5 ms·

> Expanding NATO multiple times. No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it escalatory. Why do you (and other pro Russians) view an alliance th

by _kbh_ 3y ago

> Expanding NATO multiple times. No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it escalatory. Why do you (and other pro Russians) view an alliance that effectively was created to combat Russian aggression view its expansion as aggression against Russia. I'll quote someone to tell you why. >>> Of course Russia and Russian presidents hate NATO, it stops them conducting imperialistic wars against the countries that they wish to subjugate. >>> No one should care what Russia thinks, it's clear not allowing countries like Georgia and Ukraine into NATO just causes Russia to invade them anyway https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36597883 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36597883 > Oh I dunno, appeal on the United Nations security council (just as they futitely tried to prevent the invasion of Iraq), in public speeches that US media refuses to broadcast (unless they can take a tiny clip out of context). The UN uploads all of there clips to YouTube yet your claim is unsourced. > Suppose Russia wanted to do everything you and US propaganda claims to Ukraine (up to and including apparently, genociding all Ukrainians, restoring the Soviet Union or whatever is asserted and critically accepted, just like “weapons of mass destruction” and “they hate us for our freedoms”) This isn't a claim by me but rather by the Russian TV I'll link the video. https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1531301883628986368 https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/153130188362898636... > Then why did they not invade in 2015? Why wait 8 years? The only answer I got here is “well Russians are strange”. > If we didn’t expand NATO and train Ukrainian paramilitaries to kill Russians You keep using these words like it's some sort of gotcha. The Ukrainians are being trained to defend their home from an imperialistic invasion against from a country that talks about how many millions of them they will have to kill to subjugate them. Talks about how they aren't a real country with a real culture and really just Russian lands that have been unjustly taken from them. > then the worst that would happen is Ukraine would implement the Minsk II agreements, and its fate would have been even better than Georgia after 2008 Why would Ukraine implement Minks II when Russia violated Minsk I and the Budapest Memorandum?. Did Russia pinky promise that this one time specifically they will actually follow the treaties they sign? Or was it another step out of Russias playbook to try and freeze the war in a way that was advantageous to them?. > Also, if Russia did nothing, rather than arming rebels, they would probably have been far better off. They did a lot more than arming rebels as Igor Strelkov says. > At the start of this summer, 90 percent of the rebel forces were made up of local residents, Strelkov was quoted as saying. However, by early August, Russian servicemen supposedly on "vacation" from the army had begun to arrive, he said. > According to Strelkov, the assault on the Black Sea town of Mariupol in September, which prompted concerns in Ukraine and the West that Russia has entered the conflict on a large scale, was conducted mostly by the Russian military "vacationers." > I criticize both Russia and USA both as imperialists. You criticize Russia BUT NOT USA. That’s the difference. 90% of your content is devoted to criticising America and down playing Russias involvement I the war. Hell you won't even admit the Russian army was involved in Donbas's in 2014, then the person who was the _leader of the breakaway region_ tells you they where.

