3 ms·

People bashing Russia military but asking why Russia is attacking Ukraine are not figuring out that is exactly the reason for the war. Ukraine border is too cl

People bashing Russia military but asking why Russia is attacking Ukraine are not figuring out that is exactly the reason for the war. Ukraine border is too close to Moscow, it is easy to go from Ukraine to Moscow and Russia know they would fail to defend themselves from a NATO land invasion from there. Thus why they are willing to pay a very high price to ensure this won't happen.

hollerith 2y ago
I think also Russia doesn't want the headache of defending against a nuclear attack launched from Eastern Ukraine or the headache of worrying whether anti-ballistic missiles stationed in Eastern Ukraine might provide a decisive factor in a neutralization of Russia's ability to launch a nuclear retaliatory strike. The US really doesn't have to think about these things because there are oceans between it and any potential adversary powerful enough to threaten it: any defense of the US would rely mostly on its navy and air force. In contrast, the most destructive wars are those fought with land forces, e.g., WW I, WW II, the Chinese Civil War and the one time (namely, the US Civil War) that a big land war was fought in North America. (The American Revolutionary War was a mild affair compared to the 4 wars I just listed because unlike the 4 wars I just listed, the homeland of one of the combatants was never in jeopardy.) The US security establishment is privileged because it does not need to become competent at sharing a land mass (or, worse, a plain such as the European Plain shown in the link below) with nations with high military potential: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:European_plain.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:European_plain.png
addicted 2y ago
Putin thought he would control Kyiv in 2 weeks and that gambit failed miserably and if he were to leave Ukraine now he would look extremely weak and likely get overthrown and/or executed. That’s why the war continues. If it had anything to do with NATO, but maybe you didn’t notice that as a direct result of this war 2 nations with borders with Russia have joined NATO and those 2 nations are significantly more useful members for NATO with a highly advanced defense industry in the case of Sweden, and a history of kicking Russian ass against significant odds in the case of Finland. And even the nonsense of NATO entering Russia is ridiculous. NATO is made of functioning countries that want to basically just do trade. The last thing they want is a war with a nuclear power. Heck, 2.5 years into a very clear war of aggression by Russia where there is no uncertainty about Russia’s moral guilt and the illegalness of its invasion as well as the legality of Ukraine’s defense of itself, NATO has just given Ukraine the permission to strike on Russian soil but even then in a highly limited area and only indisputably military targets. All the evidence for decades, including, for example, efforts by the U.S. to increase free trade with Russia, the Brits inviting Russian oligarchs to buy up their key football clubs and all the land in London, and Germany deliberately making itself dependent on Russian gas, has shown that NATO countries want Russia to be a partner in the community of nations and have absolutely no interest in Russia’s largely worthless land.
addicted 2y ago
The only ones bashing the Russian military are the Russian leaders who’ve been exposing the fact that the mighty Russian military isn’t even capable of taking down a military staffed nearly entirely by civilians and using discards from the Cold War which they are learning how to use in the middle of the war. The Russian military is an absolute embarrassment, and to the extent the Russian leadership and further, the Russian people, continue to allow this illegal war of aggression to continue under their names, it’s an embarrassment to them as well. When your rallying cry is “we have a history of enduring fighting bitter battles with massive loss of life to gain little to no useful territory” to justify continuing this war where you’re losing badly and embarrassing yourself on the world stage with a begging bowl aimed at North Korea, you’ve shown yourself to not be a serious nation in the 21st century.
squidbeak 2y ago
The invasion has made Ukrainian membership of NATO much more likely. So if concern over NATO proximity was indeed the reason for Putin's adventure - rather than a hubristic thirst for imperial conquest - it seems to be backfiring pretty badly for the Kremlin.
ceejayoz 2y ago
> Ukraine border is too close to Moscow, it is easy to go from Ukraine to Moscow and Russia know they would fail to defend themselves from a NATO land invasion from there. Thus why they are willing to pay a very high price to ensure this won't happen. Ironically, pushing Finland into NATO, bringing Moscow into SRBM range of an actual NATO member. Oops.
racional 2y ago
NATO was never, ever, ever going to start a land war against Russia. The idea that it would have even the slightest interest in doing so is just absolutely fucking absurd. It's just pure scare imagery that the Russian deep state puts out -- to feed its internal narratives ("The West out to encircle us, only the Russian state can protect you"), and to confuse and mollify external opposition to its blatantly aggressive actions against neighboring states.

