9 ms·

Absolutely agree. Moreover, it's the diplomatic incompetence on both sides that led to this war, which in my opinion could be easily avoided.

VWWHFSfQ 4y ago
Easily avoided! OK, now let's hear how it could be "easily avoided".
- somenameforme 4y ago
  This [1] is a 1.5 minute video of NATO expansion since 1949. It was well understood that eastern expansion would, sooner or later, result in conflict with Russia (or the Soviet Union prior). We decided to not just poke the bear but to go cover our arse in honey and twerk in front of it with Aqua's Barbie Girl pumped up to 11. And of course it sounds nice to say sovereign nations ought be able to choose their own alliances and relationships, yet how long do you think that rhetoric would last if Russia managed to get Mexico to join a military alliance that was more or less openly framed as a force to "contain" the United States? And to add extra icing on the cake, what if they managed to get Mexico to join only after actively and overtly supporting an insurrection that overthrew a democratically elected pro-US regime? [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug2468hDl6E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug2468hDl6E
  - klibertp 4y ago
    You're brave. I tried giving a more balanced perspective on this war in the comments here 3 times, and I was called a Russian troll in the first attempt, flagged in the next one, and I lost a lot of karma in the third. You're going to be - at least - downvoted a lot, so I thought I'll join and will get downvoted with you. The more the merrier, right.
    - realcertify 4y ago
      Bad diplomacy in recent times has the same roots - a lot of people stopped accepting balanced views. They think that solely their own opinion is correct, and they start calling names (racist, sexist, troll, etc), downvoting whenever someone expresses a different point of view. Being good diplomat requires very mature and balanced behavior, which a lot of modern politicians lack.
  - VWWHFSfQ 4y ago
    I'm not sure what point this is trying to make. None of these countries want to be part of the old Soviet Union.
  - rasz 4y ago
    Except Putin himself calmly explained recently its all bullshit, the Nato expansion, Nazis, harasser Russian population, all lies. Putin is after "lost land and glory" https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-says-ukraine-war-seize-land-russia-undermines-rationale-2022-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-says-ukraine-war-seize... "Putin said on Thursday that the Ukraine invasion is about expanding Russian territory. Before, Putin insisted that Russia was freeing Ukraine from so-called Nazis and preventing genocide. Putin said it was his destiny to "return and reinforce" Russia like Peter the Great did."
    - somenameforme 4y ago
      They included a link [1] to their source. Always go to to the source! Helpfully enough, this one is even in English! All of their comments were taken from one section. Here it is: "Peter the Great waged the Great Northern War for 21 years. On the face of it, he was at war with Sweden taking something away from it… He was not taking away anything, he was returning. This is how it was. The areas around Lake Ladoga, where St Petersburg was founded. When he founded the new capital, none of the European countries recognised this territory as part of Russia; everyone recognised it as part of Sweden. However, from time immemorial, the Slavs lived there along with the Finno-Ugric peoples, and this territory was under Russia’s control. The same is true of the western direction, Narva and his first campaigns. Why would he go there? He was returning and reinforcing, that is what he was doing. Clearly, it fell to our lot to return and reinforce as