I would feel threatened and humiliated with the constant media attacks ("Russia influenced the election" never mind that this is a colossal security failure on the US ), Olympic doping scandal, banning of RT (whom Hilary Clinton testified were 'Very Good') and so on. So count me delusional on this one. — FreeEmotion
I think anyone in his right mind would feel it, with years and years of sanctions and highlighting the persecution of Russian opposition leaders. — FreeEmotion
In reality the acceptance into NATO has to be unanimous , there are some dissenters out there. — FreeEmotion
So preventing them from joining NATO and allowing this catastrophe was the better choice? Is it really?
How could anyone argue against preventing an invasion without anyone getting killed? By the way this would have stopped my presumed hero, Putin. — FreeEmotion
The same way the British invaded 80% (invaded or otherwise acquired) of the world? Just want to clarify that the King or Kings of England whoever they were was, " an authoritarian leader who openly speaks of the "empire", who by force tries to claim land and increase that empire's borders". That would be consistent. The same way the Spanish, Portuguese, Germans and others created empires? — FreeEmotion
Maybe Putin is living in the past. — FreeEmotion
The United States has not threatened Sweden or Finland, but I think they may be the rare exceptions. — FreeEmotion
Putin is authoritarian, yes. He is also entitled to an opinion. If you say he should have found a better way to achieve his goals without invading a country and causing mayhem then that is valid. Maybe he is not smart enough to do that. Or maybe that was impossible. So what does he do? Give up on his goals? — FreeEmotion
Might as well ask the Ukranians to stop fighting after 14 years and save lives. The fighting is going to stop sometime, so totaling up a high body count to make a point is one option, but I do not support it. — FreeEmotion
I wouldn't rule out an internal attack. Putin is extremely protected, but it's realistic that, for example, someone in his "lifeguard" (security personnel) put a bullet in him, maybe because that person saw his son burn up in a tank in Ukraine.
NATO is a defensive alliance that accepts anyone who wants to join who both are accepted by all members of NATO and also shows itself to be a stable nation. — Christoffer
I'll tell you how it doesn't expand - it doesn't expand by countries asking "hey can you let me in?" and NATO going "mmmm, OK since you asked so nicely, yeah totally". It's not a fucking gentlemen's club. It's a strategic decision — StreetlightX
and ideally, one not made by morons who, knowing full well that Russia has literally been to war over this very issue before, think, ah fuck it, lets keep arming Ukraine and making moves to expand the European sphere of influence Eastward. — StreetlightX
This notion of an innocent, doe-eyed NATO (and EU) just waving people in willy nilly because they asked nicely is just as stupid as your Harry Potter theory of Mad King Putin. — StreetlightX
Yeah, and I bet they also hand out free rainbows and unicorns to those who write nice letters to them too. — StreetlightX
Strategic by the nation asking or NATO — Christoffer
They accept so long as it's a unanimous decision to accept as well as the nation being a stable nation that is also dedicated to helping other members of NATO, primarily, have shown good diplomacy with these nations in the past — Christoffer
Oh yes, I forgot that this thing called communication exists. Clearly, once a nation asks, NATO just has to let them right the fuck in if they fit the bureaucratic criteria. That's clearly, totally how things work, and not a fucking cartoon picture. — StreetlightX
Jesus Christ. Listen. I've come into alot of money recently because my uncle is an Australian prince from the Irwin dynasty, and he left me all this money in his will, and I need someone to store it for me while I sort out some accounting stuff. If you give me USD $50,000, I promise I will give you like, USD $2 million in return. It's just for a bit. If you can DM me your account details, that'd be great.
