I propose the easiest way for the West to defeat Putin and Xi. — Linkey

The only thing wrong with your plan is that it will never work. Oh, wait, another thing - opening up the possibility of a limited nuclear war makes it much more likely. Seems to me that any nuclear war between the US and Russia will inevitably lead to an all-out exchange of warheads. The only way to win is not to play.

what are they fighting for? For censorship and repression? — Linkey

From a general non-political non-specific state of affairs:

The "censorship" angle would hold more water if it weren't always the most awful uneducated POS' advocating for it simply so they can be better awful educated POS' and annoy and irreparably damage society with impunity. They sully their own argument, reasoning, and purpose without realizing it, and so, the best option for those who oppose them is, well, continue to let them do so!

It's not the young articulate scholar with innocent, nontraditional or nonconforming ideas who is being censored, it's the again, see above, types who in their weakness and malleability allowed themselves to be molded into a destroyed state of being by the other negative persons in their life and society who can now only do the same unto others. It's a disease, plain and simple. Disease requires quarantine. Spies or "apolitical" "anarchists" are a real thing. People who couldn't care less about the words or ideas they're attempting to make themselves seen as associated with or advocating for, but the political results and end goals they are attempting to achieve, which is instability along with fear and paranoia among a given populous with the intent of weakening patriotic resolve with again, the goal, of weakening or perhaps better yet, toppling, a nation state.

At least, that's the counterargument. And from, again, a general, non-political, non-specific state of affairs, remains solid in truth. There's also often a religious angle ("the way God wishes man to be") ie. (presumably) a state of peace, charity, understanding, and well-to-do nature toward fellow man. Anything or anyone opposite of that might cause God to turn away from said nation or for it to "lose favor" and fall. So, anyone who deviates from this "divinely intended way to live" is a literal life-and-death existential threat to the survival of millions. So, whatever must be done, must be done. "For the sake of the children", of course. And who couldn't get behind that? "What are you against children?" Check plus mate. mate. :smirk:

In short, your idea, while noble in intent, falls short and remains both woefully out-of-touch as well as out-of-date as far as any hope for a strategic change in any ongoing conflict or state of affairs. And no I'm not ignorant of the fact that totalitarian regimes are a bad idea, even when initially formed truly with all the intent and purpose they were purported to be, defend, and stand for. Simply for the reason they never last, rather corruption is the natural state of man and without checks and balances and outside input and restriction, will inevitably return to said state. Never fails. Just informing you of how other people think.

Oh, wait, another thing - opening up the possibility of a limited nuclear war makes it much more likely. — T Clark

If this risk exists, maybe a better decision will be using this approach against the CCP instead of Putin. The US should declare and spread this information in the Chinese web: the US will install a military base in Taiwan, but they can reverse this decision if CCP performs a referendum in China, with the suggestions to unblock youtube and wikipedia in the Chinese web. I am sure this can work.

The US government doesn't want to provoke a war or attempt to bring about social changes through threats.

The US government doesn't want to provoke a war or attempt to bring about social changes through threats. — frank

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement

Right. The US just isn't in an aggressive mood right now. Though Biden is a hawk (one who is quick to military action), the US on the whole is isolationist. Russia or China would actually have to attack the US to get Americans to approve of war.

Remember, Americans don't threaten war unless they're prepared to follow through. They don't have the mindset of unnecessarily antagonizing countries they aren't in a position to destroy, and that's what they would be thinking about with regard to a war with Russia: complete destruction of Russia's ability to wage war.

I live in Russia (please note that I support Ukraine). — Linkey

If so, please be careful @Linkey. And welcome to the Forum.

I am sure that Russians will vote in this referendum to end the war. If the war continues, Russian soldiers will be unable to fight, because they will suffer from cognitive dissonance - what are they fighting for? For censorship and repression? — Linkey

All the Russian emigrants living in my country that I've spoken to don't like what Putin did by attacking Ukraine, many were simply horrified, but then again they don't live Russia. Only once have I seen in 2014 in Helsinki two young Russian men openly in public wearing the black orange stripes of the ribbon of Saint George. Yet 2014 isn't 2022 or today.

Yet I think there are still Russians who support the war simply fearing what will happen to Russia if the war is lost. You see, Russia isn't a normal nation-state, it still is built on an Empire. That's the real problem. Still many Russians believe Catherine the Great's words: "I have no way to defend my borders but to extend them." This pure imperialism hasn't yet died in your country.

And the worst thing is that now other countries simply won't trust Russia. You did totally surpise the West with the collapse of the Soviet Union, but it was Russia itself wanting the destruction of the Empire.

