I don’t know why but this video of Russian soldiers allowing CNN to film them is odd. — NOS4A2

Antonov Airport is just next to Kiev. Few kilometers from the city limits. Having there paratroops means that the armored spearheads from Belarus and the Russian border have to quickly come there. The paratroops cannot hang out there alone for a long time, even if they get reinforcements by plane. Hence it's likely that Putin will try to go for the jugular and take (surround) the capital and put a new pro-Russian government into place.

But at least there's one improvement: the CNN journalist is saying that they are Russian paratroops, not "little green men" who people don't know who they are. His observations of what is likely going to happen is quite realistic.

Maybe a letter from some relatively powerless local authority members from around the corner in the neighborhood doesn't count for much (I'm not sure), but it's something. — jamalrob

It's a lot, actually.

It's the only thing that will stop imperialists like Putin.

The Russians themselves. Nobody else will do anything. Or can do.

Those scientists and journalists who condemn Russia's actions and speak the truth are very courageous people who at this moment dare to say this. The "cancel culture" in Putin's Russia, especially when the country is at war, is totally different from the woke sillyness in the West.

Likely what those scientists and journalists will get from the West are accusations of being Western stooges. Surely they have links to George Soros!

Yet I believe there are many Russians who understand what is happening and how wrong it is. Many in Russia likely believed the lie, promoted here also, that all this war-talk was just all US hype. That Russia wouldn't invade. Well, Putin did invade, did widen the war to a totally different scale. To many other places than in the Donbass. Russians are fed up with dictators, but as they do have one, they have been still silent. And if in 2014 the case looked different, it is undeniable that many Russian speaking in Crimea were for joining Russia, now attacking Kiev is a different thing. For the Russians, this is similarly futile war as invading Afghanistan.

Maybe this will push us together, Swedish and Finnish alliance, strengthening our entire line of defense. — Christoffer

Our politicians agree with this. But it's actions, not words that are important.

And there are historical experiences of this. We here often forget that there were Swedish volunteers fighting in our Winter War and Continuation War. And notable portion of Swedish Air Force fighters participated in the Winter War with (Flygflottilj 19 and it's 5 Hawker Hearts and 12 Gloster Gladiators (with the three crowns insignia covered up). This actually was important as there were absolutely no Finnish fighter aircraft to spare to defend the aerospace over Lapland.

(Swedish fighters during the Winter War in Lapland)


Yet let's see.

Some of our politicians might still insist that this isn't our mess, we are out this picture. Or that let's not make it worse by angering the bear. And that our non-alignment policy has worked well. And the fact is, it's not that Putin has territorial ambitions over Sweden or even Finland. His ambition is to control the foreign policy of our countries, to put a wedge between us and NATO countries. He would be extremely happy, if Finnish government would start acting the same way as it did during the Cold War: never saying a bad thing about Russia and being a mouthpiece for at certain issues. That is the real issue with our countries.

What we need now is genuine leadership from our leaders, not denials that everything is OK...with us and Russia.

The US government says he doesn't have the ability to occupy Ukraine. It's a logistics problem.

He can attack and make changes, leave a Russian military presence, but that's it. — frank

As he has stated, his objective is to destroy the Ukrainian military.

Åland Island are even demilitarized, so it's an easy picking for Putin, if that would happen. The border guards over there aren't much of a match and Russian helicopters have the range to fly there.

Now as tough sanctions (as EU members) and counter-sanctions from Russia will already happen, it does beg the question of what is the point? It dawned to me before the corona epidemic when sitting in the soldiers home in the local military garrison with fellow reservists and Finnish career officers and watched young British soldiers eating pizza. We are just fooling ourselves here with the non-aligned thing. Or simply giving this fig-leaf to Putin not to act.

But he clearly intends to restore some of the Russian Empire, which I believe he is perfectly entitled to do. — Apollodorus

At least as a troll, you are honestly open with your views. And people can make up their minds about your ideas.

IMO all the talk of Europe becoming "more united" in the face of Russian aggression is nonsense, as it obviously is an artificial and temporary unity that cannot possibly last as long as Europe is dominated by powers on its outskirts, like France and Britain — Apollodorus

Funny delusions again. Thanks to Putin, old NATO is back again. The Russian are feared and despised, The Ukrainians are fucked, and NATO is united. Yeah, great moves from Putin!

(notice that this interview was before the Russian invasion)


The real question is if that enthusiasm that was for the annexation Crimea holds now in Russia.