I just figure if you actually believe this utter naive bullshit that you wrote, I may as well give this a go. — StreetlightX
In the (post-Crimea annexation) context of the latest Russian invasion of Ukraine, and thereby imminent threat to former Eastern Bloc nations, Isaac, your question is a trivial non sequitur at best.What is it about my question that no-one wants to answer it?It seemed quite simple.What is the advantage in exculpating the US and Europe? — Isaac
:100: :clap:I don't know, but I know that the only advantage of blaming the West for this war, is to exculpate Putin. — Olivier5
Don't be so hard on yourself, comrade. :smirk:This is a stupid thing to say, said only by stupid people. — StreetlightX
The only ones I left with an impression of having met a true professional and not an inexperienced joker, were the Indian and the Russian embassies. — Olivier5
You don't know what I campaign or support outside of this discussion. — Christoffer
Show me where Jens Stoltenberg acts as a puppet for US affairs. — Christoffer
Minister Cavusoglu and I also discussed Turkey´s ongoing operation in Northern Syria … Turkey has legitimate security concerns … Turkey is a great power in this great region and with great power comes great responsibility… - NATO Joint press conference, 11 Oct. 2019
The United States has not threatened Sweden or Finland, but I think they may be the rare exceptions. — FreeEmotion
Yes. Yes. Yes. Their eyes were open alright, because they cared, and they were markedly more humble than the westerners I met. The mood among the latter was nervous, bossy, angry, naïve, and condescending to the highest degree, even when they didn't know they were.Which is not surprising given that India and Russia are neighbors. — Apollodorus
Why, there's no nation made of angels. The French bombed indiscriminately entire villages off the map in Syria, Algeria, Vietnam etc. The Germans, well... Need I go on? The important thing is to learn from such things, internalize the guilt, accept one's national destiny as, well, not so manifest or exceptional after all... Digest history. That's a big part of the European project in my view.Now they are laughing at Putin's problems in Ukraine. IMO they should look at their own disasters in Afghanistan and Iraq. Not to mention Vietnam ... :smile:
But he isn't delusional!!! I'm not sure where you see the illogicality here. — ssu
What is so hard to understand that Russia see's the West as a threat AND has territorial aspirations on the territory of it's neighbors? — ssu
if I say that this war is Putin's fault, it doesn't mean that the US or NATO has done everything right. — ssu
What is false to think that all this is happening because of the US wants to enlarge NATO and nothing else. — ssu
I responded to the way you fragment out points out of context of a whole argument. This is a way to effectively strawman through formatting. I don't fall for that. — Christoffer
published papers as a source that has much greater unbias than anything else — Christoffer
The great tragedy is this entire affair was avoidable. Had the United States and its European allies not succumbed to hubris, wishful thinking and liberal idealism, and relied instead on realism’s core insights, the present crisis would not have occurred. Indeed, Russia would probably never have seized Crimea, and Ukraine would be safer today. The world is paying a high price for relying on a flawed theory of world politics.
Since the dissolution of the USSR, Ukraine has had pro-Russia prime ministers until Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych was ousted after 10 years in office in what was widely seen as a ‘color revolution,’ engineered by the US.
If Americans could worry that much about a tiny country like Nicaragua, why was it so hard to understand why Russia might have some serious misgivings about the steady movement of the world’s mightiest alliance toward its borders?
You aren't making the argument that they share blame, you make the argument "it's the west's fault". — Christoffer
I asked for sources that support your actual counterargument, you have not shown the connection — Christoffer
Show me an instance where Jens Stoltenberg has done this towards Sweden and Finland. — Christoffer
The US seemed on a steady course to encircle Russia with its own version of ‘satellite’ states when the Bush administration nominated for NATO membership at the 2008 Bucharest Summit Georgia and Ukraine — states closest to Russia in ethnicity and even culture. (Stalin was from Georgia while Ukraine, whose official language is Russian, was part of the USSR from 1922 until the end of the Cold War, and the site of its nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles.)
The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels. … The documents reinforce former CIA Director Robert Gates’s criticism of ‘pressing ahead with expansion of NATO eastward [in the 1990s], when Gorbachev and others were led to believe that wouldn’t happen.’ …
At a summit in Helsinki, Clinton promised to give Yeltsin four billion dollars in investment in 1997, as much as the U.S. had provided in the five years prior, while also dangling W.T.O. membership and other economic inducements. In return, Russia would effectively allow unencumbered NATO enlargement. Yeltsin worried that these measures could be perceived as ‘sort of a bribe,’ but, given Russia’s empty coffers and his uphill prospects for reëlection, he relented.
