8 ms·

The good analogy on Ukraine crisis. Imaging if Mexico joined Russian military alliance (created specifically against US) and decided to put Russian troops and b

The good analogy on Ukraine crisis. Imaging if Mexico joined Russian military alliance (created specifically against US) and decided to put Russian troops and bases on their territory. What would happened to Mexico? Would US allowed that?

throwrqX 5y ago
Well that will never happen because the US seems to care about Mexico (and has a substantial population of Mexican heritage people in the US) unlike Russia with Ukraine so it's a moot point. It's like saying imagine if Ireland joined Russia and decided to put Russian troops on their territory, it's ridiculous and has little meaning just like making up any other geopolitical fantasy. I can understand how thought experiments might be useful in physics but in geopolitics we have realpolitik not wild fantasies. If you want to go in that direction then I assume Nazi Germany concerns at the beginning of WW2 about the spread of globalist capitalism and communism would become legitimate concerns too then and justify invading Europe over?
- vandermik 5y ago
  Mexico was used in that analogy just because it's on US borders. If this analogy seems unrealistic to you, try replace Mexico with Cuba. Could two independent countries (USSR and Cuba) agreed to place nukes close to US borders in the 60's? Legally, sure they can. Does US agree with it? Even if WW3 was the case they will never allowed it. Same thing now with Ukraine. If Ukraine joins NATO, their troops will be on russia south border, which is unacceptable for Russia. And russian government thinks about it as an existential threat. Invasion is the direct result of failed negotiations between Russia and NATO about Ukraine neutrality.
  - throwrqX 5y ago
    All the countries Nazi Germany first invaded were on their borders too. The Cuba situation is a bit different but in the modern day I would say the US should allow it, but either way it's also a moot point because Russia can loiter their nuclear subs around the US anyway. Ukraine has no chance of joining NATO too (and never did while the conflict in eastern Ukraine continued). NATO troops are already on their borders in the Baltics. Invasion is the result of Putin's delusional idea of wanting to make Russia great again USSR style because if he wanted them to never join NATO all he had to do was continue the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
    - vandermik 5y ago
      > Ukraine has no chance of joining NATO too (and never did while the conflict in eastern Ukraine continued). Then why not declare it on paper with both Ukraine and NATO guarantees? That's all Russia wanted during negotiations last few months. > NATO troops are already on their borders in the Baltics. Yes, and Russia been told for many years it will not happen. That's why Russia now wants it to be legally declared. Not just promise.
      - throwrqX 5y ago
        > Then why not declare it on paper with both Ukraine and NATO guarantees? That's all Russia wanted during negotiations last few months. It is on paper that they cannot join while in active conflict? > Yes, and Russia been told for many years it will not happen. That's why Russia now wants it to be legally declared. Not just promise. Gorbachev himself admitted there was no such formal agreement.
        vandermik 5y ago
        > Gorbachev himself admitted there was no such formal agreement. "There would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east," Secretary of State James A. Baker told Mr. Gorbachev in 1989 The National Defense archives of George Washington University declassified this discussion on 12 December 2017. You can look it up.
        throwrqX 5y ago
        I highlight the words "formal agreement". Either way, those words were said when the Soviet Union still existed and was assumed to continue existing for the future.
chess_buster 5y ago
Are you a Natural Language Model or is there actually a person behind this account?
mopsi 5y ago
It leaves out a crucial question: what would the US have to do for Mexico to isolate itself from the US as much as possible? What has Russia done in the past 100 years to all other countries in Eastern Europe? If you extend your analogy with the US behaving like Russia towards its neighbors, perhaps Russian forces on Mexican borders would sound perfectly fair. After the US invaded Mexico, killed off political and cultural elite, and started colonizing it with american resettlers to eradicate Mexican culture, but Mexico somehow regained independence, would it really sound so strange if Mexico started seeking alliance with China to prevent it from happening again?
- vandermik 5y ago
  US can elect a president that could actually build a wall
  - mopsi 5y ago
    Not exactly comparable with genocide, is it?
    - vandermik 5y ago
      sure, and good thing neither did happen
      - mopsi 5y ago
        Sure thing, buddy. Flagged as kremlinbot.
        vandermik 5y ago
        What makes you think that? Are we discussing "Understanding the War in Ukraine" or calling each other names? I'm not support this war in any sense. But at least I understand the reasons behind it. I'm actually not awared of any sign of genocide from russians to ukranians (and vice verse). If you do, plese enlight me.
leobg 5y ago
I watched it. It's a talk at Yale university, followed by a discussion. Many students in the audience actually are from former Soviet Union states. It's three years old and yet warns of exactly the kind of situation we're in now. Really an excellent talk, and one of the most insightful things I have heard so far about this whole Ukraine situation. Thank you for sharing this.

