301–310 of 317 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure that we're in World War III. We're just trying to pretend that we're not. We're at least at the buildup to it.
This is not a world war. The fighting is specific to a single area. The Vietnam War involved at least double the number of involved countries and wasn’t considered a world war.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just for clarity, Ukraine pleaded for the defense pact, we refused it because the other side scared us too much. Sure seems like a playground bully. But yeah, stand by the 'we didn't get involved because then Russia would invade', wooh, that worked out well. I think the path you support is leading to a more unstable nuclear environment then if we would have been firm. But sure, it's just Czechoslovakia, I mean Ukrain…
Three things: 1. I did not share my thoughts on what we should or shouldn’t do, nor what we should have or shouldn’t have done. Don’t presume to know my position. The truth is I don’t know what we should have done or should do now, but I know I’m not in a rush to get in a shooting war with another nuclear power without considering that we may not actually survive it. 2. Treating the battlefield like a playground chea…
Feels pretty much exactly like it, though. (Crimea was the Sudetenland (unless that was Abkhasia / South Ossetia).)
> Poland actually had defense pacts which were not honored
So to avoid that, this time around "Poland" wasn't even given any pacts (unless you count the Budapest agreement) but strung along in the hope of them... OK, so not an exact repetition; "History does repeat, but in a funny-house mirror". [Just made that up.]
> and was invaded by two of the most powerful countries in the world in a world that had not yet invented nuclear weapons nor ICBMs.
Isn't that quite a bit like someone saying "This isn't the start of WW1; we're in a vastly different world with tanks and gas now" about Poland in 1939? Yet most serious historians nowadays (AIUI) see WW2 as a direct continuation of WW1.
> This is Ukraine 2022 in a very different world with very different power dynamics, communications and much more destructive weapons technologies. There is a lot more at stake and to disregard that is foolishness.
Yeah, so it's still pretty much the same world, with the same power dynamics and weapons technologies as, but somewhat better communications than, in the 1970s and -80s.
Just like the 1920s and -30s were only a pause in the 20th Century World War, the mistake now is thinking that the Cold War ended in 1990. It's been going on all the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You replied to a report about two more Northern European countries joining NATO who seem to have been against it before by saying Putin is freezing NATO membership where it is? It seems like things are going completely opposite of the way you describe them.
Sweden and Finland is NOT joining NATO, if that is what you think.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> captured Russian soldiers saying they didn't want to be part of the invasion I am following the conflict very closely (due to having many friends and relatives on both sides). While there are some videos with what looks like Russian soldiers (some of whom look no older than 18-19, so they're definitely conscripts), I wouldn't say there have been very many of them, and what would you say in a similar situation? "Yes…
> I wouldn't say there have been very many of them, and what would you say in a similar situation? I don't think it takes many to cause domestic issues. Generally captured American soldiers, who aren't conscripts, hold the line. There are noteworthy exceptions like John Walker Lindh which caused a lot of controversy domestically. It's worth noting that seeing lots of dead conscript soldiers coming home in coffins hel…
If their families and friends get to see them, and if they're actually genuine. As for the first, it's doubtful, given the Russian state media censorship; as for the second, the Russians are of course going to claim that they're all fake, Ukrainian stooges pretending to be Russian soldiers.
And, unfortunately, maybe they -- or at least some of them -- are. Wouldn't you be tempted to try that, if you were forced to fight your war largely on social and mass media, like the Ukrainians are? I think I would. (What speaks against it is the risk of it backfiring, if it's found out. So maybe I wouldn't try it; I don't know.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Germany froze the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project. Russia has a ton of reserves, but this will hobble them economically once the reserves are drawn down. The UK and US are debating seizing property belonging to Putin's circle of supporters, which could be very precarious for him domestically. Protests are breaking out in St. Petersburg and Moscow, and videos are turning up of captured Russian soldiers saying they…
Freezing Nord Steam 2 was an obvious consequence. It must have been priced in to what ever calculation Putin is making. It wasn't in operation yet so it's not clear to me that it has any significant financial impact. Similarly, assets belonging to Putin and his supporters will have been well hidden before this kicked off. I agree though, the one positive light is the protests and people putting their lives on the lin…
What would have shown some balls would have been turning off Nord Steam 1. Germans do own woolly sweaters to wear if it's cold in their homes, and Germany does have forests to use for firewood for at least one winter.
At this point is there anything substantive any country could do at all that wouldn't irritate Russia? It seems as if the powers that be have become so utterly delicate that even something as innocuous as Sweden joining NATO is deemed to be advancing far beyond the "proper" limits.
