None of the reasoning I’ve heard from the Administration makes sense to me. If Russia uses nerve gas there’ll be consequences (or words to that effect).
I’m obviously not perceiving this correctly. We’re watching a country get invaded and bombed to oblivion on Prime Time news and you’re telling us NERVE GAS is where NATO draws the line.
What am I not understanding about this? This really sounds like a really SPECIAL kind of stupid.
So, until nerve gas is introduced we’ll sit comfortably ringside and continue watching Russia bomb the hell out of an entire population.
(Not our fight…good for the ratings…sell a few more cars…)
I get it.
I kind of understand NATO unwillingness to do anything aggressively constructive to prevent further death of innocent lives (though it seems like the humane thing to do). But in the very least it makes more sense to me that if nerve gas is where NATO chooses to draw the line then MAYBE they should just continue to sit on the sidelines and shut the ____ up.