4 ms·

Note that NATO encirclement wasn't a motivation at all or a minor one at best. The Kremlins true motivation is to create a Greater Russia. Russia will not allo

by enaaem 5y ago

Note that NATO encirclement wasn't a motivation at all or a minor one at best. The Kremlins true motivation is to create a Greater Russia. Russia will not allow for an independent Ukraine. This is consistent with Putins speech before the invasion on how Ukraine isn't really a country. Ukrainians understand this and that's why they are begging to join NATO. They are not trying to unnecessarily provoke Russia, but they already understand that Russia is an existential threat to them now. Some argued before that Ukraine should become a neutral buffer state, but that is simply not an option with the current Russian ambitions.

archi42 5y ago
That's my interpretation as well. As I said elsewhere, I recall the last maniac to promise a "Greater $nation" in Europe did cause an immeasurable amount of suffering while trying to establish what was basically an empire built on lies and deception. It's difficult to believe that in this iteration the aggressor might be "saturated" after invading the first country and everyone lives happily ever after. (sry for the /s in the end, but it makes the thought more bearable). //Edit Appendix, historical background: I'm alluding to Nazi Germany that tried to "re"establish a mixture of the German Empire (which existed in one form or another for nearly a millennium from 962 to some time in the early 19th century) and the Roman Empire; hence the name "3rd Empire" and the aspiration for it to last another millennium. After invading Poland the popular opinion was that Hitler was "saturated" and would leave the rest of Europe alone (I tried to fact check this, but I can't easily find a reference; though I'm pretty sure that this was discussed in our history books - so take this with a grain of salt). I believe history shows how fatally wrong that assessment was. But maybe as a German I am just a tiny little bit sensitive regarding dictators assaulting their neighbors and claiming nationalistic BS.
- enaaem 5y ago
  Im not afraid of that at all. Looking at the Russian performance, they stand no chance against NATO, even without the US. The Russians barely have the logistics to invade Ukraine, let alone Europe.

by enaaem 5y ago

archi42 5y ago

That's my interpretation as well. As I said elsewhere, I recall the last maniac to promise a "Greater $nation" in Europe did cause an immeasurable amount of suffering while trying to establish what was basically an empire built on lies and deception. It's difficult to believe that in this iteration the aggressor might be "saturated" after invading the first country and everyone lives happily ever after. (sry for the /s in the end, but it makes the thought more bearable). //Edit Appendix, historical background: I'm alluding to Nazi Germany that tried to "re"establish a mixture of the German Empire (which existed in one form or another for nearly a millennium from 962 to some time in the early 19th century) and the Roman Empire; hence the name "3rd Empire" and the aspiration for it to last another millennium. After invading Poland the popular opinion was that Hitler was "saturated" and would leave the rest of Europe alone (I tried to fact check this, but I can't easily find a reference; though I'm pretty sure that this was discussed in our history books - so take this with a grain of salt). I believe history shows how fatally wrong that assessment was. But maybe as a German I am just a tiny little bit sensitive regarding dictators assaulting their neighbors and claiming nationalistic BS.

enaaem 5y ago
Im not afraid of that at all. Looking at the Russian performance, they stand no chance against NATO, even without the US. The Russians barely have the logistics to invade Ukraine, let alone Europe.