US pulling back from NATO and Europe

[Elliott]

41 minutes ago, Raze said:

The other analysis was on inheritance. Russia offers the soldiers payment for their families if they die to get them to join. So yes, they can’t just pretend the soldier is still alive when they can no longer talk to anyone they know back home for years.

Yes they can, obviously.
https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/angry-families-of-missing-russian-soldiers-want-answers-from-putin-3c460762?msockid=246b563026ed62ec150143b2276b63dc

Quote

Assad is gone.

Because of Russia's losses in Ukraine, Russia has more Assads they can lose, Iran is on the verge of revolution right now,

 

Quote

Russia will prioritize Ukraine over anything else.

Russia will prioritize Russia over anything else, they will not sacrifice themselves for Ukraine.

 

Quote

Ukraine ceding to Russia is not the end of Ukraine as they can negotiate to retain more of their land. Expending their entire military would mean Ukraine loses more soldiers and civilians, takes greater economic losses, and if they keep losing land worsens their negotiation position.

It would be the end of Ukraine, even if they only give up a small portion, Russia would obviously come back when they revive themselves in a few years, why wouldn't they? At what physical line in Ukraine do you say Ukraine should not give up territory past this point. If Ukraine gives up territory, that makes them weaker for the next time Russia invades, and makes Russia stronger.

Quote

If Russia has nothing to gain why have they continued fighting?

Putin has something to gain and everything to lose, the west is going to cutoff Russia for many moons even if Russia retreats tomorrow. If Putin can gain substantial territory in Ukraine it puts him in a better position politicaly.

Edited Friday at 08:21 PM by Elliott

[Hatfort]

NATO's future is uncertain. Trump is setting new economic terms for the European countries of the military coalition, and also making direct threats like the Greenland comments at the same time. On top of that, the Ukranian war has been a disaster.

[Raze]

54 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Yes they can, obviously.
https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/angry-families-of-missing-russian-soldiers-want-answers-from-putin-3c460762?msockid=246b563026ed62ec150143b2276b63dc

Those are soldiers who are declared missing. Not the same as Russia claiming soldiers are still alive an active who died enough to fudge the numbers of those analysis.

54 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Because of Russia's losses in Ukraine, Russia has more Assads they can lose, Iran is on the verge of revolution right now,

Where else would they need to put a large amount of armed forces?

People have been saying Iran is on the verge of a revolution for decades, there really isn’t indication that’ll happen for sure at this point.

54 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Russia will prioritize Russia over anything else, they will not sacrifice themselves for Ukraine.

They view stopping Ukraine in NATO as a existential threat, fighting Ukraine is prioritizing Russia to them. Far more than propping up some foreign dictator.

54 minutes ago, Elliott said:

It would be the end of Ukraine, even if they only give up a small portion, Russia would obviously come back when they revive themselves in a few years, why wouldn't they? At what physical line in Ukraine do you say Ukraine should not give up territory past this point. If Ukraine gives up territory, that makes them weaker for the next time Russia invades, and makes Russia stronger.

Putin has something to gain and everything to lose, the west is going to cutoff Russia for many moons even if Russia retreats tomorrow. If Putin can gain substantial territory in Ukraine it puts him in a better position politicaly.

 Because the costs of continuing to go to war and occupying more and more land would not be worth it after a certain point. A negotiated settlement can also include security agreements regarding Ukraine.

The West won’t cut off Russia continually if the war ends. Firstly part of the war ending will involve offering to reduce sanctions on Russia in exchange for something. And if not eventually if people feel it’s over they’ll demand their leaders loosen them and stop taking the economic hit, the war has caused major issues in Europe especially for Germany regarding oil.

Edited Friday at 09:08 PM by Raze

[PurpleTree]

22 minutes ago, Raze said:

 

the war has caused major issues in Europe especially for Germany regarding oil.

It has. But being dependent on Russian oil/gas also caused major issues for Germany and Europe so i think in the long term it’s much better to not be dependent on Russia in any way shape or form. Putin and his gang are kgb as*hats and douchbags.

[Elliott]

 

Quote

Where else would they need to put a large amount of armed forces?

