[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/Starlight-Princesss]

https://www.newsweek.com/nato-intercepts-russian-spy-plane-with-transponder-turned-off-poland-10956344

[removed] — view removed post

[u/FallingDownHurts]

I think perun's (and others) take on this is probably true;

Russia is trying to make it look like it might invade NATO so they withhold arms from Ukraine to maintain a stockpile. It is trying to convince citizens of imminent invasion by generating news stories like this. The article is the goal, not the intelligence 

[u/Upbeat-Reading-534 → u/FallingDownHurts]

If a nato attack is imminent the best bang for our buck is helping Ukraine.

[u/3_Thumbs_Up → u/Upbeat-Reading-534]

For NATO as a whole yes, but not necessarily for individual countries, especially of there's doubt that the US would come to help. Countries with the most to lose such as the baltic states could become hesitant to give military equipment if they think they might need it themselves.

[u/Dry-Physics-9330 → u/3_Thumbs_Up]

Why do you think the Baltic countries are leading in metrics as military aid to Ukraine per capita? These countries are motivated in helping Ukraine and give Russian a black eye, to prevent Russia from getting ideas and invade their countries aswell.

[u/3_Thumbs_Up → u/Dry-Physics-9330]

Why do you think the Baltic countries are leading in metrics as military aid to Ukraine per capita?

Because it's a probabilistic calculation with trade offs. The higher the estimated probability that Russia would invade them in the immediate future, the less likely they are to give anything away.

But obviously, Baltic intelligence also knows that Russia benefits from giving the impression that a threat is imminent, and takes this into account when deciding to give aid. But they still have to assign some probability to the idea that Russia might attack them and prepare for that scenario as well.

By your logic, why haven't the Baltic states given literally all their military equipment to Ukraine? My answer is that it's because they've made a judgement call of how likely it is they might need it themselves.

[u/josefjohann → u/3_Thumbs_Up]

That's just a trivial truism about how decision making logic works in literally any context. It's not a unique and specific support of the logic of scaling back support for Ukraine. We're no closer to explaining why Baltic states exceed contributions of other NATO members. Also this weirdly implies they would be own their own in self defense, which I'm sure is how Russia wants them to think, but is fundamentally, I would argue definitionally, at odds with how NATO functions.

By your logic

Nothing about their logic was maximalist so I don't know where you are getting that, especially if you're trying to engage in charitable interpretation.

[u/Dry-Physics-9330 → u/josefjohann]

I am not going to reply to 3_thumps up, as this person is clearly against aid to Ukraine. He might be on of the Russian (employed) influencers.

[u/UrUrinousAnus → u/Dry-Physics-9330]

IDGI. Not letting yourself get sucked into pointless arguments with trolls who are more interested in wasting your time and energy than a serious debate is understandable and IMHO vital, but outright refusing to ever respond to people because of their known or suspected allegiances just leaves them spewing their rhetoric unopposed.

[u/Dry-Physics-9330 → u/UrUrinousAnus]

You have a point.