3 ms·

> This probably explains why Germany is not supporting Ukraine with fists. And also probably because we don't want a war on our borders? Ukraine was supposed t

> This probably explains why Germany is not supporting Ukraine with fists. And also probably because we don't want a war on our borders? Ukraine was supposed to be a buffer state between NATO and Russia, and then US promised that Ukraine would have joined NATO, and back at the time Germany and France pushed back[0]. But US has only to gain with disorders in the old continent, so here we are... [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/world/europe/03nato.html https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/world/europe/03nato.html

raxxorrax 5y ago
Very true, but as with the Iraq war, the guilty are easily found and support for a war quickly comes from the righteous®. Russia actually does have an argument for protecting former Russians in some countries. These are people that suddenly lost their nationality with the collapse of the soviet union and don't want to relieve it in favor of the new countries. That puts them in a situation where they are not allowed to travel because of lacking passports. There is additional discrimination that the population faces. Of course that is not at all an excuse for an invasion. But if you deny that Russia has security interests in that region, you basically are asking for a war. And the Russians have made it very clear that it is seen that way and made their reaction very predictable. Yet, western nations ignored that completely. After what the US media conjured as Russian election interference it certainly drove more animosity towards Russians. Completely irresponsible behavior and not a lesser extend of state propaganda than you would hear from Kremlin media. But people will completely deny this reality due to a religious self-image, even if they know it was bollocks. Shame on those that reiterated that message which was not restricted to the US at all. The US might have some obligations towards Ukraine, as has Great Britain. But I don't think the involvement of the US has been very helpful. Bush wanted to be seen as strong everywhere after 9-11 and that extended to giving Ukraine and Georgia hope of Nato membership. At that time Russia didn't even react much. But the course for the escalation was set. One common factor of those that asked for a strong response, which the west mostly gave with the exception of Germany perhaps, was being profoundly ignorant in how to talk to Russia and its interest. Ukraine has interests too, but there is no solution for them without a dialogue with its neighbor. And just promising to not include Ukraine in a military alliance (it is not just a defensive pact) would have mostly ended the conflict and most arguments. Yet, some people decided not to do that.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > ...don't want to relieve it in favor of the new countries. That puts them in a situation where they are not allowed to travel because of lacking passports. There is additional discrimination... They put themselves in that situation by not getting new passports, so if there's any "additional discrimination" it's done by themselves. If they didn't want to become citizens of their newly independent ex-Soviet Republics but remain Russians, they should have moved to Russia. > Of course that is not at all an excuse for an invasion. It certainly is being used as one, just as it has in the past.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > But if you deny that Russia has security interests in that region, you basically are asking for a war. And the Russians have made it very clear that it is seen that way and made their reaction very predictable. Russia's "security interests" are, as they have ever been, aggressive unilateral expansion. Nobody else was "asking for a war"; nobody needs to, because Russia is always only too willing to serve one up unasked. So yes indeed, "their reaction [is] very predictable". It always is, and it's of course even easier to predict when it's a "reaction" to circumstances they themselves engineered. > Yet, western nations ignored that completely. So WTF were they supposed to do? Acquiesce and appease, as so many times before? There has to be a limit somewhere. Putin cannot count on Munich 1938 going on forever.
- CRConrad 5y ago
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > One common factor of those that asked for a strong response, which the west mostly gave with the exception of Germany perhaps, was being profoundly ignorant in how to talk to Russia and its interest. Because normal international diplomatic relations and norms don't apply to Russia; one has to "talk to" Russia in a special way? How about fucking Russia just come down off its high horse, in stead? > Ukraine has interests too, but there is no solution for them without a dialogue with its neighbor. There is no solution for them with such a neighbour. > And just promising to not include Ukraine in a military alliance (it is not just a defensive pact) would have mostly ended the conflict and most arguments. Yet, some people decided not to do that. Here's what people with a dictatorial mindset[1] just can't seem to get: It's not a matter of what other powers should "promise" or "decide", but what the people of the sovereign nation of Ukraine themselves WANT to do. If they feel that they need to belong to an alliance in order to preserve their national security, then who the fuck is Putin to say they can't? He has his own nation to run; he is not the dictator of the Ukrainians. (Yet. :-( ) [1]: Like you are so convincingly demonstrating here.

