4 ms·

“in light of potential Russian aggression in Europe” Who was it pushed NATO right up against Russia's border. Despite repeated statements from the Russians tha

“in light of potential Russian aggression in Europe” Who was it pushed NATO right up against Russia's border. Despite repeated statements from the Russians that there would be push-back. -- coob > “NATO have always been on Russia’s border.” (deleted) On the Soviet Unions border. When the Soviets relinquished control of the client states to the west, they were given an understanding that NATO would not expand east. (and modded down)

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
fsloth 3y ago
Modded down for a good reason. 1. The client states weren't client states. They were de-facto annexed polities with centuries of distinct characteristics. After Soviet Union fell these countries could resume their legitimate existence. 2. Russia has always been an imperialistic, genocidal and brutal country, incapable of creating anything of lasting value. A country on the Russia's border has no reason to be categorized under "russian dominion". Legitimate states have unalienable right under international law to guide their own path, regardless who their neighbours are. If your neighbour is Russia, you really want to ally with a larger party. "Who was it pushed NATO right up against Russia's border." Nobody PUSHED NATO. This is what is wrong about the posting above. The CCE countries, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, knew very wall what Russia was and that it had not changed. They wanted to join NATO exactly because they knew Russia would one day again attempt to annex them. Unless Estonia was in NATO, Russian armors might very well be now in Tallinn.
- D_Alex 3y ago
  >Russia has always been an imperialistic, genocidal and brutal country, incapable of creating anything of lasting value. Wow dude, that is quite deranged. >Unless Estonia was in NATO, Russian armors might very well be now in Tallinn. Russia borders 14 countries, and I don't think it fought with any except over the issue of NATO membership.
  - heavenlyblue 3y ago
    In 2008 Russia attacked Georgia
    - themgt 3y ago
      relations between Russia and Georgia began to deteriorate, reaching a full diplomatic crisis by April 2008, when NATO promised to consider Georgia's bid for membership. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
      - smcl 3y ago
        I'm starting to see a pattern here - country seeks closer ties with NATO as a means of protection from Russia, followed by a war with Russia. NATO has a pretty questionable history what with Operation Gladio and the like, but I'm not sure how these are examples of NATO aggression given that Russia was, y'know, the aggressor.
  - fsloth 3y ago
    Neither was this war about NATO. NATO was an excuse. The war in ukraine is colonial and genocidal war with the intent of eradicating Ukrainian language and statehood and subvert the fee will of Ukrainian people under Russian yoke.
    - pessimizer 3y ago
      It's strange that they go ahead with making this excuse when everyone could have just consulted you.
      - fsloth 3y ago
        Russian state makes publicly whatever statements they feel are judicious. Don't trust anything the Kremlin says. Note they accepted Finlands entry to NATO alliance without so much as a whimper. While complete calculus behind the reasons for the invasion may never surface, these offer excellent commentary why more countries joining NATO was not really the real reason for the war. 'Moreover, this is not even primarily about NATO. ... The larger objective is to re-establish Russian political and cultural dominance over a nation that Putin sees as one with Russia, and then follow up by undoing the European rules-based order and security architecture established in the aftermath of World War II. ... If Russia’s main concern had been NATO enlargement, it would have reacted with rhetoric and/or hostile actions in its neighborhood after each step in the NATO expansion process. The largest wave of NATO’s eastward expansion took place in March 2004, when seven Eastern European countries joined, including the formerly Soviet Baltic states. Russia “grumbled,” as the New York Times put it then, by adopting a Duma resolution criticizing the expansion, but no hostile and sustained rhetoric followed about NATO enlargement as a Western plot against Russian interests.'[0] 'Some claim Russia was goaded into acting by the threat of NATO expansion. But Putin himself said in 2004 that 'Russia has no concerns about the expansion of NATO from the standpoint of ensuring security'. Russia, after all, has a massive nuclear arsenal and has no reason to fear any adversary. What is the purpose of nuclear weapons then? In addition, several countries bordering Russia, including Finland and the Baltic States are already entering the alliance, with not a murmur from Moscow.'[1] [0] https://www.justsecurity.org/80343/russias-new-assault-on-ukraine-is-not-entirely-maybe-not-even-largely-about-nato/ https://www.justsecurity.org/80343/russias-new-assault-on-uk... [1] https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-02-21-expert-comment-no-proxy-war-russia-really-invaded-ukraine https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-02-21-expert-comment-no-proxy...
7952 3y ago
Maybe the west did make some mistakes in its dealing with Russia. But that does not justify Russian aggression or negate the need to repel that agression.
- pessimizer 3y ago
  West: mistakes Russia: aggression
  - 7952 3y ago
    Western agression (if you want to put it like that) does not justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nor would it reduce the threat Russia poses. Surely it would increase it!
    - Pixie_Dust 3y ago
      > Western agression (if you want to put it like that) does not justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nor would it reduce the threat Russia poses. Surely it would increase it! How many times has Russia invaded western Europe? How many times has Europe launched an invasion of Russia (3).
      - smcl 3y ago
        Ahhh very carefully worded indeed. I know you desperately wanted to refer to NATO, but that would mean conceding that "Russia" (since you're conflating the USSR and Russia, and assuming modern day borders) had invaded Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary after WW2. All three countries who leapt at the chance to join a pact which meant they wouldn't meet the same fate again, as did Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland who had also been subjugated by Russia in some form in the past I mean if you really want to keep score we can continue, and we can explore what happened to some former USSR or Russian Empire countries who didn't join NATO (Belarus being the last dictatorship in Europe and under Putin's thumb, Georgia/Russia wars, Ukraine and the very war we are discussing right now), but I don't think it ends well for your argument...
      - 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

