3 ms·
So you're telling me that Putin ordered the invasion of Russia because NATO represented an existential threat to Russia. And this existential threat to Russia i
by smcl 5y ago
So you're telling me that Putin ordered the invasion of Russia because NATO represented an existential threat to Russia. And this existential threat to Russia is demonstrated by an inflow of arms to Ukraine as a direct result of the invasion?
Meaning that he could accurately predict the future reaction to his invasion, and used it as a justification for the invasion? We don't have to cheerlead a NATO or EU military response (and I'm certainly not for that), make stupid "Ghost of Kyiv" memes or display the sort of bloodlust that some in the media have ... but this is a really weird position you're taking.
One mistake I think many are making is mapping this to different invasions/wars in the past - Germany/Poland, USSR/Agfhanistan, USA/Afghanistan etc - and assigning roles then picking sides accordingly. I do not think it is that simple and by the same token I do not know what the right course of action should be. But I know that "Putin is justified and acting rationally" is one of the wrongest takes of this war.
- mjburgess 5y agoRussia regarded NATO as an existential threat, rightly or wrongly. If the west wanted to show that NATO wasnt a threat, it could have stopped trying to capture ukraine -- this is what russians explicitly said they didnt want. The USA didnt listen, europe (france, germany) did -- but the USA overruled them. That NATO is now conducting a proxy war in ukraine shows, after the fact, that russia's thinking here was actually just correct. Russia poses no existential threat to NATO, but NATO is now bent on destroying Russia. If NATO was not an enemy of Russia, why is it helping ukraine? China is not sending arms to ukraine, NATO is --- because NATO is an existential threat to russia.