Once again, NATO and US foreign policy have lost a war - this time Ukraine

[BlueOak]

26 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

@BlueOak All you say Israel has also done. So I find it double standards.

 

Also shelling civilians like Putin has is a lot worse than kidnapping kids because at least the kids can go back. Dead people cannot. 
I find it weird that BiBi and Putin are not wanted for that

Because doing so would mean having to admit the double standards. Not just in Israel but with America's policy since the Bush years and the second invasion of Iraq.

The world fundamentally changed since 9/11. *Some people like to pretend it hasn't still.

Edited December 31, 2023 by BlueOak

[Raze]

4 hours ago, BlueOak said:

People join NATO for fear of Russian aggression. NATO doesn't go anywhere.

Neutrality was offered to Putin. He rejected it and has ever since put up impossible conditions to meet. Ex: We can't catch the easter bunny and give him to Putin, just like we can't catch non-existent Nazi's in control of the country and give them to Putin.

For a variety of reasons I've already listed, Putin wants to expand to the former USSR borders. Ukraine is in the way of that, as are the Baltics, Moldova, Poland, and Romania.

1. There is no evidence Putin plans to expand past Ukraine. This is just a propagandistic claim spread by the military industrial complex to justify war. In fact Putin had written blog posts specifically about how he feared Ukraine joining NATO and wanted Ukraine to have a relationship to Russia like Canada has to the US. He’s never said anything about rebuilding the USSR. Justifying war based on this speculation is absurd and certainly not justifiable evidence to turn Ukraine into Afghanistan, a war torn country for decades that may literally lose an entire generation.

2. Neutrality was offered by Putin and the US and NATO rejected it. He put a draft US Russia security agreement that just required NATO not expand into Ukraine, this was rejected. The US even overthrew Ukraine’s previous government to replace it with a more anti-Russian government to try and lead them to joining Ukraine.

3. we have leaked Memos from even the CIA director admitting NATO is aggressively expanding into Ukraine and this can trigger a war with Russia.

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/08MOSCOW265_a.html

Edited December 31, 2023 by Raze

[BlueOak]

@Raze
1, All countries expand their spheres of influence, including Russia. 
You are acknowledging 'past Ukraine'? Because he wants all of Ukraine, despite the population not wanting him (especially now).

I'll re-list a few links and add plenty more.

A, Russian Units fly USSR Flags
Plenty of units leave USSR flags on the ground now also. Here is a wider look at how the state and its people are propagandized into the vision of a 'greater russia' That's been going on for decades, the vision of a greater Russia and a return to the old ways, using liberalism as a scapegoat, Putin requires these nationalists satisfied to stay in power and he knows it.

B, Moldova's Breakaway Republic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria - Ditto the Russian Breakaway republics in Ukraine. Speculating the same strategy in the baltics with their Russian populations. The fool Lukashenko pointed to this on Live TV at the start of the war as their next target.

C, Threats to take Poland

D, 8th War to rebuild the USSR. If you need the 8 wars from this list, I can list them. Putin is ex KGB, he laments the fall of the USSR  

E, Further:  Putin has been flooding the EU with immigrants to destabilize it, this has been known for a while now, 2016 article, especially from Syria.

F, Putin generally uses conspiracy nonesnse like QANON and backdoor groups like the Russian Imperialist movement to import Ruscism to the west. Ruscism is something Putin has adopted from Alexander Dugin, which culminates in a desire to restore a new Russian Empire.  Like wagner they can do this quietly and with plausible deniability.

G, There is a reason in the german far right coup attempt that they sort out Russian aid. Because Russia is actively trying to infiltrate Europe more and destabilize it. Arne Schönbohm was the most public Russian agent in Germany, sacked for his ties to Russian intelligence service as one obvious example, however, Ukraine publicly listed 600 more. There is little for them to gain by posting fake names.

2, I gave several links in previous posts showing neutrality was offered a month after the war started. You've ignored or not seen them. There are hundreds more.

3, NATO doesn't 'go' anywhere, countries come to it. For a country to join NATO, it has to have an internal popular wish for it and a lot of government support. People join NATO out of fear of Russia's actions. I can list the many hundreds of reasons Eastern Europe fears Russia if it will help, or just watch some Ukraine footage. If you mean America and Russia's sphere of influence collided in Ukraine yes, largely because of the changing social, economic, and cultural conditions in Eastern Europe. People were enjoying capitalism and Western liberal values, the EU gave them a good quality of life, and security from Russia. Ukraine wanted in.