Western expansion into the middle east is a serious threat to Russia because of the oil. Russia maintains a hegemony in the old soviet block in Asia, this could greatly weaken that as well, Kazakhstan has already been distancing from Russia. Libya is another, again oil.

 

Quote

People have been saying Iran is on the verge of a revolution for decades, there really isn’t indication that’ll happen for sure at this point.

There's no doubt that Israel will be infiltrating for a revolution after Republicans unrelenting support.

 

Quote

They view stopping Ukraine in NATO as a existential threat, fighting Ukraine is prioritizing Russia to them. Far more than propping up some foreign dictator.

No they don't, how can the country with the most nukes be afraid of Ukraine in NATO, they view it as an existential threat to Russian expansion. You believe NATO is an offensive force? It's a defense alliance, not offense. It's not NATO taking over Ukraine, Ukraine would be able to leave NATO for Russia even.

 

Quote

 Because the costs of continuing to go to war and occupying more and more land would not be worth it after a certain point. A negotiated settlement can also include security agreements regarding Ukraine.

How is the cost of the current war worth it but future wars wouldn't be, how is it worth it for the little land Russia is gaining? Why should Ukraine concede anything then, either they can beat Russia long term or they can't. Conceding land to Russia weakens Ukraine and strengthens Russia for future wars.

 

Quote

The West won’t cut off Russia continually if the war ends. Firstly part of the war ending will involve offering to reduce sanctions on Russia in exchange for something. And if not eventually if people feel it’s over they’ll demand their leaders loosen them and stop taking the economic hit, the war has caused major issues in Europe especially for Germany regarding oil.

Why do you think Europe is supporting Ukraine at all then? I gathered you thought it was out of self-interest, why would they then help Russia if they see them as an enemy? They're just helping Ukraine out of the goodness of their hearts, they trust Russia?

 

Reuters

https://www.reuters.com › business › energy

Quote

 

70% of Germans back Ukraine despite high energy prices, survey …

Jul 15, 2022 · Some 70% of those polled backed Germany's support for Ukraine

 

 

[aurum]

4 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

 

It's just astounding to watch JD Vance proudly lecture the Europeans about democracy.

JD Vance, the guy who loves the idea of replacing the entire administrative state with loyalists.

JD Vance, the guy linked to known anti-democratic billionaire Peter Thiel.

JD Vance, the guy whose president has already tried to knowingly overthrow one free election.

JD Vance, the guy whose current administration is actively removing democratic checks in the US and attempting a coup.

How can anyone even take this seriously?

Edited Saturday at 12:53 AM by aurum

[PurpleTree]

12 minutes ago, aurum said:

How can anyone even take this seriously?

Because they’re throwing Ukraine under the bus. Emboldening Putin. And countries like the Baltics are also very vulnerable.

[Jodistrict]

The perpetual war strategy of the Biden administration was cruel and inhumane.   Ukraine is strategically important to Russia, but not to the United States.  NATO was just as responsible as Russia for the debacle.    The reality is that the United States has to focus on China, which is a superpower and the only rival of the United States.   The United States is also deeply in debt and can’t afford to be a hegemony anymore.  Europe has to take care of itself.   The neocons are delusional and can’t see that.

[Elliott]

No one serious takes them serious

 

Edited Saturday at 01:55 AM by Elliott

[Raze]

3 hours ago, Elliott said:

Western expansion into the middle east is a serious threat to Russia because of the oil. Russia maintains a hegemony in the old soviet block in Asia, this could greatly weaken that as well, Kazakhstan has already been distancing from Russia. Libya is another, again oil.

Those aren’t of greater importance than Ukraine, which is why they didn’t intervene again to rescue Assad 

3 hours ago, Elliott said:

There's no doubt that Israel will be infiltrating for a revolution after Republicans unrelenting support.

If they could do that, they would have already done it 

3 hours ago, Elliott said:

No they don't, how can the country with the most nukes be afraid of Ukraine in NATO, they view it as an existential threat to Russian expansion. You believe NATO is an offensive force? It's a defense alliance, not offense. It's not NATO taking over Ukraine, Ukraine would be able to leave NATO for Russia even.

