5 ms·
The problem is not even a land grab per se (even though it does cause problems). The problem is that the grabbing party, having succeeded, does not stop, and de
by nine_k 2y ago
The problem is not even a land grab per se (even though it does cause problems). The problem is that the grabbing party, having succeeded, does not stop, and develops an approach to international affairs that ends up being problematic in the long term. Germany in 1939 did not limit itself to acquiring Alsace and Lorraine, and even to grabbing most of Poland (along with its then-ally USSR), and even to grabbing most of France. Same for any historical empire. (The US in this regard is slightly different, e.g. it did not directly grab Texas, and bought large parts of California. Having grabbed the entire width of the continent, there remained little desire to grab the inhospitable south or north.)
Your logic may work with e.g. Taiwan: I don't think China would go on an expansionist rampage once it grabs Taiwan (or "returns", some would say). Should the US be just okay with that?
- rayiner 2y agoI don’t think we have any indication that Russia is more like Nazi Germany than say, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq or the US stealing territory from the Spanish. There are historical reasons why Russia would want to control Ukraine that don’t imply that they would want to keep expanding into Germany and France. I think the notion that Russia seeks to take over the world is just Peddled by a bunch of Cold War holdovers who don’t have a job anymore. Whats shocking is that many people who should know better have bought into Dick Cheney-ism.
- nine_k 2y agoGermany and France, maybe not. But parts of Poland were also historically controlled by Russia, as was Finland, and the eastern Baltic coast, countries like Lithuania or Estonia. All these countries are NATO members. I don't think that Russia is trying to take over the world, Genghis Khan-style. But I see a strong tendency in the current Russian regime to restore the area of control and influence that the USSR used to have, and it's not a small and inconsequential alteration of the world map.
- rayiner 2y agoIt’s not anyone’s job to maintain the status quo “world map.” Certainly not america’s. Does it matter to America if Russia takes over part of Poland?
- nine_k 2y agoYes, because USA is a founding member of NATO, and, along with other NATO members, is obliged to protect any NATO members under attack with military force. (As a homework, consider the consequences if the USA refused to follow on with this obligation.)
- rayiner 2y agoThat just shows our commitment to NATO is obsolete.
- racional 2y agoThere are historical reasons why Russia would want to control Ukraine that don’t imply that they would want to keep expanding into Germany and France. But they do imply they would want to start messing with Poland and the Baltics (and Russian leaders have stated as much openly). I think the notion that Russia seeks to take over the world ... No one is saying Russia seeks to "take over the whole world". But it is openly seeking to subjugate a country of 44 million people to whatever extent it can get away with, and has issued recent threats to other countries (see above) it has invaded previously, some multiple times.
- rayiner 2y agoWhy are the Baltics worth spending American tax dollars?
- racional 2y agoThat's a different topic. I'm just making it clear that it's not just about Ukraine. The Baltics (and Poland) are currently in NATO, which means the US has signed a treaty that states is committed to defending them.
- rayiner 2y agoThose countries weren’t part of nato when we signed the treaty. Whatever sense the original treaty made, countries have treated nato membership as a way to outsource their defense to the US, and the treaty makes no sense today.
- racional 2y agoThen write your congressperson. I'm just explaining the current policy rationale. Which isn't random, and has nothing to do with Dick Cheney.