For us in Europe, especially Sweden, we have a real risk of invasion of our island Gotland since it's a strategic military point to govern the entire Baltic sea. So it is quite possible that the process to join NATO is fast and it will include Sweden and Finland — Christoffer

Yeah I think exactly the same. This conflict and issue would make the European nations to regroup and stay together, reinforcing the treaties and cooperation. EU has to take of it and not lead anyone to make a gap among the members and alliances. — javi2541997

And that's the big question for us. Hopefully both Sweden and Finland can decide together if to join NATO. Not to make a move behind the other one's back, as the two countries have talked about military cooperation for so long now. Or the EU gets it act up (which it won't, but anyway)

And Putin has promised a swift and tough measures if Finland applies to NATO. Of course, it see both Sweden and Finland already as allies of NATO, that's for sure. The B-52s flying over Sweden in exercises just days ago makes this obvious.

Of course we can insist that a) this doesn't matter to us, b) we have good relations with Russia and c) joining NATO isn't current for us.

In other words, we just finlandize us again. Which obviously is what Putin really wants us to do.

It pays to remember just how many WMDs were found in Iraq and what the intelligence community thought it knew and how that was spun by politicians and Powell in particular.

Edit: let me translate that "anybody who believes the US and UK narrative is an idiot". — Benkei

That was a week ago @Benkei. You still think so?

(At least I admitted I got Covid wrong at start, thanks to you and others, I changed my mind. It was a pandemic, not media hype.)

The problem is that there's a mentally challenged lunatic called Putin who is indirectly threatening with nuclear weapons. — Christoffer

Which he possibly can use.

In the Stalinist rhetoric to ESCALATE TO DE-ESCALATE the war. Russia’s military doctrine dictates the use of nuclear weapons in response to any non-nuclear assault on Russian territory.

The doctrine goes like this: make a conventional attack, try destroying the enemy and reaching your military objectives by conventional means. Once that starts not to have the desired effect and your attack stalls, use tactical nuclear weapons to bully the opponent into a favorable terms for you and you obtain those objectives you wanted.

See Escalate To De-Escalate: Russia’s Nuclear Deterrence Strategy

See Russia’s Crazy Nuclear War Strategy: Escalation...to De-escalate?

This is something the Russia HAS TRAINED IN MILITARY Exercises. First a conventional war, then use of nuclear weapons in the end. For de-escalation.

Because WE KNOW from Fukushima, a nuclear accident that didn't kill anyone (as when the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami killed nearly 20 000) the World just remembers Fukushima.

One low yield tactical nuke will do it. The world will go crazy to demand the immediate cessation of hostilities. People will forget the Ukraine doesn't have nuclear weapons. They will easily be lured into thinking that all-out nuclear war is imminent between the US and Russia. And Putin will show how STRONG he is. People like Trump will continue to admire him.

Now it's time for the conventional cruise missiles, the MLRS attacks and attacks from everywhere even from Belarus.

Yeah. We do have states, nations and governments. They have to operate somehow. How they operate is that evil you talk about: politics. If you think anarchy is the answer, that is a political idea some people don't like.

If it is true that Putin was assured that NATO membership was out of the negotiating table for them, then he had to act somehow, it seems to me. — Manuel

Interesting fact:

Vladimir Putin wanted Russia to join Nato but did not want his country to have to go through the usual application process and stand in line “with a lot of countries that don’t matter”, according to a former secretary general of the transatlantic alliance.

George Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary who led Nato between 1999 and 2003, said Putin made it clear at their first meeting that he wanted Russia to be part of western Europe. “They wanted to be part of that secure, stable prosperous west that Russia was out of at the time,” he said.

The Labour peer recalled an early meeting with Putin, who became Russian president in 2000. “Putin said: ‘When are you going to invite us to join Nato?’ And [Robertson] said: ‘Well, we don’t invite people to join Nato, they apply to join Nato.’ And he said: ‘Well, we’re not standing in line with a lot of countries that don’t matter.’”

And that's actually how close it was. Or how far it was, as you would have needed larger than life politicians to sell that membership both to Russians and Americans. But you see, Americans thought they won the Cold War and didn't need Russia. And Russia can go always back into remembering Napoleon and Hitler.

I'm really not making it up when I say people were truly thinking of Russian partnership in NATO. Russia was in the partnership-for-peace program. It was the time of "new threats" for NATO when people laughed about thinking of article 5. Now Putin has molded NATO back to it's original form. If pre-2008 NATO didn't care anything about issues like defending the Baltic states from a hypothetical attack from Russia, now they sure do and also train for it.

Any and all forms of political activity are exercises in evil, and nothing else. — Garrett Travers

?

So they may ask for help. Who is willing to help them help beyond giving them weapons, as in offering troops, is not too clear. Maybe neighboring countries. — Manuel

The neighboring countries and US and UK are giving them weapons. Lots of talk about Anti-tank guided missiles and manportable surface-to-air missiles (of which earlier the US vacuumed Ukraine out of because it feared the effective weapon systems might fall into hands of terrorists). Poland and the Baltic States have given them weapons also. But NOBODY, absolutely nobody is going to send troops. At least officially. That would mean WW3.

