3 ms·

why? how is this different from cuban missile crisis that was averted but this was not because ukraine was told to not back out. why do you want "regime chang

why? how is this different from cuban missile crisis that was averted but this was not because ukraine was told to not back out. why do you want "regime change" in russia? what if russians say they want the same for biden or trump or whatever they have there? i am neither american, nor russian/chinese so i am looking at this objectively from a distance. why does americans "want" everyone to toe their line and push their narratives only?

himinlomax 5y ago
Because in 1945, the world agreed on the UN charter and it precisely prohibits what Russia is currently doing.
- 2Gkashmiri 5y ago
  so bush can continue to falsely accuse iraq of WMDs, flatten that country down, murder gaddafi and put his country into a civil war because he refused to accept american hegemony of american dollars and wanted gold for his oil. my point is, what russia is doing is simply to counter american advances against itself. why does american "need" to bring ukraine or other russian neighbours into nato? why does america have military bases across the world? why does america have to be the world police?
  - himinlomax 5y ago
    > so bush can continue to falsely accuse iraq of WMDs, flatten that country down, murder gaddafi and put his country into a civil war because he refused to accept american hegemony of american dollars and wanted gold for his oil. And many other countries opposed it. Including many in Nato. Note how no one is supporting Russia in this affair, except North Korea and the likes. Even China is abstaining. > why does american "need" to bring ukraine or other russian neighbours into nato? why does america have military bases across the world? That's the question countries like Finland were asking before this crisis, and polls were at 16% in favor of joining Nato there just a month ago. Now it's 80%.
SkeuomorphicBee 5y ago
> how is this different from cuban missile crisis [?] I'll assume this is a honest good faith question, so I'll give an actual (although short) answer by listing just three notable differences between the two situations: 1. Reason Placing of nuclear arsenal vs ???: the Cuban missile crisis started when the USSR started to move nuclear missiles to Cuba. In contrast, in the Russian invasion of Ukraine there was no movement of NATO nuclear missiles to Ukraine, in fact, there are no current concrete plans for Ukraine to even join NATO. And more importantly, NATO already capitulated to Russia in this exact regard by not placing nuclear weapons in countries that are already members if they are too close to Russia (E.g. Poland). So to summarize, the Cuban missile crisis started because USSR was advancing nukes to Cuba, and was averted when the USSR capitulated and canceled plans to send nukes; while the Russian invasion of Ukraine started by reasons non-related to nukes, and NATO already made the nuke capitulation, not placing nukes in Poland, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania (and definitely not placing nukes in Ukraine, which is not even a member). 2. Blockade vs Invasion: When the Cuban missile crisis started, the USA didn't launch a full scale assault on Cuba with boots on the ground and bombardment of major Cuban cities, it didn't kill Cuban military and civilians alike. Instead the USA just instituted a blockade. I agree that a blockade is also an act of war, but there is a big big difference in level of escalation. 3. Back down back to previous status quo vs down back to anexation: In the Cuban missile crisis, a back down by Cuba and the USSR meant the return of the previous status quo of a Cuba without nukes but still free and still hostile to the USA. It didn't include a regime change, breaking of the alliance between Cuba and USSR, or subjugation of Cuba to the USA. Cuba continued being a USSR aligned state to the end, and its government continues independent to this day. On the other hand, if Ukraine backs down, it won't be to the previous status quo, a back down by Ukraine means the current country ceases to be, Russia is aiming at a regime change with Ukraine becoming a vassal territory of Russia (or broken into many vassal territories). Could you imagine what would be the result of the Cuban missile crisis if the USA demands where that Cuba became a USA territory like Porto Rico? So yes, Ukraine was told to not back out, because backing out means annexation by a dictatorship and the death of the democratic country of Ukraine. Not a compromise most Ukrainians are willing to take.

himinlomax 5y ago

Because in 1945, the world agreed on the UN charter and it precisely prohibits what Russia is currently doing.

2Gkashmiri 5y ago
so bush can continue to falsely accuse iraq of WMDs, flatten that country down, murder gaddafi and put his country into a civil war because he refused to accept american hegemony of american dollars and wanted gold for his oil. my point is, what russia is doing is simply to counter american advances against itself. why does american "need" to bring ukraine or other russian neighbours into nato? why does america have military bases across the world? why does america have to be the world police?
- himinlomax 5y ago
  > so bush can continue to falsely accuse iraq of WMDs, flatten that country down, murder gaddafi and put his country into a civil war because he refused to accept american hegemony of american dollars and wanted gold for his oil. And many other countries opposed it. Including many in Nato. Note how no one is supporting Russia in this affair, except North Korea and the likes. Even China is abstaining. > why does american "need" to bring ukraine or other russian neighbours into nato? why does america have military bases across the world? That's the question countries like Finland were asking before this crisis, and polls were at 16% in favor of joining Nato there just a month ago. Now it's 80%.

SkeuomorphicBee 5y ago

> how is this different from cuban missile crisis [?] I'll assume this is a honest good faith question, so I'll give an actual (although short) answer by listing just three notable differences between the two situations: 1. Reason Placing of nuclear arsenal vs ???: the Cuban missile crisis started when the USSR started to move nuclear missiles to Cuba. In contrast, in the Russian invasion of Ukraine there was no movement of NATO nuclear missiles to Ukraine, in fact, there are no current concrete plans for Ukraine to even join NATO. And more importantly, NATO already capitulated to Russia in this exact regard by not placing nuclear weapons in countries that are already members if they are too close to Russia (E.g. Poland). So to summarize, the Cuban missile crisis started because USSR was advancing nukes to Cuba, and was averted when the USSR capitulated and canceled plans to send nukes; while the Russian invasion of Ukraine started by reasons non-related to nukes, and NATO already made the nuke capitulation, not placing nukes in Poland, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania (and definitely not placing nukes in Ukraine, which is not even a member). 2. Blockade vs Invasion: When the Cuban missile crisis started, the USA didn't launch a full scale assault on Cuba with boots on the ground and bombardment of major Cuban cities, it didn't kill Cuban military and civilians alike. Instead the USA just instituted a blockade. I agree that a blockade is also an act of war, but there is a big big difference in level of escalation. 3. Back down back to previous status quo vs down back to anexation: In the Cuban missile crisis, a back down by Cuba and the USSR meant the return of the previous status quo of a Cuba without nukes but still free and still hostile to the USA. It didn't include a regime change, breaking of the alliance between Cuba and USSR, or subjugation of Cuba to the USA. Cuba continued being a USSR aligned state to the end, and its government continues independent to this day. On the other hand, if Ukraine backs down, it won't be to the previous status quo, a back down by Ukraine means the current country ceases to be, Russia is aiming at a regime change with Ukraine becoming a vassal territory of Russia (or broken into many vassal territories). Could you imagine what would be the result of the Cuban missile crisis if the USA demands where that Cuba became a USA territory like Porto Rico? So yes, Ukraine was told to not back out, because backing out means annexation by a dictatorship and the death of the democratic country of Ukraine. Not a compromise most Ukrainians are willing to take.