FishBulbia posted:

From a realist perspective, Ukraine is also rationally motivated. The issue is its goals are insignificant compared to powers which can delete life on earth in under an hour. Neorealists mostly claim that the US has surrendered its interests in exchange for vague notions of principals, and is therefore harming its geopolitical goals by being lost in rhetoric.

Somaen posted:

Actually, from a neorealist perspective Russia needs to give up its world power pretensions and join the US fold in the stand-off against China - the two actual superpowers with agency and interests worth considering

Treating politics as a paradox map game is relatable but not particularly close to modelling material reality or insightful as you purposefully miss many actors and their interests involved to abstracting states to anthromorphized characters

khwarezm posted:

Where else could Russia even demand aren't allowed allowed to join NATO if Ukraine is disregarded? Turkey and the Baltic states have already been lost to NATO from their POV, which is a major strategic handicap to Russia and probably their next biggest issue after Ukraine when we are talking about their Western foreign policy, and I doubt they would ask for something as nuts as expelling currently existing members.

khwarezm posted:

Where else could Russia even demand aren't allowed allowed to join NATO if Ukraine is disregarded?

Sinteres posted:

Everyone would prefer not to see Russia invade Ukraine, so NATO should stop pretending it's going to invite Ukraine and continue its advance to encircle Russia.

khwarezm posted:

Where else could Russia even demand aren't allowed allowed to join NATO if Ukraine is disregarded? Turkey and the Baltic states have already been lost to NATO from their POV, which is a major strategic handicap to Russia and probably their next biggest issue after Ukraine when we are talking about their Western foreign policy, and I doubt they would ask for something as nuts as expelling currently existing members. Finland seems like the only realistic candidate next but if that's the case then the Russians are playing a dangerous game since its typically been best for everybody to just let Finland perform its tightrope balancing act like its done since the 1940s, acting aggressively towards the countries that border Russia only makes NATO seem much more useful to said countries, and I can't imagine that Finns are terrifically fond of what they are seeing in Ukraine.

Sinteres posted:

Everyone would prefer not to see Russia invade Ukraine, so NATO should stop pretending it's going to invite Ukraine and continue its advance to encircle Russia.

Sinteres posted:

Everyone would prefer not to see Russia invade Ukraine, so NATO should stop pretending it's going to invite Ukraine and continue its advance to encircle Russia.

Finland and Sweden

Kamrat posted:

I'm not saying what they're doing is okay but Russia already is encircled, it's just that Ukraine is part of Russia's buffer-zone.

mobby_6kl posted:

steinrokkan posted:

"Buffer zone" is just a term for "imperialism I like", hth.

Sinteres posted:

Now point out on the map where Russia's two biggest cities are.

So is defensive alliance.

Sinteres posted:

So is defensive alliance. Remember when the defensive alliance attacked Russian allies in Serbia and Libya?

Nenonen posted:

For some reason a Russian cargo airplane flew yesterday from Moscow to Leipzig via this route, which has caught a lot of media attention in Finland. Finnish Air Force says the plane was following flight plan, which isn't much of an explanation.

This route took the plane suspiciously close to Finnish Air Force HQ in central Finland, so dunno, signal intelligence or just a random nothingburger?

Grouchio posted:

You should know how this works: Russia wanted to see if Finland was stupid enough to shoot down a cargo plane as a casus belli. Nothing happened, obviously.

Sinteres posted:

You seem upset, maybe take a breather. Whether Serbia was in the wrong or not though, it obviously wasn't a defensive action by NATO, and as I pointed out in a previous post, it's interesting how the US and its allies only operate based on their high minded principles in defense of life and liberty when it coincides with cynical geopolitical goals.

Sinteres posted:

You seem upset, maybe take a breather. Whether Serbia was in the wrong or not though, it obviously wasn't a defensive action by NATO, and as I pointed out in a previous post, it's interesting how the US and its allies only operate based on their high minded principles in defense of life and liberty when it coincides with cynical geopolitical goals.

