|
TipTow posted:I agree 100%. But there's a cadre of people that become apoplectic at the insinuation there aren't "good guys" in this crisis. I don't think there's any good guys, but there is one distinct actor very much taking bad actions. And its not NATO.
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:31 |
|
|
Fair enough, thank you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:29
|
|
|
Russia has been agressive in its neighbourhood since the Soviet Union dissolved. This time when Russia was totally peaceful until the West bribed a few too many former satellite countries, it's a complete propaganda myth. Georgian Civil War (1991) Abkhazia (1991) Transnistria (1992) North Ossetia (1992) Chechnya (1994, 1999) Dagestan (1999) Georgia (2008) Ukraine (2014) Totally peaceful guys, the fact we're constantly messing with our neighbours and minorities is completely the fault of the West who cheated us with the evils of shock therapy capitalism in the 90s.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:29
|
|
|
orcane posted:Why is that odd? How likely is it that these US jets will be used in (hidden? what?) attacks on Russia, the one country with enough nuclear weapons to rival the United States? How many times have the US used forces stationed in Europe to attack Russia? How is that even comparable I'm not concerned about them attacking Russia, I'm concerned about them entering Ukraine, either preventatively or in response to Russia entering Ukraine, which is something one might do with forces stationed in Poland. CommieGIR posted:So far the only troops in Poland is the 82nd Airborne and was brought in to help with evacuations (which Poland has largely opened the border for) Hopefully! This is certainly what has been repeated by the administration even within the past hour. I would like to be able to believe it!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:29
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:but that means the innocent people are also bad Everyone holding power.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:29
|
|
|
TipTow posted:If this was true, what was the point of expanding NATO? What did the U.S., France, the U.K., and Turkey gain from adding Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia? Surely they wouldn't need the extra help in fighting off Russia if that was was never going to happen anyway. The last time the Baltics were independent prior to 1991 they were subsequently absorbed into the USSR after having been absorbed into the Russian Empire before that. Those countries have a very legitimate reason to want protection from Russia. And you're misinterpreting what I said. I said that nothing would be an existential threat to RUSSIA. Not that RUSSIA wouldn't be an existential threat to its NEIGHBORS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:30
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I'm inclined to say Afghanistan at least involved self defense, even if the end result was obviously horrifying. You really shouldn't though. The Taliban offered to turn Bin Laden over. The entire war could have easily been avoided. orcane posted:Chechnya (1994, 1999) You realize these are part of Russia, yeah?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:30
|
|
|
Red and Black posted:You really shouldn't though. The Taliban offered to turn Bin Laden over. The entire war could have easily been avoided. What is it with you and these thought terminating cliches?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:32
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:I'm not concerned about them attacking Russia, I'm concerned about them entering Ukraine, either preventatively or in response to Russia entering Ukraine, which is something one might do with forces stationed in Poland.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:34
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:It's closer to 150,000, and it's close to 60% of active duty military. Obviously they can call up a few million conscripts, and ... party like it's 1914? Is there an article going into where these numbers come from? I've seen some discussion of these numbers before and not see much context for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:35
|
|
|
TipTow posted:If this was true, what was the point of expanding NATO? What did the U.S., France, the U.K., and Turkey gain from adding Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia? Surely they wouldn't need the extra help in fighting off Russia if that was was never going to happen anyway. it's actually an interesting question. War on the Rocks has a good retrospective on the Baltics and their path to NATO membership that makes the case that their entry was not something done casually or thoughtlessly. instead, the enlargement was something that was only agreed to after much internal debate and after the baltic states aggressively worked to demonstrate that they could "share the burden" and their democratic reforms wouldn't immediately collapse. quote:A recurrent criticism leveled against NATO’s decision to take on the Baltics is that it was done somewhat “casually” or even “emotionally” without judicious processes in place. Others have maintained that it was a feeling of collective historical guilt that drove the West to “rewrite the geopolitical landscape in favor of the Central and Eastern European countries.” While one can indeed find language of moral obligation steeped into speeches of U.S. officials, past tragedies were not