Why isn’t anyone in the Russian government able to stop Putin?

[Leo Gura]

@Blackhawk You are not making any progress in understamding reality. Hope you're happy with that.

[Danioover9000]

@Vrubel

59 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

Sure, the idea is from Athens, and Britain also has a democratic tradition, though the war started because Americans did not feel represented. It was about Americans asserting their right as Americans (Bald eagle sound in background*). In historical terms having a 240-year-old chain of 44 presidents that freely gave up power after term limit or elections is pretty fu*king revolutionary. Of course, there was a civil war and a dent in that chain as of late. But the experiment is nonetheless marching on.

Russia also has redeeming qualities. They kicked Hitlers' ass, which is about as redeeming as you can get. There is also something poetic about how unpoetically Russians suffer and shoot themselves in the foot constantly. 

 

I meant more about whether it's good foreign policy to be constantly preaching about human rights. Of course, it's going to turn them off but on the other hand, America can use its power leverage to make countries think twice before they commit some questionable action like chopping up a journalist. Though in that particular case, I think America shot itself in the foot by just hammering it down so relentlessly because it totally alienated the Saudis which has bad geopolitical consequences for them.  

   before and during the war, at that time, the Yankees and earlier Colonial settlers in America felt not represented, or were they convinced and persuaded into rebelling against GB?

   So, the drive was about asserting themselves as Americans, a newer nationalistic and patriotic identity? For reference see below:

   Also relevant to the Ukraine/Russia conflict, because the two experts here also claim that Ukraine is in a similar psychological and symbolic position as was America and GB, fighting for their freedom to be identified and survive as Ukraine and Ukrainians, also recently invented nationalist identities as well.

[Hardkill]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Blackhawk You are not making any progress in understamding reality. Hope you're happy with that.

I am still not sure if Putin has been using the idea of NATO encroaching eastward as a pretext or some kind of BS excuse for wanting to invade and takeover Ukraine for his own selfish desires.

How do you know for sure that Putin has not tricked you into believing what he’s saying? I mean he already lied about how Ukraine needed to be “de-Nazified.”

Edited April 18, 2023 by Hardkill

[Vrubel]

@Danioover9000 Of course! before the war, it was hard for me to respect Ukraine as a country because they were so undefined and didn't have their noses pointed in one direction. Yet another point where Putin smelled weakness though ironically he did them a big favor here. It turned out that Ukraine was the sleeping bear and not Russia.

[Leo Gura]

47 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

I am still not sure if Putin has been using the idea of NATO encroaching eastward as a pretext or some kind of BS excuse for wanting to invade and takeover Ukraine for his own selfish desires.

How do you know for sure that Putin has not tricked you into believing what he’s saying? I mean he already lied about how Ukraine needed to be “de-Nazified.”

He probably does have a desire to recapture parts of the old Russian territory like Crimea. That landbridge to Crimea has a lot of strategic importance to him/Russia. He needs it to build up the Russian navy to compete against NATO's huge naval power.

I think the reason he desires to take over Ukraine is to build up a defensive zone against NATO. He wants to be in a stronger position rather than standing with his pants down.

The more of a threat NATO presents the more defensive Putin will feel. The logic here is actually so simple and obvious. This is not any kind of 3D chess. It's basic chess. What's amazing is that Americans think they can just advance a bunch of pieces up the board all around the enemy king and that the enemy will just sit and watch.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

26 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

He probably does have a desire to recapture parts of the old Russian territory like Crimea. That landbridge to Crimea has a lot of strategic importance to him/Russia. He needs it to build up the Russian navy to compete against NATO's huge naval power.

I think the reason he desires to take over Ukraine is to build up a defensive zone against NATO. He wants to be in a stronger position rather than standing with his pants down.

The more of a threat NATO presents the more defensive Putin will feel. The logic here is actually so simple and obvious. This is not any kind of 3D chess. It's basic chess. What's amazing is that Americans think they can just advance a bunch of pieces up the board all around the enemy king and that the enemy will just sit and watch.

hmm, I see.

But to be fair, NATO hasn't been forcing any countries to join them. They've simply had an open-door policy that has merely invited other European countries to join them. 

Every single nation that has been a part of NATO had joined in because they wanted to and were happy to agree to all of the terms of alliance according to NATO.

Ukraine, Finland, and Sweden now want to join NATO on their own accord. 

Even if NATO took over all of Europe except for Russia I don't think that NATO would want to invade Russia.

In fact, the US and NATO are fully aware of the fact that if we did have a conventional war with Russia, then it would very well lead to an apocalyptic nuclear war.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

13 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

But to be fair, NATO hasn't been forcing any countries to join them. They've simply had an open-door policy that has merely invited other European countries to join them. 

