3 ms·

A "Russian Asset" yet Putin invaded Crimea when Obama was president. Also invaded Ukraine when Biden was president. I wonder what the pattern is.

stuu99 5y ago
- vegai_ 5y ago
  Why would there have been Russian troops inside Ukraine's territory, when that's the last thing they wanted in there? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wwweston 5y ago
While you're wondering, consider the possibility that Russia had more convenient means than military force for achieving its policy goals during the Trump administration. Then while you're specifically considering Crimea, consider which US president simply said "Oh yeah, Crimea is russian": https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/albertonardelli/trump-russia-crimea https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/albertonardelli/trump-r... (and then "but that's Obama's fault" instead of IDK, Russia's). And then there's a whole host of other weirdly pro-Russian policies: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/03/belarus-election-fraud-trump-lukashenko-putin/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/03/belarus-election-fraud-... https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2019/02/05/russias-new-strategy-in-georgia-creeping-occupation/ https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2019/02/05/russias-new-s... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-russia/russia-lands-forces-at-former-u-s-air-base-in-northern-syria-idUSKBN1XP0XN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-russia/rus... Not to mention lots of known Trump-Russia connections: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-flynn-comey-russia-timeline-2017-htmlstory.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-flynn-comey-... http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/342509-new-book-devils-bargain-details-trump-lashing-out-at-manafort-days http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/342509-new-book-... http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-russia-timeline/ http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-... https://theintercept.com/2017/07/14/just-six-days-after-trump-jr-s-meeting-guccifer-2-0-emailed-me-but-there-was-one-key-difference/ https://theintercept.com/2017/07/14/just-six-days-after-trum... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-... https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-connection-between-a-russian-bank-and-the-trump-campaign https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-co... http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article137881768.html http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/ar... http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article135187364.html http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article135187364.ht...
- MockObject 5y ago
  Nevertheless, if Ukraine was a thorn in the Kremlin's side, or at least a potential trouble source, it would have been rational for Russia to stabilize the issue with an invasion during a friendly US admin, rather than leave the situation uncertain, and then have to resolve it against the type of US admin such as exists today. That strategic decision cannot be explained by your theory, discredited media stories notwithstanding.
  - wwweston 5y ago
    > if Ukraine was a thorn in the Kremlin's side If Ukraine was THE thorn in the Kremlin's side... vs one point in a constellation of concerns including undermining NATO [0], weakening the EU [1], weakening the US, affirming nationalist authoritarianism vs social democracy, etc etc. > it would have been rational for Russia to stabilize the issue with an invasion If invasions didn't have any risks and consequences (even absent US intervention). And at this point, it sure looks like those risks and consequences are on full display even if we only look at the military action. Meanwhile 3 years ago it actually looked plausible that the US could be forced into having to sacrifice either aid to Ukraine or the candidate that eventually beat Trump. > discredited media stories notwithstanding. "discredited" needs citation. Especially considering that the introductory set of articles I linked to above isn't even the short list. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/03/us/politics/trump-nato-withdraw.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/03/us/politics/trump-nato-wi... [1] https://france-amerique.com/en/trump-has-done-everything-he-can-to-weaken-the-e-u/ https://france-amerique.com/en/trump-has-done-everything-he-...
vegai_ 5y ago
The pattern you're looking for is "when I have an asset in the White House, I don't need to waste huge amounts of resources and global credibility on a stupid and brute military campaign, I can just use the asset." Also perhaps "when I have an asset in the White House, I should not undermine his local image with a power struggle".

stuu99 5y ago

vegai_ 5y ago
Why would there have been Russian troops inside Ukraine's territory, when that's the last thing they wanted in there? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wwweston 5y ago

While you're wondering, consider the possibility that Russia had more convenient means than military force for achieving its policy goals during the Trump administration. Then while you're specifically considering Crimea, consider which US president simply said "Oh yeah, Crimea is russian": https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/albertonardelli/trump-russia-crimea https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/albertonardelli/trump-r... (and then "but that's Obama's fault" instead of IDK, Russia's). And then there's a whole host of other weirdly pro-Russian policies: https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/03/belarus-election-fraud-trump-lukashenko-putin/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/03/belarus-election-fraud-... https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2019/02/05/russias-new-strategy-in-georgia-creeping-occupation/ https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/humanrights/2019/02/05/russias-new-s... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-russia/russia-lands-forces-at-former-u-s-air-base-in-northern-syria-idUSKBN1XP0XN https://www.reuters.com/article/us-syria-security-russia/rus... Not to mention lots of known Trump-Russia connections: http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-flynn-comey-russia-timeline-2017-htmlstory.html http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-flynn-comey-... http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/342509-new-book-devils-bargain-details-trump-lashing-out-at-manafort-days http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/342509-new-book-... http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-russia-timeline/ http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/03/politics/trump-putin-... https://theintercept.com/2017/07/14/just-six-days-after-trump-jr-s-meeting-guccifer-2-0-emailed-me-but-there-was-one-key-difference/ https://theintercept.com/2017/07/14/just-six-days-after-trum... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-... https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-connection-between-a-russian-bank-and-the-trump-campaign https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/15/was-there-a-co... http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article137881768.html http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/ar... http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article135187364.html http://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/article135187364.ht...

MockObject 5y ago
Nevertheless, if Ukraine was a thorn in the Kremlin's side, or at least a potential trouble source, it would have been rational for Russia to stabilize the issue with an invasion during a friendly US admin, rather than leave the situation uncertain, and then have to resolve it against the type of US admin such as exists today. That strategic decision cannot be explained by your theory, discredited media stories notwithstanding.
- wwweston 5y ago
  > if Ukraine was a thorn in the Kremlin's side If Ukraine was THE thorn in the Kremlin's side... vs one point in a constellation of concerns including undermining NATO [0], weakening the EU [1], weakening the US, affirming nationalist authoritarianism vs social democracy, etc etc. > it would have been rational for Russia to stabilize the issue with an invasion If invasions didn't have any risks and consequences (even absent US intervention). And at this point, it sure looks like those risks and consequences are on full display even if we only look at the military action. Meanwhile 3 years ago it actually looked plausible that the US could be forced into having to sacrifice either aid to Ukraine or the candidate that eventually beat Trump. > discredited media stories notwithstanding. "discredited" needs citation. Especially considering that the introductory set of articles I linked to above isn't even the short list. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/03/us/politics/trump-nato-withdraw.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/03/us/politics/trump-nato-wi... [1] https://france-amerique.com/en/trump-has-done-everything-he-can-to-weaken-the-e-u/ https://france-amerique.com/en/trump-has-done-everything-he-...

vegai_ 5y ago

The pattern you're looking for is "when I have an asset in the White House, I don't need to waste huge amounts of resources and global credibility on a stupid and brute military campaign, I can just use the asset." Also perhaps "when I have an asset in the White House, I should not undermine his local image with a power struggle".