6 ms·

His motive is that he wants to reestablish the Russian Empire and he views the Euromaidan as the US taking Ukraine from him

roenxi 3y ago
> Mr. Putin framed his decision to invade Ukraine as a last-ditch effort to halt the West’s hostile expansion ever closer to Russia’s borders. ~ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/24/world/europe/putin-ukraine-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/24/world/europe/putin-ukrain... > It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. ~ Vladimir Putin
- MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
  He is completely correct. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia repeatedly tried to join NATO. It was rebuffed by the US - why? Instead of forging a new alliance, the west preferred to uphold old friend-enemy distinctions, and instead moved the NATO ever closer to Russia‘s border, ignoring its security needs and breaking old promises (as evidenced by the embassy cable leaks). Then, Ukraine shelled the Russian civilian minority population for years after the manufactured coup of the 2014 Euromaidan revolution. It started to suppress Russian language and culture. The Azov Nazi army committed cruel war crimes. Guarantees regarding the black sea fleet were no longer trustworthy. Essentially, they „kicked the dog until it bites“ and then blamed the dog. Putin repeatedly and very clearly communicated his (reasonable) terms for peace, and still people act like he can’t be reasoned with. Instead the West decided to send Ukrainian men into a meatgrinder, probably until the supply of recruits is exhausted. Prominent establishment people like John Mearsheimer have been warning that this would be the inevitable outcome of Nato expansion, all the way back in the 90s, and that it was the greatest strategic error of the west. They were ignored by the same people that lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction to start another war. The US State Department has a lot of blood on its hands.
  - whythre 3y ago
    ‘Russia was provoked into this war because of things that happened 30 years ago’ is such bullshit apologia. NATO was a defensive pact against Russia- and just because the Soviet Union collapsed does not mean Russia is somehow now moral or benign. They are run by brital KGB thug who faked his country’s 9/11 so they could build some patriotic solidarity killing Chechnyans.
    - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
      That makes sense, you convinced me. To quote the righteous and merciful western leadership: “…and the Russians are dying. That’s the best money we’ve ever spent.” — Lindsey Graham. https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1662630291893256193 https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1662630291893256193
  - chrysler 3y ago
    >> After the collapse of the USSR, Russia repeatedly tried to join NATO. That never happened. You will no find no trace of that in State Duma transcripts, policy papers or any other contemporary source. I can show you a long trail of adopted laws and doctrines for countries that eventually joined NATO (or failed in their bid), but nothing of this sort exists for Russia. It's a hoax invented to justify the invasion of Ukraine. >> instead moved the NATO ever closer to Russia‘s border, ignoring its security needs and breaking old promises The start of NATO expansion talks were preceded by a treaty between NATO and Russia declaring the respect for third countries freely choosing their allies. The narrative that NATO promised never to accept Eastern Europe (and broke that promise) was invented much later and conflicts with personal accounts and written agreements from that time. >> Prominent establishment people like John Mearsheimer His infamous lecture that presents a totally warped view of the world is the single most damaging piece of propaganda related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. If that's what you're basing your views on, then it's no surprise that you are totally off the mark.
    - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
      > That never happened. Even left-wing Guardian admits as much, you can find easily find other sources: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-s... The West offered the "Partnership for Peace" program at the beginning of the 90s a distraction simply because they didn't see Russia as partners, but as defeated enemies. Even if we concede for a moment that this promise never happened, lots of people, among them Joe Biden, admitted back then that this would be a move that Russia could never accept. I think Bidens words were it would create a "vigorous and hostile reaction". You can of course claim that this does not justify the invasion, but then you basically say Russia can never have legitimate security interests that run counter to the west. > The narrative that NATO promised never to accept Eastern Europe (and broke that promise) was invented much later That has been claimed often but proven wrong by the cable leaks. > His infamous lecture that presents a totally warped view of the world This is just a generic ad-hominem. If you have substantial rebuttals, I'm eager to hear them.

