4 ms·

Also at the end of coldwar, there was a certain promise of not expanding Nato eastwards and letting Russia continue to have a sphere of influence, which the Wes

by publicola1990 6y ago

Also at the end of coldwar, there was a certain promise of not expanding Nato eastwards and letting Russia continue to have a sphere of influence, which the West has not been adhering to.

Robotbeat 6y ago
More importantly, there was also a promise by the West and Russia that if Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons, Russia and the West would ensure Ukraine’s security (ie from attack and invasion). How’s that going? It’s insane to me that in a conflict between a smaller and poorer country and a larger imperial country, people keep taking the side of the aggressor who literally invaded and is attempted to annex portions of the smaller. NATO is no justification for this!
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  That promise was cynical more than anything. In reality, Ukraine had the choice to give up nuclear weapons (which they couldn't deploy) or be invaded, either by Russia or the US. This was a preferable option. As far as Russia, it's not a question of right or wrong. As part of the dissolution of the USSR, NATO made a tacti assurance TO Russia that they would not push until the border. The occupation of Ukraine is a response to calls from Ukraine to align with the EU and NATO. Since neither organism allows entry if there is an active territorial dispute, so Russia created one. From our position, it looks like Ukraine is only trying to defend from Russian imperialism, a much bigger power. From the Russian position, it looks like NATO coordinating a total encirclement of Russia and massing troops directly at its border and cutting off any hope Russia has to be able to assure its trade routes and even territorial security, against an openly interventionist empire. Ultimately, both perspectives are true. NATO does seek to geopolitically checkmate Russia, which will make life for the average Russian citizen worse and increase the risk of a major war. At the same time Russia is indeed imposing on Ukraine. Russia could be headed by anyone else under any even remotely functional system of government and it would go to amazing lengths to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, no matter what. It's a simple matter that there is not really any choice available here.
  - Robotbeat 6y ago
    I can’t think of anything that would make Ukraine want to align with the West than being invaded by and pieces of it annexed by Russia. Come on, there is no moral equivalence to invading and annexing a country. This is not excusable.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Well, that's the spot Ukraine is in. If there is a chance that they join NATO or the EU, Russia has no choice but to create territorial disputes to prevent it. Morality matters very little here. Was it moral for the West to intervene after 1991 to loot the post-soviet states leading to the death of 7 million people? No. Was it done anyways? Yes. This is the context in which you operate. If you decide to operate morally when confronted with amoral actors all you will do is cause the suffering of millions of your own citizens.
      - Robotbeat 6y ago
        That’s balooney. Russia absolutely has a choice whether or not to invade and annex Ukraine. The West is not at war with Russia, has no desire to invade Russia, and even offered to admit Russia to NATO. This is imperialist justification of literally invading and annexing parts of another country that they consider a renegade vassal state. It’s not defensive in the least. Come on, this is super weak justification.
        sudosysgen 6y ago
        The West never offered to admit Russia into NATO. It was Russia that made the proposition, and there was no pursuit beyond years of stalling. Russia hasn't invaded Ukraine because they consider it to be a vassal state, Russia only invaded Ukraine after the Euromaidan movement suceeded and pursued integration into the EU and NATO. What you are saying may well be the propaganda Putin and his proto-fascist cabal give, but it is not the actual reason, or they would have acted much before and wouldn't have stopped in the Donbass.

Also at the end of coldwar, there was a certain promise of not expanding Nato eastwards and letting Russia continue to have a sphere of influence, which the West has not been adhering to.

Robotbeat 6y ago

More importantly, there was also a promise by the West and Russia that if Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons, Russia and the West would ensure Ukraine’s security (ie from attack and invasion). How’s that going? It’s insane to me that in a conflict between a smaller and poorer country and a larger imperial country, people keep taking the side of the aggressor who literally invaded and is attempted to annex portions of the smaller. NATO is no justification for this!

sudosysgen 6y ago
That promise was cynical more than anything. In reality, Ukraine had the choice to give up nuclear weapons (which they couldn't deploy) or be invaded, either by Russia or the US. This was a preferable option. As far as Russia, it's not a question of right or wrong. As part of the dissolution of the USSR, NATO made a tacti assurance TO Russia that they would not push until the border. The occupation of Ukraine is a response to calls from Ukraine to align with the EU and NATO. Since neither organism allows entry if there is an active territorial dispute, so Russia created one. From our position, it looks like Ukraine is only trying to defend from Russian imperialism, a much bigger power. From the Russian position, it looks like NATO coordinating a total encirclement of Russia and massing troops directly at its border and cutting off any hope Russia has to be able to assure its trade routes and even territorial security, against an openly interventionist empire. Ultimately, both perspectives are true. NATO does seek to geopolitically checkmate Russia, which will make life for the average Russian citizen worse and increase the risk of a major war. At the same time Russia is indeed imposing on Ukraine. Russia could be headed by anyone else under any even remotely functional system of government and it would go to amazing lengths to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO, no matter what. It's a simple matter that there is not really any choice available here.
- Robotbeat 6y ago
  I can’t think of anything that would make Ukraine want to align with the West than being invaded by and pieces of it annexed by Russia. Come on, there is no moral equivalence to invading and annexing a country. This is not excusable.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Well, that's the spot Ukraine is in. If there is a chance that they join NATO or the EU, Russia has no choice but to create territorial disputes to prevent it. Morality matters very little here. Was it moral for the West to intervene after 1991 to loot the post-soviet states leading to the death of 7 million people? No. Was it done anyways? Yes. This is the context in which you operate. If you decide to operate morally when confronted with amoral actors all you will do is cause the suffering of millions of your own citizens.
    - Robotbeat 6y ago
      That’s balooney. Russia absolutely has a choice whether or not to invade and annex Ukraine. The West is not at war with Russia, has no desire to invade Russia, and even offered to admit Russia to NATO. This is imperialist justification of literally invading and annexing parts of another country that they consider a renegade vassal state. It’s not defensive in the least. Come on, this is super weak justification.
      - sudosysgen 6y ago
        The West never offered to admit Russia into NATO. It was Russia that made the proposition, and there was no pursuit beyond years of stalling. Russia hasn't invaded Ukraine because they consider it to be a vassal state, Russia only invaded Ukraine after the Euromaidan movement suceeded and pursued integration into the EU and NATO. What you are saying may well be the propaganda Putin and his proto-fascist cabal give, but it is not the actual reason, or they would have acted much before and wouldn't have stopped in the Donbass.