raxxorrax 5y ago

Very true, but as with the Iraq war, the guilty are easily found and support for a war quickly comes from the righteous®. Russia actually does have an argument for protecting former Russians in some countries. These are people that suddenly lost their nationality with the collapse of the soviet union and don't want to relieve it in favor of the new countries. That puts them in a situation where they are not allowed to travel because of lacking passports. There is additional discrimination that the population faces. Of course that is not at all an excuse for an invasion. But if you deny that Russia has security interests in that region, you basically are asking for a war. And the Russians have made it very clear that it is seen that way and made their reaction very predictable. Yet, western nations ignored that completely. After what the US media conjured as Russian election interference it certainly drove more animosity towards Russians. Completely irresponsible behavior and not a lesser extend of state propaganda than you would hear from Kremlin media. But people will completely deny this reality due to a religious self-image, even if they know it was bollocks. Shame on those that reiterated that message which was not restricted to the US at all. The US might have some obligations towards Ukraine, as has Great Britain. But I don't think the involvement of the US has been very helpful. Bush wanted to be seen as strong everywhere after 9-11 and that extended to giving Ukraine and Georgia hope of Nato membership. At that time Russia didn't even react much. But the course for the escalation was set. One common factor of those that asked for a strong response, which the west mostly gave with the exception of Germany perhaps, was being profoundly ignorant in how to talk to Russia and its interest. Ukraine has interests too, but there is no solution for them without a dialogue with its neighbor. And just promising to not include Ukraine in a military alliance (it is not just a defensive pact) would have mostly ended the conflict and most arguments. Yet, some people decided not to do that.

CRConrad 5y ago
> ...don't want to relieve it in favor of the new countries. That puts them in a situation where they are not allowed to travel because of lacking passports. There is additional discrimination... They put themselves in that situation by not getting new passports, so if there's any "additional discrimination" it's done by themselves. If they didn't want to become citizens of their newly independent ex-Soviet Republics but remain Russians, they should have moved to Russia. > Of course that is not at all an excuse for an invasion. It certainly is being used as one, just as it has in the past.
CRConrad 5y ago
> But if you deny that Russia has security interests in that region, you basically are asking for a war. And the Russians have made it very clear that it is seen that way and made their reaction very predictable. Russia's "security interests" are, as they have ever been, aggressive unilateral expansion. Nobody else was "asking for a war"; nobody needs to, because Russia is always only too willing to serve one up unasked. So yes indeed, "their reaction [is] very predictable". It always is, and it's of course even easier to predict when it's a "reaction" to circumstances they themselves engineered. > Yet, western nations ignored that completely. So WTF were they supposed to do? Acquiesce and appease, as so many times before? There has to be a limit somewhere. Putin cannot count on Munich 1938 going on forever.
CRConrad 5y ago
CRConrad 5y ago
> One common factor of those that asked for a strong response, which the west mostly gave with the exception of Germany perhaps, was being profoundly ignorant in how to talk to Russia and its interest. Because normal international diplomatic relations and norms don't apply to Russia; one has to "talk to" Russia in a special way? How about fucking Russia just come down off its high horse, in stead? > Ukraine has interests too, but there is no solution for them without a dialogue with its neighbor. There is no solution for them with such a neighbour. > And just promising to not include Ukraine in a military alliance (it is not just a defensive pact) would have mostly ended the conflict and most arguments. Yet, some people decided not to do that. Here's what people with a dictatorial mindset[1] just can't seem to get: It's not a matter of what other powers should "promise" or "decide", but what the people of the sovereign nation of Ukraine themselves WANT to do. If they feel that they need to belong to an alliance in order to preserve their national security, then who the fuck is Putin to say they can't? He has his own nation to run; he is not the dictator of the Ukrainians. (Yet. :-( ) [1]: Like you are so convincingly demonstrating here.