well. And if we operate on the premise that these basic values constitute the basis of our existence, we will certainly succeed in achieving our goals." He's obviously speaking by analogy about Ukraine without stating as much, but there's something much more specific he's referencing. This [2] is a map of Ukraine by native language, which is about as close as you can get to ethnicity. After the pro-Russian government in 2014 was overthrown, it's essentially those areas in red that declared their independence and have remained independent since. [1] - http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68606 http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68606 [2] - https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/02/world/ukraine-divided/ https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/02/world/ukraine-di...
- klibertp 4y ago
  Wouldn't selling Crimea and recognizing the breakaway republics as countries work? It might be unacceptable, but it's definitely simple...
  - sofixa 4y ago
    That's what they said in Munich in 1938 - just give Hitler the Sudetenland, that would work and satisfy him, he'll stop after that. Appeasing dictators with delusions of grandeur simply doesn't work. It might buy you some time, but you better prepare during it.
    - klibertp 4y ago
      Buying time is the same as saving thousands of lives. I would hardly say that means it doesn't work. Then there's the nuclear arsenal of NATO. Would Hitler attack Poland if it had nukes capable of putting an end to the Fuhrer himself, his Volk, and his Reich? From what I learned he wasn't suicidal until much later. Is Putin right now? Possibly, but I think he'd get assassinated long before his order to perform "special military operation" against a NATO country could reach his troops.
      - sofixa 4y ago
        > Buying time is the same as saving thousands of lives How so? If you prepare for war in the meantime ( like Ukraine did between 2014 and now), yes, but otherwise i don't see anything but postponing that loss of lives.
        klibertp 4y ago
        > If you prepare for war in the meantime Yes, exactly - I should have written it more clearly: > Buying time is the same as saving thousands of lives. I would hardly say that means it doesn't work [- unless you decide to waste that time by not preparing sufficiently.] In short, you're right - buying time on its own doesn't help much. I don't think Ukraine prepared sufficiently, by the way. I don't know what their leaders thought, but joining NATO was effectively a pipe dream due to the unresolved civil war in the east. Without NATO nukes it was obvious that they will need to fight for survival at some point. How come they need so much weaponry and ammunition right now? Where are the stockpiles accumulated over the last 8 years, where are the nationalized factories that produce tanks and guns, where are the roads, railways, bunkers, weapon caches, evacuation routes, minefields, trenches, and so on? Apparently in Switzerland - the most peaceful, neutral country (in Europe at least) - they have enough bunkers to house all its population and then some. They are used as warehouses normally... and mostly for long-lasting foodstuffs, too. How come Ukrainian civilians, after 8 years of preparation, need to hide in theaters? You could say that it's in hindsight that we know Russia would attack, but.. It's Russia we're talking about! They have a lot of similar wars in their history, both in the past ~1k years and in the past 50 years - enough to conclude that they will try to attack if the circumstances are favorable to it (after a major, world-wide crisis, preferably).
- osipov 4y ago
AzzieElbab 4y ago
Which both sides? There are no sides in this conflict whose goals align in any way

