6 ms·

> This is what got us the Ukraine war in the first place, an uncompromising hard line against a weak Russia because the USA was in the position to do so. Russia

> This is what got us the Ukraine war in the first place, an uncompromising hard line against a weak Russia because the USA was in the position to do so. Russia opposed each NATO expansion but did nothing in the end and it was the same gamble with Ukraine, hoping that Russia will once more do nothing. Ah, the classic "The West forced Russia to invade Ukraine. Like the government in Ukraine didn't have any legitimate reason to align itself with the West after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. Have you heard the rhetoric coming from Putin and the Kremlin? About how Ukraine doesn't have a legitimate national or ethnic identity of their own, and how the territory of Ukraine should just be a part of Russia. And how the Ukrainians (who are really just Russians, really) don't deserve to self-govern? Going on right now in occupied Ukraine, the Russians are actively purging all Ukrainian language and culture. Only the Russian language will be taught in schools. Yes, the West is totally to blame here. Totally.

danbruc 3y ago
Forced is not true and I did not say that, Russia could also have decided not to invaded. I also did not say that Ukraine has no reasons to want to join NATO, they have and they most likely had them long before 2014. But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion, Russia threatened severe consequences, NATO gave no signs that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or entered any kind of negotiations, Russia delivered on its promise. The outcome was rather predictable, at least ignoring that Russia did not react as strongly to previous NATO expansions. We can debate all day long whether NATO should expand, whether Russia should have any say in which alliances Ukraine enters, whether an invasion is a justifiable means, whether Russia would have invaded anyway if NATO would have given up on the expansion, that are all fair questions. My point is just that there was a relatively simple situation, Russia warns NATO, one step closer and there will be war, and NATO decides that it will make that step.
- ansible 3y ago
  > But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion, Russia threatened severe consequences, NATO gave no signs that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or entered any kind of negotiations, Russia delivered on its promise. The outcome was rather predictable, at least ignoring that Russia did not react as strongly to previous NATO expansions. Oh, so we're supposed to just listen and obey every dictator out there now? We are supposed to listen and obey when North Korea threatens our (or our ally's) destruction? Are we supposed to just sit back and let China dredge up new islands out of nothing in the South China Sea, and then claim the entire thing is now their territorial waters? Are we supposed to just let them have Taiwan too? How many times has China threatened something when we sold Taiwan some more F-16s or some other military hardware? And what about our threats? Do you think the Kremlin wasn't warned about what the consequences to Russia would be if they invaded in 2022? Why shouldn't Putin have listened to us? > My point is just that there was a relatively simple situation, Russia warns NATO, one step closer and there will be war, and NATO decides that it will make that step. What's funny with all this is that Finland and Sweden resisted joining NATO for decades, despite being very closely aligned with the rest of Europe. Russia made angry noises about that for years and years, and they listened. Wow! Exactly what you thought should happen! Fantastic! And then Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. Then those two countries decided they could no longer listen to the threats coming from Russia, and had to choose what was best for their own security and prosperity. And so they joined NATO to protect themselves. Why do you think Poland, one of the poorest countries in Europe, has been giving proportionately so much aid to Ukraine? Because they fear for the war spreading, and want to stop Russia now. Why do you think Poland wanted to join NATO back in 1999? Even though one of the member countries of NATO (Germany) that had invaded them 50 years earlier? Did they fear that Poland was going to be invaded by NATO, that this was some coercion? No, because NATO doesn't invade other countries. Poland joined NATO because they were worried about the other country that had also invaded them 50 years previously, Russia. Are you starting to see that it is Russia that is the problem here?
  - danbruc 3y ago
    Oh, so we're supposed to just listen and obey every dictator out there now? No, you can also go to war with them. The one side wants Ukraine in NATO, the other not, so there is a conflict. You can now either negotiate some compromise that is acceptable for both sides or you have to fight this out. I personally think that a Ukrainian NATO membership is not worth hundred thousands of dead and wounded, millions of refuges and a destroyed country, but others obviously disagree. And what about our threats? [...] Why shouldn't Putin have listened to us? Which threats? Putin already decided that Ukrainian NATO membership is so important that he is willing to go to war over the issue if there is no political solution, he certainly expected sanctions and support from the West.