Consider Sweden's geography along coast of the Baltic Sea ; joining NATO would basically close this path to the Atlantic Ocean for the Russian Navy. Well, at least if enough missiles and/or fighter jets are placed on its soil by NATO countries to effectively close the Baltic Sea in case of war.
Given how narrow Öresund is, I'm fairly sure conventional artillery (not to mention missiles...) could cover the entire strait from the coast of NATO member Denmark. I doubt Sweden would protest too loudly about this incursion on her territorial waters, if she lets the Russian navy do the same first... And even if she does, so what?
I don't understand why Russia, or anyone else, thinks that Ukraine was anywhere near joining NATO. Ukraine had bits of it that were occupied by Russia, specifically Crimea. There was no way Ukraine would have been allowed to join under such circumstances because such occupations would have immediately triggered Article 5. Letting Ukraine into NATO would be tantamount to declaring war on Russia. It was never a real op…
I don't understand why anyone thinks that Russia thought that Ukraine was anywhere near joining NATO.
I don't understand why Russia, or anyone else, thinks that Ukraine was anywhere near joining NATO. Ukraine had bits of it that were occupied by Russia, specifically Crimea. There was no way Ukraine would have been allowed to join under such circumstances because such occupations would have immediately triggered Article 5. Letting Ukraine into NATO would be tantamount to declaring war on Russia. It was never a real op…
> I don't understand why Russia, or anyone else, thinks that Ukraine was anywhere near joining NATO IMO, because this is how all of Putin's propaganda has framed it. NATO is some big bully ("Nazi") that keeps "aggressing" by letting sovereign countries liberalize and freely associate with the West. The shameless destruction of Ukraine is right in line with the authoritarian autocrats's imperative - turn the place int…
Yes and no: It's true for now, but it will turn out to have been optimistic when he takes the next one[1].
Wonder how long the West is going to go on falling for it? Until he dies of natural causes, at far too high an age[2], or well beyond -- when an equally Stalinesque / Hitleresque successor is firmly ensconced and keeps on doing it?
___
[1]: And the next, and the next, and...
[2]: That is, anything above about fifty.
I don't understand why Russia, or anyone else, thinks that Ukraine was anywhere near joining NATO. Ukraine had bits of it that were occupied by Russia, specifically Crimea. There was no way Ukraine would have been allowed to join under such circumstances because such occupations would have immediately triggered Article 5. Letting Ukraine into NATO would be tantamount to declaring war on Russia. It was never a real op…
Ukraine added that they will join NATO to their constitution, and in the past months NATO started to ramp up the amount of NATO weaponry in or near Ukraine. Russia reaction is basically the reaction of anyone cornered, something Sun Tzu warned about, if someone is cornered they will fight back hard because they can't retreat, they can only go forward, through whoever is cornering them.
If you're "cornered" because your neighbours feel a need to defend themselves from your aggression, the problem isn't with them but with you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ukraine added that they will join NATO to their constitution, and in the past months NATO started to ramp up the amount of NATO weaponry in or near Ukraine. Russia reaction is basically the reaction of anyone cornered, something Sun Tzu warned about, if someone is cornered they will fight back hard because they can't retreat, they can only go forward, through whoever is cornering them.
This is really out of touch with reality. Russia has been provoking military incidents almost every day for years. From memory, in total, western airforces had to block Russian fighters entering their sovereign territory 240 times in 2021. French fighters were sent several times to stop Russian fighters in the English Channel, e.g. 2000 km from their base. Then you can add Russia submarines nosing around, spy vessels…
What, do you mean the Finno-Soviet Treaty of 1948[1]? That ended in 1992, and "[w]hen in January 1992 the new Treaty of Friendship was complemented by the exchange of notes terminating the 1948 treaty, the last remnant of restrictions on an independent Finnish foreign policy were formally removed."[2]
> and are so vulnerable. They may prefer the status quo.
I doubt it.[3] The Finns have been vulnerable to Russia before, and know how to hold a grudge. A majority[4] is for membership now.
On Friday the fifth of March (I think it was), the Eduskunta -- the Finnish Parliament -- debated NATO membership. And not one, but two Citizens' Initiatives that have each gathered enough signatures to make (further?) parliamentary discussion mandatory.
___
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finno-Soviet_Treaty_of_1948
[2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20181125193537/https://www.forei...
[3]: Source: Personal experience; lived here for 27 years now.