the reason why these countries were let into NATO. Above all, they were judged by their ability to implement sound policy reforms and shoulder international military burdens. In short, this was a performance-based process. According to a senior Estonian diplomat, the Baltics quickly realized that the argument “you owe this to us” did not take them far. They learned that the West was “not Catholic but Lutheran. God helps those who help themselves and confession does not really make things better, but behaving differently does.” the piece also makes the point that, though russia lobbied hard against entry, its posture was nowhere near aggressive at the time as it is today: quote:Today, Russia assertively claims that NATO’s second wave enlargement violated its red lines. It is important to recall, however, that at the time Moscow reacted in a measured way, tempering its criticism vis-à-vis NATO enlargement. In 2001, during a radio interview with National Public Radio, when asked if he opposed the admission of the three Baltic Republics into NATO Russian President Vladimir Putin responded that the issue could not be summed up in “a yes or a no.” He later added that “we cannot forbid people to make certain choices if they want to increase the security of their nations in a particular way.” In another appearance, Putin declared that Baltic membership was “no tragedy” for Russia. These statements clearly were not a ringing endorsement. However, by historical standards, this was the least public resistance put up by the head of the Russian state. Alexander Vershbow, U.S. Ambassador to Moscow at a time of NATO enlargement, insists that he heard few complaints from the Russian side when the Baltics formally joined the alliance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:35
|
|
|
TipTow posted:NATO always has been and still is an anti-Russian alliance. If it wasn't, why did those countries join in the aughts? What were they afraid of, Sweden? Nato is a mutual defense union. If Russia invades one of its members, only then it will become an anti-Russian alliance. Otherwise Russia's actions are just what drives countries to seek safety within it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
There was a misunderstanding in the previous thread that seems to be continuing in this one, and it would be for the best to nip it in the bud right now. One can oppose American arm shipments to Ukraine without believing that Putin is really good and should immediately invade Ukraine who would deserve it for being bad. To be honest, I think that should be obvious and it seems less like a misunderstanding and more like intentional disingenuousness on the people making the mistake. But I don't want to assume bad faith on the part of others so I will make a good faith attempt to clear up the issue. Just speaking for myself, I don't think the US should arm extremist right wing military units that have been accused of war crimes. America has a bad history of doing that, and it tends to end pretty poorly. The Ukrainian military has at least one such unit, the Azov Battalion, within it's military. Therefore I believe that the US should not supply weapons to the Ukrainian military. At the same time, I do not support Vladimir Putin. I am opposed to the idea of Russia invading Ukraine. I am opposed to invasions generally, and specifically in this case. If the areas of the Ukraine under contention have a significant population that wish to be part of Russia, then that should be settled peacefully, maybe with a plebiscite or something. But definitely not with an invasion. But, I am not a Russian. The actions of the Russian military do not have any immediate bearing my life. I am an American citizen. The choices the US government makes do have an immediate bearing on my life. Right now, my government is choosing to spend American resources to send weapons to another country with the full knowledge that they will end up in the hands of nazi war criminals. I am completely opposed to that. And I hope that I am not the only American who feels that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:The last time the Baltics were independent prior to 1991 they were subsequently absorbed into the USSR after having been absorbed into the Russian Empire before that. Those countries have a very legitimate reason to want protection from Russia. I agree! HonorableTB posted:And you're misinterpreting what I said. I said that nothing would be an existential threat to RUSSIA. Not that RUSSIA wouldn't be an existential threat to its NEIGHBORS. No, I don't think I am. Certainly not trying to misrepresent what you said. It seemed like "Russia has nukes, they shouldn't have to worry about their neighbors." Is that right? If that logic is true, why did the U.S., the U.K., and France--which also all have nukes--feel the need to extend their security umbrella to cover the Baltics? Joining NATO is a two-way street. I 100% understand why the Baltics wanted in, and believe them justified in that desire. I also know why the rest of NATO wanted them in, and it wasn't "democracy" or whatever. It's hegemony and a land border on Russia. That is not justified.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:36
|
|
|
