5 ms·

That is not a reason why there is a war. The Ukrainian war is an existential one, a continuation of multiple acts of genocide performed by russians for centurie

That is not a reason why there is a war. The Ukrainian war is an existential one, a continuation of multiple acts of genocide performed by russians for centuries. That is a big difference between war in Ukraine and war in Iraq or Venezuela. Russia has unlimited objectives: destroy Ukrainian identity and sovereignty. Annex the country. While USA has limited objectives, like to overthrow the government.

milutinovici 9mo ago
Overthrowing government (and installing puppet government) is considered an unlimited objective. This is what Russians would presumably also do if able. So your point doesn't stand
Gupie 9mo ago
Yes and as a corollary, it has nothing to do with Venezuela having the largest oil reserves of any country.
- Paradigma11 9mo ago
  Not a lot since Maduro had no objections to selling the Oil to the US.
tsimionescu 9mo ago
Russia would be very happy to install a puppet regime in Ukraine, as long as they had some certainty this regime would be stable and subservient to their interests. We know for a fact that they don't care about necessarily invading other countries as long as those countries are subservient: they are not planning to annex Belarus, nor did they have any real problems with Ukraine as long as it was led by their preferred leaders and it was not making any overtures to NATO or the EU. The exact same thing will happen in Venezuela: the USA will be happy with any leader that they have confidence will represent US interests, stop doing any business with Russia or Iran, and that they think will last. If instead another member of Maduro's party looks likely to win power, either now or in the near future, they will certainly not allow that to happen, even if it were to happen as a result of free elections.
- toenail 9mo ago
  The Russians actually had a puppet regime, which was overthrown by a "revolution".
  - tsimionescu 9mo ago
    Yes, they did, and there was no attempt to annex Ukraine before that regime fell, I said as much in my comment. Note that this is not in any way an attempt to justify Russia's actions, quite the contrary. I'm using the comparison to Russia's obviously horrible actions in Ukraine to condemn the USA's equally horrible actions in Venezuela.
    - wiseowise 9mo ago
      > and there was no attempt to annex Ukraine before that regime fell, I said as much in my comment. They literally did. It's just they couldn't do it militarily before 2014 because of Chechnya and bad economic at the time. In 90s they already tried to take Crimea (via politics). In 2003 they tried to take Tuzla.
      - tsimionescu 9mo ago
        In the 90s, the status of Crimea was an internal dispute in the newly-formed Ukrainian state. The status of Crimea as a part of the new Ukrainian state at this time was not yet settled in any way. The territory only became firmly a part of Ukraine in 1995. The 2003 dispute over the island of Tuzla - whose status had not been clearly settled during the independence of Ukraine from the USSR - was settled diplomatically. If you call this occasion an "attempt to annex Ukraine", then we could equally say that "Romania attempted to annex Ukraine" when the countries had several rounds of negotiation and arbitration for control of Snake Island in the Black Sea.
        geoka9 9mo ago
        The only reason Russia has been reluctant to formally annex territories it broke away from other countries until 2022 was minimizing economic damage to itself. They knew how sensitive the western countries were to forceful changes of the world map, and felt no need to inflict economic sanctions on themselves for a mere symbolic act of annexing a territory they already fully controlled. Once that Rubicon was crossed (sanctions were in place and there was nothing to lose), they annexed the four regions of Ukraine that they partially controlled.
lovegrenoble 9mo ago
[flagged]
- ponector 9mo ago
  >> Russia stood by while everything Russian, including the Russian language which is the native language of millions of Ukrainians, was facing many restrictions You think Ukrainians shouldn't decide which language to use? Also russian is native for millions of Ukrainians due to ethnic cleansing done by russians for centuries.
  - pacija 9mo ago
    Well behaved governments will provide national minorities with everything they need to feel at home. Bilingual street signs, schools in minority's native language, churches, radio and TV broadcasts in minority's native language etc. Any government who denies this to their national minorities should be promptly replaced as this kind of disrespect to other peoples' culture, religion and national identity inevitably leads to bad outcomes.
- LunaSea 9mo ago
  Russia never cared about diplomacy and always wanted to regain the ex-USSR territories back. This has been confirmed by various Russian declarations and maps. The diplomatic issues are merely an official stance that is presented to convince the gullible. It's on you if you believe it. You can look at Moldova, Georgia, Romania and Chechnya for other examples of Putin and Russia's imperialistic ambissions.

milutinovici 9mo ago

Overthrowing government (and installing puppet government) is considered an unlimited objective. This is what Russians would presumably also do if able. So your point doesn't stand

Gupie 9mo ago

Yes and as a corollary, it has nothing to do with Venezuela having the largest oil reserves of any country.

