Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-23 and Invasion

[Razgovory]

Sad truth is that if you asked the populations of the US, UK, Italy and Germany  they'd probably be okay giving up the Baltics.  Hell, there are a lot of people who would side with Russia.

[ulmont]

What is a man?

A miserable little pile of secrets.

[Habbaku]

What is a man?

A miserable little pile of secrets.

Finally.

[Jacob]

Sad truth is that if you asked the populations of the US, UK, Italy and Germany  they'd probably be okay giving up the Baltics.  Hell, there are a lot of people who would side with Russia.

Scandinavia is pretty pro-Baltic. That's probably not enough to move the US or the UK, but it may make a difference for Germany and the EU.

[Berkut]

The Baltics are in NATO. Ukraine is not.

[Razgovory]

[Jacob]

Comparing "would" and "should" make it seem like the questions were picked for a particular result.

[Eddie Teach]

Comparing "would" and "should" make it seem like the questions were picked for a particular result.

Those sneaky Dutch, fixing polls to make themselves look good.

[Sheilbh]

Comparing "would" and "should" make it seem like the questions were picked for a particular result.

Yeah - but if you were a policy maker in the Baltics or Poland that poll is one of the reasons you are not super-hyped about the idea of increased European defence/autonomy v NATO.

There's also an element of almost a rent-seeking here of countries that economically benefit and loudly proclaim support for a "rules based liberal order" not being willing to bear the financial or political costs of actually maintaining that "order".

There's no doubt in my mind that from a political perspective the UK would absolutely defend the Baltic States and Poland - the last month or so have seen a lot of diplomatic activity in Eastern Europe (financial support and military deals and cooperation with Ukraine signed by Defence Secretary in Kyiv, joint exercises with Baltic States plus Foreign Secretary visiting, more troops being deployed at the request of Poland and Lithuania plus Polish PM visiting UK and Defence and Foreign Secretary visiting Warsaw). It's also not particularly partisan - now - so I think, if anything, Labour is more robust on Russia and China than the Tories, and I think there is broad support for NATO and a reasonable degree of support for the idea that as an ally we would have to get involved.

I suspect in the UK it's partly because polling shows that Russia is seen as the biggest threat to security in the world which I suspect is linked to the Skripal murder because I think that really shifted opinions in the UK and I wonder if because someone was murdered in a sleepy, pretty cathedral town by Russian security agents with Novichok we see Russia in more of a similar way as the Baltics. It's a threat to our security and though we're physically very distant it feels a little more front-lline because of that murder.

[grumbler]

Comparing "would" and "should" make it seem like the questions were picked for a particular result.

How would you improve the poll?  It seems to me that the questions compare what a person thinks their own country should do versus what they predict the US would do.  What they think the US would do is illuminating as to what they think their own country should do (i.e. is their own involvement dependent on "let the US do it").  A third question about what the people of each country think the US should do would be interesting, but not as illuminating.

[Jacob]

Comparing "would" and "should" make it seem like the questions were picked for a particular result.

How would you improve the poll?  It seems to me that the questions compare what a person thinks their own country should do versus what they predict the US would do.  What they think the US would do is illuminating as to what they think their own country should do (i.e. is their own involvement dependent on "let the US do it").  A third question about what the people of each country think the US should do would be interesting, but not as illuminating.

I think comparing "should" to "should" or "would" to "would" would be more illustrative. Either include both sets of questions or pick one set to focus on.

[Razgovory]

I must be reading this wrong, because I thought it did compare "should and should not"

[Jacob]

I must be reading this wrong, because I thought it did compare "should and should not"

Here's what I understand the poll to be asking people:

If Russia starts shit with a NATO ally:

Question 1: SHOULD your own country send soldiers to defend the NATO ally or SHOULD IT NOT?
(I.e. is it the right thing for your country to risk its soldiers' lives to defend the ally)

Question 2: WOULD the US send soldiers to defend the NATO ally or WOULD IT NOT?
(I.e. do you think the US would intervene, independently of whether it is the right thing to do or not)

But to my eye, the way the information is presented - and comparing the two questions - makes it very easy to conclude that a non-trivial number of people are are saying "the US should defend NATO allies, but we're not going to bother." Which maybe some people do think, and if they do it's kind of bullshit, but the poll doesn't actually provide the information to draw that conclusion.

The fact that the two questions are so similar but carry significantly different meanings also opens the possibility that the respondents confused the meaning of the two questions when they answered.

[garbon]

I must be reading this wrong, because I thought it did compare "should and should not"

Here's what I understand the poll to be asking people:

If Russia starts shit with a NATO ally:

Question 1: SHOULD your own country send soldiers to defend the NATO ally or SHOULD IT NOT?
(I.e. is it the right thing for your country to risk its soldiers' lives to defend the ally)

Question 2: WOULD the US send soldiers to defend the NATO ally or WOULD IT NOT?
(I.e. do you think the US would intervene, independently of whether it is the right thing to do or not)

But to my eye, the way the information is presented - and comparing the two questions - makes it very easy to conclude that a non-trivial number of people are are saying "the US should defend NATO allies, but we're not going to bother." Which maybe some people do think, and if they do it's kind of bullshit, but the poll doesn't actually provide the information to draw that conclusion.

The fact that the two questions are so similar but carry significantly different meanings also opens the possibility that the respondents confused the meaning of the two questions when they answered.

How does it not provide relevent information. You answer if you think your own country should defend the ally or not. Then afterward you get asked if you think the US would.

So for instance in 2017 conclusion was: Europeans generally expect the U.S. to use military force to defend a NATO ally from a Russian attack, but they are less supportive of using their own armed forces under the same circumstances.

Doesn't really seem anything misleading in that.

Also the survey has been running for years with that same question set, so are you suggesting people were confused every year?

[Sheilbh]

But to my eye, the way the information is presented - and comparing the two questions - makes it very easy to conclude that a non-trivial number of people are are saying "the US should defend NATO allies, but we're not going to bother." Which maybe some people do think, and if they do it's kind of bullshit, but the poll doesn't actually provide the information to draw that conclusion.

Isn't that definitely going to be something people think though? For example any anti-war anti-American people (which isn't necessarily a small category) probably think that their country shouldn't be involved but the US definitely will - I think that's a big part of why Italy and Greece are at the top of the difference comparison.

The fact that the two questions are so similar but carry significantly different meanings also opens the possibility that the respondents confused the meaning of the two questions when they answered.

Is that not only the case in English though where you could get a should/would confusion especially if they're close.