    - ansible 3y ago
      > I personally think that a Ukrainian NATO membership is not worth hundred thousands of dead and wounded, millions of refuges and a destroyed country, but others obviously disagree. Well, it has been for the Ukrainians to decide. They have fought like hell to avoid being conquered by a foreign dictator that would destroy their country, their culture and the rape, torture and murder their own people. > Which threats? Putin already decided that Ukrainian NATO membership is so important that he is willing to go to war over the issue if there is no political solution, he certainly expected sanctions and support from the West. Which threats? I assure you that in the run-up to February 2022, there were some very serious phone calls and meetings between the USA State Department and the Russian Foreign Ministry. Just because that wasn't reported on the news doesn't mean it didn't happen. Often we try to find solutions to problems without it being a public announcement.
      - blasphemers 3y ago
        > Well, it has been for the Ukrainians to decide This is idiotic, it is not up to the Ukrainians to decide to join NATO, their decision ends at applying for NATO membership. Not everybody gets to join NATO, it's not some open membership organization that anybody gets to join.
- mcphage 3y ago
  > We can debate all day long […] whether Russia should have any say in which alliances Ukraine enters What the fuck? How can you debate on that at all, let alone all day? Does Russia own Ukraine? No. So does Russia have any say in which alliances Ukraine enters? Absolutely not.
  - danbruc 3y ago
    The US government has warned Solomon Islands it will “respond accordingly” if its security agreement with China leads to a Chinese military presence in the Pacific island nation. Does the USA own Solomon Islands? It is just a reality that powerful nations try to exert influence over other states, whether you like it or not. We can discuss how good or bad that is but it certainly not only Russia that thinks it has some say in what other countries can or can not do.
    - mcphage 3y ago
      I’m pretty sure we all (or most of us) agree that the US bossing around the Solomon Islands is a bad thing, right? But since we don’t own Solomon Islands, they can go right ahead and do it anyway. And think we’re also all of us in agreement that it would not give the US license to invade. This all seems really obvious and not requiring any debate. Am I wrong about that? Do you feel a US invasion would be justified at that point?
- koonsolo 3y ago
  > But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion. Let's be real here: Russia wants Ukraine to be "under their influence", preferably the same way Belarus is, and Chechnya. They want Ukraine to be their puppet state. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 because the population already gave clear indications that they wanted to move closer to the West. Russia was losing their grip on Ukraine. That's the reason why they invaded. The NATO argument is all bullshit. Finland joined NATO. Is Russia invading Finland? Or at least securing their borders with Finland? Russia wants to control Ukraine, no more, no less.
  - danbruc 3y ago
    And NATO wanted it under their influence, I mean that is just the game of geopolitics.
    - koonsolo 3y ago
      NATO doesn't control any of the countries that decided to join. These are sovereign countries that decided to join an alliance for their own security. Most of the benefit comes from article 5 that protects smaller countries from being invaded. This is very different than an imperial dictatorship like Russia, which actually does turn their conquests into puppet states. But of course Russia and its minions like to act as if NATO is an imperial power. They also like to act as if USA controls all the NATO countries. While if fact, those countries are democracies that decide their own destinies. So in the end, it's actually Ukraine that wants to join NATO for obvious reasons, not the other way around. NATO could have already let Ukraine join if it wanted to. This is not 'NATO wanting Ukraine under their influence', this is 'Ukraine wanting the security guarantees that NATO offers'. I'm getting really tired of all the Russian bullshit that's being spread here.
      - danbruc 3y ago
        If NATO has no interest in Ukraine joining, then they could just have said no and avoided the entire mess.
- mopsi 3y ago
  > But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion, Russia threatened severe consequences, NATO gave no signs that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or entered any kind of negotiations, Russia delivered on its promise. I don't understand what you are talking about. NATO did exactly what you suggest: at the request of Russians, shut the door to NATO for Georgia and Ukraine. Russia used the opportunity and shortly thereafter invaded both of them. Russia has not invaded a single country that actually joined NATO. Seeking NATO membership is the best strategy to prevent a Russian invasion, hence why Finland and Sweden decided to join. It was a particularly notable policy shift for Sweden, because Sweden abandoned 200 years of neutrality.
  - danbruc 3y ago
    NATO did exactly what you suggest: at the request of Russians, shut the door to NATO for Georgia and Ukraine. Where do you get this interpretation from, honest question. In Bucharest 2008 France and Germany voiced opposition against a NATO membership of Georgia and Ukraine. Despite that resistance the declarations of the summit says the following. We reiterate that decisions on enlargement are for NATO itself to make. [...] NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations. In December 2021 Russia made a final attempt to get a political resolution of the conflict, sending letters to the US president and NATO demanding an agreement. The response came in January 2022. What we have made clear is that we will not compromise on some core principles. And one of them is, of course, that every nation has the right to choose its own path. So NATO respects a country or a nation when they decide to apply for NATO membership, as for instance, Ukraine [...] I don't see how this can be interpreted as abandoning the idea of a NATO membership for Ukraine. It also somewhat misrepresent the process, it is of course in the hands of NATO members to admit new members, a country wanting to join does not mean much on its own. Also article 10 says that new members must be in a position to contribute to the security in the treaty area. Depending on how one understands that sentence, a NATO membership of Ukraine - or even just its consideration - arguably achieved the exact opposite, at least for the moment.