I don't trust Wikileaks. Russia has weaponized it, like most conspiracy sites.

A general note on Russian spies for further reading.
https://www.businessinsider.com/inside-world-deep-cover-russia-spies-infiltrating-west-putin-agents-2023-12?op=1&r=US&IR=T

Edited December 31, 2023 by BlueOak

[Raze]

@BlueOak dude, not a single one of those is actual evidence Putin specifically plans to expand past Ukraine its not even circumstantial evidence, it’s just blind speculation. Present actual clear evidence Putin is planning this.

2, so what is your response to Putin only invading when Ukraine was heading to join NATO and saying multiple times that is a red line?

3. It doesn’t matter if you don’t trust Wikileaks, that was a actual memo and it has never been disputed as real by the government. If you have proof it’s fake I’ll consider it, or even any proof they’ve ever fabricated a document.

Edited January 1 by Raze

[Devin]

What do you mean a double standard? Ukraine and Israel are Western allies, no one is claiming the West is supporting Ukraine out of the goodness of their heart, that's asinine to strawman the situation like that.

Russia is the largest enemy, by Putin's choosing, of the West, Ukraine is an ally. Israel is an ally, Palestine is Iran adjacent, making them in the very least a neutral party. All this talk of being on the right side or whatever is juvenile narrativization.

 

It seems completely irrelevant to me whether Putin wants to expand more, Ukraine has a right to defend it's own land, the idea that the U.K. is forcing them to war with Russia seems ludicrous to me, just before the war Biden announced that the attack wouldn't likely last long and that Russia would take the region. There was a map released by Russian media that accidently showed a planned operation in Moldova, which fits the m.o..

Edited January 1 by Devin

[BlueOak]

8 hours ago, Raze said:

@BlueOak dude, not a single one of those is actual evidence Putin specifically plans to expand past Ukraine its not even circumstantial evidence, it’s just blind speculation. Present actual clear evidence Putin is planning this.

If you are dismissing all that as nothing. Your bias is too immovable to connect with. 

Edited January 1 by BlueOak

[Raze]

14 hours ago, BlueOak said:

If you are dismissing all that as nothing. Your bias is too immovable to connect with. 

I’m dismissing it because none of that is actually proof

A) from the article you yourself link, this is a quote from a political scientist 

Quote

These scattered instances of Soviet flags on vehicles should not be taken as an expression of a Russian policy of re-establishing Soviet power, but of re-establishing Russian domination over Ukraine.

 

B) that doesn’t entail them moving past Ukraine, and clearly trying to get them to join NATO would trigger a war there too, that wouldn’t be an example of recreating the Soviet Union, it would be, like with Ukraine, not tolerating a border country joining a alliance he views as hostile to his government.

C) that’s not Putin nor a threat to invade Poland, it’s a threat because they are backing Ukraine

D) the majority of those were before Putin was prime minister, those are mostly crushing rebellions not re-establishing the Soviet Union, every invasion has economic motivations for more logical ex: the Caucuses was to connect Russia to Iran  

lamenting the fall of something, even specifying the economic fallout and losing Russian speaking people as the reason, doesn’t mean he is planning on trying to reestablish it

he also said:

https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191843730.001.0001/q-oro-ed5-00016963

‘anyone who doesn’t regret the passing of the Soviet Union has no heart. Anyone who wants it restored has no brains.’

E)  nothing about that tactic proves he wants to bring back to Soviet Union, just destabilize countries who are pushing against his interests. Putin opposed the Iraq war and backed Assad. The USA overthrew Iraq and backed a civil war to overthrow Assad creating chaos in the region and millions of refugees and migrants, if flooding migrants into other countries is a tactic to bring back the Soviet Union then the USA is more in favor of it than Putin.

F) paying for bots to spread conspiracies online isn’t proof he’s reviving the Soviet Union. Also studies find  they had no meaningful effect. https://theintercept.com/2023/01/10/russia-twitter-bots-trump-election/

G) again, having operations against hostile countries is not proof he plans on reviving the Soviet Union

If Putin invaded Ukraine to re-establish the Soviet Union, why did he only do so after it was close to joining NATO, and even offer to not invade if NATO didn’t admit it? If the goal is just expansion it would be invaded regardless.

Why is it so hard to believe that Ukraine was invaded because Putin won’t tolerate NATO encroaching on his borders.