throwrqX 5y ago

Well that will never happen because the US seems to care about Mexico (and has a substantial population of Mexican heritage people in the US) unlike Russia with Ukraine so it's a moot point. It's like saying imagine if Ireland joined Russia and decided to put Russian troops on their territory, it's ridiculous and has little meaning just like making up any other geopolitical fantasy. I can understand how thought experiments might be useful in physics but in geopolitics we have realpolitik not wild fantasies. If you want to go in that direction then I assume Nazi Germany concerns at the beginning of WW2 about the spread of globalist capitalism and communism would become legitimate concerns too then and justify invading Europe over?

vandermik 5y ago
Mexico was used in that analogy just because it's on US borders. If this analogy seems unrealistic to you, try replace Mexico with Cuba. Could two independent countries (USSR and Cuba) agreed to place nukes close to US borders in the 60's? Legally, sure they can. Does US agree with it? Even if WW3 was the case they will never allowed it. Same thing now with Ukraine. If Ukraine joins NATO, their troops will be on russia south border, which is unacceptable for Russia. And russian government thinks about it as an existential threat. Invasion is the direct result of failed negotiations between Russia and NATO about Ukraine neutrality.
- throwrqX 5y ago
  All the countries Nazi Germany first invaded were on their borders too. The Cuba situation is a bit different but in the modern day I would say the US should allow it, but either way it's also a moot point because Russia can loiter their nuclear subs around the US anyway. Ukraine has no chance of joining NATO too (and never did while the conflict in eastern Ukraine continued). NATO troops are already on their borders in the Baltics. Invasion is the result of Putin's delusional idea of wanting to make Russia great again USSR style because if he wanted them to never join NATO all he had to do was continue the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
  - vandermik 5y ago
    > Ukraine has no chance of joining NATO too (and never did while the conflict in eastern Ukraine continued). Then why not declare it on paper with both Ukraine and NATO guarantees? That's all Russia wanted during negotiations last few months. > NATO troops are already on their borders in the Baltics. Yes, and Russia been told for many years it will not happen. That's why Russia now wants it to be legally declared. Not just promise.
    - throwrqX 5y ago
      > Then why not declare it on paper with both Ukraine and NATO guarantees? That's all Russia wanted during negotiations last few months. It is on paper that they cannot join while in active conflict? > Yes, and Russia been told for many years it will not happen. That's why Russia now wants it to be legally declared. Not just promise. Gorbachev himself admitted there was no such formal agreement.
      - vandermik 5y ago
        > Gorbachev himself admitted there was no such formal agreement. "There would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east," Secretary of State James A. Baker told Mr. Gorbachev in 1989 The National Defense archives of George Washington University declassified this discussion on 12 December 2017. You can look it up.
        throwrqX 5y ago
        I highlight the words "formal agreement". Either way, those words were said when the Soviet Union still existed and was assumed to continue existing for the future.

chess_buster 5y ago

Are you a Natural Language Model or is there actually a person behind this account?

mopsi 5y ago

It leaves out a crucial question: what would the US have to do for Mexico to isolate itself from the US as much as possible? What has Russia done in the past 100 years to all other countries in Eastern Europe? If you extend your analogy with the US behaving like Russia towards its neighbors, perhaps Russian forces on Mexican borders would sound perfectly fair. After the US invaded Mexico, killed off political and cultural elite, and started colonizing it with american resettlers to eradicate Mexican culture, but Mexico somehow regained independence, would it really sound so strange if Mexico started seeking alliance with China to prevent it from happening again?

vandermik 5y ago
US can elect a president that could actually build a wall
- mopsi 5y ago
  Not exactly comparable with genocide, is it?
  - vandermik 5y ago
    sure, and good thing neither did happen
    - mopsi 5y ago
      Sure thing, buddy. Flagged as kremlinbot.
      - vandermik 5y ago
        What makes you think that? Are we discussing "Understanding the War in Ukraine" or calling each other names? I'm not support this war in any sense. But at least I understand the reasons behind it. I'm actually not awared of any sign of genocide from russians to ukranians (and vice verse). If you do, plese enlight me.

leobg 5y ago

I watched it. It's a talk at Yale university, followed by a discussion. Many students in the audience actually are from former Soviet Union states. It's three years old and yet warns of exactly the kind of situation we're in now. Really an excellent talk, and one of the most insightful things I have heard so far about this whole Ukraine situation. Thank you for sharing this.