Paradigma11 9mo ago
Not a lot since Maduro had no objections to selling the Oil to the US.

tsimionescu 9mo ago

Russia would be very happy to install a puppet regime in Ukraine, as long as they had some certainty this regime would be stable and subservient to their interests. We know for a fact that they don't care about necessarily invading other countries as long as those countries are subservient: they are not planning to annex Belarus, nor did they have any real problems with Ukraine as long as it was led by their preferred leaders and it was not making any overtures to NATO or the EU. The exact same thing will happen in Venezuela: the USA will be happy with any leader that they have confidence will represent US interests, stop doing any business with Russia or Iran, and that they think will last. If instead another member of Maduro's party looks likely to win power, either now or in the near future, they will certainly not allow that to happen, even if it were to happen as a result of free elections.

toenail 9mo ago
The Russians actually had a puppet regime, which was overthrown by a "revolution".
- tsimionescu 9mo ago
  Yes, they did, and there was no attempt to annex Ukraine before that regime fell, I said as much in my comment. Note that this is not in any way an attempt to justify Russia's actions, quite the contrary. I'm using the comparison to Russia's obviously horrible actions in Ukraine to condemn the USA's equally horrible actions in Venezuela.
  - wiseowise 9mo ago
    > and there was no attempt to annex Ukraine before that regime fell, I said as much in my comment. They literally did. It's just they couldn't do it militarily before 2014 because of Chechnya and bad economic at the time. In 90s they already tried to take Crimea (via politics). In 2003 they tried to take Tuzla.
    - tsimionescu 9mo ago
      In the 90s, the status of Crimea was an internal dispute in the newly-formed Ukrainian state. The status of Crimea as a part of the new Ukrainian state at this time was not yet settled in any way. The territory only became firmly a part of Ukraine in 1995. The 2003 dispute over the island of Tuzla - whose status had not been clearly settled during the independence of Ukraine from the USSR - was settled diplomatically. If you call this occasion an "attempt to annex Ukraine", then we could equally say that "Romania attempted to annex Ukraine" when the countries had several rounds of negotiation and arbitration for control of Snake Island in the Black Sea.
      - geoka9 9mo ago
        The only reason Russia has been reluctant to formally annex territories it broke away from other countries until 2022 was minimizing economic damage to itself. They knew how sensitive the western countries were to forceful changes of the world map, and felt no need to inflict economic sanctions on themselves for a mere symbolic act of annexing a territory they already fully controlled. Once that Rubicon was crossed (sanctions were in place and there was nothing to lose), they annexed the four regions of Ukraine that they partially controlled.

lovegrenoble 9mo ago

[flagged]

ponector 9mo ago
>> Russia stood by while everything Russian, including the Russian language which is the native language of millions of Ukrainians, was facing many restrictions You think Ukrainians shouldn't decide which language to use? Also russian is native for millions of Ukrainians due to ethnic cleansing done by russians for centuries.
- pacija 9mo ago
  Well behaved governments will provide national minorities with everything they need to feel at home. Bilingual street signs, schools in minority's native language, churches, radio and TV broadcasts in minority's native language etc. Any government who denies this to their national minorities should be promptly replaced as this kind of disrespect to other peoples' culture, religion and national identity inevitably leads to bad outcomes.
LunaSea 9mo ago
Russia never cared about diplomacy and always wanted to regain the ex-USSR territories back. This has been confirmed by various Russian declarations and maps. The diplomatic issues are merely an official stance that is presented to convince the gullible. It's on you if you believe it. You can look at Moldova, Georgia, Romania and Chechnya for other examples of Putin and Russia's imperialistic ambissions.