391–400 of 521 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia didn't take over Finland because it couldn't . It wasn't for a lack of will. They committed 450k to 750k of their man and lost 300k of them. If that isn't defeat, I don't know what is.
[flagged]
Big difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of influence or increase tensions with Russia It was a mistake for NATO to do it without Russia. It's not a matter of "influence", but a matter of military risks and perceived threats. If there was a political will towards pushing Russia to NATO any similar to wh…
Dictators don't like united democracies. Strange.
For people not very well versed into the background of this, the pop-geopolitics personality-phenomena Peter Zeihan did a recap on it today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Vt3CxtQsuQ&ab_channel=Zeiha...
It is not background but U.S. centric perspective, that results in tunnel world view and bubble info diet, and man in question is analyst for Stratfor from 2000. Zeihan spent 12 years at Stratfor, eventually rising to vice-president.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never assumed Russia was a passive unresponsive corpse with no concerns or perspective and memory of its own . In fact, I am very concerned about its death-worshipping perspective and distorted memory. You still have to stand up to a bully, or you encourage them. A strategic mistake was not putting severe sanctions on Russia in 2014 when they annexed Crimea.
> death-worshipping perspective and distorted memory Elaborate? The point of distorted memories and elective outlooks on the past event had been on my mind for some time now. > bully Anthropomorphizing countries distorts reality, but do you honestly don't see how every narrative of Russian imperialism and so on could be just as well applied to western post-Cold War totally never-ever threatened very polite expansioni…
Anthropomorphizing coutries - yes it distorts, but much less so in dictatorships, because so few (actual!) people hold the reigns. Putin is a bully, let's rephrase it like that. Not kicking his balls encourages him and others like him.
Finland got de-Finlandized at last. Which is what the expansion of NATO was always about. NATO isn't a threat to Russia itself - if Russia seriously feared NATO aggression, it wouldn't voluntarily demilitarize its NATO borders during the past 13 months. NATO expansion just neutralizes Russian ability to force its will upon its neighbors through threat of aggression (or in case like Ukraine through the use of aggressi…
I don't buy the idea that it was a mistake for NATO to allow former Soviet bloc countries to join, because it would supposedly encroach on Russia's sphere of influence or increase tensions with Russia. Spheres of influence are gained through economic muscle and cultural power now, not force of arms.
Poland and other CEE countries lobbied aggressively to join NATO in the 90s, and by far their biggest asset was their diaspora communities in the US. The GOP had taken the House in '94 and were pushing for NATO expansion leading up to the '96 election. In order to head off this threat, Clinton promised NATO expansion eventually, to which Dole ended up promising a definite date for CEE's entry. Said Clinton at the time:
'I face a difficult campaign, but I have a reasonable chance. The Republicans are pushing NATO expansion. Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio are key; they represented a big part of my majority last time—states where I won by a narrow margin. The Republicans think they can take away those states by playing on the idea of NATO expansion.'
https://www.russiamatters.org/blog/how-much-did-us-elections...
[flagged]
"If his former exes asked for a restraining order against him, what incentive or assurance does he have for allowing them to break up with him?" The problem is Russia. Russia could be a normal country like its neighbors and make money from trading goods while wooing foreign investors, but Putin took the history books he read too seriously and thinks he can pull another round of territorial conquests. I don't see how…
I'm so sorry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are no gymnastics - previously Finland and Russia had a diplomatic relationship. Now if Russia has a conflict with one of the Baltic states, Finland is dragged into it. Before a war between Lithuania and Russia would not involve Finland necessarily. Now Finland has pledged a war between Lithuania and Russia would involve Finland. Not many mental gymnastics are needed - to a person who reaches the level of avera…
And in what circumstances would Lithuania, a country with population of 2.8M, would be at war with Russia?
Lithuania is in NATO, so Russian conflict with any other NATO member drags Lithuania in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, we all know that this move was played out by those sneaky Americans. 4D chess that invasion of Ukraine /s
A good politician never lets a catastrophe go to waste. U.S. may not have purposely caused the invasion of Ukraine, but it's certainly a useful tool to rake in those NATO holdouts.
Making it seem as if Finland is but a vassal for the U.S. for this move is disingenuous at best. After Georgia, Crimea, and now the rest of Ukraine, anyone would make such a decision. Out of their own will. In order to survive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that how NATO is spoken about in Europe, that it is the might of 30 nations and not just the US?
Like all things such as this, it's controversial and there is no such thing as a unified vision. For some people, yes... In fact US involvement is largely a controversial topic because joining NATO, to some people and politicians, is tantamount to putting US military bases in your country. The reality is, when people talk about the benefits of NATO they will strongly lean on the fact that it's many countries in a pac…
Too bad their funding didn't match that rhetoric until after Russia was already invading Ukraine. It'll be years yet before Germany's military will be up to snuff, and outside of France, the UK, and Poland, most of the NATO armies would struggle if they encountered any resistance on-par with what the Russians are putting out.
Nor are their logistics and production capable of keeping up w/ the high-intensity peer/near-peer fight that we're seeing in UKR.