The only like troops, if it comes to that, would be mercenaries. Mercenaries, the Russian Wagner Group and it's US counterparts might be used. Just like in Syria, where the US had a firefight with Russian mercenaries and killed many of them (and Putin didn't raise even a finger). And then the intelligence services are likely there, but they are far and few.

The last time US and Soviet fought each other was during the Korean War above North Korea. Then Stalin rotated Soviet fighter regiments as "North Koreans" to fight the US air force and some Soviet pilots even became aces. Both sides stayed silent about it because they didn't want to escalate the war.

Hopefully it's mostly a political scare, than anything beyond that. — Manuel

It's a political scare everywhere else than in Ukraine, where it is the widening of the war that has already gone on for years.

Russia have been extremely mild, like, Roman Abrhamovic, the owner of Chelsea, is completely fine. — Manuel

He isn't in Putin's inner circle. He was in Yeltsin's. And I guess recommending Yeltsin that Vladimir Putin would be his successor doesn't make you damned by the West.

Couldn't Russia just join NATO? :D — jorndoe

I remember very vividly in a presentation when a German military attache to Finland said right to my face in the mid 1990's that this was a possible option. Other Finns in the room smiled.

That was the reality in back then...when that NATO enlargement was going on.

First page. It doesn't shed much light on exactly what is happening now but it's worth looking at. — jamalrob

If one thinks that every bad event that happens in the World because of US policy, to think that this is happening ONLY because of NATO enlargement will seem reasonable. Yet then you shut your eyes on other facts (as some do here).

Starting from the obvious: Do notice what actually Putin is saying, repeatedly and constantly. For years now, but quite clearly repeating especially now. As you said yourself, it's odd. I agree.

That Ukraine is an artificial country. Of the ties Ukraine has to Russia. How all of the borders were only decisions (basically wrong ones) made by Lenin and Khrushchev. And do note the annexations. Not just military strikes, not just taking possible out the leadership and hopefully having a more friendly one put there, but actual territorial annexations, territory made Russian.

Ask yourself: If this would be just about the threat they perceive from NATO and NATO enlargement, would Putin be talking what he is talking and making territorial claims and annexations?

You see, if the US went all ballistic (even close literally going ballistic) when Russia positioned nuclear weapons to Cuba and was very close to invading Cuba, do note the difference. What do you make of it if JFK then would have said that Cuba was "artificial country" and had these ideas how Cuba and the US belong together? Last time US policy was similar to Putin's was in the 19th Century towards his northern and southern neighbors. And even if the first Cuban president was an US citizen, Cuba wasn't made part of the US, but an independent country where the US obviously had a say. Yet Crimea is a part of Russia, and that difference should be noted.

There actually is a lot of hopeful thinking in that Putin's actions are just a response to NATO enlargement. It is, of course, one reason, clearly stated as the number 1. threat in the Russian Military doctrine, but one should look at what Putin is actually doing. And this is why it's actually Putin that is creating a self-enforcing vicious circle, which just increases the fear of what his actual objectives are and where he will stop.

I don't think people realize just how incompetent Trump and the Republicans are on the world stage. — Christoffer

It's obvious that the whole party is a mess.

Do note that on the other hand, especially when not facing or speaking directly to the Trump supporting voters, large part of the Republicans behave totally normally and understand what has happened. Some interpret this as there being two factions, but remember how totally schizophrenic the Trump administration was itself. Yes, Trump praised Putin all the time and believed Putin instead of his intelligence services. However the administration was not at all so friendly to Putin's agenda. Especially the former generals, apart from the one that was the national security advisor for only a few days, were examples of the consistent long-term US foreign & security policy thinking. The Trump crazies were more or less limited to the media show and the spin cycle of Trump, where Trump basically personally operates (when he isn't watching at Fox News).

Even as Trump portrays himself as better-equipped to counter Putin, the majority of congressional Republicans are backing Biden’s vow to impose crushing sanctions on Russia after its troops entered eastern Ukraine on Tuesday. Some have even praised Biden’s moves, like the deployment of additional U.S. troops to Eastern Europe to boost NATO’s defenses.

But a vocal GOP minority on and off Capitol Hill — represented by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance, among others — has taken a third path, actively arguing against any U.S. involvement in the region while still dinging Biden. They argue that expanding the U.S. commitment to NATO is a mistake, and that the president should instead focus on countering China and securing America’s southern border.

That discordant chorus is making it harder for Republicans to craft a unified message on Russia the way it did during last year’s chaotic U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan or during Putin’s invasion of Crimea when Barack Obama was president in 2014.