    - 3y ago

danbruc 3y ago

Forced is not true and I did not say that, Russia could also have decided not to invaded. I also did not say that Ukraine has no reasons to want to join NATO, they have and they most likely had them long before 2014. But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion, Russia threatened severe consequences, NATO gave no signs that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or entered any kind of negotiations, Russia delivered on its promise. The outcome was rather predictable, at least ignoring that Russia did not react as strongly to previous NATO expansions. We can debate all day long whether NATO should expand, whether Russia should have any say in which alliances Ukraine enters, whether an invasion is a justifiable means, whether Russia would have invaded anyway if NATO would have given up on the expansion, that are all fair questions. My point is just that there was a relatively simple situation, Russia warns NATO, one step closer and there will be war, and NATO decides that it will make that step.

ansible 3y ago
> But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion, Russia threatened severe consequences, NATO gave no signs that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or entered any kind of negotiations, Russia delivered on its promise. The outcome was rather predictable, at least ignoring that Russia did not react as strongly to previous NATO expansions. Oh, so we're supposed to just listen and obey every dictator out there now? We are supposed to listen and obey when North Korea threatens our (or our ally's) destruction? Are we supposed to just sit back and let China dredge up new islands out of nothing in the South China Sea, and then claim the entire thing is now their territorial waters? Are we supposed to just let them have Taiwan too? How many times has China threatened something when we sold Taiwan some more F-16s or some other military hardware? And what about our threats? Do you think the Kremlin wasn't warned about what the consequences to Russia would be if they invaded in 2022? Why shouldn't Putin have listened to us? > My point is just that there was a relatively simple situation, Russia warns NATO, one step closer and there will be war, and NATO decides that it will make that step. What's funny with all this is that Finland and Sweden resisted joining NATO for decades, despite being very closely aligned with the rest of Europe. Russia made angry noises about that for years and years, and they listened. Wow! Exactly what you thought should happen! Fantastic! And then Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022. Then those two countries decided they could no longer listen to the threats coming from Russia, and had to choose what was best for their own security and prosperity. And so they joined NATO to protect themselves. Why do you think Poland, one of the poorest countries in Europe, has been giving proportionately so much aid to Ukraine? Because they fear for the war spreading, and want to stop Russia now. Why do you think Poland wanted to join NATO back in 1999? Even though one of the member countries of NATO (Germany) that had invaded them 50 years earlier? Did they fear that Poland was going to be invaded by NATO, that this was some coercion? No, because NATO doesn't invade other countries. Poland joined NATO because they were worried about the other country that had also invaded them 50 years previously, Russia. Are you starting to see that it is Russia that is the problem here?
- danbruc 3y ago
  Oh, so we're supposed to just listen and obey every dictator out there now? No, you can also go to war with them. The one side wants Ukraine in NATO, the other not, so there is a conflict. You can now either negotiate some compromise that is acceptable for both sides or you have to fight this out. I personally think that a Ukrainian NATO membership is not worth hundred thousands of dead and wounded, millions of refuges and a destroyed country, but others obviously disagree. And what about our threats? [...] Why shouldn't Putin have listened to us? Which threats? Putin already decided that Ukrainian NATO membership is so important that he is willing to go to war over the issue if there is no political solution, he certainly expected sanctions and support from the West.
  - ansible 3y ago
    > I personally think that a Ukrainian NATO membership is not worth hundred thousands of dead and wounded, millions of refuges and a destroyed country, but others obviously disagree. Well, it has been for the Ukrainians to decide. They have fought like hell to avoid being conquered by a foreign dictator that would destroy their country, their culture and the rape, torture and murder their own people. > Which threats? Putin already decided that Ukrainian NATO membership is so important that he is willing to go to war over the issue if there is no political solution, he certainly expected sanctions and support from the West. Which threats? I assure you that in the run-up to February 2022, there were some very serious phone calls and meetings between the USA State Department and the Russian Foreign Ministry. Just because that wasn't reported on the news doesn't mean it didn't happen. Often we try to find solutions to problems without it being a public announcement.
