6 ms·
Ukraine Is Trying to Goad the US into World War III
- smt88 5y agoUkraine is trying to stay alive. All the blame for wars (World War III or otherwise) is Putin's. Side note: it's impossible to take this writer seriously when he writes an article asking why the West didn't try to negotiate with Putin[1]. He also (pre-emptively) blames WWIII on the Trump/Russia investigation, which is equally insane and/or disingenuous. 1. https://mtracey.substack.com/p/why-wouldnt-the-us-negotiate-with https://mtracey.substack.com/p/why-wouldnt-the-us-negotiate-...
- jleyank 5y agoVarious countries including the US and Russia guaranteed Ukraine when it nuclear-disarmed. Guess we should ask Neville about scraps of paper, eh? It's a proxy war straight out of the 50's-70's being fought under similar examples of pretzel logic - fight, but keep the principals from touching.
- SalimoS 5y agoWasn’t the reason of the invasion the Ukraine wanting to join the NATO which was a big no inside the same scraps of paper ? (That’s what I understood)
- NicoJuicy 5y agoNo, Ukraine found gas in Crimea, enough to replace Russian flows, in 2010-2012. Russia invaded in 2014 since they couldn't join NATO then and immediately seized Crimea.
- chasil 5y agoThere ars some gas deposits outside the Crimea, and shale deposits in the far east and west of the country.
- NicoJuicy 5y agoYes, but the one found in Crimea is huge and much more easily to extract. I believe the other 2 you are talking about are shale.
- singularity2001 5y agoSo why wasn't Putin Satisfied with Crimea?
- chasil 5y agoUkraine turned off the water supply to Crimea by closing a canal. Ukraine also has excessive tariffs for anything that flows through its pipeline network, to the extent that Russia will push anything through other networks that is possible to avoid the fees. ...plus many other reasons.
- yucky 5y ago>Russia invaded in 2014 since they couldn't join NATO then and immediately seized Crimea. Did you forget about the Ukranian coup that happened days before Russia invaded Crimea? That invasion (justified or not) was clearly in response to the coup, was it not?
- NicoJuicy 5y agoAre you talking about the Russian guy, that came from a Russian party that was supposed to lead Ukraine in name of Russia? Doesn't seem like he had Ukrainian interest in his priority list and considering your response ( justified or not), you were already aware of that.
- yucky 5y agoA coup is not an act of democracy. It was illegal, and against the Ukrainian Constitution. Everyone understands that Ukraine can never be part of NATO. And yet this new regime that took over after the coup has explicitly said that is what is going to happen. They even changed their Constitution after the coup to declare as much. Since Crimea is not recognized as Russian by Ukraine, then having Ukraine enter NATO means they will immediately be in conflict with the Russians in Crimea, leading to a World War. Russia will never let Ukraine have nuclear weapons, nor join NATO since it effectively means the same thing. So what is the solution, in your mind?
- NicoJuicy 5y agoCrimea is Ukraine, just look at it geographically. Crimea isn't even viable without Ukraine ( water). Who's talking about nuclear weapons, you're reading too much Russian propaganda.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agoSince parent poster's main and repeated talking point across comments is "the Ukranian coup" when referring to Maidan (1) it's clear that they're both reading and repeating Russian propaganda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity
- Imnimo 5y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances#Content https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit... This is my understanding of what the "scraps of paper" for denuclearization covered. I don't think NATO membership was addressed. Is there another treaty or commitment you're referring to?
- timeon 5y agoIt was not. Ukraine could not join the NATO because of Crimea and Luhansk+Donetsk.
- rich_sasha 5y agoUkraine kept getting a “that’s interesting, ask us again in a few years time”.
- polski-g 5y ago> Various countries including the US and Russia guaranteed Ukraine when it nuclear-disarmed. This is false: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30459923 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30459923
- jleyank 5y agoFrom Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Securit...
- cft 5y ago[flagged]
- nikolay 5y ago
- smt88 5y agoIt's true that many believe this. It is also Russian state propaganda and obviously a lie.
- nikolay 5y ago
- smt88 5y ago[flagged]
- nikolay 5y ago
- smt88 5y agoSo anyone different from Putin is a drug addict who is high or drunk most of the time? I would describe Putin's behavior as much more strange and insane, by the way. Threatening nuclear war while attempting to annex a peaceful, sovereign neighbor is not a sane behavior. Assassinating and jailing political opponents is not sane. If you're going to compare the two, you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone outside of the Russian propaganda sphere that Putin is the less insane or erratic.
- nikolay 5y agoDon't get me wrong, I don't like Putin, his botox face definitely tries to hide any wanted emotional expressions, maybe it's a KGB thing, I don't know. Putin has been a bit too aggressive in his facial expressions after this "special operation" in Ukraine, but that's all expected; on some of the videos of Zelensky, he does not act adequately. And given he's an actor, i.e. has more control over these things than others, it really brings a lot of questions!
- nikolay 5y agoYeah, it's kind of the old Après moi, le déluge.
- Imnimo 5y agoThat is not what the word "goad" means.
- woopwoop 5y agoIt is possible to look at someone's track record on a subject and decide it's best to just ignore them. It is not the case that this is never appropriate.
- eternalban 5y agoSince I posted this, have read it, and don't think it is a complete account of the matter at hand (should one take the author's cautionary self assumed role), here is my understanding and 2c on this: The background of this "crisis" is not sufficiently explicitly communicated to the public at large. I am not talking about Ukraine vs Russia here. I am talking about ex-USSR and the West, and China and who knows who else silently. The Russians issued an ultimatum in December 2021, along with treaty proposals for a reset of the security order in Europe and US, addressed to US and NATO. EU was not addressed. The terms of the treaty proposals are a revisionist renegotiation of USSR dissolution and an demand for fulfillment of verbal assurances by the West with USSR. It seems fair to say that Russians knew perfectly well that the West would not accept the terms. US attempted to talk down the terms by offering to start relevant arms negotiations. Russia then proceeded with its "military-technical" response as promised. Meanwhile back with China, the two other major nuclear great powers published a manifesto of their vision for a new world order. The Russian and Chinese argument (which has been made repeatedly for a long time by officials, organs, propaganda sock puppets, useful idiots, etc.) is that US acts the way it does because it believes no one can tell or make it to stop. And it's officials talk down to them (if you recall the meeting in Alaska) from a presumption of a position of power. As to what their vision is, well, google it. It is not secret. This "crisis" then is settling the question of 'is a new world order required'? The mechanism to run the test is Russia acting as if no one can make it or tell it to stop. In other words, Russia is acting as if it has escalation dominance. It has already placed notice that it could interpret non-Ukrainian action to date as an act of war. The puzzle is why now. That's the background dynamics (only) as I understand it. The article is addressing NFZ, arguing that it would lead to WWIII. It side-steps the larger issue discussed above. But nevertheless it does raise a valid point regarding the informational content of public discourse on this matter. Considering the potential import, this needs to be addressed, and corrected. If indeed the situation is that we're on a runaway train here, then we should publicly start preparing for total war, and sure, have the NFZ as well. This would be agreeing with "we're already in WWIII". But tweeting support is rather short sighted. Or, we decide that we're not up to total war and WW III, in which case we should read the Russian and Chinese proposal and see if we can live with it. If we can not live with it and/or we believe they'll lose in a war that we will survive, then there is that option. These are the choices, as far as I can tell. The possibilities add the additional that the Russians et al are really bluffing and things like NFZ or hoping for a quagmire (which ignores who has escalation dominance) will ultimately convince them to back down. And yes, the sanctions too. And yes, squeezing the Chinese, peeling apart alliances, regime changes, are other mid to long term tools. But again, the other side understands about time and stuff. So that's my take on all this.
- chasil 5y agoI saw the article below on a conservative news aggregator last week. I do believe that Ukraine has done some spectacularly foolish things over the last decade. The U.S. impeached a president over Ukraine; that should have prompted reflection on all sides. I don't believe that any country should be invaded, but NATO members cannot intervene. Media should stop parroting Ukrainian propaganda and give us all a hard dose of realism, unless we really do want the apocalypse. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/ukraines-deadly-gamble https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/ukraines-de...
- nine_k 5y agoFor a stereoscopic view, re-read the history of Western Europe in 1935-1939.
- chasil 5y agoWhat I principally remember from William Shirer's Decline and Fall of the Third Reich was that Hitler would have been crushed if the war had started with the invasion of the Sudetenland. Perhaps Russia sees the Ukraine through a similar lens; addressing problems there become more costly with time. It is a shame that accommodation could not be found, and war averted.
- rich_sasha 5y agoOr conversely, Ukraine is the Sudetenland being invaded by Russia. The West’s shot at stopping this is now. Russia has been for a while, and now stepped up, similarly aggressive rhetoric against Eastern and Central Europe.
- chrismcb 5y agoWhy would have that prompted reflection on all sides? It seems that one side may have some something wrong, why should the other side take a look? You claim Ukraine had done some foolish things, like what?
- 5y ago