Conservatives in the third, self-described “America First” camp contend that the GOP base is on their side, even as congressional Republicans are for the most part in line behind Ukraine and NATO.

It's like the public comments to the loonie crowd are one thing and then there is the actual policies implemented behind closed doors is something different. And yes, this is actually very worrying as it doesn't work well at all.

First Trump administration went somehow, if you have a SECOND Trump administration, oh boy...

So what are their alternatives? — frank

a) Costly buying from the SPOT-market, b) extend the use of nuclear energy as they have still three nuclear power plants working which are planned to be shut off this year and even switch on again some power plants that have been shut down, but still can be brought back to operation (which would be suicide for the Greens in the government), c) go humbly to your neighbors like Poland or France and ask to buy electricity at a high price, d) Make deals either with Norway or the US or others to buy LNG from them and have a crash program to build a LNG port in Germany or e) all of the above or some of the options mentioned above. Then there is of course option f) Act surprised when you have power outages and blame them on something, the weather, climate change, Putin's cyberwarfare or whatever you can invent that would seem acceptable to the ignorant voters.

Likely we won't see rolling blackouts in Germany, but who knows. It's basically a self inflicted wound as Germany opted to shut down all nuclear energy because of the Fukushima hysteria.

I think the Germans didn't see any problem earlier as the trade in energy went all fine with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. But history doesn't repeat itself and Putin has been active in using all tools he has in his "hybrid warfare".

Some developments:

Germany put a halt to the Nordstream 2.

Germany on Tuesday halted the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea gas pipeline project, designed to double the flow of Russian gas direct to Germany, after Russia formally recognized two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine.

Europe's most divisive energy project, worth $11 billion, was finished in September, but has stood idle pending certification by Germany and the European Union.

Similarly here the government is going to make a new risk analysis of a nuclear reactor a Russian company was just starting to build here. The obvious issue is that Putin's Russia is a totally unreliable provider of energy. Germany really has to look what to do with it's energy policy.

Other developments....

(Global News) Russian President Vladimir Putin asked the country’s parliament on Tuesday for a permission to use military force outside the country.

Putin’s letter to the upper house of parliament would formalize a Russian military deployment to rebel regions in eastern Ukraine, a day after the Russian leader recognized their independence.

It may also herald Putin’s intention to launch a broader attack on Ukraine. Western leaders earlier said Russian troops had moved into the country’s east – and the U.S. called it an “invasion.”

Lawmakers are expected to quickly rubber-stamp Putin’s request during a session Tuesday. Putin signed friendship treaties earlier in the day with the two rebel regions that envisage the deployment of the Russian military there.

If I was getting responses this stupid (especially see above), I would just give up. — Baden

Well, giving the benefit of the doubt to someone that has different views from yours is important in a forum like this, but up to a point. Ad hominems are just a sign of there's not much the other side has to argue.

Delusional nonsense and lies, as you haven't been long in this forum. I remember well those who defended on the previous site the invasion of Iraq and deemed me anti-american.

That you aren't against the annexations that Russia has done is enough for everyone to understand your position in this thread.

Enough of your trolling.

Thanks for the reference.

I think it would good to say one totally obvious thing:

If one is against imperialism, it is logical to be against all imperialism no matter who or which side has these imperial aspirations.

It is obvious that we have many examples of imperialism and actions totally similar to imperialism done by the West too, yet this surely isn't a reason why then to dismiss imperialism of others. Or at worst, to defend those who are in opposition to the West in their own acts of imperialism and become a spokesperson for one side. One then is just a hypocrite for whom the values themselves don't need anything. After all, this is a philosophy forum, so values and ideas ought to matter.

(And those who are actually against imperialism will be both accused of being anti-American and being pro-American by those that think they have to choose a side in these matters.)

Putin and Trump both backed Brexit. — Amity

Do note that Putin also actively encouraged Scottish independence. When you think of it, the Scottish Independence Party and UKIP/Brexit crowd are quite in opposite camps. But that doesn't matter. For Russia, there is no other logic than to a) break up Atlanticism and NATO, b) break up the EU and c) break up Western countries, if possible. I think the only case where Putin wasn't active (or didn't care) was with the possible secession of Catalonia from Spain. Spain I guess isn't so important for Russia.

Let's say that the United Kingdom understood when it had lost the empire. The French did also, but after far many wars. Putin's Russia, or basically Putin himself and his cabal, have not understood that they truly lost the empire. The Soviet empire collapsed in such an instant, Putin likely doesn't believe that it was something permanent. He genuinely believes that he can push Ukrainians to be part of Russia and they will accept their "historical" place.

