5 ms·

“A complete demilitarization and a commitment not to join EU/NATO“ For the common man and woman in Ukraine this is the best scenario for a quick exit from this

by nnx 5y ago

“A complete demilitarization and a commitment not to join EU/NATO“ For the common man and woman in Ukraine this is the best scenario for a quick exit from this senseless war. Too bad politicians (and armchair geopoliticians) do not see it.

adwn 5y ago
Demilitarization and not being a NATO member means that the next time Russia gets imperialistic cravings, Ukraine will be utterly helpless and defenseless, with zero bargaining power. And judging by Russia's current behavior, that's a "when", not an "if".
- random_upvoter 5y ago
  Imperialist cravings? Not seventy years ago Russia was almost destroyed by the West, with the lost of forty million lives. For Russia the danger comes from the West and the fact that we the West think ourselves to be all enlightened doesn't change that. I don't want to justify Russia's behavior in any way, but imagine if you will, for one second, that Russia starts arming one of the sides in the Mexican Drug War with high-tech weaponry and tries to convince the Mexican government to join some Warsaw pact alliance. The USA would not tolerate this for one day. Russia has tolerated this for over a decade. Since 2004 the West has been doing whatever the fuck they want in Eastern Europe and expected Russia to just take it on the chin. Now Russia has reacted and there was much astonishment. The West have been wiping their feet on a basic tenet of geopolitics, namely that the regional superpower calls the shots within their sphere of influence. Now the results are in and guess what? The West is STILL not taking this seriously, further escalating the conflict by arming Ukraine to the teeth. President Biden laughing at the idea of nuclear war like Dr. Hibbert from the Simpsons. Clown world is truly here.
  - dash2 5y ago
    It was Nazi Germany, not “the West”, that invaded the USSR. The West, insofar as that means anything, was fighting on the other side - alone for 2 years, while the USSR had signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. The rest of your analogy is also weak. We haven’t armed one side in a drug war (eh?) NATO membership has not even been realistically on the table. As for the West “doing whatever they want”, can you give some examples? My impression was that eastern European countries were keen to join the EU, not that this was imposed on them. And once in, they have very much forged their own path, often to the great discomfort of Western Europeans (eg in Hungary, Poland).
    - random_upvoter 5y ago
      > It was Nazi Germany, not “the West”, that invaded the USSR. Ok and if you look at the last 30 years, which "side" has been to most aggressive in attacking and subjugating foreign nations? "Oh but when we do it, it's for good reasons." Then the West is genuinely surprised that other blocs like South America or the Mid East are not jumping on the great anti-Russia train by default. What is wrong with those people?
      - watwut 5y ago
        Where do you see genuine surprise? Like, you made that up. However, I see a lot of ingenuine surprise over, like, right-next country accepting refugees from country just across the border. The very same people who would cry hypocrisy of the refugees were not accepted (you demand surrounding countries in other conflicts to accept refugees). I see a lot of blaming America for Russian actions, in Ukraine and of Russian actions in Syria too.
      - dash2 5y ago
        About those examples i asked for…
      - tkot 5y ago
        It does seem like almost entire world (including most of South America and Middle East) condemns this particular invasion, though: > The vote on the “Aggression against Ukraine” resolution was 141-5, with 35 abstentions. > Only Belarus, Syria, North Korea and Eritrea joined Russia in opposing the measure, (...) https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-vladimir-putin-united-nations-general-assembly-business-north-korea-80c6e848c8d904ef981b5df50bd024d1 https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-vladimir-putin-uni...
        random_upvoter 5y ago
        Of course we all condemn Russia's aggression. I condemn Russia's aggression. Condemning costs nothing. But those other countries are not resorting to extremely harsh economic measures against Russia, nor are they sending weapons to Ukraine.
  - adwn 5y ago
    > Not seventy years ago Russia was almost destroyed by the West, with the lost of forty million lives. No Western country wants to invade Russia, and hasn't wanted to for 30 years at the least. There's nothing to gain, it would be much too costly in terms of money, resources, and human lives. Russia is much more useful as a trading partner – Germany alone, for example, imports more than 50% of its natural gas from Russia. Ironically, Russia is doing its best to destroy this mutually beneficial partnership, in favor of building protection against a completely imaginary threat. > Since 2004 the West has been doing whatever the fuck they want in Eastern Europe and expected Russia to just take it on the chin. Now Russia has reacted and there was much astonishment. The West have been wiping their feet on a basic tenet of geopolitics, namely that the regional superpower calls the shots within their sphere of influence. That describes imperialist behavior down to a T. "Their sphere of influence"?! Come on. Ukraine is a sovereign country. If they want to join NATO (a purely defense alliance, by the way), then that's their business.
    - random_upvoter 5y ago
      > If they want to join NATO (a purely defense alliance, by the way), then that's their business. It's a purely defensive alliance that, somehow, keeps expanding to the East.
      - watwut 5y ago
        > It's a purely defensive alliance that, somehow, keeps expanding to the East. It keeps expanding, because countries further east wants protection from Russia aggression too. There is nothing contra intuitive or shocking about it. Presence of large aggressor in the region makes other countries want to enter the aliance. Duh.
      - tokai 5y ago
        This logic is like a wife beater getting angry that the wife flinch when he raise his hand. edit: I guess this is a bad analogy given the status of domestic violence in Russia.
      - cuteboy19 5y ago
pawelmurias 5y ago
What would stop a follow up invasion once they get fully demilitarized?
TheCoelacanth 5y ago
So basically they should just become a Russian vassal?

