5 ms·

>Germany is currently stagnating because of the toll the Ukraine war is taking on them, The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. It was all self inflict

>Germany is currently stagnating because of the toll the Ukraine war is taking on them, The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. It was all self inflicted. It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace.

wakawaka28 2y ago
>The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. Their fuel costs are skyrocketing, which is affecting everything there. >It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace. I agree about this. They should have never been unprepared, and they should have settled it by now with a reasonable deal. The war started because of NATO screwing around in Ukraine's politics and trying to set up NATO on Russia's border. Of course Russia also did political things in Ukraine, but it makes more sense for them to be involved with their neighbor than for countries much farther away to do it.
- mopsi 2y ago
  > The war started because of NATO screwing around in Ukraine's politics and trying to set up NATO on Russia's border. That sounds like an attempt to rewrite history. Ukraine's prospect of becoming a member of NATO was completely buried since 2008, and the intention to join NATO was resurrected only after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. To this day, the interest of other members to accept Ukraine into NATO remains lukewarm and no meaningful progress has been made in this direction. The war started because Russia couldn't stomach that Ukraine was on the verge of signing a major trade deal with the EU that would've opened up the EU market for Ukraine, and Russia, facing its vaning influence over Ukraine, decided to invade and subjugate Ukrainians through violence, as it had nothing else to offer.
  - wakawaka28 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - mopsi 2y ago
      > You can even go back to the 90s and promises that NATO made that it would not expand to eastern Europe if you really want to get deep on the causes of this war. The story about broken NATO promises was invented as an excuse for the war, the same way Hitler had no shortage of excuses for invading Poland. Many top officials of the USSR were still alive when Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014. Gorbachev, the minister of foreign affairs Shevardnadze, and the minister of defense Yazov all denied the story. In an interview to German ZDF channel, Gorbachev directly called it a myth: https://x.com/Jesuitchild/status/1749887239226617873 https://x.com/Jesuitchild/status/1749887239226617873 Their successors, like Kozyrev, the first post-USSR minister of foreign affairs of Russian Federation, have also called this story a total fabrication. Gorbachev summed it up with: "Had we had an agreement, we would've written it down." > At least some NATO members (and Zelenskyy himself) want Ukraine to join NATO to this day. This is hardly lukewarm. This is exactly what I call lukewarm. Even more than 10 years after Russia invaded Ukraine, Ukraine has still not received even an official invitation to begin ascension negotiations, let alone reached any key milestones of the process. Despite Ukrainians openly begging for it, NATO membership remains a distant dream. > They want influence over their neighbor, it is true. Why does the EU want to influence Russia's neighbor? It doesn't. The initiative for more open trade with the EU comes from Ukraine, because judging by the way rest of Eastern Europe opened up trade with the EU, Ukrainians could expect to see their standard of living rise very sharply in a very short time. In a decade, open trade with the EU could easily double or triple the income for most people in Ukraine. How would you feel about getting paid three times as much for the same job? > How would you feel about Russia making trade deals with Mexico, sponsoring pro-Russia politicians, and selling advanced military gear to them? How would you feel if Mexico was attacking us with cruise missiles supplied and operated by Russia? If this was preceded by the US treating Mexico the same way Russia has treated Ukraine, then I'd passionately support the Mexican-Russian alliance. If the US poisoned Mexican politicians, claimed that the Mexican people are a made up ethnicity, demanded Mexico to give up Baja California and Sonora, brainwashed Americans every day with genocidal propaganda directed against Mexicans calling for their extermination, and eventually invaded Mexico, razed entire cities from the earth, killed hundreds of thousands of Mexicans, forced millions of them to become refugees, kidnapped children, stole cultural artifacts, and polluted vast areas of Mexico for centuries with unexploded munitions, could you blame Mexico for seeking closer relations with whoever offers them support in withstanding the onslaught? Russian treatment of Ukraine is best summed up by this pair of photos: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-43611547 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-43611547 This is Ukraine's president. The photos were taken a few months apart, before and after Russians poisoned him. The US treats Mexico better than this and that's why the Mexican-Russian alliance remains a far-fetched fiction and not anything remotely plausible.
- rat87 2y ago
  Russia has shown no issue settling it in a rational way, ie getting the F*%# out of Ukraine in exchange for dropping sanctions. Its not like capturing a few parts of Ukraine does them any good. Russia were the ones who started this whole ridiculous way. Neither NATO nor the US nor the EU was as you claim screwing around in Ukrainian politics the way you claim. The one doing the screwing around was Russia much of this was illegal (bribes, corruption, etc) and was generally malicous. NATO was already on Russia's borders and its not like they were building huge bases or putting nukes there much less making diabolical plans to invade Russia. Instead they were banding over backwards to appease Russia. Hell neither the EU nor NATO cared that much about Ukraine, not nearly as much as they should have. Poland Finland and the Baltics are right in the neighborhood and have a much more rational interest in making sure Russia doesn't conquer Ukraine, cause they might be next. And NATO and the EU have an interest in making sure Russia gives up on its aggression otherwise its eastern members won't be safe. Ukraine is also a future member of both. Also crucially Ukraine has a bigger interest in Ukraine then Russia does

wakawaka28 2y ago

>The war is not inflicting any tolls on Germany. Their fuel costs are skyrocketing, which is affecting everything there. >It was pure stupidity not to be prepared to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and it was pure stupidity to respond while unprepared instead of brokering some Realpolitik peace. I agree about this. They should have never been unprepared, and they should have settled it by now with a reasonable deal. The war started because of NATO screwing around in Ukraine's politics and trying to set up NATO on Russia's border. Of course Russia also did political things in Ukraine, but it makes more sense for them to be involved with their neighbor than for countries much farther away to do it.