Perhaps only now we have to see the wars that typically result in the collapse of an Empire. That's really a tragedy, when the Soviet Union did collapse rather peacefully 30 years ago.

Well called in advance from you.

The next thing I assume, at least at some timetable, is that these "independent countries" will hold referendums or simply decide otherwise to join the Russian Federation. Something quite similar how the Baltic states "voluntarily joined" the Soviet Union.

What is also notable is that Russia is also strengthening it's grip on Belarus. Next Sunday Belarus will have a referendum basically for Lukashenko to continue as president (for life) and for the parliament to have less power, but the changes will also mean that Belarus as a nuclear-weapons free zone and the (now theoretical) neutrality of the country are going to be done away with. (See Belarus seeks to amend its constitution to host Russian nuclear weapons) It's telling that it was Russia that openly lobbied for the changes in the Belarussian constitution. After the huge protests against his rule, Lukashenko is too weak to be as independent as he was in 2014.

As Putin is obviously trying to reconstitute and reconquer the Russian (Soviet) Empire, he truly is the modern imperialist in the genuine sense.

I think that the Canadian government is noticing that Canadians are not what they are stereotypically portrayed to be.

But anyway, any Western government going with mandatory vaccinations is just asking for it and deserves the consequences it gets. Few if any are like the Austrians. It's just stupidity.

It's pretty self-explanatory just to read what Vladimir the Great said in his television address:

Ukraine never had a tradition of genuine statehood. - From the very first steps they began to build their statehood on the denial of everything that unites us. They tried to distort the consciousness, the historical memory of millions of people, entire generations living in Ukraine.

In NATO documents, our country is officially and directly declared the main threat to North Atlantic security. And Ukraine will serve as a forward springboard for the strike. If our ancestors had heard about it, they probably would simply not have believed it. And today we don't want to believe it, but it's true.

They are trying to blackmail us again. They are threatening us again with sanctions, which, by the way, I think they will introduce anyway as Russia's sovereignty strengthens and the power of our armed forces grows. And a pretext for another sanctions attack will always be found or fabricated. Regardless of the situation in Ukraine. There is only one goal - to restrain the development of Russia. And they will do it, as they did before. Even without any formal pretext at all. Just because we exist, and we will never compromise our sovereignty, national interests and our values. I want to say clearly and directly that in the current situation, when our proposals for an equal dialogue on fundamental issues have actually remained unanswered by the United States and NATO, when the level of threats to our country is increasing significantly, Russia has every right to take retaliatory measures to ensure its own security. That is exactly what we will do.

That is a speech from a man going to war.

Or in stalinist speech, a man that has just started "a peacekeeping operation in the countries he has recognized as being sovereign."

(Btw, remember that before Crimea joined Russia, it also "declared independence" in March 11th, 2014)

I think people want to avoid discussion about where this line-in-the-sand is simply because they don't want to be ideologically tied to it if they sense a change in the wind of popular zeitgeist. — Isaac

Lines in the sand don't work as every event or incident is in the end unique, if it's not the typical marital fight that ends up in the police coming because of the noise complaints. I guess here the underlying assumption is that we are talking about political discourse and political influencing.

But do notice the emotional response on the topic from some about polarization and the hostility towards the idea of working through the normal routes of political participation, which does actually include the importance of demonstrations. For some, outer-parliamentary actions are the only hope. Now in Burma or similar places this actually is the case (as there is no actual democratic process), but it isn't reality for us. Not yet.

And yes, I realize that people like you wait for the concentration camps to be in full swing before deciding that maybe the good 'ol stern chat may not be quite enough. — StreetlightX

You just keep those red see-nazi glasses on and everybody will seem as a supporter of Hitler to you.

In any case, Crimea doesn’t belong to Ukraine, — Apollodorus

FINALLY!

The Truth from you (likely as a slip, but still). Sovereignty of nations and the multitude of international agreements in that Russia accepted the territorial integrity of Ukraine don't matter. After all, Ukraine is the historical birthplace of Russia, so it's totally natural for Ukraine to be a part of Russia...as Putin has hinted many times (the same way the artificiality of an independent Ukraine has been mentioned by the Kremlin).

You know what Swedes and other Scandinavians say about Finns, don’t you? — Apollodorus

Oh so empty with nothing else to say that go for ad hominems or national stereotypes? Lol.

And no, NATO won't do anything and no-one will even be talking about it in six months. — Baden

They haven't stopped talking about Crimea, so this won't be forgotten.

The last conflict that could have been forgotten was the Russo-Georgian war, as the US tried to "reset" the relations. But Georgia is on the other side of the Caucasus Mountains, so technically not in Europe.

Right from the Stalinist playbook.

After recognizing the Independence of Luhansk and Donetsk, next phase I assume is that they volunteer to join the Great Motherland of the Russian Federation. And hence the Minsk agreements are dead.