EGreg 3y ago
> No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it escalatory. That’s not up to the aggressor to determine. “Lighten up baby, you shouldn’t be afraid of me” is not how it works. Especially after NATO countries have engaged in so much belligerence in just the last 25 years (Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) Also, how about just keeping your word? USA doesn’t have a great record of keeping its word since its founding, eg to Native American nations. Same escalations from both sides. Same broken promises. The whole POINT of successful dialogue and diplomacy is to listen to the repeatedly expressed, pervasively held, major concerns of others. It works also in couples counseling. “No matter how many times you say I scare you, doesn’t make my actions scary or hurtful” is NOT a helpful attitude IF you want to actually make things better for both parties, and in the case of leaders of huge countries, it is their duty to do diplomacy on behalf of citizens of both countries. In what world is a country saying “you have different style of government, different values, etc. so the concerns you express and want to negotite are totally irrelevant to us, our answer is no” — considered a good diplomatic actor? Obviously they don’t WANT to solve it diplomatically. As for 90% of my content — when the rest of the people in a forum are already spending 100% of their time bashing women, for instance, or men, or whatever, then the major thing I need to add is THE OPPOSITE OF THAT. That’s normal. But also, to a white supremacist who blames the other races for so much, saying ANYTHING that is evenhanded sounds to them like “you must love those guys, why do you hate whites so much”. Similarly lefties and progressives often heard “why do you hate America / capitalism” when they merely expressed a bit of criticism. Or people who said anything evenhanded about Palestinians and Israelis can be excoriated by rabid Zionists or Anti-Zionists. So yes. You are the holdong extreme position that one side is 100% wrong. And anything evenhanded sounds like “we have here a Ru**n lover!”
- _kbh_ 3y ago
  > That’s not up to the aggressor to determine. “Lighten up baby, you shouldn’t be afraid of me” is not how it works. Especially after NATO countries have engaged in so much belligerence in just the last 25 years (Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) Except thats nothing like the situation. The situation is more like a drug addict who keeps breaking into his neighbours houses to steal there things and rape and murder their family members is now shouting about how his neighbours joining a group to protect themselves is being "an aggressor". When was the last time NATO invaded Russia?. Answer is never. When was the last time Russia invaded a member of NATO?. Theres a reason the Baltic states wanted into NATO so much, and that so many regions that were previously under "Russian influence" jumped at the opportunity. They know the horrors that the Russian regime brings. > As for 90% of my content — when the rest of the people in a forum are already spending 100% of their time bashing women, for instance, or men, or whatever, then the major thing I need to add is THE OPPOSITE OF THAT. That’s normal. Ah I see you're just a Vatnik. There makes it clear, your are compelled to defend the Russian point of view and write paragraphs and paragraphs of whataboutism. > evenhanded Your view of "evenhandedness" is just straight up Russian propaganda.

by _kbh_ 3y ago

EGreg 3y ago

> No matter how many times you say this it doesn't make it escalatory. That’s not up to the aggressor to determine. “Lighten up baby, you shouldn’t be afraid of me” is not how it works. Especially after NATO countries have engaged in so much belligerence in just the last 25 years (Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) Also, how about just keeping your word? USA doesn’t have a great record of keeping its word since its founding, eg to Native American nations. Same escalations from both sides. Same broken promises. The whole POINT of successful dialogue and diplomacy is to listen to the repeatedly expressed, pervasively held, major concerns of others. It works also in couples counseling. “No matter how many times you say I scare you, doesn’t make my actions scary or hurtful” is NOT a helpful attitude IF you want to actually make things better for both parties, and in the case of leaders of huge countries, it is their duty to do diplomacy on behalf of citizens of both countries. In what world is a country saying “you have different style of government, different values, etc. so the concerns you express and want to negotite are totally irrelevant to us, our answer is no” — considered a good diplomatic actor? Obviously they don’t WANT to solve it diplomatically. As for 90% of my content — when the rest of the people in a forum are already spending 100% of their time bashing women, for instance, or men, or whatever, then the major thing I need to add is THE OPPOSITE OF THAT. That’s normal. But also, to a white supremacist who blames the other races for so much, saying ANYTHING that is evenhanded sounds to them like “you must love those guys, why do you hate whites so much”. Similarly lefties and progressives often heard “why do you hate America / capitalism” when they merely expressed a bit of criticism. Or people who said anything evenhanded about Palestinians and Israelis can be excoriated by rabid Zionists or Anti-Zionists. So yes. You are the holdong extreme position that one side is 100% wrong. And anything evenhanded sounds like “we have here a Ru**n lover!”

_kbh_ 3y ago
> That’s not up to the aggressor to determine. “Lighten up baby, you shouldn’t be afraid of me” is not how it works. Especially after NATO countries have engaged in so much belligerence in just the last 25 years (Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) Except thats nothing like the situation. The situation is more like a drug addict who keeps breaking into his neighbours houses to steal there things and rape and murder their family members is now shouting about how his neighbours joining a group to protect themselves is being "an aggressor". When was the last time NATO invaded Russia?. Answer is never. When was the last time Russia invaded a member of NATO?. Theres a reason the Baltic states wanted into NATO so much, and that so many regions that were previously under "Russian influence" jumped at the opportunity. They know the horrors that the Russian regime brings. > As for 90% of my content — when the rest of the people in a forum are already spending 100% of their time bashing women, for instance, or men, or whatever, then the major thing I need to add is THE OPPOSITE OF THAT. That’s normal. Ah I see you're just a Vatnik. There makes it clear, your are compelled to defend the Russian point of view and write paragraphs and paragraphs of whataboutism. > evenhanded Your view of "evenhandedness" is just straight up Russian propaganda.