NATO regularly takes aggressive action, such as Serbia or Libya.

The head of CIA admitted in leaked memos that Russia views Ukraine entering NATO as an existential threat 

3 hours ago, Elliott said:

How is the cost of the current war worth it but future wars wouldn't be, how is it worth it for the little land Russia is gaining? Why should Ukraine concede anything then, either they can beat Russia long term or they can't. Conceding land to Russia weakens Ukraine and strengthens Russia for future wars.

Because Ukraine cannot win in all likelihood, so it makes sense to negotiate what you can now rather than fight on and lose more and more for a worse end result

 

3 hours ago, Elliott said:

Why do you think Europe is supporting Ukraine at all then? I gathered you thought it was out of self-interest, why would they then help Russia if they see them as an enemy? They're just helping Ukraine out of the goodness of their hearts, they trust Russia?

Because they are morally against the invasion and the US pressured them as they could use Ukraine as bait to weaken Russia, they did the same with Afghanistan to damage the Soviet Union. 
 

They wouldn’t then help Russia, just that when the active conflict is over they will be more open to trading with Russia for their own benefit as there is less reason not to.

Edited Saturday at 02:44 AM by Raze

[Elliott]

 

Quote

 

NATO regularly takes aggressive action, such as Serbia or Libya.

The head of CIA admitted in leaked memos that Russia views Ukraine entering NATO as an existential threat 

Ukraine joining NATO creates no greater threat to Russian defense, do you think otherwise?

 

Quote

They wouldn’t then help Russia, just that when the active conflict is over they will be more open to trading with Russia for their own benefit as there is less reason not to.

You think the west wants to spend billions funding a proxy war purely to attack Russia, with destabilizing their own world, but they wouldn't be willing to maintain sanctions to hurt Russia without destabilizing the world. Ridiculous. And if they are morally opposed to invasion it's the same thing, Russia will obviously continue to invade their smaller neighbors, so their morality will be suspended out of retardation?

Edited Saturday at 08:27 AM by Elliott

[Rafael Thundercat]

29 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Ukraine joining NATO creates no greater threat to Russian defense, do you think otherwise?

Now after all this War, maybe Ukraine will keep the resentment alive and figth back later in history even if the war end today. Karma is a Bitch

[Raze]

5 hours ago, Elliott said:

Ukraine joining NATO creates no greater threat to Russian defense, do you think otherwise?

- it doesn’t matter what you or I think, it matters what Russia thinks

- how did the USA behave when Cuba tried to house Russian nukes?

 

5 hours ago, Elliott said:

 

You think the west wants to spend billions funding a proxy war purely to attack Russia, with destabilizing their own world, but they wouldn't be willing to maintain sanctions to hurt Russia without destabilizing the world. Ridiculous. And if they are morally opposed to invasion it's the same thing, Russia will obviously continue to invade their smaller neighbors, so their morality will be suspended out of retardation?

multiple US politicians publicly said they support Ukraine because they see it as a way to hurt Russia without expending American lives.

Why would Russia continue invading smaller neighbors?

Theyll suspend sanctions because they can’t justify them to the public when there isn’t a war going on, also their opinion is shifting to wanting to focus on China and not viewing Russia as a threat. Anyway the sanctions will probably be suspended before that as part of a peace deal regardless. 

Edited Saturday at 02:19 PM by Raze

[Elliott]

1 hour ago, Raze said:

- it doesn’t matter what you or I think, it matters what Russia thinks

- how did the USA behave when Cuba tried to house Russian nukes?

I already admitted that Russia views it as an existential threat, to Russian expansion. Why don't you answer the simple question? No one is putting a nuke in Ukraine, do you really believe that? It makes no difference what NATO does anywhere,they are at a nuclear stalemate with Russia. Is NATO controlling Kosovo and Libya? Iraq?

Russia needs to build a coalition diplomatically, no facade USSR is going to lead the world like they want. They're stuck in the 19th century way of thinking. If Russia would quit invading countries Ukraine would have no need to join NATO. Ask Chechnya why Ukraine and Georgia are interested in NATO.

