Writing for The Federalist, strategist Harry Kazianis describes the results of many war games playing out the eventual outcomes of the invasion we are now experiencing in real life in Ukraine. It is one of the most profoundly pessimistic analyses I have ever read. Here is the money quote:
Can we ever defeat Russian President Vladamir Putin in an armed conflict over Ukraine or the Baltics and not start a nuclear war in the process?
So far, over at least several years, and with at least 100 different participants that all held different ideas about war and political allegiances, the answer is a flat out no.
To which he adds the following hyper-fatalistic coda:
In every scenario I have been a part of there is one common theme to all of them: When Vladimir Putin feels boxed in and feels Russia is directly threatened, usually from a mistake he makes on the battlefield, he decides to use whatever escalatory step he desires to try and make up for it.
The only question in a NATO-Russia war seems obvious: how many millions or billions of people would die?
Wow! (Irony alert) Didn’t that conclusion simply make your day bright and shiny? Especially if you live in a major population center you know will be targeted for annihilation. Hat tip to RealClearPolitics for the link.