fsloth 3y ago

Modded down for a good reason. 1. The client states weren't client states. They were de-facto annexed polities with centuries of distinct characteristics. After Soviet Union fell these countries could resume their legitimate existence. 2. Russia has always been an imperialistic, genocidal and brutal country, incapable of creating anything of lasting value. A country on the Russia's border has no reason to be categorized under "russian dominion". Legitimate states have unalienable right under international law to guide their own path, regardless who their neighbours are. If your neighbour is Russia, you really want to ally with a larger party. "Who was it pushed NATO right up against Russia's border." Nobody PUSHED NATO. This is what is wrong about the posting above. The CCE countries, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, knew very wall what Russia was and that it had not changed. They wanted to join NATO exactly because they knew Russia would one day again attempt to annex them. Unless Estonia was in NATO, Russian armors might very well be now in Tallinn.

D_Alex 3y ago
>Russia has always been an imperialistic, genocidal and brutal country, incapable of creating anything of lasting value. Wow dude, that is quite deranged. >Unless Estonia was in NATO, Russian armors might very well be now in Tallinn. Russia borders 14 countries, and I don't think it fought with any except over the issue of NATO membership.
- heavenlyblue 3y ago
  In 2008 Russia attacked Georgia
  - themgt 3y ago
    relations between Russia and Georgia began to deteriorate, reaching a full diplomatic crisis by April 2008, when NATO promised to consider Georgia's bid for membership. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War
    - smcl 3y ago
      I'm starting to see a pattern here - country seeks closer ties with NATO as a means of protection from Russia, followed by a war with Russia. NATO has a pretty questionable history what with Operation Gladio and the like, but I'm not sure how these are examples of NATO aggression given that Russia was, y'know, the aggressor.
- fsloth 3y ago
  Neither was this war about NATO. NATO was an excuse. The war in ukraine is colonial and genocidal war with the intent of eradicating Ukrainian language and statehood and subvert the fee will of Ukrainian people under Russian yoke.
  - pessimizer 3y ago
    It's strange that they go ahead with making this excuse when everyone could have just consulted you.
    - fsloth 3y ago
      Russian state makes publicly whatever statements they feel are judicious. Don't trust anything the Kremlin says. Note they accepted Finlands entry to NATO alliance without so much as a whimper. While complete calculus behind the reasons for the invasion may never surface, these offer excellent commentary why more countries joining NATO was not really the real reason for the war. 'Moreover, this is not even primarily about NATO. ... The larger objective is to re-establish Russian political and cultural dominance over a nation that Putin sees as one with Russia, and then follow up by undoing the European rules-based order and security architecture established in the aftermath of World War II. ... If Russia’s main concern had been NATO enlargement, it would have reacted with rhetoric and/or hostile actions in its neighborhood after each step in the NATO expansion process. The largest wave of NATO’s eastward expansion took place in March 2004, when seven Eastern European countries joined, including the formerly Soviet Baltic states. Russia “grumbled,” as the New York Times put it then, by adopting a Duma resolution criticizing the expansion, but no hostile and sustained rhetoric followed about NATO enlargement as a Western plot against Russian interests.'[0] 'Some claim Russia was goaded into acting by the threat of NATO expansion. But Putin himself said in 2004 that 'Russia has no concerns about the expansion of NATO from the standpoint of ensuring security'. Russia, after all, has a massive nuclear arsenal and has no reason to fear any adversary. What is the purpose of nuclear weapons then? In addition, several countries bordering Russia, including Finland and the Baltic States are already entering the alliance, with not a murmur from Moscow.'[1] [0] https://www.justsecurity.org/80343/russias-new-assault-on-ukraine-is-not-entirely-maybe-not-even-largely-about-nato/ https://www.justsecurity.org/80343/russias-new-assault-on-uk... [1] https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-02-21-expert-comment-no-proxy-war-russia-really-invaded-ukraine https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2023-02-21-expert-comment-no-proxy...

7952 3y ago

Maybe the west did make some mistakes in its dealing with Russia. But that does not justify Russian aggression or negate the need to repel that agression.

pessimizer 3y ago
West: mistakes Russia: aggression
- 7952 3y ago
  Western agression (if you want to put it like that) does not justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nor would it reduce the threat Russia poses. Surely it would increase it!
  - Pixie_Dust 3y ago
    > Western agression (if you want to put it like that) does not justify the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nor would it reduce the threat Russia poses. Surely it would increase it! How many times has Russia invaded western Europe? How many times has Europe launched an invasion of Russia (3).
    - smcl 3y ago
      Ahhh very carefully worded indeed. I know you desperately wanted to refer to NATO, but that would mean conceding that "Russia" (since you're conflating the USSR and Russia, and assuming modern day borders) had invaded Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary after WW2. All three countries who leapt at the chance to join a pact which meant they wouldn't meet the same fate again, as did Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland who had also been subjugated by Russia in some form in the past I mean if you really want to keep score we can continue, and we can explore what happened to some former USSR or Russian Empire countries who didn't join NATO (Belarus being the last dictatorship in Europe and under Putin's thumb, Georgia/Russia wars, Ukraine and the very war we are discussing right now), but I don't think it ends well for your argument...
    - 3y ago