NATO was working with Russia and developing together, NATO didn't sabotage them. That's gone for decades now, Russia is done like Iran.

Quote

Theyll suspend sanctions because they can’t justify them to the public when there isn’t a war going on, also their opinion is shifting to wanting to focus on China and not viewing Russia as a threat. Anyway the sanctions will probably be suspended before that as part of a peace deal regardless. 

The public is clueless about sanctions, does the public have outrage about sanctions on Iran, no.
 

 

Edited Saturday at 04:01 PM by Elliott

[Raze]

2 hours ago, Elliott said:

I already admitted that Russia views it as an existential threat, to Russian expansion. Why don't you answer the simple question? No one is putting a nuke in Ukraine, do you really believe that? It makes no difference what NATO does anywhere,they are at a nuclear stalemate with Russia. Is NATO controlling Kosovo and Libya? Iraq?

The USA which has the most control over NATO has been involved in countless coups and civil wars to topple governments they don’t like. It’s completely natural Russias regime would view NATO trying to get onto its borders as a potential threat.

NATO was involved in bombing Serbia and toppling Gadaffi. Putin himself reportedly regretted not intervening to stop the overthrowing of Gadaffi.

The CIA maintains 12 bases on Ukraines border. Given the history of the CIA removing leaders the US doesn’t like, yes they are a threat. That doesn’t mean a invasion was the right move or justified however. It does mean that, as you agreed, it’s to be expected that trying to bring Ukraine into NATO would lead to Russia becoming aggressive.

2 hours ago, Elliott said:

Russia needs to build a coalition diplomatically, no facade USSR is going to lead the world like they want. They're stuck in the 19th century way of thinking. If Russia would quit invading countries Ukraine would have no need to join NATO. Ask Chechnya why Ukraine and Georgia are interested in NATO.

Currently Russia has been forced into strong ties with China and the global south is uniting more behind BRICS

I could say the same thing to the US and NATO. Why exactly do they feel the need to continue expanding to be closer and closer to Russias borders while knowing Russia views it as a threat?

What do you think the US would do if Mexico tried entering a military alliance with China and let Chinas secret service build bases on the US Mexican border?

2 hours ago, Elliott said:

 

NATO was working with Russia and developing together, NATO didn't sabotage them. That's gone for decades now, Russia is done like Iran.

The public is clueless about sanctions, does the public have outrage about sanctions on Iran, no.

Russia has the most sanctions of any country in the world and their economy is growing because they found ways around it. So it doesn’t look like they are “done.”.

It doesn’t seem like Iran is done either. Reports now show Netanyahu is planning to strike Iran to draw the US into war, if Israel could just get Iranians to internally overthrow the government they wouldn’t need to do that. So far trump indicated interest in a deal, so Iran isn’t looking like it’s done either if the deal goes through and they can remove some of their sanctions. 

Now Americans on the right are getting tired of funding Ukraine and it looks like a negotiated solution is coming. If not Russia will continue seizing more and more land as they already are.

Sanctioning Iran is much easier than sanctioning Russia because Europe didn’t rely on a lot of trade from Iran. In the case of Russia the sanctions have hurt the economy of Europe. 
 

Lets assume somehow the war ends without a deal that doesn’t requires removing the sanctions, eventually the public will start asking why exactly they are hurting their own energy economy by sanctioning Russia when there isn’t an active conflict with Russia (given that the war ended). So no the sanctions wouldn’t last. And again that’s also a unlikely scenario simply because sanctions being removed as part of a negotiated solution is much more likely. 

Edited Saturday at 05:50 PM by Raze

[Elliott]

1 hour ago, Raze said:

The USA which has the most control over NATO has been involved in countless coups and civil wars to topple governments they don’t like. It’s completely natural Russias regime would view NATO trying to get onto its borders as a potential threat.

Whether Ukraine joins NATO or not, doesn't threaten RUSSIA though, Ukraine can already join in any assault the u.s. orchestrates, NATO is a defensive alliance, the u.s. has non NATO countries it allies with militarily to overthrow regimes already, see Syria and Israel. Ukraine joining NATO makes zero difference, Ukraine can already attack Russia with the u.s.

