It's 3 years old, but relevant up until today, imho.
Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
31–40 of 241 posts
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it was the United States that broke the promise to not expand NATO after the fall of the Soviet Union This promise is a myth [1]. At best, it was an informal statement by some guy in the U.S. government [2]. This has been blown out of proportion beyond any semblance to reality by Putin's propaganda. And if it had happened, it would have been an agreement with the Soviet Union. Which does not exist. Russia, in 1994,…
Citing a blog post by the Brookings Institution is very funny to me. They were one of many think tanks in Washington that built the intellectual groundwork to justify the expansion of NATO in the first place.
There is no shortage of sources on the ambiguity of this alleged promise [1][2]. More critically, there is a total absence of sources from Putin. Because he doesn't have any. Because when nations agree to things, they do so by issuing public declarations and/or signing treaties.
[1] https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017...
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/09/us/politics/russia-ukrain...
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#33It's funny when the aggressor is "negotiating" to attack or not. The biggest bully in the region feeling "threatened" by its neighbours seeking any possible way to protect themselves from it. Like a government-level "Why are you hitting yourself?"
It's one of the oldest tricks in the book. Remember that Russia invaded and annexed Crimea "to save Russian citizens".
I mean, isn't this also the tactic used in the late 1800s in the western U.S. to give a reason to pacify Native Americans? Promote U.S. citizens into frontier homesteads and then use the military to protect them/annex land?
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#34It's funny when the aggressor is "negotiating" to attack or not. The biggest bully in the region feeling "threatened" by its neighbours seeking any possible way to protect themselves from it. Like a government-level "Why are you hitting yourself?"
It's one of the oldest tricks in the book. Remember that Russia invaded and annexed Crimea "to save Russian citizens".
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#35I don't blame Russia's stance. I blame the cold war and the US's two pronged approach to most diplomacy matters. NATO was formed to halt the power of the soviet union. once the soviet union fell. NATO should've been disbanded. anyone with a pea of a brain would've seen the consequences of not abandoning nato, and now we're about to pay for those mistakes.
As a Russian I say you are completely wrong. The current crisis is entirely manufactured by Putin and his authoritarian needs, which are contrary to the actual needs of the Russian people. The Baltic states joined NATO in 2004, and there isn't much difference in nuke flight time between a launch from Latvia or from Kharkiv, so the entire premise that Ukraine potentially joining NATO somehow threatens Russia is a ruse. What's really going on is that Putin's popularity is falling, and he needs a) distractions b) to fullfill the imperialistic need that has been propagandized out of every hole for the last 15+ years (I.e the need Putin himself created), and through that increase his popularity. For some time the conflict in the eastern Ukraine served that purpose, but people's eyes and ears got tired of that, so he has to up the stakes. Also an endless conflict with a great adversary is a good justification to further limit the scraps of freedom that remain, and justify the poor state of the economy, arrest people for being "foreign agents" etc etc -- something that the North Korean monarchy has perfected.
>NATO should've been disbanded.
If that happened the Baltic states would have already been occupied by Russia, to protect the Russian minority of course. Nobody forced east European countries to join NATO, it's in their interest, it preserves their sovereignty.
America is imperialist too, but it's much more benign imperialism, focused on furthering globalism, democratic rule, and capitalists' profits. Russian imperialism only brings submission and authoritarianism -- the main narrative is sacrificing oneself for the imperialist rodina like the деды.
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#36The bigger question is "why now". Ukraine is not joining NATO or the EU any time soon. Russia has de facto annexed Crimea and its ongoing support for separatists in Donbas keeps the region unstable to its advantage. I suspect two reasons: Putin's flagging domestic support and Russia's (and to be honest, the world's) perception that America is currently so divided and weak it will be unable to offer much resistance th…
I'm wondering if this all about the NordStream 2 pipeline, though I'm not sure how threatening Ukraine helps Russia's case... maybe just to show that you don't want pipelines through an unstable region. Also, who benefits when natural gas prices go higher?
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#37why is NATO a threat? Has NATO ever started a conflict, seized territory, or imposed sanctions? Genuinely asking, I pretty ignorant here.
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#38Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#39It's funny when the aggressor is "negotiating" to attack or not. The biggest bully in the region feeling "threatened" by its neighbours seeking any possible way to protect themselves from it. Like a government-level "Why are you hitting yourself?"
Re: Russia says Ukraine talks hit 'dead end', Poland warns of risk of war
#40The bigger question is "why now". Ukraine is not joining NATO or the EU any time soon. Russia has de facto annexed Crimea and its ongoing support for separatists in Donbas keeps the region unstable to its advantage. I suspect two reasons: Putin's flagging domestic support and Russia's (and to be honest, the world's) perception that America is currently so divided and weak it will be unable to offer much resistance th…
But also, "What's the goal?". They obviously can't occupy the whole country (Ukraine is large and populous, that would be way too expensive). Do they want the eastern part (with a big Russian minority), land bridge to Crimea, or just extend Donbas/Luhansk or just reheat the conflict, destabilize the Ukraine?
It has to be something worthy. Ukrainian army is in a much better state than in 2014 and a full scale invasion could become very expensive and politically risky.
Or maybe it really is just sabre rattling and Putin wants something completely different (lifting of existing sanctions, NS2 completion...).