4 ms·

I disagree about the Russia Ukraine prediction statements in this discussion. Nobody wanted to admit a "full blown invasion would happen" is better wording. R

I disagree about the Russia Ukraine prediction statements in this discussion. Nobody wanted to admit a "full blown invasion would happen" is better wording. Russia invaded and was meddling with Ukraine back in 2014. It invaded Georgia in an actual war back then over the same act. EU vetoed related action and was preaching that everything is going to be fine because Germany was using all their power to not ruin their profitable trade with Russia. We have to call things with their own name. Related to the average Joe's beliefs: they would believe their leaders telling them everything is fine and nothing bad will happen because they want to believe it. No thinking or prediction was involved in any of this.

nobodyandproud 4y ago
> Nobody wanted to admit a "full blown invasion would happen" is better wording. That’s still a spectacular failure in its own right. It means we’re not willing to admit the obvious until it becomes a far bigger problem. A weakness of a democratic process without the right leaders.
- thrashh 4y ago
  Are you suggesting someone should have pre-emptively invaded Russia after Crimea, thus instead of worrying about a possible full-blown invasion, get it out of the way and just guarantee one? Because as far as I know, the right people expected something to happen — there is just the issue of “well, what do you do about it?”
  - nobodyandproud 4y ago
    > Are you suggesting someone should have pre-emptively invaded Russia after Crimea, thus instead of worrying about a possible full-blown invasion, get it out of the way and just guarantee one? That’s quite a leap of logic there. I think it’s enough to recognize that many believed a full invasion wasn’t in the cards. > Because as far as I know, the right people expected something to happen — there is just the issue of “well, what do you do about it?” The main issue here is that we let down our guard against hostile leaders and nations. And there still seems to be a a large portion of Western civilization in denial. But a deadman-switch NATO membership? Prop up their defensive capabilities? Put pressure on Germany with regards to gas and overly cozy relationships with Russia? Hindsight is easy and I’m sure others have better ideas; that’s besides the point.
    - thrashh 4y ago
      What are you talking about? Do you not remember this whole thing? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_complex_in_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_... Or the talk about nations joining NATO? Or the discussion about how because we expect Russia to do something, we actually are not sure about NATO anymore because we don't want to be obligated to enter in a war? Here's an 2021 article about US pressure on Germany to stop the import of more Russian gas before Ukraine happened (2022): https://www.marketplace.org/2021/04/19/germany-under-u-s-pressure-over-russian-pipeline/ https://www.marketplace.org/2021/04/19/germany-under-u-s-pre... The US did all the things that you are complaining that it didn't do.
      - nobodyandproud 4y ago
        > The US did all the things that you are complaining that it didn't do. Strange. Do you believe the US is the entire Western civilization? And do you believe if the entire US believed Russia was going to invade, that we wouldn’t have pressured Germany even more?
        thrashh 4y ago
        No but your point is that it is a weakness of the democratic process when clearly the democratic process created both outcomes. You also made the point that a weakness of democracy is that it follows the general sentiment, but clearly the US govt didn't give a damn that a lot of people didn't care about Russia or weren't even aware of the things the US govt was doing -- like trying to put US missile installations in other sovereign nations. We tried and tried... for a very long time. If Germany had an authoritarian leader, it doesn't mean that they would have taken Russia any more seriously. I've heard that Angela Merkel supported the shutdown of nuclear reactors after Fukishima because she wanted to shore up her popularity. An authoritarian leader could have done exactly the same thing -- who doesn't want to look good? There is a limit to the amount of pressure that the US can put on a country. Crimea already happened and if that wasn't good enough, what was? Even after Russia did invade Ukraine, the US had to pressure Europe to really look into alternative energy sources (especially after the shutdown of those nuclear reactors) even through winter was coming up and the writing was on the wall. In the end, the US ended up becoming the world's biggest (or 2nd biggest -- don't recall) natural gas exporter this winter just to shore up Europe's heating supplies (which also meant my natural gas bill went up like 3x!). Ultimately, I don't think democracy can be blamed. We can blame bad leadership in some cases, but that is a problem endemic to every political system.

nobodyandproud 4y ago

> Nobody wanted to admit a "full blown invasion would happen" is better wording. That’s still a spectacular failure in its own right. It means we’re not willing to admit the obvious until it becomes a far bigger problem. A weakness of a democratic process without the right leaders.

thrashh 4y ago
Are you suggesting someone should have pre-emptively invaded Russia after Crimea, thus instead of worrying about a possible full-blown invasion, get it out of the way and just guarantee one? Because as far as I know, the right people expected something to happen — there is just the issue of “well, what do you do about it?”
- nobodyandproud 4y ago
  > Are you suggesting someone should have pre-emptively invaded Russia after Crimea, thus instead of worrying about a possible full-blown invasion, get it out of the way and just guarantee one? That’s quite a leap of logic there. I think it’s enough to recognize that many believed a full invasion wasn’t in the cards. > Because as far as I know, the right people expected something to happen — there is just the issue of “well, what do you do about it?” The main issue here is that we let down our guard against hostile leaders and nations. And there still seems to be a a large portion of Western civilization in denial. But a deadman-switch NATO membership? Prop up their defensive capabilities? Put pressure on Germany with regards to gas and overly cozy relationships with Russia? Hindsight is easy and I’m sure others have better ideas; that’s besides the point.
  - thrashh 4y ago
    What are you talking about? Do you not remember this whole thing? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_complex_in_Poland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_... Or the talk about nations joining NATO? Or the discussion about how because we expect Russia to do something, we actually are not sure about NATO anymore because we don't want to be obligated to enter in a war? Here's an 2021 article about US pressure on Germany to stop the import of more Russian gas before Ukraine happened (2022): https://www.marketplace.org/2021/04/19/germany-under-u-s-pressure-over-russian-pipeline/ https://www.marketplace.org/2021/04/19/germany-under-u-s-pre... The US did all the things that you are complaining that it didn't do.
    - nobodyandproud 4y ago
      > The US did all the things that you are complaining that it didn't do. Strange. Do you believe the US is the entire Western civilization? And do you believe if the entire US believed Russia was going to invade, that we wouldn’t have pressured Germany even more?
      - thrashh 4y ago
        No but your point is that it is a weakness of the democratic process when clearly the democratic process created both outcomes. You also made the point that a weakness of democracy is that it follows the general sentiment, but clearly the US govt didn't give a damn that a lot of people didn't care about Russia or weren't even aware of the things the US govt was doing -- like trying to put US missile installations in other sovereign nations. We tried and tried... for a very long time. If Germany had an authoritarian leader, it doesn't mean that they would have taken Russia any more seriously. I've heard that Angela Merkel supported the shutdown of nuclear reactors after Fukishima because she wanted to shore up her popularity. An authoritarian leader could have done exactly the same thing -- who doesn't want to look good? There is a limit to the amount of pressure that the US can put on a country. Crimea already happened and if that wasn't good enough, what was? Even after Russia did invade Ukraine, the US had to pressure Europe to really look into alternative energy sources (especially after the shutdown of those nuclear reactors) even through winter was coming up and the writing was on the wall. In the end, the US ended up becoming the world's biggest (or 2nd biggest -- don't recall) natural gas exporter this winter just to shore up Europe's heating supplies (which also meant my natural gas bill went up like 3x!). Ultimately, I don't think democracy can be blamed. We can blame bad leadership in some cases, but that is a problem endemic to every political system.