1) it matches the timing perfectly

2) it makes logical sense based on his actual actions 

3) it aligns with his actual beliefs

4) he has said it multiple times and even US government officials acknowledged it

meanwhile the idea he wants to re-establish the Soviet Union and Ukraine is the last line of Defence matches perfectly with supporting the goals of the military industrial complex and extending the war. Not the least bit suspicious?

Edited January 1 by Raze

[zazen]

Good discussion. I’ll just add that speaking of the good old days and past glory of empire isn’t calling for expansionism of old but reviving a sense of inspiration and fostering regionalism. Modern day empire expansion isn’t geographic but more about establishing alliances, trade and economic blocks. 
 

As the world stagnates and our institutions become burdened the call for past growth and dynamism is present - like adults wishing for their youth. Make America great again, Brexit, nationalism and the build back better theme many nations touted signal this. They aren’t necessarily calls for old colonial days.

 

 

Edited January 1 by zazen

[Devin]

2 hours ago, Raze said:

 

Why is it so hard to believe that Ukraine was invaded because Putin won’t tolerate NATO encroaching on his borders.

 

It seems completely nonsensical to me to think a 32 nation defensive alliance like NATO is an offensive threat to Russia. NATO is only a defensive alliance, it requires an attack for NATO to threaten anyone.

It seems like a ridiculous concept because without NATO agreement those same countries plus every other non Russian influence neighbor can secretly conspire at anytime to cooperatively attack Russia, a country with half the nuclear warheads in the world.

[Raze]

3 hours ago, Devin said:

It seems completely nonsensical to me to think a 32 nation defensive alliance like NATO is an offensive threat to Russia. NATO is only a defensive alliance, it requires an attack for NATO to threaten anyone.

It seems like a ridiculous concept because without NATO agreement those same countries plus every other non Russian influence neighbor can secretly conspire at anytime to cooperatively attack Russia, a country with half the nuclear warheads in the world.

I’m not saying they think NATO will attack them out of the blue.

But it’s the same reason why the US didn’t want Cuba to hold Russian nukes or why the US surrounds Iran with bases. So if a war does break out they have a close launch pad for operations. 

Also Putin wanted free travel between Ukraine and Russia, but if Ukraine joins NATO the US can launch destabilization operations to try and ferment a revolt of Russia’s governments. The US does this constantly, they even overthrew Ukraine’s President.

[Devin]

10 hours ago, Raze said:

I’m not saying they think NATO will attack them out of the blue.

But it’s the same reason why the US didn’t want Cuba to hold Russian nukes or why the US surrounds Iran with bases. So if a war does break out they have a close launch pad for operations. 

Also Putin wanted free travel between Ukraine and Russia, but if Ukraine joins NATO the US can launch destabilization operations to try and ferment a revolt of Russia’s governments. The US does this constantly, they even overthrew Ukraine’s President.

How would this help the U.S. destabilize Russia? Before this war Russia was largely accepted by the West, I'm not saying this point isn't valid though.

The proximity for war does not seem relevant to me with modern warfare. If Ukraine was in NATO there would be no reason for NATO nukes in Ukraine, no nukes at all, even NATO bases. It would be too late for Putin to do anything then so I see why he would act now but again if these countries want to attack Russia, Ukraine is completely inconsequential with modern warfare. If Ukraine was NATO, why would NATO ever care about attacking Russia, it would require all 32 nations to vote in approval, to attack a nuclear superpower aligned with China.

But yes I have heard Putin talk about Western expansion as a dangerous hegemony and I agree with him on that, I just believe his tact is completely backwards and of a previous century to attack countries, he needs to use diplomacy to be effective, tyranny is just digging him in a deeper hole even if he wins every state he attacks. The West is now going to destroy Russia financially, Russia is better off losing in Ukraine actually.

 

Edited January 2 by Devin

[BlueOak]

@Raze

What evidence do you want then, the guns firing? Bombs dropping? Then its about 10 years too late to do anything, and guess what, another repeat of Ukraine. Again most countries try to expand their sphere of influence, and Russians consider many of these lands as Russian. With America pulling back Russia is trying to push forward, albeit about a decade too early because of Russia's population crisis. - You are sitting in a comfortable country far from all of this saying don't worry, its all cool, meanwhile a familiar Russian aggression is taking place over the border for many of these countries.

tl;dr Don't ignore history or Eastern Europe. You'd be much better off arguing why NATO might deter him, than reasoning there is no pattern of the 8 Russian wars in former USSR territory.