That is not a good excuse. It simply doesn't matter from Russia's POV whether NATO expanded willingingly or not. The threat is the same. Nor does it matter much that NATO is not an attack force. If NATO was an attack force Putin would have started WW3 two decades ago.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That is not a good excuse. It simply doesn't matter from Russia's POV whether NATO expanded willingly or not. The threat is the same. Nor does it matter much that NATO is not an attack force. If NATO was an attack force Putin would have started WW3 two decades ago.

I see. So, that's why he never wanted to go to war with NATO.

But what will Putin have truly gained even if he does succeed in taking over the country?

According to a WSJ article on Russia's economy, Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska warned this month that Russia is running out of cash. “There will be no money next year, we need foreign investors,” the raw-materials magnate said at an economic conference. 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russias-economy-is-starting-to-come-undone-431a2878

The only big countries that would still be interested in doing business with Russia are India and Russia. Yet, economists such as Paul Krugman have already mentioned that China and India won't be enough to save Russia economically.

[Leo Gura]

26 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Oleg Deripaska warned this month that Russia is running out of cash.

I doubt Russia will ever run out of cash. They got endless natural resources to sell to China, India, and elsewhere.

Ukraine will run out of cash and bullets before Russia does.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

17 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I doubt Russia will ever run out of cash. They got endless natural resources to sell to China, India, and elsewhere.

Ukraine will run out of cash and bullets before Russia does.

But won't the people of Russia be gravely suffering financially from this war?

Do you think then that Russia will inevitably succeed in taking over Ukraine?

Edited April 18, 2023 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

19 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

But won't the people of Russia be gravely suffering financially from this war?

Russian people have endured far worse.

Quote

Do you think then that Russia will inevitably succeed in taking over Ukraine?

Not the whole of it. Perhaps the land bridge to Crimea parts. I don't think Putin has any intention of taking all of Ukraine at this point. I think we would settle for the land bridge, but I doubt Zelensky will.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Hardkill]

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Russian people have endured far worse.

That's true.

It's too bad that they aren't enough of them who are clamoring for freedom and financial support from the government. 

Btw, what about the fact that there are a lot of people in Russia who want the war to stop because they have many family members and relatives who live in Ukraine? Or do those Russians represent only a small percentage of the Russian population?

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Not the whole of it. Perhaps the land bridge to Crimea parts. I don't think Putin has any intention of taking all of Ukraine at this point. I think he would settle for the land bridge, but I doubt Zelensky will.

Ah, that would make sense. 

Yeah, I kinda wish that Zelensky and his government would be willing to compromise on something. Then again, it is certainly within his and his people's right to have all of Ukraine back in one piece especially after everything the Ukrainian have been through.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Hardkill

[mr_engineer]

@Hardkill That is a very good question to ponder. Especially if you've been listening to CNN about the war. 

It's literally the glitch in the matrix of the mainstream media narrative about the war. It's not just Putin's war. He has an entire cabinet of very smart people who are with him, not opposing him. The jobs of all of these people is to be honest with Putin with their expert-opinions of what the consequences could be. Yet, they're all on board. Why is that?! How can that be, if this is just Putin wanting to colonize Ukraine?! 

[Blackhawk]

4 hours ago, Hardkill said:

I am still not sure if Putin has been using the idea of NATO encroaching eastward as a pretext or some kind of BS excuse for wanting to invade and takeover Ukraine for his own selfish desires.

How do you know for sure that Putin has not tricked you into believing what he’s saying? I mean he already lied about how Ukraine needed to be “de-Nazified.”

Of course it's a pretext. And most experts think that too.

How would it sound like if Putin would say: "Ukraine and west isn't a threat to Russia, but I'm invading Ukraine because I'm a imperialist"? He would be insane if he would tell the truth.

Edited April 18, 2023 by Blackhawk

[Jwayne]

6 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

Of course it's a pretext. And most experts think that too.

How would it sound like if Putin would say: "Ukraine and west isn't a threat to Russia, but I'm invading Ukraine because I'm a imperialist"? He would be insane if he would tell the truth.

If you take a stand against imperialism, then you cannot also support democracy.

Because the people may decide/vote/ratify  imperialist policies.

How are you going to resolve this problem?

The world has addressed it by establishing international laws through the UN, which the United States merely leverages as a weapon to veto and blackmail anyone who challenges their hegemony.

However the UN is also faulty because most of the world's population is unrepresented on the Security Council (e.g. India, Africa, Indonesia, Brazil, the entire Global South).

So the UN also needs reform for its international law to be legitimate.

Or, you can claim "My personal sense of morality should be the universal standard and all peoples everywhere should bow to my convictions." That's basically what you're doing now.

Edited April 19, 2023 by Jwayne