Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesn't make sense objectively, when viewed from a West European perspective. For one of Europe's major powers to invade a smaller state--Belgium, say, or Denmark, is unthinkable. It can only make sense when viewed from a Soviet perspective of spheres of influence. The USSR had its own version of the US Monroe Doctrine. Things haven't changed as much as the West would like to think, since BACK in the USSR. Russia's President is a product of that time, bear in mind. And fwiw, let's acknowledge that the Monroe Doctrine is still in force in the Western Hemisphere to some degree, though perhaps a bit more subtly than before. And the man in the Kremlin did cite the Cuban missile crisis as a precedent, in the early part of the war.
I'm sure our Russian colleagues here would also point out, that Russia for centuries has been concerned with surrounding itself with buffer zones.
It's more than that, this is an oldskool slavic slugfest, way predating the Soviet Union, and at least some of the combatants are absolutely loving it, on both sides. Think dudes on horseback, with pointy helmets and chainmail vests, strapped with broad swords...with rape/pillage/conquest on their minds.
So you admit that it was Russia fault for invading. Why does it seem you are always supporting them?
I don't "always support them." If I'd be "always supporting them," I'd be moving to Russia, lol.
But in case of Ukraine, truth is on Russia's side, not America's side.
It was a covert American aggression and Russia HAD to respond to it.
Putin simply failed to do it in a timely manner, for the reasons that he is not who he claims to be ( i.e die hard "Russian patriot." In reality he is yet another corporate goon.)
And since he failed to do what needed to be done back in 2014, it led to disaster that today's war is.
( Should I mention the Minsk Agreements yet again, that were the last straw for peace, yet dissed by Washington?)
"Washington has also not supported the Minsk II agreement, arguing it was obsolete and irrelevant, a view also echoed by the British, who think a Minsk-based deal would lead to the “Finlandization” of Ukraine. Behind the scenes, it is quite clear, by omission and commission, that Washington has let the Ukrainians believe that Minsk II is off the table – although the US was never a party to Minsk II.
So once Washington removed Minsk agreement off the table, Putin recognized LNR and DNR as the separate entities, even though he was insisting all the previous years that they should remain part of Ukraine, and all while people there wanted to be part of Russia.
Sorry, facts are facts and truth is truth, and we have to acknowledge it, whether we like it sometimes or not.
It's all about the "moral compass" in us, and some of us have it, and some - don't. For such people it's all about "what 's mine is always right, what's not mine is wrong."
Despite all the sky is falling rhetoric about how WW3 is going to start if we send Ukraine one more missile or tank, Russia has only escalated through conventional means. If using nuclear weapons is the magic button that will allow Russia to win this war instantly, why haven't they pressed it?
At the start of the war, Germany sent helmets. Now they are providing tanks. The lesson learned here should be, provide Ukraine more lethal conventional weapons and faster before manpower becomes a problem.
It's more than that, this is an oldskool slavic slugfest, way predating the Soviet Union,and at least some of the combatants are absolutely loving it, on both sides. Think dudes on horseback, with pointy helmets and chainmail vests, strapped with broad swords...with rape/pillage/conquest on their minds.
Have to admit there is some truth to it, because ( as I've already said before - Russians and Ukrainians are really originally one and the same people.)
And this should explain why Redshadow is oftentimes so wrong, when projecting some cultural Anglo-Saxon ideas onto that part of the world.
I guess “Putin propaganda” has infiltrated ABC News and Politico
Did Putin miscalculate? Yes. Does that mean he has no leverage? Nope.
This is not a “win lose” situation. This is a “let’s talk about peace before there’s nothing left to defend.” Japan would’ve been bombed off the map if they didn’t ”capitulate.”
Why reply to that? Obviously not even a first grade level of comprehension.
The neighboring country became an asset for Russia's enemy ( which includes NATO.)
So among other things, NATO was already making itself comfortable in Ukraine, adjusting local ports for arrival of American war ships and training Ukrainian army.
Or do you think NATO was really waiting for some "official admission of Ukraine" in order to proceed with acquisition of Ukraine?
Of course not. So as Putin said, NATO was making inroads into Ukraine, using it for its own purpose, yet without making any official commitments to defense of Ukraine.
And he was right about that one.
Ukraine was not even close to becoming a member if NATO .....
But even if it was close to becoming a NATO country .....why does that mean Russia has to invade?
Is Ukrane in NATO = threat to Russia?
What about Estonia and Latvia directly bordering Russia?
Does Russia really think that NATO (or any country for that matter) is wanting to invade Russia?
"The number of troops killed or wounded in Ukraine since Russia’s invasion is approaching 500,000, according to US officials, in a harrowing estimate not accounting for civilian deaths.
Russia’s military casualties are approaching 300,000, including as many as 120,000 deaths.
While Ukraine has lost 70,000 troops, with between 100,000 and 120,000 injured, officials in Washington were reported as saying on Friday by the New York Times.
Casualty figures remain difficult to estimate because Moscow is presumed to undercount its war dead and injured, while official figures are not reported by Kyiv."
So no need to hide behind "it was not close to becoming a NATO country."
Quote:
Is Ukrane in NATO = threat to Russia?
What about Estonia and Latvia directly bordering Russia?
Consider Ukraine becoming the last straw in this respect.
Quote:
Does Russia really think that NATO (or any country for that matter) is wanting to invade Russia?
I believe Russians rather think that NATO is trying to suffocate their country in the long run both economically and militarily, while supporting all the hostile governments around it.
So no need to hide behind "it was not close to becoming a NATO country."
Consider Ukraine becoming the last straw in this respect.
I believe Russians rather think that NATO is trying to suffocate their country in the long run both economically and militarily, while supporting all the hostile governments around it.
And they are correct about that one.
America/NATO ARE the aggressors here.
And yet, Russia is the one who invaded.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
