6 ms·

Russia is unique in that they are both presently and historically a threat to the entire western world.

by michaelmrose 2y ago

est 2y ago
> threat to the entire western world .... and China.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Ardum 2y ago
[dead]
tim333 2y ago
Not so much a threat as actively attacking.
smallstepforman 2y ago
[flagged]
- ninkendo 2y ago
  > One could make the identical argument for the other world power No, one couldn’t.
  - nataliste 2y ago
    I know this will get flagged and I'll get called a Russian despite being an American from flyover country: Yes, one definitely can tenably make that argument. The Monroe Doctrine, ironically, was precipitated by negotiations with Russia[1] and is almost identical in its aims for the Western Hemisphere as Putin's nominal arguments against NATO expansion eastward, namely the assertion that the Western Hemisphere was closed to European colonization and settlement. Is this Putin talking about NATO expansion? 'Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the "falling domino" principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have a beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences.' No, it's Dwight Eisenhower talking about communism in Indochina in 1954. The maxims "Principiis obsta" and "Finem respice" apply universally. The Monroe Doctrine and Domino Theory were both framed as defensive policies that were then used for protectionist and geopolitical justifications for foreign wars of aggression against neighbors and neutral independent countries. Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya didn't even have the protection of these broader geopolitical aims, just naked warmongering and profiteering (Osama Bin Laden was Saudi). The necessity for narratives of moral exceptionalism to maintain a permanently jingoist state is to be expected, but it'd be healthier for the intelligentsia to privately admit that fact rather than hiding behind moral exceptionalism even in their personal lives. The West wants to permanently de-fang and colonize Russia for obvious reasons--geopoltical hegemony and market intrusion. These reasons create a perennial playbook everyone else has played by for thousands of years. And I'm sure when NATO does inevitably fail to a novel power, the remnants will play by the same rules Monroe and Putin played by, sed Carthago delenda est.[3] [1] https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est
    - EasyMark 2y ago
      I think we have to look at the intentions of NATO. Has it ever been to take over and enslave another nation like Putin’s? I’m not talking about colonial Europe or America, I’m talking about the last 70-80 years, roughly the average lifetime of a human. Now look at the history of Russia in that time frame, aggression after aggression, belligerence the whole time with its neighbors.
    - aguaviva 2y ago
      The fact that you need to dial back to 1823 to make some kind of moral equivalence argument between the two powers should be telling you something. And then we have this: The West wants to permanently de-fang and colonize Russia for obvious reasons -- geopolitical hegemony and market intrusion. Which in your view is the basic reason we have the war in Ukraine right now, is what I'm hearing.
      - nataliste 2y ago
        >The fact that you need to dial back to 1823 to make some kind of moral equivalence argument between the two powers should be telling you something. Libya was in 2011. Iraq was in 2003. Afghanistan in 2001. I can go backwards to 1823, solely for the United States (and accordingly NATO). >Which is what you reason to be the basic reason we have the war in Ukraine right now, is what I'm hearing. The basic reason are fundamental realities of IR, which you somehow take to be a unique aspect of Western-Russian relations.
        aguaviva 2y ago
        "The US did something bad, therefore if Russia also does something bad (even if not really comparable) then it's just the fundamental realities of IR, and in fact the US basically made them do it" is how your thesis currently reads.
        nataliste 2y ago
        This is more of a you problem than a me problem. Perhaps you should try not to reduce arguments to less than 200 characters, but I suspect it's uncontrollable due to longterm Twitter usage given your particular patois.
Jomamadidit 2y ago
[flagged]
ChumpGPT 2y ago
Russia is an Empire of Evil and Murder. Even Russian rulers hold their own people in contempt and have no use for them except as slaves. 800 years of their history proves it. Junk away.
scheldon 2y ago
[flagged]

Russia is unique in that they are both presently and historically a threat to the entire western world.

est 2y ago

> threat to the entire western world .... and China.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

Ardum 2y ago

[dead]

tim333 2y ago

Not so much a threat as actively attacking.

smallstepforman 2y ago

[flagged]

ninkendo 2y ago
> One could make the identical argument for the other world power No, one couldn’t.
- nataliste 2y ago
  I know this will get flagged and I'll get called a Russian despite being an American from flyover country: Yes, one definitely can tenably make that argument. The Monroe Doctrine, ironically, was precipitated by negotiations with Russia[1] and is almost identical in its aims for the Western Hemisphere as Putin's nominal arguments against NATO expansion eastward, namely the assertion that the Western Hemisphere was closed to European colonization and settlement. Is this Putin talking about NATO expansion? 'Finally, you have broader considerations that might follow what you would call the "falling domino" principle. You have a row of dominoes set up, you knock over the first one, and what will happen to the last one is the certainty that it will go over very quickly. So you could have a beginning of a disintegration that would have the most profound influences.' No, it's Dwight Eisenhower talking about communism in Indochina in 1954. The maxims "Principiis obsta" and "Finem respice" apply universally. The Monroe Doctrine and Domino Theory were both framed as defensive policies that were then used for protectionist and geopolitical justifications for foreign wars of aggression against neighbors and neutral independent countries. Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya didn't even have the protection of these broader geopolitical aims, just naked warmongering and profiteering (Osama Bin Laden was Saudi). The necessity for narratives of moral exceptionalism to maintain a permanently jingoist state is to be expected, but it'd be healthier for the intelligentsia to privately admit that fact rather than hiding behind moral exceptionalism even in their personal lives. The West wants to permanently de-fang and colonize Russia for obvious reasons--geopoltical hegemony and market intrusion. These reasons create a perennial playbook everyone else has played by for thousands of years. And I'm sure when NATO does inevitably fail to a novel power, the remnants will play by the same rules Monroe and Putin played by, sed Carthago delenda est.[3] [1] https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/monroe-doctrine [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino_theory [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est
  - EasyMark 2y ago
    I think we have to look at the intentions of NATO. Has it ever been to take over and enslave another nation like Putin’s? I’m not talking about colonial Europe or America, I’m talking about the last 70-80 years, roughly the average lifetime of a human. Now look at the history of Russia in that time frame, aggression after aggression, belligerence the whole time with its neighbors.
  - aguaviva 2y ago
    The fact that you need to dial back to 1823 to make some kind of moral equivalence argument between the two powers should be telling you something. And then we have this: The West wants to permanently de-fang and colonize Russia for obvious reasons -- geopolitical hegemony and market intrusion. Which in your view is the basic reason we have the war in Ukraine right now, is what I'm hearing.
    - nataliste 2y ago
      >The fact that you need to dial back to 1823 to make some kind of moral equivalence argument between the two powers should be telling you something. Libya was in 2011. Iraq was in 2003. Afghanistan in 2001. I can go backwards to 1823, solely for the United States (and accordingly NATO). >Which is what you reason to be the basic reason we have the war in Ukraine right now, is what I'm hearing. The basic reason are fundamental realities of IR, which you somehow take to be a unique aspect of Western-Russian relations.
      - aguaviva 2y ago
        "The US did something bad, therefore if Russia also does something bad (even if not really comparable) then it's just the fundamental realities of IR, and in fact the US basically made them do it" is how your thesis currently reads.
        nataliste 2y ago
        This is more of a you problem than a me problem. Perhaps you should try not to reduce arguments to less than 200 characters, but I suspect it's uncontrollable due to longterm Twitter usage given your particular patois.

Jomamadidit 2y ago

[flagged]

ChumpGPT 2y ago

Russia is an Empire of Evil and Murder. Even Russian rulers hold their own people in contempt and have no use for them except as slaves. 800 years of their history proves it. Junk away.

scheldon 2y ago

[flagged]