The EU leaders Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel said: “The recognition of the two separatist territories in Ukraine is a blatant violation of international law, the territorial integrity of Ukraine and the Minsk agreements.

Nobody wants any of this to happen. — Wayfarer

Except Putin. He surely wants this to happen. Do note the choreographed theater how Putin plays this.

This isn't anymore some rough-handed way to get NATO to "back down", to get them seriously to talk, but an obvious march to war.

Those still persisting that it's the US behind the war scare that doesn't exist should just read what Russian news media is writing. How Ukraine is constantly harassing and making provocations towards Russia. (They do have sites in English also, you know.)

Perhaps one should look at this another way. Putin started a concentrated effort to reorganize and modernize the Russian armed forces after a quite chaotic war with Georgia, which was successful, but could have ended in a disaster. Then he gained strategic surprise with the occupation and annexation of Crimea and the war in the Donbass. Then he has had the ability to train his commanders and air force in Syria. And now perhaps, he feels confident in his forces. And he does seem firmly believe what he says:

Putin calls eastern Ukraine ancient Russian lands. He says situation in eastern Ukraine is critical again.

“Ukraine authorities have been contaminated by virus of nationalism and corruption," he said during a televised address. The President accuses Ukraine of stealing Russian gas in the past, of using energy to blackmail Russia.

"Ukraine leaders wanted all good things from Russia without obligations." He accused the western intelligence services of helping Ukraine commit crimes.

As to the larger point of the OP: it's as if, trapped in a burning building, walls crushing down on people, pundits cry out: Why is everyone so PoLaRiZed? These people may as well side with the walls and fire. — StreetlightX

But you aren't trapped in a burning building with the walls crushing down on you. Australia isn't on the verge of collapse. You're just spending your time debating issues with strangers that likely are on another continent.

There's a time and a moment when civil discourse cannot do anything. But the usual option then is for people to go the guns. And remember who have the guns.

It's a MAD, MAD world! :up: — Agent Smith

And I'm sure that Leibniz wouldn't have liked that disappointing answer.

No powerful state would want a hostile military alliance, much less NATO, at the border. — Manuel

Usually it has been Putin who has pushed NATO back to it's Cold War stance. There was genuine talk of Russia becoming a member of NATO, we shouldn't forget. In the 1990's there really was "a window of opportunity". But that collapsed due to the Kosovo war NATO fought.

Relations between the NATO military alliance and the Russian Federation were established in 1991 within the framework of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council. In 1994, Russia joined the Partnership for Peace program, and since that time, NATO and Russia have signed several important agreements on cooperation.

Back then, Russia didn't seem as important as it seemed not to pose any threat.

It was part of the quite disastrous disintegration of the USSR - which could have proceeded in a much better direction, with less suffering involved for all, as we are now seeing. — Manuel

Not as disastrous as the disintegration of Yugoslavia. In fact, what we should be grateful for the last leaders of Soviet Union is that the it didn't end in a Second Civil War. Now we can see just how precarious the situation in the 1990's was. What was then lacking was the Slobodan Milosevic of Russia, that would have started to "protect Russians everywhere in the Soviet sphere". On the contrary, we had Boris Yeltsin, a leader of Russia who the August Coup wasn't able to detain, but defied them. The peculiar case happened then when the Russian federation, the largest member with the majority ethnicity of the union was against the Soviet Union. There simply was nobody to support the failed enterprise. Until now, when we have leadership in the Kremlin who will ethnic Russians everywhere.

It's funny that Crimea is mentioned so frequently - and fine to mention it, fair - but Guantanamo is not. Yet Guantanamo has nothing to do with the US - there are no Americans living there, minus the base. But people don't like to hear this. — Manuel

Actually the case of Cuba just shows how brittle the whole "sphere of influence" idea is. If you are overtly hostile towards a country, which the US has been towards Cuba, in the end you only have the option to invade. When sanctions, coup attempts, using proxies, assassination attempts aren't options anymore. Yes, you have that base GITMO where there is no business for the Americans to stray out of their base perimeter. With South American countries the US has to be even more careful as there simply isn't the option to militarily occupy them. Sometimes the pressure works, but sometimes it doesn't. And Russia has used all the alternative in the playbook to pressure Ukraine, which has lead Ukraine just to defend it's corner.

When the "sphere of influence" works is when the relationship is mutually beneficial and there is not hostility or aggression, just like the US enjoys with Canada (as the US hasn't any territorial claims at Canada and lost the last war when it was part of Great Britain). This is what @Apollodorus is utterly incapable to understand: the US didn't create it's sphere of influence by "divide and rule", but through integration, that the other countries saw beneficial also. Hence West European countries have accepted NATO as their own defense solution. That the US is bitching that the Europeans aren't paying up their share just show this relationship is different. There's a huge difference to the Warsaw Pact. After all, the only time the Warsaw Pact saw action was to crush the Prague Spring in 1968.

