even possible)
- The kremlin could have deemed it too costly to invade
But it may also have adverse effects like:
- It could have emboldened Ukrainians militia to try and get back Donetsk and Luhansk witch might have prompted a Russian invasion way earlier when Ukraine wasn't ready to defend themselves
- It may have giving Russia way more propaganda material justifying there invasion earlier
- It may have caused Russia to invade with war more troops and equipment maybe 500k+ instead of 200k
- It may also have caused Russia to be more cautious and realist in their invasion negating the terrible logistics they are showing today
- It could have offered the possibility for Russia to drop the "special military operation" crap and go straight to this is a war and still keep support from Russian.
- It could have been enough of a reason for China to accepts denazification narrative and openly support the Kremlin
- Right now it could embolden an Ukraine to fire on Russian soldier in occupied territory during protest prompting them to open fire on protesters.
- It may lead to more Ukrainians death by being emboldened and not thinking things through before realizing their weapons are ineffective against most military assets like tanks, plane, helicopter, most vehicles.
Essay Pro