hollerith 2y ago

I think also Russia doesn't want the headache of defending against a nuclear attack launched from Eastern Ukraine or the headache of worrying whether anti-ballistic missiles stationed in Eastern Ukraine might provide a decisive factor in a neutralization of Russia's ability to launch a nuclear retaliatory strike. The US really doesn't have to think about these things because there are oceans between it and any potential adversary powerful enough to threaten it: any defense of the US would rely mostly on its navy and air force. In contrast, the most destructive wars are those fought with land forces, e.g., WW I, WW II, the Chinese Civil War and the one time (namely, the US Civil War) that a big land war was fought in North America. (The American Revolutionary War was a mild affair compared to the 4 wars I just listed because unlike the 4 wars I just listed, the homeland of one of the combatants was never in jeopardy.) The US security establishment is privileged because it does not need to become competent at sharing a land mass (or, worse, a plain such as the European Plain shown in the link below) with nations with high military potential: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:European_plain.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:European_plain.png

addicted 2y ago

Putin thought he would control Kyiv in 2 weeks and that gambit failed miserably and if he were to leave Ukraine now he would look extremely weak and likely get overthrown and/or executed. That’s why the war continues. If it had anything to do with NATO, but maybe you didn’t notice that as a direct result of this war 2 nations with borders with Russia have joined NATO and those 2 nations are significantly more useful members for NATO with a highly advanced defense industry in the case of Sweden, and a history of kicking Russian ass against significant odds in the case of Finland. And even the nonsense of NATO entering Russia is ridiculous. NATO is made of functioning countries that want to basically just do trade. The last thing they want is a war with a nuclear power. Heck, 2.5 years into a very clear war of aggression by Russia where there is no uncertainty about Russia’s moral guilt and the illegalness of its invasion as well as the legality of Ukraine’s defense of itself, NATO has just given Ukraine the permission to strike on Russian soil but even then in a highly limited area and only indisputably military targets. All the evidence for decades, including, for example, efforts by the U.S. to increase free trade with Russia, the Brits inviting Russian oligarchs to buy up their key football clubs and all the land in London, and Germany deliberately making itself dependent on Russian gas, has shown that NATO countries want Russia to be a partner in the community of nations and have absolutely no interest in Russia’s largely worthless land.

addicted 2y ago

The only ones bashing the Russian military are the Russian leaders who’ve been exposing the fact that the mighty Russian military isn’t even capable of taking down a military staffed nearly entirely by civilians and using discards from the Cold War which they are learning how to use in the middle of the war. The Russian military is an absolute embarrassment, and to the extent the Russian leadership and further, the Russian people, continue to allow this illegal war of aggression to continue under their names, it’s an embarrassment to them as well. When your rallying cry is “we have a history of enduring fighting bitter battles with massive loss of life to gain little to no useful territory” to justify continuing this war where you’re losing badly and embarrassing yourself on the world stage with a begging bowl aimed at North Korea, you’ve shown yourself to not be a serious nation in the 21st century.

squidbeak 2y ago

The invasion has made Ukrainian membership of NATO much more likely. So if concern over NATO proximity was indeed the reason for Putin's adventure - rather than a hubristic thirst for imperial conquest - it seems to be backfiring pretty badly for the Kremlin.

ceejayoz 2y ago

> Ukraine border is too close to Moscow, it is easy to go from Ukraine to Moscow and Russia know they would fail to defend themselves from a NATO land invasion from there. Thus why they are willing to pay a very high price to ensure this won't happen. Ironically, pushing Finland into NATO, bringing Moscow into SRBM range of an actual NATO member. Oops.

racional 2y ago

NATO was never, ever, ever going to start a land war against Russia. The idea that it would have even the slightest interest in doing so is just absolutely fucking absurd. It's just pure scare imagery that the Russian deep state puts out -- to feed its internal narratives ("The West out to encircle us, only the Russian state can protect you"), and to confuse and mollify external opposition to its blatantly aggressive actions against neighboring states.