You still don't haven't provided a clear "other reason" or "cause" for Putin's invasion. Your sources are about the risk of influence of neonazis in Ukraine around 2014. How does that in any shape or form relate to Putin's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 or his reasons for aggressions over the course of his rule of authoritarian power? — Christoffer
What we shouldn’t do now is inflame the situation further through saber-rattling and warmongering. Whoever believes that a symbolic tank parade on the alliance’s eastern border will bring security is mistaken. We are well-advised to not create pretexts to renew an old confrontation
How so? — Isaac
Because it's a fucking research institute on the subject of Russia and Putin. — Christoffer
Either quote me blaming them for everything, or refrain from ascribing me views I've never espoused. — Isaac
It was a reversal of your argument to show you your own rhetoric. — Christoffer
Because it balances the facts. — Christoffer
Again, please don't just assign views to me without sources. Where have I dismissed any notion of Putin's guilt? — Isaac
Where have you connected Putin's guilt to be partly the west's? — Christoffer
Interesting historical fact: Stalin asked the US to bomb Finland during WW2. The United States rejected this as the two countries were not at war. In fact, the US never declared war to Finland during WW2. Only on June 30th 1944 the US broke off diplomatic relations with Finland when President Ryti, in order to get more assistance from Germany, signed personally an alliance with Germany and issued promises that Finland wouldn't seek a separate peace with Russia. Which naturally it did immediately and which it got after a month in September 1944. Then Finns started fighting their old brothers-in-arms. A Dolchstoss and proud of it!The United States has not threatened Sweden or Finland, but I think they may be the rare exceptions. — FreeEmotion
And how much do you blame the Dutch of the fighting that they took part from May 10th to May 14th 1940?There's a saying in Dutch : where two people are fighting, two are to blame. — Benkei
That Belarus would join the war I find hard to believe (as you do also).Belarus appears to have entered the war yesterday based on imint. This is pure desperation. Belarus just had a year of mass uprisings against the Russian backed regime. - On another note, I guess I was behind. Belorussians are already sabotaging railways and transport for the Russians, with some groups forming.
More mass arrests Sunday, unclear about Monday. They are clamping down on information. — Count Timothy von Icarus
This would be the craziest thing ever. So a country, that has had no hostile intentions against Ukraine, no animosity, has had not long ago major popular demonstrations against the ruling regime, would then go an participate in a war that their President has until now said that they aren't part of. Wouldn't make sense. I'd wait for real confirmation on this. — ssu
Which is precisely why I argued to "sacrifice" Ukraine at an earlier stage, e.g. repeal earlier promises and overtures for it to join the EU and NATO. I also wondered why trustworthiness was so low on the list of priorities for NATO and particularly the US. I can only think of two answers, incompetence or another goal. If it's another goal, then finding grounds for more extreme sanctions seems the only reliable one. In which case the US provoked a war for entirely economic reasons.
That, or we are to accept that the Ukraine has a strategic military purpose but then I question why it's not actually defended. So I ain't buy that, particularly because Turkey, a NATO member, can close access to the Mediterranean. — Benkei
But even if the paper mentions all the actors we've all mentioned, it's very clear, if the paper is a truly leaked paper, that all of this is Putin's delusional dreams of a new Russian empire.
I really would like to know if that paper is real. Hard to verify things during propaganda machines on both sides during a conflict. — Christoffer
So, the nukes come with attached diplomacy and networking to make sure everyone does not become trigger happy. Putin included.
All countries with nukes are licensed to kill. But being licensed to kill does not mean your nuclear ambition and decision are your decision only. — L'éléphant
I think the likelihood of nuclear deployment is small. But if Putin didn't think it would be considered even remotely as a serious threat, then why would he bother issuing it? — Janus
That is what the Ukraine ambassador to the U.N. was referring to by suggesting Putin cut to the chase and shoot himself like "that guy in Berlin, you know, in 45." — Paine
Since ssu and @Christoffer seem so keen on ascribing to me positions I don't hold, I thought I'd make a post here to easily refer to.
I think the recent invasion of Ukraine was caused mostly by Putin's autocratic desire for a Russian empire.
I think that's also the least interesting and least important cause.
It's the least interesting because no one should be surprised by it, he's been saying as much for years.
It's the least important because none of us have any influence at all in Russia. The Russians themselves are doing a sterling job of opposing the war from their end.
Our concern is the extent to which our actions, mistakes, and systematic policies have lead to this. How, faced with a despotic leader intent on empire building, we did absolutely fuck all about it, but rather just made the situation worse by warmongering and sabre-rattling.
Our concern is the institutions which benefit from war, regime change, post-war reconstruction and a broken economy on its knees seeking loans to which we can attach punitive terms. — Isaac
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.