Which tells a lot about the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet system.

Why should the US intervene? — Manuel

As Frank said, the US is not going to intervene. They just promise to impose more sanctions. Biden has said he won't even use the US military to evacuate Americans from Ukraine (as he did from Afghanistan). Likely will send military support to Ukraine and deploy more forces to NATO countries, as they have done already.

And of course, Putin doesn't care about sanctions:

(RT)No new sanctions can possibly deter Russia from doing what it wants, because Moscow has experience dealing with them for many years already, Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned.

Speaking at a joint press conference with his Belarusian counterpart Alexander Lukashenko, on Friday, the Russian leader claimed Moscow cannot possibly avoid Western sanctions, because they are not aimed at altering the Kremlin's behavior. In his view, they are actually a plan to hinder the economic development of Russia.

“Sanctions will be imposed in any case. Whether they have a reason today, for example, in connection with the events in Ukraine, or there is no reason, it will be found,” Putin said. “The goal is different. In this case, the goal is to slow down the development of Russia and Belarus.”

The problem is that Putin is sticking to his argument, which NATO cannot do. You cannot erase quarter of a century of the alliance. However, Putin will try:

Putin "once again stressed the necessity for the United States and NATO to take Russia’s demands on ensuring security guarantees seriously and to respond to them in a concrete and substantive manner," the Kremlin said after their phone call.

Russia referred its proposals on security guarantees to the United States and NATO in December 2021. The proposed measures include guarantees that NATO will not advance eastward, including the accession of Ukraine and other countries into the alliance, as well as non-deployment of serious offensive weapons, including nuclear ones. Russia also demands the NATO military infrastructure be retreated to the 1997 borders.

Retreating to "1997 infrastructure" would mean that NATO wouldn't defend ANY of it's Eastern members starting with Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic and 11 other member countries.

Well, since we're calling Chinese communist because they said so, shouldn't we also acknowledge that China is a democracy? — Judaka

:smile:

Well, I've noticed that the Marxists here aren't so excited about the current "Chinese Marxism" that the Chinese promote either.

It's too late for that, Russia will probably be joining both this century. — Judaka

If there is a revolution or civil war. Or Putin's regime collapses. After 2014 he and Russia has gone down a rabbit hole. It's a long, long way now to dissolve the distrust towards Russia.

The present militarism is really unheard of anywhere else and what is obvious is the lack of understanding how crucial trade with other countries is for the prosperity of one country. Italy and Canada have larger economies and they aren't putting money into exotic nuclear weapons and other military spending. Seems Putin is obsessed with territory and "geopolitics" and doesn't see that good relations with neighbors would be important in order for him to get prosperity for his subjects.

Right. So you'd agree with me, on this topic, then, that the presentation of data from the CDC, FDA, journals, experts etc. should not be presented as if it were gospel truth, but rather as contributions to be critiqued like any other (within the bounds of our prior knowledge)? — Isaac

Nobody is a gospel of truth. And since a global pandemic hit us, it's totally understandable that there are errors, overreactions and misguided attempts as there also can be successful decisions. Good example of this is how totally different was the response in Sweden compared to other Nordic or European countries. A totally different response on the lockdown issue simply shows that these aren't things that are "right" or "incorrect". And the Swedes are totally happy with the path that their social democrat government put them. Even if the deaths were a little bit higher in Sweden, they weren't all that higher at all.

There's just this level of hostility towards different opinions, and also the ease in how the discourse can be manipulated. But that doesn't mean one cannot make sense about it.

Because it seems you've been arguing the opposite in the past, though I may have misinterpreted. — Isaac

That can indeed have happen, because I also don't find an obvious disagreement here.

That situation is more difficult. Look at what happened to Hong Kong, pretty sad. — Manuel

One country, two systems could go only so long... until the Chinese leader decided that he did't need the West anymore and Chinese version of Marxism would do just fine. In 1997 when the UK did hand back Hong Kong to China, the economic situation of China was different: they needed that Western investment and technology.

I think that authoritarian regimes, however benign and open they might seem to be have a fundamental flaw in that they cannot trust their people as they see any opposition as an enemy that poses an existential threat against them. Democracy is just a sneaky way to undermine their nation.

Here is the fundamental flaw to a functioning democracy: in a democracy the opposition is your sparring partner. You might find yourself in the opposition and then gain back the leadership and you accept that you can lose in elections. And leaders retire.