by nnx 5y ago

adwn 5y ago

Demilitarization and not being a NATO member means that the next time Russia gets imperialistic cravings, Ukraine will be utterly helpless and defenseless, with zero bargaining power. And judging by Russia's current behavior, that's a "when", not an "if".

random_upvoter 5y ago
Imperialist cravings? Not seventy years ago Russia was almost destroyed by the West, with the lost of forty million lives. For Russia the danger comes from the West and the fact that we the West think ourselves to be all enlightened doesn't change that. I don't want to justify Russia's behavior in any way, but imagine if you will, for one second, that Russia starts arming one of the sides in the Mexican Drug War with high-tech weaponry and tries to convince the Mexican government to join some Warsaw pact alliance. The USA would not tolerate this for one day. Russia has tolerated this for over a decade. Since 2004 the West has been doing whatever the fuck they want in Eastern Europe and expected Russia to just take it on the chin. Now Russia has reacted and there was much astonishment. The West have been wiping their feet on a basic tenet of geopolitics, namely that the regional superpower calls the shots within their sphere of influence. Now the results are in and guess what? The West is STILL not taking this seriously, further escalating the conflict by arming Ukraine to the teeth. President Biden laughing at the idea of nuclear war like Dr. Hibbert from the Simpsons. Clown world is truly here.
- dash2 5y ago
  It was Nazi Germany, not “the West”, that invaded the USSR. The West, insofar as that means anything, was fighting on the other side - alone for 2 years, while the USSR had signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. The rest of your analogy is also weak. We haven’t armed one side in a drug war (eh?) NATO membership has not even been realistically on the table. As for the West “doing whatever they want”, can you give some examples? My impression was that eastern European countries were keen to join the EU, not that this was imposed on them. And once in, they have very much forged their own path, often to the great discomfort of Western Europeans (eg in Hungary, Poland).
  - random_upvoter 5y ago
    > It was Nazi Germany, not “the West”, that invaded the USSR. Ok and if you look at the last 30 years, which "side" has been to most aggressive in attacking and subjugating foreign nations? "Oh but when we do it, it's for good reasons." Then the West is genuinely surprised that other blocs like South America or the Mid East are not jumping on the great anti-Russia train by default. What is wrong with those people?
    - watwut 5y ago
      Where do you see genuine surprise? Like, you made that up. However, I see a lot of ingenuine surprise over, like, right-next country accepting refugees from country just across the border. The very same people who would cry hypocrisy of the refugees were not accepted (you demand surrounding countries in other conflicts to accept refugees). I see a lot of blaming America for Russian actions, in Ukraine and of Russian actions in Syria too.
    - dash2 5y ago
      About those examples i asked for…
    - tkot 5y ago
      It does seem like almost entire world (including most of South America and Middle East) condemns this particular invasion, though: > The vote on the “Aggression against Ukraine” resolution was 141-5, with 35 abstentions. > Only Belarus, Syria, North Korea and Eritrea joined Russia in opposing the measure, (...) https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-vladimir-putin-united-nations-general-assembly-business-north-korea-80c6e848c8d904ef981b5df50bd024d1 https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-vladimir-putin-uni...
      - random_upvoter 5y ago
        Of course we all condemn Russia's aggression. I condemn Russia's aggression. Condemning costs nothing. But those other countries are not resorting to extremely harsh economic measures against Russia, nor are they sending weapons to Ukraine.
- adwn 5y ago
  > Not seventy years ago Russia was almost destroyed by the West, with the lost of forty million lives. No Western country wants to invade Russia, and hasn't wanted to for 30 years at the least. There's nothing to gain, it would be much too costly in terms of money, resources, and human lives. Russia is much more useful as a trading partner – Germany alone, for example, imports more than 50% of its natural gas from Russia. Ironically, Russia is doing its best to destroy this mutually beneficial partnership, in favor of building protection against a completely imaginary threat. > Since 2004 the West has been doing whatever the fuck they want in Eastern Europe and expected Russia to just take it on the chin. Now Russia has reacted and there was much astonishment. The West have been wiping their feet on a basic tenet of geopolitics, namely that the regional superpower calls the shots within their sphere of influence. That describes imperialist behavior down to a T. "Their sphere of influence"?! Come on. Ukraine is a sovereign country. If they want to join NATO (a purely defense alliance, by the way), then that's their business.
  - random_upvoter 5y ago
    > If they want to join NATO (a purely defense alliance, by the way), then that's their business. It's a purely defensive alliance that, somehow, keeps expanding to the East.
    - watwut 5y ago
      > It's a purely defensive alliance that, somehow, keeps expanding to the East. It keeps expanding, because countries further east wants protection from Russia aggression too. There is nothing contra intuitive or shocking about it. Presence of large aggressor in the region makes other countries want to enter the aliance. Duh.
    - tokai 5y ago
      This logic is like a wife beater getting angry that the wife flinch when he raise his hand. edit: I guess this is a bad analogy given the status of domestic violence in Russia.
    - cuteboy19 5y ago

pawelmurias 5y ago

What would stop a follow up invasion once they get fully demilitarized?

TheCoelacanth 5y ago

So basically they should just become a Russian vassal?