A) The heavy amount of Russian USSR, or greater Russian propaganda has fueled a nationalist and fascist shift in Russia. Giving it one likely trajectory, not guaranteed, but likely. That is achieving the promised (or imagined) 'Greater Russia' aim for Putin to remain in power. Even disregarding Putin's own bias. Putin requires the nationalists to be satisfied (or dead or living in fantasy). I can give you a dozen more links if necessary to show the level of USSR and greater Russian propaganda in the country to achieve that fantasy. Their State TV does it 24/7.

B) I just did a post with 20 reasons for invading Ukraine, NATO borders were one of them, why ignore all of them? Because you believe wars have just one cause? You think world leaders decide wars just for one reason? Black and white? Good and bad? No. They have many considerations in a government, and in a population, even with a dictator. You don't get or last in a position of power if you are only capable of binary reasoning. ex: I've heard Russians say the Ukraine war is a civil war, with nothing to do with NATO at all, because they consider those people and that land Russian.

Ditto you think there is just one factor in Putin deciding whether to invade Moldova, the Baltics, Poland and Romania?

Would considering Eastern Europe, the history of the region vs Russia, the population dynamics, the resources, industrial centers, and ports, preferred borders, Russia's own history, Kaliningrad, the growing nationalist sentiments, sea patrol routes, America's trending isolationism, global trade routes, Putin's ego, the current Russia trend of invading former USSR countries, etc, as opposed to just saying NATO be too much to ask? I understand as I think you are American and very distant, but it is a failing of the American perspective (and Russian) to only see NATO vs Russia. Many Russians still see those territories as Russian, not another country.

C) No comment is coming out of Russia without Kremlin approval minus a death sentence. Certainly not from that Putin puppet. Several times Russia has said Poland was given to them by the Russians. If you knew much about the history of the two countries, you would not have replied with that. Its not a cozy relationship at all. It's one more demonstration that you can't see Eastern Europe as an influencing or deciding factor in this.

D) I am showing you an ongoing pattern and history of the few ex-USSR elite left in Russia, re-establishing control over former USSR countries. There is not one of those 8 wars Russia has fought which didn't take land, or put in a proxy government.

Then I sit here and show you another one in Ukraine and you are trying to deny the obvious pattern. Its even more obvious because it only happened after the Russian proxy government lost control of the country. Anyone denying that Russia want to re-establish control over Ukraine is pure head-in-the-sand behavior at this stage. A bit like denying the message Russia keep telling the world over and over and over, that they want a greater Russia. To remake the glory days, both in their actions, their social movements, Putin's speeches, their state TV, their history of wars, and their current leader fighting yet another one.

It's like watching a burglar with a map laid out of where he's going, while his friends on TV are telling you that's where he's going, and saying ah it's not a pattern.

E) Putting Russian populations in countries next to their border is both a tactic Russia and China use to legitimize war or smaller-scale actions against their neighbors. Russian's were saying we are fighting for Russian language speakers early on, it is still a constant justification to save the Russian population. How about Moldova's breakaway territories? Or the fact people in the Baltics are worrying about their Russian populations being next?

It also shows clearly a larger-scale operation against Europe. I mean hell it's all people talk about in European politics, migration, migration, migration.

F)  Filling the world with conspiracy theories to destabilize it, is a core tenant of fascism. It's very much an action of a fascist state pushing its influence outward. See Themes of Fascism on Wikipedia.

G) Its not hard at all! Because I agree NATO was one factor of many. One. It was a tipping point that pushed Putin over the edge. Relations have been souring with Europe for decades. You'd only know that if you put NATO aside for a moment and really looked into it, which I agree is hard as Russian's love their secrets (and that's part of the problem in communication). While Europe and America don't like to admit their ignorance of the Russian perspective or their own mistakes. - Or here again, as with 95% of Americans, Eastern Europe.

A mirror for you: You ignoring all trends inside Russia or every external action it takes as somehow disjointed or individually made, while trying to cover its actions abroad as happenstance, is very suspicious to someone experiencing them. To quote you, suspicion isn't proof of anything. (And no I don't think that regarding you, but that's your exact mirror regarding suspicion)

Edited January 2 by BlueOak

[Devin]

 

[PurpleTree]

how many people died in this war thus far?

[PurpleTree]

https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/nepal-bars-citizens-russia-ukraine-work-recruited-fighters-106124536

 

 

russia using everybody as cannon fodder, even nepalese