5 ms·

I'd avoid the meme that Putin is acting irrationally or crazy. He is looking at the west build a fortress around Russia through NATO. Look at US reaction to Cu

• toyg 5y ago
  NATO membership is a red herring. But I agree that "we" made a lot of bad moves in the past decade: if you keep poking the bear, at some point he's going to react somehow.
  • stjohnswarts 5y ago
    The only one poking "the bear" is Putin. He hates that his country is withering on the vine. He can't see that it's his own authoritarian policies that are slowly killing his country.
  • nopenopenopeno 5y ago
    If it’s a red herring then why was Biden so stubborn in refusing to give assurances that Ukraine was not invited into NATO? We are talking about war. There is never an excuse to come short of doing everything possible to prevent it. But Biden refused. How do you explain that?
    • stjohnswarts 5y ago
      Because why should he? Ukraine is a sovereign nation and should make up its own mind. I'm personally unsure why they didn't just declare themselves a neutral country like Switzerland, but here we are.
      • nopenopenopeno 5y ago
        If you’re so into Ukraine making up it’s own mind, what do you think of Western leaders toppling its democratically elected government in 2014? This is commonly known history. Hypocrisy like this has defined the West’s efforts towards global domination for over half a century, and it’s a primary reason Putin would have understandably needed every bit of reassurance that could have been provided. But Biden refused. The arrogance knows no bounds.
        • NicoJuicy 5y ago
          That way off what happened in the real world. Russia literally signed Ukrainians independence in 1991, although they didn't have much room to despute that. Ukrainians wanted deeper ties with Europe in 2014 and now they are literally fighting for it. NATO explicitly mentioned that no countries are allowed that have border disputes, that's why Russia started a gray zone war immediately after in 2014. And now they are in full war mode, trying to force their will on a country that wants to be a democracy with the 2nd democratically elected president. Biden wasn't even elected president in 2014 and Yanukovych ( who got overthrown) was literally a member of the Russian communist party, born in Russia. And not at all democratically elected as you are suggesting. That is all known history.
          • toyg 5y ago
            tbf, there is a bit more than that. The Maidan movement might have had public support, but behind the scenes EU and US actors were definitely jockeying to choose who to support. There are documents and even intercepts showing that. And after the world stopped caring, the new regime turned out to be not particularly less corrupt than the previous one - hence Ukrainians voting in complete outsiders like Klitschko (a boxer) and Zelenskiy (a tv comedian), who in turn sold out very quickly too to various interests. Zelenksiy is balls-out pro-NATO, but without this war he risked being thrown out, after his offshore funds were found in one of the various PanamaPapers-like leaks. He managed to lose pretty much all political capital and support he had in a matter of months, and his Nato obsession was seen as a bit humiliating really. > NATO explicitly mentioned that no countries are allowed that have border disputes, that's why Russia started a gray zone war immediately after in 2014. That has more to do with those regions being largely Russophone, and the Ukrainian government being too weak to regain control over them. If that was the only obstacle to join the Alliance, don't you think Zelenskiy or his predecessors would have just renounced them? Surely that's a price worth paying for a permanent security upgrade for the rest of the country. No, the reality is that even the alliance never really wanted Ukraine to join. There are already enough members to contain Russia militarily if needs be. Same goes for the EU, which is already pretty big with 27 members and stalling pretty much all requests for further accession (not just Ukraine but Serbia and others too). But dangling carrots in front of people is how you make them do your bidding, so such requests are never formally rejected, just stalled forever. > Ukrainians wanted deeper ties with Europe Putin likely doesn't care about that, he cares about the leverage Ukrainians have over the precious Gazprom product that helps him stay in power.
    • toyg 5y ago
      > There is never an excuse to come short of doing everything possible to prevent it. That's your point of view. In practice, a proxy war can be beneficial for a nation-state. Obviously it won't benefit the proxy-state's own citizenry, but hey, they are not your voters! Look at the actual effects: the world is now economically bombing Russia, Biden was weak and now gets to look tough, and if you try to take a nuanced stance you'll be booed from the room. > How do you explain that? I might be wrong but IMHO the point really isn't NATO membership, but dropping American objections to NordStream2. Everything else was just stuff thrown on the table as a negotiable chip.
      • nopenopenopeno 5y ago
        Proxy wars are horrendous and completely inhumane. But yes, they can be “effective.” However, they are bad for all working people of both nations. Americans who drive to work will feel the pain.