Assume if Putin's regime falls and new not so hostile towards the West administration takes over. Well, a lot of people in the West won't believe that this administration will continue to hold firmly power and assume that we can in the West might (again) wake up with coup again in Moscow and a new regime that builds statues for Putin the Great and declares to the Russian people how evil the West is and how it's real intention is to destroy Russia.

I hope I will not violate the forum rules, if I propose the easiest way for the West to defeat Putin and Xi. First, the United States should reconsider its nuclear doctrine, and declare that the use of US nuclear weapons is possible only in the form of a symmetrical response. If Putin nukes one city, the United States would nuke one Russian city, if Putin nukes ten, the United States would nike ten, and so on. — Linkey

With nuclear weapons there's always strategic ambiguity: you won't really tell what you're response is and even if you tell it, it's likely that others won't believe you. And you don't want to tie your hands. Now it is likely that a nuclear exchange might well become a tit-for-tat, isn't at all sure that nuclear war would go this way. Once you have crossed the line and have used nukes, it's a whole new World: use of nuclear weapons is normal. People will adapt to it.

The Achilles heel of modern totalitarian regimes is freedom of speech. It’s why they incessantly try to control the narrative with a mix of censorship, propaganda, and brute force. But all it takes is a small percentage of citizens to stop thinking in their terms and the downfall begins.

Yet I think there are still Russians who support the war simply fearing what will happen to Russia if the war is lost. You see, Russia isn't a normal nation-state, it still is built on an Empire. That's the real problem. Still many Russians believe Catherine the Great's words: "I have no way to defend my borders but to extend them." This pure imperialism hasn't yet died in your country. — ssu

Do you know about the democratic peace theory?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_peace_theory

Democratic countries unite instead of dissipating, and the people in the West must try to make the Russians know about that.
Again, if the West is afraid of Putin's nukes, maybe the most weak points of the Evil is China: as I have suggested, the US should declare that they will build military bases on Taiwan unless a referendum is performed in PRC with a suggestion to unban youtube. I think this is really a strong idea: as far as I know, many people in China (probably most) don't like the censorship in their country and the social credit system. I am sure that they will vote for unblocking the youtube, and this will quickly make the democratization of China the only way for Xi. After that, the same processes will start in Russia.

maybe a better decision will be using this approach against the CCP instead of Putin. — Linkey

All your ideas likely would lead immediately to an all-out war with a good chance of proceeding to nuclear. Your naivety, if echoed by people with power, will lead to the death of my children.

Do you know about the democratic peace theory? — Linkey

Yes, but I don't unfortunately believe it.

United Kingdom declared war to Finland in December 5th 1941. I assume the both countries were then democracies even back then. (And do notice that the US never declared war to Finland, it only severed diplomatic ties as late as 30th July 1944, only few months before Finland declared war on it's de-facto ally Germany.)

And republics in Latin America have gone to war with each other, latest being the Cenepa war in 1995. And basically both Pakistan and India have been democracies, even if Pakistan has had it's share of military rule. Hence I would argue that being democracies lowers the risk of war between countries, but it doesn't erase the possibility.

Democratic countries unite instead of dissipating, and the people in the West must try to make the Russians know about that. — Linkey

Well, sorry, democracies seem far more weaker and undetermined than they actually are.

And I would urge that this is something that Russians themselves have to do. You already have had a proto-democracy in your history in the state of Novgorod, so you could easily built on that and finally overthrow the idea that Russia needs a Tzar or otherwise it collapses, which I view as nonsense.

as I have suggested, the US should declare that they will build military bases on Taiwan unless a referendum is performed in PRC with a suggestion to unban youtube. I think this is really a strong idea: as far as I know, many people in China (probably most) don't like the censorship in their country and the social credit system. — Linkey

Unfortunately those actions would only consolidate the position of the Chinese communist party and it's supporters. There would be many in the West who would see this as an imperialist attack on China and reckless warmongering.

Sorry, but the only ones that truly can liberate the Russians are the Russians themselves and so it is for the Chinese too.

I have written on Medium an article describing my idea:

https://medium.com/@grandrienko22/the-achilles-heel-of-modern-authoritarian-regimes-699c25d6d9a8

Can anybody help me with the information, how can I pay for boosting (promoting) this article in Medium? I was unable to google this information.

United Kingdom declared war to Finland in December 5th 1941. I assume the both countries were then democracies even back then. — ssu

Of course there are some counter-arguments against the theory, but they do not matter really much. Finland had to join Germany because Germany started a war against the enemy of Finland. A similar situation was an alliance between USA and the Saudi Arabia, because Saddam became the enemy of the latter.
And there is no case in histiry where a war of annihilation (sorry if my English was bad, I hope I was understood) occured between two democratic countries (well, maybe we can speculate about ancient Greece, my knowledge of it is incomplete).