mopsi 2y ago
> The war started because of NATO screwing around in Ukraine's politics and trying to set up NATO on Russia's border. That sounds like an attempt to rewrite history. Ukraine's prospect of becoming a member of NATO was completely buried since 2008, and the intention to join NATO was resurrected only after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014. To this day, the interest of other members to accept Ukraine into NATO remains lukewarm and no meaningful progress has been made in this direction. The war started because Russia couldn't stomach that Ukraine was on the verge of signing a major trade deal with the EU that would've opened up the EU market for Ukraine, and Russia, facing its vaning influence over Ukraine, decided to invade and subjugate Ukrainians through violence, as it had nothing else to offer.
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - mopsi 2y ago
    > You can even go back to the 90s and promises that NATO made that it would not expand to eastern Europe if you really want to get deep on the causes of this war. The story about broken NATO promises was invented as an excuse for the war, the same way Hitler had no shortage of excuses for invading Poland. Many top officials of the USSR were still alive when Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014. Gorbachev, the minister of foreign affairs Shevardnadze, and the minister of defense Yazov all denied the story. In an interview to German ZDF channel, Gorbachev directly called it a myth: https://x.com/Jesuitchild/status/1749887239226617873 https://x.com/Jesuitchild/status/1749887239226617873 Their successors, like Kozyrev, the first post-USSR minister of foreign affairs of Russian Federation, have also called this story a total fabrication. Gorbachev summed it up with: "Had we had an agreement, we would've written it down." > At least some NATO members (and Zelenskyy himself) want Ukraine to join NATO to this day. This is hardly lukewarm. This is exactly what I call lukewarm. Even more than 10 years after Russia invaded Ukraine, Ukraine has still not received even an official invitation to begin ascension negotiations, let alone reached any key milestones of the process. Despite Ukrainians openly begging for it, NATO membership remains a distant dream. > They want influence over their neighbor, it is true. Why does the EU want to influence Russia's neighbor? It doesn't. The initiative for more open trade with the EU comes from Ukraine, because judging by the way rest of Eastern Europe opened up trade with the EU, Ukrainians could expect to see their standard of living rise very sharply in a very short time. In a decade, open trade with the EU could easily double or triple the income for most people in Ukraine. How would you feel about getting paid three times as much for the same job? > How would you feel about Russia making trade deals with Mexico, sponsoring pro-Russia politicians, and selling advanced military gear to them? How would you feel if Mexico was attacking us with cruise missiles supplied and operated by Russia? If this was preceded by the US treating Mexico the same way Russia has treated Ukraine, then I'd passionately support the Mexican-Russian alliance. If the US poisoned Mexican politicians, claimed that the Mexican people are a made up ethnicity, demanded Mexico to give up Baja California and Sonora, brainwashed Americans every day with genocidal propaganda directed against Mexicans calling for their extermination, and eventually invaded Mexico, razed entire cities from the earth, killed hundreds of thousands of Mexicans, forced millions of them to become refugees, kidnapped children, stole cultural artifacts, and polluted vast areas of Mexico for centuries with unexploded munitions, could you blame Mexico for seeking closer relations with whoever offers them support in withstanding the onslaught? Russian treatment of Ukraine is best summed up by this pair of photos: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-43611547 https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-43611547 This is Ukraine's president. The photos were taken a few months apart, before and after Russians poisoned him. The US treats Mexico better than this and that's why the Mexican-Russian alliance remains a far-fetched fiction and not anything remotely plausible.
rat87 2y ago
Russia has shown no issue settling it in a rational way, ie getting the F*%# out of Ukraine in exchange for dropping sanctions. Its not like capturing a few parts of Ukraine does them any good. Russia were the ones who started this whole ridiculous way. Neither NATO nor the US nor the EU was as you claim screwing around in Ukrainian politics the way you claim. The one doing the screwing around was Russia much of this was illegal (bribes, corruption, etc) and was generally malicous. NATO was already on Russia's borders and its not like they were building huge bases or putting nukes there much less making diabolical plans to invade Russia. Instead they were banding over backwards to appease Russia. Hell neither the EU nor NATO cared that much about Ukraine, not nearly as much as they should have. Poland Finland and the Baltics are right in the neighborhood and have a much more rational interest in making sure Russia doesn't conquer Ukraine, cause they might be next. And NATO and the EU have an interest in making sure Russia gives up on its aggression otherwise its eastern members won't be safe. Ukraine is also a future member of both. Also crucially Ukraine has a bigger interest in Ukraine then Russia does