War in Ukraine | Should the West intervene militarily?

Reactions were numerous and divided to the text “The West must intervene militarily” by Rémi Landry, retired lieutenant-colonel of the Canadian Armed Forces and associate professor at the University of Sherbrooke, published on March 9. Here is an overview of the emails received.

Posted at 12:00 p.m.

I share this opinion. I am deeply touched in my humanity, as I have never been before. We must have the COURAGE of our convictions. This time, I believe that we will pay dearly for our inaction. It’s high time to crush the snake’s head.

Arlette Raymond

It would be to provoke Russia and provide it with a reason to use nuclear weapons. Such a request is irresponsible.

carol harvey

Finally, a realistic discourse that brings real solutions. Even if the Russian president threatens, I’m sure he’ll think twice before attacking NATO head-on. But if he wants to go, I’m sure there are highly qualified people within the Russian military who realize that this challenge is arrogant and too risky for Russia itself. NATO missed a great opportunity to prove its integrity, just like the League of Nations (LON) in 1939. Finally, the current governance of the UN Security Council is, in my opinion, outdated. The right of veto is no longer constructive, because decisions are no longer taken with regard to the mission of the organization (to protect people), but according to geopolitical interests and the balance of power between factions with opposing interests. . Only a democratic vote where all have equal weight would maintain its value.

Jocelyn Boyer

Dear sir, you omit to mention the risk of nuclear escalation, argument number 1 against the establishment of the no fly zone, and you offer no concrete strategy. It’s unfortunate, but the Ukrainian people will probably have to lay down their arms and resign themselves to end the cycle of violence. Putin’s reign will end one day. There is no valid reason for going to war, on one side or the other. “To die for ideas of agreement, but of slow death…” (G. Brassens)

Pierre Cote, Shefford

Unfortunately, our governments, and certainly American governments as well as Russian ones, have relied on nuclear weapons as a deterrent since the end of World War II. What nonsense ! All it takes is a spark to trigger chaos, hundreds of millions of deaths! Yes, the apocalypse! Far from preventing war, nuclear weapons and the fear of their use justify non-interference and laissez-faire. Paradoxically, the only statesman who had the audacity to question it was a Russian! His name was Mikhail Gorbachev.

Mario Leclerc

You are out of touch, sir: an intervention in Ukraine by NATO forces will precipitate us into World War III, an apocalyptic situation. We must navigate this conflict tactfully… as we are doing right now.

Claude Renaud

While fearing a world war, I’m afraid you’re right.

Mario Courchesne

I entirely share your point of view, Mr. Landry, like probably most of the good people who follow the daily evolution of this terrible massacre. But what is the opinion of a people worth against leaders who prefer sanctions to action.

Denise Lafond

Totally disagree with you. Going into World War III would be madness. The intervention in Bosnia/Serbia/Croatia was under the aegis of the UN and it was blue helmets who were sent to restore peace, and not to fight on one side or the other.

Johanne Fleury

I admit that we feel more and more a great discomfort not to intervene when we see all these horrors that the Ukrainian people undergo. What if it was us?

Odette Lapointe

Unfortunately in agreement… but, “ideally”, by a surgical intervention carried out by a small NATO team, and very precisely targeted at Putin and his immediate political and military entourage. Very sadly…

Francine Trempe

Totally agree with that. Putin is reinforced in his decision, because he knows that democratic countries are afraid to act. After Ukraine, who will it be?

Roger Bergeron

I recognize that the author is right on several points, but he does not really address a fundamental component in this conflict: the extraordinary nuclear power available to this tyrant. There is a significant paradigm shift here. We are no longer in Rwanda in 1994. How to deal with a dictator whose state of mind we do not really know and who has the capacity to return the world to the Stone Age? This seems to me to be the fundamental issue currently for the Western powers. Any answer must take this paradigm into account.

Alain Blanchette, Montreal

Without being a specialist in these matters, I tend to think like you, Mr. Landry. To let Putin do is to deny who we are and to assume that our international charters and institutions are in fact nothing but sham. In short, it is to renounce democracy and humanity.

Elise Roy

Indeed, it is not with economic sanctions that we will save Ukraine. We must act now and with force. Air exclusion over Ukraine is the only option that will give local forces a fighting chance against the Russian invader. As far as the UN is concerned, the right of veto of the five countries should have been abolished a long time ago or, at the very least, better regulated to prevent a party to a conflict from using its veto .

Daniel Despres, Trois-Rivieres


source site-58