Sinteres posted:

Again, I never said anything about Serbia being in the right.

Sinteres posted:

Again, I never said anything about Serbia being in the right.

steinrokkan posted:

somebody who's just admitted to thinking that stopping a genocide is worse than genocide itself if it inconveniences mommy Russia

Nenonen posted:

You aren't saying they were in the wrong, either, just that Nato countries were in the wrong in intervening.

Sinteres posted:

I didn't say that, and I think you should try reading the posts you're responding to rather than simply responding emotionally when you see the name of a bad country typed out.

I didn't even say they were wrong to intervene, just that it clearly wasn't a defensive action.

steinrokkan posted:

Again, you called it, explicitly, imperialism

Nenonen posted:

https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/ru675#2a81cd2a

For some reason a Russian cargo airplane flew yesterday from Moscow to Leipzig via this route, which has caught a lot of media attention in Finland. Finnish Air Force says the plane was following flight plan, which isn't much of an explanation.

This route took the plane suspiciously close to Finnish Air Force HQ in central Finland, so dunno, signal intelligence or just a random nothingburger?

steinrokkan posted:

gently caress off, especially with the Serbia did nothing wrong truther bullshit

quote:

ALMATY – Former Kazakh President Nursultan Nazarbayev said Tuesday that there was “no conflict or confrontation” among Kazakhstan's elite in his first appearance since deadly protests rocked the former Soviet country earlier this month.

Nazarbayev, 81, has not been seen in public since the worst unrest since Kazakhstan’s independence broke out earlier this month, leading to widespread speculation over his whereabouts and his relationship with current President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

Tokayev “has full power,” Nazarbayev said in Tuesday’s video address. “He is the chairman of the Security Council…There is no conflict or confrontation in the elite. Rumors on this subject are absolutely groundless.”

...

In the video, Nazarbayev described himself as a “pensioner since 2019” — when he handed the presidency to Tokayev — despite heading the Security Council until early January and holding the formal title of Leader of the Nation.

“I am currently on a well-deserved rest in the capital of Kazakhstan and have not left anywhere,” Nazarbayev said.

...

In his address, Nazarbayev urged Kazakhs to support a new series of populist measures introduced by Tokayev.

“The president put forward a new reform program aimed at improving the welfare of the people. This program needs to be supported,” Nazarbayev said.

cinci zoo sniper posted:

https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2022...comments-a76073

Grouchio posted:

This reads like Sukarno reading a script declaring "Suharto is totally my successor. He totally didn't strip me of powers then replace me after an abortive coup. That totally didn't lead to the eradication of my voter base in retaliation. Yep."

Somaen posted:

This wouldn't achieve any strategic objectives that Russia has for Ukraine
- Would confirm Russia as the psychotic bad guy that attacks its neighbors with whatever consequences
- Further resolve to join NATO and EU for Ukrainians
- Installed Yanukovich figure overthrown in two days
- Crimean water access not secured
- Russian speakers not saved, Czar looks weak, no bump in polls
Etc

The only outcome I see is an occupation, massive repressions and flooding Europe with refugees as punishment which is again, nuts to think about but not zero chance of happening.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

I was under the impression that Russian would only take Eastern Ukraine because from what I've skimmed across on twitter along with other articles is that their current troops aren't sufficient enough for a full scaled occupation. There's a real risk that it'd turn into another Afghanistan and slowly bleed Russian lives. They win in the short term but long term they'd just bleed out.

All of this really sounds lovely too and there isn't much we are able to do. Wars are so goddamn dumb.

BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:

It’s going to turn into that no matter what if Russia invades imo. Conventional war won extremely quickly, guerillas and insurgents take their price later. Except worse politically the aghanistan because Russia still has conscription so there’s a bunch of people and peoples sons who did not volunteer for this getting sent into danger.