roenxi 3y ago

> Mr. Putin framed his decision to invade Ukraine as a last-ditch effort to halt the West’s hostile expansion ever closer to Russia’s borders. ~ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/24/world/europe/putin-ukraine-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/24/world/europe/putin-ukrain... > It is a fact that over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. In response to our proposals, we invariably faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. ~ Vladimir Putin

MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
He is completely correct. After the collapse of the USSR, Russia repeatedly tried to join NATO. It was rebuffed by the US - why? Instead of forging a new alliance, the west preferred to uphold old friend-enemy distinctions, and instead moved the NATO ever closer to Russia‘s border, ignoring its security needs and breaking old promises (as evidenced by the embassy cable leaks). Then, Ukraine shelled the Russian civilian minority population for years after the manufactured coup of the 2014 Euromaidan revolution. It started to suppress Russian language and culture. The Azov Nazi army committed cruel war crimes. Guarantees regarding the black sea fleet were no longer trustworthy. Essentially, they „kicked the dog until it bites“ and then blamed the dog. Putin repeatedly and very clearly communicated his (reasonable) terms for peace, and still people act like he can’t be reasoned with. Instead the West decided to send Ukrainian men into a meatgrinder, probably until the supply of recruits is exhausted. Prominent establishment people like John Mearsheimer have been warning that this would be the inevitable outcome of Nato expansion, all the way back in the 90s, and that it was the greatest strategic error of the west. They were ignored by the same people that lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction to start another war. The US State Department has a lot of blood on its hands.
- whythre 3y ago
  ‘Russia was provoked into this war because of things that happened 30 years ago’ is such bullshit apologia. NATO was a defensive pact against Russia- and just because the Soviet Union collapsed does not mean Russia is somehow now moral or benign. They are run by brital KGB thug who faked his country’s 9/11 so they could build some patriotic solidarity killing Chechnyans.
  - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
    That makes sense, you convinced me. To quote the righteous and merciful western leadership: “…and the Russians are dying. That’s the best money we’ve ever spent.” — Lindsey Graham. https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1662630291893256193 https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1662630291893256193
- chrysler 3y ago
  >> After the collapse of the USSR, Russia repeatedly tried to join NATO. That never happened. You will no find no trace of that in State Duma transcripts, policy papers or any other contemporary source. I can show you a long trail of adopted laws and doctrines for countries that eventually joined NATO (or failed in their bid), but nothing of this sort exists for Russia. It's a hoax invented to justify the invasion of Ukraine. >> instead moved the NATO ever closer to Russia‘s border, ignoring its security needs and breaking old promises The start of NATO expansion talks were preceded by a treaty between NATO and Russia declaring the respect for third countries freely choosing their allies. The narrative that NATO promised never to accept Eastern Europe (and broke that promise) was invented much later and conflicts with personal accounts and written agreements from that time. >> Prominent establishment people like John Mearsheimer His infamous lecture that presents a totally warped view of the world is the single most damaging piece of propaganda related to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. If that's what you're basing your views on, then it's no surprise that you are totally off the mark.
  - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
    > That never happened. Even left-wing Guardian admits as much, you can find easily find other sources: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/ex-nato-head-s... The West offered the "Partnership for Peace" program at the beginning of the 90s a distraction simply because they didn't see Russia as partners, but as defeated enemies. Even if we concede for a moment that this promise never happened, lots of people, among them Joe Biden, admitted back then that this would be a move that Russia could never accept. I think Bidens words were it would create a "vigorous and hostile reaction". You can of course claim that this does not justify the invasion, but then you basically say Russia can never have legitimate security interests that run counter to the west. > The narrative that NATO promised never to accept Eastern Europe (and broke that promise) was invented much later That has been claimed often but proven wrong by the cable leaks. > His infamous lecture that presents a totally warped view of the world This is just a generic ad-hominem. If you have substantial rebuttals, I'm eager to hear them.