In China this is obvious, be it the students in Hong Kong or the protests earlier in Tiananmen Square in 1989, a religious movement like Falun Gong or in the Maoist era, just that Chinese people simply were respecting the former foreign minister Zhou Enlai too much in his funeral, that causes the regime to clamp down on the counterrevolutionaries.

This is why any opposition in Russia, no matter what the agenda is, is viewed as a personal threat by Vladimir Putin on his regime (and himself).

We need more polarization, more division, especially when it comes to power and control. And we should avoid it; we should engage in it. — NOS4A2

I don't. Civil discourse has no value in and of itself. You don't "civil discourse" your way out of fascism. There is a time and place for incivility, and it should be used when necessary. There are people who deserve to be shamed, hounded, and made permanently miserable by all, as a matter of civil good. — StreetlightX

Our upholders of democracy and freedom. :snicker:

Well, that's just great. :/ — jorndoe

And that is also reported by TASS, the Russian news agency. So it can't be just "NATO propaganda".

LUGANSK, February 19. /TASS/. Head of the self-proclaimed Lugansk People’s Republic Leonid Pasechnik has ordered general mobilization.

"General mobilization shall be announced on the territory of the Lugansk People’s Republic," he said in a decree published online. "The People’s Council of the LPR, the LPR government shall be immediately notified about the announcement of mobilization".

The decree said the mobilization aims to create conditions for repelling an aggression against the LPR by Ukraine. It orders full battle readiness for the People’s Militia and other military units. The republic also prohibited men aged 18 through 55 from leaving the region.

Donetsk People’s Republic
Head of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic Denis Pushilin has ordered general mobilization.

"I’m urging fellow citizens who are in the reserve to report to military conscription offices," he said in a video address on Saturday. "I have signed a decree on general mobilization today.".

"We will protect Donbass and all Russian people," he said.

And furthermore, accusations that Russia has been shelled by Ukraine:

(Russia Today) Two explosions reported on the Russian side of the border with Ukraine were the result of incoming artillery shells, officials have claimed, amid an escalating military stand-off across the border in the Donbass.

In a statement issued on Saturday, the FSB security service in the southern Rostov Region said that local border guard officials had recorded “ammunition strikes” near two rural settlements.

“One of the shells exploded two kilometers from the Russian-Ukrainian border on the outskirts of the village of Mityakinskaya,” authorities said. “Another shell destroyed an outbuilding on the ground of a private home in the Manotsky farming community.” No injuries have been reported, and a criminal investigation is said to be underway.

While officials have not yet publicly declared who they believe to be responsible for the alleged incidents, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba has insisted they had nothing to do with Kiev’s armed forces. “We resolutely refute all accusations of any alleged Ukrainian shells falling on Russian territory,” he wrote on Twitter. “Ukraine has never opened any such fire. We call for an immediate and impartial international investigation of the incidents reported by Russian media.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has also cast doubt on the news.

Looks really like Putin wants to enlarge the war.

So crazy. Absolutely crazy.

A lot of the people "canceled" by cancel culture actually resigned due to public uproar. They weren't fired per se, so I don't think you're grappling with the main problem. It's public intolerance and the vulnerability of a university, newspaper, etc. to public anger. — frank

Resigning due to "public uproar" is one's own choice. Here one should really think what is genuine "public uproar". It's one thing that you are attacked in the social media, it's another thing is some person tracks you down and attacks you physically in the street!

Or are you seriously of the opinion that whilst the unrivalled lobbying power of the largest organisations the world's ever seen has dominated the notoriously powerful mass media, but they've somehow met their match at a handful of tweed-suited university deans and the barely functional management of the main academic journals? — Isaac

No, but those notoriously powerful mass media or the "unrivalled lobbying power of the largest organisations" aren't so insuperable as you portray them.

It's not them, it is up to yourself to make up your mind!

Look at Taiwan, for instance, both sides are doing military drills in the straight all the time. There is an analogue to Ukraine in that instance. — Manuel

My bad to forget Taiwan!

Well, Taiwan would be similar to that there would be an island or territory where the White Russian forces would have treated to and where the Imperial Russia would still claim a foothold to the Soviet Union. The Island formerly known as Formosa is truly a thorn in the side of China. After all, if the mainland China would have the same per capita as Taiwan, China would have surpassed in GDP the US long time ago. Above all, it's now quite democratic, more prosperous, than the mainland.

And you are correct that there is an analogue to Ukraine. Namely that Taiwan is no real threat to mainland China. It simply cannot build an army and invade and defeat Communist China. It simply isn't any kind of threat. The only threat is that Chinese, just as Russians, can observe that things are there better. Of course in the case of Russia and Ukraine, Russia is the more prosperous example (which explains why there could be a separatist movement in the Donbass at the first place).