• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

UA-RU | DISCUSSIONS

Status
Not open for further replies.
bartok said:
In EU too. In Italy in particular. It's a disaster. Gazoline and diesel +100% in a few month, even with controlled prices. I don't have time to speak about the problem, but sanction are hurting us much more that Russia.
Click to expand...
No, no they are not. Please be my guest and compare the data to EU. Not even close. Inflation may be a problem but western economies are not in free fall like Russia. Not even by a long shot.
 
David Michael Fabian said:
Yes, just like Russia had warned NATO for decades about NATO's expansion toward Russia's border. NATO chose to ignore Russia, which forced Russia to eventually take action. So now, NATO decides to expand, in response to a war caused by NATO expansion... unfknbelievable :rolleyes:. Furthermore, as NATO's sanctions hurt NATO, NATO looks like idiots... and if NATO sanctions hurt Russia, NATO will still look like idiots when Russia nukes NATO's decision-making centers.
Click to expand...
You do realize Russia lost the Cold War, part of losing is taking a hit not a reset in place.
That nato expansion happened not by force or invasion but a voluntary act of independent nations.

You use “expansion” deliberately as a tool to inflict blame and culpability.
Did Russia actually believe the Warsaw pac nations were just going to remain in Russias loyal orbit like lap dogs?
If they did they were fools.

The USSR collapsed the world changed.
This NATO expansion happened directly because Of their history in dealing with Russia for two centuries. That and they saw what was coming under Putin and his returned to an expansionist imperialist nation.

The process of new members was and is a voluntary request and approval process by both nato members and the incoming nations.
Not “expansionistic” colonial dreams.
Just the request and approval process of Sweden and Finland alone recently is enough to drain the expansionist claims.
They are joining NATO after 50 years of choosing not to directly because of the actions of Russia no one else. They were respected nations already in bilateral defense training contacts with the west since WW2. There was never a cause for nato to “expand” into them till Russia proved what the Eastern European nations already knew. They would be back and those nations did not want to be at the feet of Russian imperialism again. This is a two hindered year cycle with Russia first under the czars then the USSR now Putin.
So the claims that NATO is in some way a imperialistic aggressor is foolish.
Two years ago they couldn’t even agree as a body on who was spending enough on military support to the alliance.
Now it’s some domineering world power. Bent on the destruction of Russian history and dominance.
Is non sequitur.

One can choose to believe NATO is at fault but the reality is it is the failure of one system of governance and foreign policy to another.
Nukes and threats are not a mulligan for repeated failures.
 
David Michael Fabian said:
So now, NATO decides to expand, in response to a war caused by NATO expansion...
Click to expand...
I don't think NATO's expansion justifies Russia's invasion of two countries. (Georgie and Ukraine)

NATO's expansion, at least, was voluntary on the part of the countries who joined. I don't recall an invitation by Georgie or Ukraine.

If Russia doesn't like NATO's expansion, they have to eat it. That doesn't give them license to invade.

Russia started those wars. Not NATO.
 
We might see things calm down once Putin secures warm water ports.? Brics is the new western threat for the future. Of which Putin is only one player. And now may well be more successful in a longer drawn out conflict. Simply from a new trade perspective to finance such conflict longer than the west might be prepared to indure. As I said this coalition if smart will trade outside of American dollars drastically reducing its value on the global markets. I could be wrong but a short time period may well show this future possibility.
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
I don't think NATO's expansion justifies Russia's invasion of two countries. (Georgie and Ukraine)

NATO's expansion, at least, was voluntary on the part of the countries who joined. I don't recall an invitation by Georgie or Ukraine.

If Russia doesn't like NATO's expansion, they have to eat it. That doesn't give them license to invade.

Russia started those wars. Not NATO.
Click to expand...
The notion that Russia wouldn't have invaded or otherwise sought to subjugate Ukraine if NATO hadn't expanded is so infantile that there are simply no words. It shows a complete failure to understand what Russia is, or how geopolitics work, as well as utter ignorance of world history (and of Russian history in particular).
 
Silent said:
Putin certainly does more for the Russian people as President Biden for the US Americans.
Click to expand...
The fact that Putin doesn't give a rat's ass about the Russian people may be the reason this war hasn't yet escalated beyond Ukraine. Imagine what the US would have done if a hostile state killed 20-odd thousand American soldiers with weapons supplied by Russia.

In fact, OSINT shows most of these casualties are from the piss-poor provincial oblasts. This is also deliberate. If Putin does really "care" about any Russians, it's really only about the residents of Moscow and several other large cities; the rest is just cannon fodder.
 
Saguenay said:
wrong, putin cares about his people, otherwise he would be dictator of absolutely no one.
Click to expand...
So him being a dictator is not possible because if he was no one would allow them to lead there nation for long.
“He would be a dictator of absolutely no one”
So the world no longer needs to worry about totalitarian dictators because no nation would put up with it.
Doesn’t sq with history but ok
 
Socom7 said:
The notion that Russia wouldn't have invaded or otherwise sought to subjugate Ukraine if NATO hadn't expanded is so infantile that there are simply no words. It shows a complete failure to understand what Russia is, or how geopolitics work, as well as utter ignorance of world history (and of Russian history in particular).
Click to expand...
I looked over my post that you were replying to to make sure I wasn't unclear.

I never said Russia wasn't responding to NATO movements.

I said, very clearly, that Russia had no business invading other countries or starting a war. NATO's expansion does not give another country license to invade. Period.

If Canada does something the U.S. doesn't like, does the U.S. have the right to invade? No.

If Russia doesn't like NATO's expansion, they can suck it. They don't get a free pass to invade another country. Double period.

If Russia restarts the Warsaw Pact and Belarus joins (voluntarily), does the U.S. have the right to invade Belarus? Are we being consistent here?
 
Obreid said:
I don’t have to, as far as attacking or threatening to attack the nation that supplied those weapons we did nothing.
Vietnam
Click to expand...
Vietnam is a bad example as it didn't matter to the the USA nearly as much as Ukraine matters to Russia. For a better Gedankenexperiment - imagine the US is in a war with Mexico, and Russia is arming the latter. And even that doesn't really do justice to the current situation. In fact - imagine Texas has seceded from the US and Russia is now arming Texas.
 
Socom7 said:
Vietnam is a bad example as it didn't matter to the the USA nearly as much as Ukraine matters to Russia. For a better Gedankenexperiment - imagine the US is in a war with Mexico, and Russia is arming the latter. And even that doesn't really do justice to the current situation. In fact - imagine Texas has seceded from the US and Russia is now arming Texas.
Click to expand...
It mattered as much to the US for the #’s of Americans who died in Vietnam. Proximity does not validate or invalidate the purposes to resist the aggressor.
Granted the conditions of the war were different.

But isn’t it ironic that the “Occidental” is forever bashed for being the colonizer and all of the evils that sprang from that.
Yet here we have Russia waging war to recover lost colonial territory. It would be a parallel to Britain invading Zimbabwe to reestablish the colonial nation of Rhodesia.

But many thousands more of American servicemen died in Vietnam compared to the Russian soldiers who have died in Ukraine.
I’m just talking about the deaths of Americans with weapons provided by the soviets and Chinese.
There was no bombastic rhetoric from the west that nuclear war was at hand and that Russia and China were risking starting a greater war because they were suppling arms to kill Americans.

So yes I reject all of the rhetoric out of Russia of nato expansionism arms to Ukraine and economic sanctions as being a dangerous step towards WW3.
The culpability and choices to deescalate this war rest solely at the feet of Russia.
Spin it how you want reject it it makes no difference it is up to Russia to stand down or they risk a escalation to the war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom