> Trying to join is exactly what provoked this invasion. Putin may br evil but the one thing you cant say is that he wasnt absolutely crystal clear on this bein

> Trying to join is exactly what provoked this invasion. Putin may br evil but the one thing you cant say is that he wasnt absolutely crystal clear on this being Russia's one red line. Zelensky announcing that he was hell bent on joining NATO as Russian troops pulled away was probably the final trigger. This didn't help but Putin does do the same to NATO (e.g. Koningsberg). Which is even said to host nuclear missiles. There was no talk of that in Ukraine at all and there aren't any in other CEE countries like Poland. Personally as a European I would not have approved of Ukraine joining NATO and I also voted against them joining the EU (the association treaty), though the latter was more because I felt they weren't ready. Ukraine in the early 2010s was just as much an oligarchy and corruption quagmire as Russia is today. We already have too many issues with emerging corporate oligarchy ourselves (aka neoliberalism). However, the Ukraine that will emerge out of this crisis will probably have a very different identity, I imagine. I would imagine a more united people more aligned with the EU. A bit like the Baltic states which are doing really well. Though I imagine this is also what prompts Putin to continue this war. When he leaves the situation for him will be worse than it was. > Putin is still being clear that renouncing NATO membership will stop the war. This is literally 100% what Ukrainians are dying for - the ability to join NATO. I hope they consider it worth it. Washington does. I dont. Personally I also think they should, though we should be careful at trusting Putin at his word. Remember him saying there was absolutely no preparation going on and forces were leaving the border? Why would his word on this count as much? Remember he has also said he's not happy until everything is reverted back to 1997 standards. There's a lot of Eastern European countries that have embraced democracy since then that will have very different feelings about that. However, having said that, if there is a way to set this in stone (Ukraine not joining NATO but getting some protection in case Russia change their minds) I would be all for it if it would make Russia pull back. I think they would be too, after all NATO is not a means to an end, it's the promise of protection that matters. > It seems fairly plausible that Libya is a model for what NATO wants to see happen to Russia as it creeps up to its most exposed border. Theyd rather mariupol be a smoking radioactive crater than be a host for NATO forces along their jugular. Well I think Libya is not much of a model for anything. I don't think civilians are a lot better off there as they were under Khadaffi. The Arab spring was a big failure and led to the emergence of things like ISIS. Same in Iraq and Afghanistan. I opposed my country's joining of those wars too. I'm not saying the west is perfect. > Zelensky is more right than he can imagine as he says that hes fighting our war. It is a geopolitical coup for the west to have a smaller weaker country on the border of foreign powers fight and die in our wars. It was the British Empire's main trick. In Europe we don't want any fighting. We just want peace and trade. And Zelensky would never get nukes. Most EU countries don't even have them. Some have some caches but they're owned and armed by the Americans. And they're all tactical weapons which are not permissible in NATO doctrine. They're more of symbolic value (and I wish they would just remove them as they do represent real contamination risk in case of accidents). But I feel in all this there is a lot more going on geopolitically behind the scenes. Similarly to the way I don't believe Putin's agression is only about Ukraine potentially joining NATO and nothing else, I'm sure the west's leadership has more interests than they are willing to admit. Just like with the middle-east invasions which like I said I didn't support.