VWWHFSfQ 4y ago

Easily avoided! OK, now let's hear how it could be "easily avoided".

somenameforme 4y ago
This [1] is a 1.5 minute video of NATO expansion since 1949. It was well understood that eastern expansion would, sooner or later, result in conflict with Russia (or the Soviet Union prior). We decided to not just poke the bear but to go cover our arse in honey and twerk in front of it with Aqua's Barbie Girl pumped up to 11. And of course it sounds nice to say sovereign nations ought be able to choose their own alliances and relationships, yet how long do you think that rhetoric would last if Russia managed to get Mexico to join a military alliance that was more or less openly framed as a force to "contain" the United States? And to add extra icing on the cake, what if they managed to get Mexico to join only after actively and overtly supporting an insurrection that overthrew a democratically elected pro-US regime? [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug2468hDl6E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug2468hDl6E
- klibertp 4y ago
  You're brave. I tried giving a more balanced perspective on this war in the comments here 3 times, and I was called a Russian troll in the first attempt, flagged in the next one, and I lost a lot of karma in the third. You're going to be - at least - downvoted a lot, so I thought I'll join and will get downvoted with you. The more the merrier, right.
  - realcertify 4y ago
    Bad diplomacy in recent times has the same roots - a lot of people stopped accepting balanced views. They think that solely their own opinion is correct, and they start calling names (racist, sexist, troll, etc), downvoting whenever someone expresses a different point of view. Being good diplomat requires very mature and balanced behavior, which a lot of modern politicians lack.
- VWWHFSfQ 4y ago
  I'm not sure what point this is trying to make. None of these countries want to be part of the old Soviet Union.
- rasz 4y ago
  Except Putin himself calmly explained recently its all bullshit, the Nato expansion, Nazis, harasser Russian population, all lies. Putin is after "lost land and glory" https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-says-ukraine-war-seize-land-russia-undermines-rationale-2022-6 https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-says-ukraine-war-seize... "Putin said on Thursday that the Ukraine invasion is about expanding Russian territory. Before, Putin insisted that Russia was freeing Ukraine from so-called Nazis and preventing genocide. Putin said it was his destiny to "return and reinforce" Russia like Peter the Great did."
  - somenameforme 4y ago
    They included a link [1] to their source. Always go to to the source! Helpfully enough, this one is even in English! All of their comments were taken from one section. Here it is: "Peter the Great waged the Great Northern War for 21 years. On the face of it, he was at war with Sweden taking something away from it… He was not taking away anything, he was returning. This is how it was. The areas around Lake Ladoga, where St Petersburg was founded. When he founded the new capital, none of the European countries recognised this territory as part of Russia; everyone recognised it as part of Sweden. However, from time immemorial, the Slavs lived there along with the Finno-Ugric peoples, and this territory was under Russia’s control. The same is true of the western direction, Narva and his first campaigns. Why would he go there? He was returning and reinforcing, that is what he was doing. Clearly, it fell to our lot to return and reinforce as well. And if we operate on the premise that these basic values constitute the basis of our existence, we will certainly succeed in achieving our goals." He's obviously speaking by analogy about Ukraine without stating as much, but there's something much more specific he's referencing. This [2] is a map of Ukraine by native language, which is about as close as you can get to ethnicity. After the pro-Russian government in 2014 was overthrown, it's essentially those areas in red that declared their independence and have remained independent since. [1] - http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68606 http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/68606 [2] - https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/02/world/ukraine-divided/ https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2014/02/world/ukraine-di...
klibertp 4y ago
Wouldn't selling Crimea and recognizing the breakaway republics as countries work? It might be unacceptable, but it's definitely simple...
- sofixa 4y ago
  That's what they said in Munich in 1938 - just give Hitler the Sudetenland, that would work and satisfy him, he'll stop after that. Appeasing dictators with delusions of grandeur simply doesn't work. It might buy you some time, but you better prepare during it.
  - klibertp 4y ago
    Buying time is the same as saving thousands of lives. I would hardly say that means it doesn't work. Then there's the nuclear arsenal of NATO. Would Hitler attack Poland if it had nukes capable of putting an end to the Fuhrer himself, his Volk, and his Reich? From what I learned he wasn't suicidal until much later. Is Putin right now? Possibly, but I think he'd get assassinated long before his order to perform "special military operation" against a NATO country could reach his troops.
    - sofixa 4y ago
      > Buying time is the same as saving thousands of lives How so? If you prepare for war in the meantime ( like Ukraine did between 2014 and now), yes, but otherwise i don't see anything but postponing that loss of lives.
      - klibertp 4y ago
        > If you prepare for war in the meantime Yes, exactly - I should have written it more clearly: > Buying time is the same as saving thousands of lives. I would hardly say that means it doesn't work [- unless you decide to waste that time by not preparing sufficiently.] In short, you're right - buying time on its own doesn't help much. I don't think Ukraine prepared sufficiently, by the way. I don't know what their leaders thought, but joining NATO was effectively a pipe dream due to the unresolved civil war in the east. Without NATO nukes it was obvious that they will need to fight for survival at some point. How come they need so much weaponry and ammunition right now? Where are the stockpiles accumulated over the last 8 years, where are the nationalized factories that produce tanks and guns, where are the roads, railways, bunkers, weapon caches, evacuation routes, minefields, trenches, and so on? Apparently in Switzerland - the most peaceful, neutral country (in Europe at least) - they have enough bunkers to house all its population and then some. They are used as warehouses normally... and mostly for long-lasting foodstuffs, too. How come Ukrainian civilians, after 8 years of preparation, need to hide in theaters? You could say that it's in hindsight that we know Russia would attack, but.. It's Russia we're talking about! They have a lot of similar wars in their history, both in the past ~1k years and in the past 50 years - enough to conclude that they will try to attack if the circumstances are favorable to it (after a major, world-wide crisis, preferably).
osipov 4y ago

AzzieElbab 4y ago

Which both sides? There are no sides in this conflict whose goals align in any way