631–640 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm so sorry. But the truth is that you don't stand a chance. Russia will get what it wants (it got the support of China that will offset any sanctions the the West might impose) I really hope you will stay safe.
Ukraine will make Russia suffer though as they seem very determined to protect their country. And the rest of the world will make Russia suffer economically. So this is a lose-lose situation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So many commentators did not live through post-USSR 90s to completely miss the mentality and culture which shapes Putin's decisions. First, you need to understand values of a person, then their goals, then their methods to achieve the goals. 90s in post-USSR countries were a relatively free environment (from state prosecution) and it naturally selected for individuals which wanted as much power as possible and were w…
Quoted post unavailable.
In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard Zbigniew Brzezinski did say that if Europe went to war again it would start in Ukraine. Some choice quotes: “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” “However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine,…
So many commentators did not live through post-USSR 90s to completely miss the mentality and culture which shapes Putin's decisions. First, you need to understand values of a person, then their goals, then their methods to achieve the goals. 90s in post-USSR countries were a relatively free environment (from state prosecution) and it naturally selected for individuals which wanted as much power as possible and were w…
Also, you could choose more neutral labels. The point of the egalitarians isn't that people should be soft but that people have rights even if they can't defend them. And really Putin believes this too, he just ignores this when convenient. He isn't okay with harms done to Russia when it was weak. If he really accepted this warrior ethos, he would think they were perfectly fine. Russia couldn't defend its interests, so it deserved whatever it got.
A neutral term for might makes right is kraterocracy. "Democracy" doesn't quite capture the alternative, but will do. Perhaps "egalitarianism" is better.
Some economic perspective. The Russian economy is 10x the size of the Ukrainian. The US economy is 14x larger than Russia's. The Canadian economy is larger than Russia's. The combined economy of all of NATO is 25x the size of Russia's. This does not even include Pacific allies like Japan and ANZUS. For historical perspective, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor the US economy was 7x larger than theirs. At the end of WW2…
In the era of industrialization economic size was a proxy for the capability of a state to mobilize its industrial capacity for war. Does that still hold true?
In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard Zbigniew Brzezinski did say that if Europe went to war again it would start in Ukraine. Some choice quotes: “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” “However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine,…
> “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.” He claims that without any proof. This maybe would have been true in the 19th century given the technologies for war and power at that time. But we have the 21st century now. Why should the Ukr…
Side note: you've used the old-fashioned (and Putin-favoured) english nomenclature for Ukraine as "the Ukraine" in the first sentence, and the Ukraine-preferred nomenclature in the second.
This is actually the crux of the issue in two sentences. Ukraine is a sovereign state, but Putin politically asserts it is merely a territory they control, harking back to a pre-WWII time; Ukraine was a territory regularly divided up and under the control of different neighbouring states as a bargaining chip, gift, settlement, or conquest.
This is I guess why Brzezinski talked about it as it was and as it is. Ukraine used to be passed around and fought over as a set of territories without a home. Post WWII, it is a nation state and its existence as a nation state historically perturbs its neighbours, most notably Russia.
Ukraine still has all the geographical significance it had. It's the second-largest country by land mass in Europe, it is fertile (a nearby breadbasket, geopolitically), it is also mineral rich, etc.
So Brzezinski wasn't wrong to say it was still a source of conflict, a prize, but now being an independent nation state it has the right to defend itself and enter alliances. That makes it a risk strategic point -- even perhaps a pivot -- in a future conflict.
> Why could Russia not be an empire without Ukraine?
If Russia is to (re)build an "empire", it needs Ukraine to do it, for all the reasons above.
Bold to say Brzezinski wrote nonsense, though. Good for you: put yourself out there as an international statesman.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't even imagine what you are going through. If you need to get out, Sweden welcomes you!
I wish. Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said this 6 days ago: > If Russia enters Ukraine, it is assumed that this will lead to large numbers of refugees fleeing the country. Amnesty International warns of a humanitarian catastrophe. > But Sweden will not be a major recipient country, according to Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. She believes that the responsibility lies with other countries. https://www.dn.se/v…
Some economic perspective. The Russian economy is 10x the size of the Ukrainian. The US economy is 14x larger than Russia's. The Canadian economy is larger than Russia's. The combined economy of all of NATO is 25x the size of Russia's. This does not even include Pacific allies like Japan and ANZUS. For historical perspective, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor the US economy was 7x larger than theirs. At the end of WW2…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same prediction is made in Dugin's Foundations of Geopolitics . Many of his recommendations have come to pass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics#Con...
I laughed at this one: The United Kingdom, merely described as an "extraterritorial floating base of the U.S.", should be cut off from Europe.[9]
Some economic perspective. The Russian economy is 10x the size of the Ukrainian. The US economy is 14x larger than Russia's. The Canadian economy is larger than Russia's. The combined economy of all of NATO is 25x the size of Russia's. This does not even include Pacific allies like Japan and ANZUS. For historical perspective, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor the US economy was 7x larger than theirs. At the end of WW2…
What you seem to be saying is that we should be willing to fight, but it's not been long since our last involvement. How big is the Afghan economy in relation to the West?
Who is this "we"? For all the condemnation and claims about sanctions, everyone saw this coming and did not a damn thing. If sanctions actually are imposed, Putin can just turn off the gas to Europe. If anyone wants to engage militarily (and Europeans rightly had enough of that) they have to worry about nuclear weapons.
I see this as a big eye opener to the other European "Union" countries when they see nobody actually has Ukraine's back.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Putin is a 69 year old dictator who is realizing his life is over. He's decided to go out with a bang. He obviously does not care about his country since this war will only hurt Russia, it's already had multiple consequences that are directly opposed to his stated goals. He wants to play with his army and tanks. "Take all your overgrown infants away somewhere And build them a home, a little place of their own. The Fl…
Why would Putin think his life is over? He's 10 years younger than Biden. And, have you ever heard the expressions, "better dead than Red" and "give me liberty or give me death"? People often believe that deeply held principles are more important than mere survival. Similarly Putin might believe that establishing Russia's strength and border security is more important than any short term pain Russia endures. In other…
Sure there are other perspectives and possible motivations for his actions. But it's the idea that he may not care any more and might do anything that I find scary. If he's willing to risk full scale invasion across all of Ukraine after the international focus that preceded it, would he also be willing to launch supersonic nuclear weapons? In his televised statement he said Russia is ready for all outcomes.
For the USA what probably worries me most is cyberattacks. The USA is such a soft target. Our government can't even secure it's systems after a decade of laws, warnings, bad reports, and actual attacks.
I do hope I'm wrong and Putin is actually sane and has a strategic plan that makes sense for his country.