    - blasphemers 3y ago
      > Well, it has been for the Ukrainians to decide This is idiotic, it is not up to the Ukrainians to decide to join NATO, their decision ends at applying for NATO membership. Not everybody gets to join NATO, it's not some open membership organization that anybody gets to join.
mcphage 3y ago
> We can debate all day long […] whether Russia should have any say in which alliances Ukraine enters What the fuck? How can you debate on that at all, let alone all day? Does Russia own Ukraine? No. So does Russia have any say in which alliances Ukraine enters? Absolutely not.
- danbruc 3y ago
  The US government has warned Solomon Islands it will “respond accordingly” if its security agreement with China leads to a Chinese military presence in the Pacific island nation. Does the USA own Solomon Islands? It is just a reality that powerful nations try to exert influence over other states, whether you like it or not. We can discuss how good or bad that is but it certainly not only Russia that thinks it has some say in what other countries can or can not do.
  - mcphage 3y ago
    I’m pretty sure we all (or most of us) agree that the US bossing around the Solomon Islands is a bad thing, right? But since we don’t own Solomon Islands, they can go right ahead and do it anyway. And think we’re also all of us in agreement that it would not give the US license to invade. This all seems really obvious and not requiring any debate. Am I wrong about that? Do you feel a US invasion would be justified at that point?
koonsolo 3y ago
> But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion. Let's be real here: Russia wants Ukraine to be "under their influence", preferably the same way Belarus is, and Chechnya. They want Ukraine to be their puppet state. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 because the population already gave clear indications that they wanted to move closer to the West. Russia was losing their grip on Ukraine. That's the reason why they invaded. The NATO argument is all bullshit. Finland joined NATO. Is Russia invading Finland? Or at least securing their borders with Finland? Russia wants to control Ukraine, no more, no less.
- danbruc 3y ago
  And NATO wanted it under their influence, I mean that is just the game of geopolitics.
  - koonsolo 3y ago
    NATO doesn't control any of the countries that decided to join. These are sovereign countries that decided to join an alliance for their own security. Most of the benefit comes from article 5 that protects smaller countries from being invaded. This is very different than an imperial dictatorship like Russia, which actually does turn their conquests into puppet states. But of course Russia and its minions like to act as if NATO is an imperial power. They also like to act as if USA controls all the NATO countries. While if fact, those countries are democracies that decide their own destinies. So in the end, it's actually Ukraine that wants to join NATO for obvious reasons, not the other way around. NATO could have already let Ukraine join if it wanted to. This is not 'NATO wanting Ukraine under their influence', this is 'Ukraine wanting the security guarantees that NATO offers'. I'm getting really tired of all the Russian bullshit that's being spread here.
    - danbruc 3y ago
      If NATO has no interest in Ukraine joining, then they could just have said no and avoided the entire mess.
mopsi 3y ago
> But none of that even addresses my argument, Russia opposed NATO expansion, Russia threatened severe consequences, NATO gave no signs that Ukraine would not be allowed to join NATO or entered any kind of negotiations, Russia delivered on its promise. I don't understand what you are talking about. NATO did exactly what you suggest: at the request of Russians, shut the door to NATO for Georgia and Ukraine. Russia used the opportunity and shortly thereafter invaded both of them. Russia has not invaded a single country that actually joined NATO. Seeking NATO membership is the best strategy to prevent a Russian invasion, hence why Finland and Sweden decided to join. It was a particularly notable policy shift for Sweden, because Sweden abandoned 200 years of neutrality.
- danbruc 3y ago
  NATO did exactly what you suggest: at the request of Russians, shut the door to NATO for Georgia and Ukraine. Where do you get this interpretation from, honest question. In Bucharest 2008 France and Germany voiced opposition against a NATO membership of Georgia and Ukraine. Despite that resistance the declarations of the summit says the following. We reiterate that decisions on enlargement are for NATO itself to make. [...] NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO. Both nations have made valuable contributions to Alliance operations. In December 2021 Russia made a final attempt to get a political resolution of the conflict, sending letters to the US president and NATO demanding an agreement. The response came in January 2022. What we have made clear is that we will not compromise on some core principles. And one of them is, of course, that every nation has the right to choose its own path. So NATO respects a country or a nation when they decide to apply for NATO membership, as for instance, Ukraine [...] I don't see how this can be interpreted as abandoning the idea of a NATO membership for Ukraine. It also somewhat misrepresent the process, it is of course in the hands of NATO members to admit new members, a country wanting to join does not mean much on its own. Also article 10 says that new members must be in a position to contribute to the security in the treaty area. Depending on how one understands that sentence, a NATO membership of Ukraine - or even just its consideration - arguably achieved the exact opposite, at least for the moment.
  - 3y ago