• sfe22 5y ago
  And nato was created to control and prevent the influence/expansion of USSR. Russia is not that threat anymore, so no major reason for nato to exist at all, let alone expand in Ukraine.
  • shadowgovt 5y ago
    Well, Russia wasn't a threat. Putin unilaterally invading a neighboring country has just justified NATO's existence for another generation.
  • JohnJamesRambo 5y ago
    Did anything prove they needed to be in NATO more than this invasion???
    • sfe22 5y ago
      Maybe this would not have happened had nato not tried to expand to ukraine
  • type0 5y ago
    > Russia is not that threat anymore, realistically China+Russia is that threat to the West today
  • stjohnswarts 5y ago
    LOL NATO has every reason to exist as proven by what just happened. They can at least act as a united front and send unlimited arms and supplies to Ukraine.
  • rtsil 5y ago
    Putin just extended NATO's lifetime by decades. And probably reinforced the idea of a EU defense system as well. The EU can't rely on US military support indefinitely, particularly since that support may vanish at the whim of the American voters.
  • baq 5y ago
    dude if Baltics weren't in NATO they'd be Russia since 2010.
• MrRiddle 5y ago
  Putin is crazy = I’m ignorant. Every country in Russia’s position would do the same, or have already. You already mentioned Cuba, for China it would be Hong Kong. In case of US, it would be a too long list of attacks of sovereignty whether through war or subversion.
  • Symbiote 5y ago
    Britain did have army, navy and air force bases in Hong Kong: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Forces_Overseas_Hong_Kong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Forces_Overseas_Hong_K...
    • MrRiddle 5y ago
      And guess what one of China's main focuses was? To take it back. Now that is theirs, do you think they would allow someone to take it? Do you think China would allow Taiwan to work against their interests? You realize that US was incredibly close to nuke Cuba? Lucky for both US and Cuba, Cuba is an island so blockade was possible. Now imagine Cuba having land border and is positioned on coast between DC and NYC.
      • Symbiote 5y ago
        China regained Hong Kong through negotiation and by the terms of the original treaty. They already "allow" Taiwan to work against some (not all) of their interests. Russia has land borders with several NATO states, so I don't see how the Cuba comparison is relevant.
• dumdumdumdum 5y ago
  > He is looking at the west build a fortress around Russia through NATO. Look at US reaction to Cuba and now imagine Cuba having a 100x more tactical and strategic geography in relationship to the US. Wouldn't it be more similar if the Cuban missile crisis had taken place in Quebec or something? Or would that still have been better tactically and geographically better for D.C., than a NATO Ukraine is for Moscow? Terrain looks a lot easier there.
• ch4s3 5y ago
  > Months ago Russia asked that Ukraine and Georgia be excluded from NATO. We ignored him. I don't think this holds up to scrutiny for a few reasons. Ukraine was not invited to join NATO, Zelensky's government fearing the escalation of Russia's incursions into the East started the process of asking for admission last June. Russian units have been operating in the East for years, and they took Crimea. If you read Putin's speech from early this week he laid out a revanchist case for recapturing old Soviet/Russian Imperial territory. He even laid claim to the whole of Ukraine, failing to note that the western portion only became part of the USSR because of WWII and had previously been part of other political entities. He's been carving up neighbors for years, so it's no wonder that the neighboring state might want to join NATO.
• nopenopenopeno 5y ago
  Bingo. This is the answer. Putin’s speech was pretty unhinged but his tactics are the smartest maneuvers he could have made outside of full capitulation to the incorrigible Western liberal consensus. Yes, he may fail in the end. But the other options are absolutely miserable. As with all war, the ultimate losers are the working people of every nation involved, and the US has considered them no less than Putin has.
• phatfish 5y ago
  No one is "building a fortress around Russia", least of all the Western allies. The Russian western border is a small part of their territorial limits. Ukraine is an independent country and can decide who they want to ally with, clearly it's not Russia. He got pissed off when Ukrainians elected a leader that was not a puppet of Russia. Now he is exacting revenge because he doesn't have a tacit Russian territory like with Belarus any more. When Finland and Sweden decide they need the defensive advantages of NATO is he going to invade Scandinavia too? Should they be force to be "permanently neutral" as well?
• stjohnswarts 5y ago
  He is irrational. For some stupid reason, he thinks that NATO/USA wants to invade Russia. When you listen for such things in the music of politics, you won't hear anything like that. It's always Russia being the aggressor. Putin wants the USSR back and always has. Look at his speeches about the topic down through the years. He is getting old and knows this might be his last chance to get part of that dream done.