Russia, the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads is afraid of conventional warfare in the 21st century? No, it's about Russian imperialism.

 

Quote

NATO was involved in bombing Serbia and toppling Gadaffi. Putin himself reportedly regretted not intervening to stop the overthrowing of Gadaffi.

The CIA maintains 12 bases on Ukraines border. Given the history of the CIA removing leaders the US doesn’t like, yes they are a threat. That doesn’t mean a invasion was the right move or justified however. It does mean that, as you agreed, it’s to be expected that trying to bring Ukraine into NATO would lead to Russia becoming aggressive.

True, the u.s. could use close cultural ties to overthrow a Russian dictator, why would they overthrow a peaceful leader though? That renders the argument moot for anyone other than a dictator, I can't imagine you believe the world should sacrifice Ukraine for Putin's musings.

 

Quote

Currently Russia has been forced into strong ties with China and the global south is uniting more behind BRICS

I could say the same thing to the US and NATO. Why exactly do they feel the need to continue expanding to be closer and closer to Russias borders while knowing Russia views it as a threat?

NATO is not a country it's a defensive alliance Ukraine wants in because Russia toppled it's neighbors before Ukraine ever tried to join nato, see chechnya.

Quote

What do you think the US would do if Mexico tried entering a military alliance with China and let Chinas secret service build bases on the US Mexican Chechnya.

First off, I'm not arguing for anything u.s. to be allowed in Ukraine, that would be imperialist.

China wouldn't do that, there's no reason to in a nuclear world. I don't think the u.s. would invade Mexico, either way i would oppose it. They would cut them off economically and build bases in Taiwan. China already has military ties in the Americas by the way.

 

Quote

Russia has the most sanctions of any country in the world and their economy is growing because they found ways around it. So it doesn’t look like they are “done.”.

It doesn’t seem like Iran is done either. Reports now show Netanyahu is planning to strike Iran to draw the US into war, if Israel could just get Iranians to internally overthrow the government they wouldn’t need to do that. So far trump indicated interest in a deal, so Iran isn’t looking like it’s done either if the deal goes through and they can remove some of their sanctions. 

Now Americans on the right are getting tired of funding Ukraine and it looks like a negotiated solution is coming. If not Russia will continue seizing more and more land as they already are.

Sanctioning Iran is much easier than sanctioning Russia because Europe didn’t rely on a lot of trade from Iran. In the case of Russia the sanctions have hurt the economy of Europe. 
 

Lets assume somehow the war ends without a deal that doesn’t requires removing the sanctions, eventually the public will start asking why exactly they are hurting their own energy economy by sanctioning Russia when there isn’t an active conflict with Russia (given that the war ended). So no the sanctions wouldn’t last. And again that’s also a unlikely scenario simply because sanctions being removed as part of a negotiated solution is much more likely. 

They would likely lift some sanctions on energy but I don't think European leaders trust Russia anymore and will cut every other tie they can which will prevent any growth, otherwise why haven't they already agreed to that. No one cares about Ukraine joining NATO except Ukraine, you think Europe would cut sanctions but not cancel Ukraines bid for NATO, that makes no sense, if so what else does Russia want in your mind, why haven't they agreed?

Edited Saturday at 06:52 PM by Elliott

[Raze]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

Whether Ukraine joins NATO or not, doesn't threaten RUSSIA though, Ukraine can already join in any assault the u.s. orchestrates, NATO is a defensive alliance, the u.s. has non NATO countries it allies with militarily to overthrow regimes already, see Syria and Israel. Ukraine joining NATO makes zero difference, Ukraine can already attack Russia with the u.s.

Russia, the largest stockpile of nuclear warheads is afraid of conventional warfare in the 21st century? No, it's about Russian imperialism.

 

It does matter because Ukraine remaining neutral limits its military coordination with the US and if they try to use Ukraine as a launch pad for attacks Russia can attack it without triggering article 5 if it’s not in NATO

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

True, the u.s. could use close cultural ties to overthrow a Russian dictator, why would they overthrow a peaceful leader though? That renders the argument moot for anyone other than a dictator, I can't imagine you believe the world should sacrifice Ukraine for Putin's musings.

 

The US has overthrown countless democratic leaders.

Russia is a dictatorship, so that does nothing to assuage their fears. US overthrowing a dictator often lead to less peace.

it’s the opposite, Ukraine was fine when it was neutral, trying to incorporate it into NATO has wrecked an entire generation of Ukrainians 

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

NATO is not a country it's a defensive alliance Ukraine wants in because Russia toppled it's neighbors before Ukraine ever tried to join nato, see chechnya.

They invaded Chechnya because they feared a domino of independence movements. Ukraine was their fears coming true.

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

First off, I'm not arguing for anything u.s. to be allowed in Ukraine, that would be imperialist.

China wouldn't do that, there's no reason to in a nuclear world. I don't think the u.s. would invade Mexico, either way i would oppose it. They would cut them off economically and build bases in Taiwan. China already has military ties in the Americas by the way.

 

NATO is largely funded by the US and defends its interests 

Then you are naive, the US has toppled governments and invaded counties that posed no security threat to it especially in Latin America, they would be highly aggressive to a border country engaging with a direct rival

China wouldn’t do that because China is sane enough to realize it shouldn’t try baiting wars with great powers outside of its circle of influence. Though if the security competition between China and thenUS a heats up its entirely possible they ape US strategy to try and get the US bogged down in wars to weaken it as the US a has done to Russia twice now. 

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

 

They would likely lift some sanctions on energy but I don't think European leaders trust Russia anymore and will cut every other tie they can which will prevent any growth, otherwise why haven't they already agreed to that. No one cares about Ukraine joining NATO except Ukraine, you think Europe would cut sanctions but not cancel Ukraines bid for NATO, that makes no sense, if so what else does Russia want in your mind, why haven't they agreed?

Russias economy is already growing under sanctions. If according to you they would lift some sanctions that indicates better prospects of growth.

If no one cares about Ukraine joining NATO they would reject its membership. World leaders have said multiple times they plan on admitting Ukraine into NATO. The US was pushing for Ukraine in NATO for years.

Russia probably wants to control four oblasts as a buffer and have guarantees of a demilitarized neutral Ukraine 

Edited Saturday at 07:55 PM by Raze

[Elliott]

23 minutes ago, Raze said:

It does matter because Ukraine remaining neutral limits its military coordination with the US and if they try to use Ukraine as a launch pad for attacks Russia can attack it without triggering article 5 if it’s not in NATO

The US has overthrown countless democratic leaders.

Russia is a dictatorship, so that does nothing to assuage their fears. US overthrowing a dictator often lead to less peace.

it’s the opposite, Ukraine was fine when it was neutral, trying to incorporate it into NATO has wrecked an entire generation of Ukrainians 

They invaded Chechnya because they feared a domino of independence movements. Ukraine was their fears coming true.

NATO is largely funded by the US and defends its interests 

Then you are naive, the US has toppled governments and invaded counties that posed no security threat to it especially in Latin America, they would be highly aggressive to a border country engaging with a direct rival

China wouldn’t do that because China is sane enough to realize it shouldn’t try baiting wars with great powers outside of its circle of influence. Though if the security competition between China and thenUS a heats up its entirely possible they ape US strategy to try and get the US bogged down in wars to weaken it as the US a has done to Russia twice now. 

Russias economy is already growing under sanctions. If according to you they would lift some sanctions that indicates better prospects of growth.

If no one cares about Ukraine joining NATO they would reject its membership. World leaders have said multiple times they plan on admitting Ukraine into NATO. The US was pushing for Ukraine in NATO for years.

Russia probably wants to control four oblasts as a buffer and have guarantees of a demilitarized neutral Ukraine 

You think NATO would attack Russia, the largest nuclear stockpiler, that's ludicrous. Have you seen how big Russia is on a map, they need 4 oblasts for a buffer.

Edited Saturday at 08:13 PM by Elliott

[PurpleTree]

 

[Raze]

1 hour ago, Elliott said:

You think NATO would attack Russia, the largest nuclear stockpiler, that's ludicrous. Have you seen how big Russia is on a map, they need 4 oblasts for a buffer.

I never said they would