Shes Not Impressed posted:What is it with you and these thought terminating cliches? Interesting. What do you think a thought terminating cliche is?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:I'm not concerned about them attacking Russia, I'm concerned about them entering Ukraine, either preventatively or in response to Russia entering Ukraine, which is something one might do with forces stationed in Poland. The US is keeping their dick out. They have no way to even slow down a force concentration of this magnitude without killing so many flagged Russian military that it'd trigger World War 3. And even if it didn't escalate that far, it'd nevertheless inevitably result in thousands of US are troops casualties that Biden most definitely doesn't want on him in the lead-up to the midterms. On the contrary, they're bending over backwards to avoid an escalation chain. https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1491914139505242113 Smartest words his decaying grey matter has articulated in the past 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:38
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:There was a misunderstanding in the previous thread that seems to be continuing in this one, and it would be for the best to nip it in the bud right now. One can oppose American arm shipments to Ukraine without believing that Putin is really good and should immediately invade Ukraine who would deserve it for being bad. To be honest, I think that should be obvious and it seems less like a misunderstanding and more like intentional disingenuousness on the people making the mistake. But I don't want to assume bad faith on the part of others so I will make a good faith attempt to clear up the issue. So you're against a Russian invasion, but you're also against actually doing anything about it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:38
|
|
|
Can someone give me a run down on what evidence there is that Russia even invaded the Donbass?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:38
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:it's actually an interesting question. War on the Rocks has a good retrospective on the Baltics and their path to NATO membership that makes the case that their entry was not something done casually or thoughtlessly. instead, the enlargement was something that was only agreed to after much internal debate and after the baltic states aggressively worked to demonstrate that they could "share the burden" and their democratic reforms wouldn't immediately collapse. Not to mention that in 2000 Putin was on board with Russia straight up joining NATO. Now that's a missed opportunity for NATO. They should have accepted Russia before Baltics and this whole thing could be avoided.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:39
|
|
|
TipTow posted:I also know why the rest of NATO wanted them in, and it wasn't "democracy" or whatever. It's hegemony and a land border on Russia. That is not justified. Well tell then what you know. What is this nefarious plan that Nato had desiring a land border with Russia? Give evidence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:40
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:The US is keeping their dick out. I don't understand how you can say we are avoiding escalation while we are actively arming one side. We are trying to keep our own troops out, sure, but that's different from avoiding escalation. You can even say that it's good that we're arming one side, we should be giving Ukraine weapons with which they can defend themselves. But that is still not avoiding escalation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:40
|
|
|
TipTow posted:I agree! Ahh I see. I admit, I don't understand the deeper reasons why the Baltics wanted in beyond "Russia refuses to let us be independent without the threat of significant force", so I will yield the second point on the grounds that I'm not qualified to debate that specific topic until I research it more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:42
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:So you're against a Russian invasion, but you're also against actually doing anything about it? Basically yeah. The idea that America has to always "do something" in response to bad things or potential bad things in other countries has been one of the most destructive urges in recent history.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:44
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Well tell then what you know. What is this nefarious plan that Nato had desiring a land border with Russia? Give evidence. Would you like to actually discuss this and not post like a petty dick? Gripweed made a good point about there being a lot of nuance to what's going on right now and people misinterpreting positions and thoughts, intentionally or no. And if you don't think there's a lot of nuance, then fine, nothing to discuss, go back to the EE chat thread. Y'all got what you wanted anyway, don't know why you're trying to start poo poo in the containment thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:Basically yeah. The idea that America has to always "do something" in response to bad things or potential bad things in other countries has been one of the most destructive urges in recent history. That's an interesting kind of opposition. It reminds me of a libertrarian saying 'i'm opposed to poverty, but doing anything about it would be tyranny'
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Red and Black posted:Can someone give me a run down on what evidence there is that Russia even invaded the Donbass? https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/11/13/136-brigade-in-donbass/ https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2017/04/02/tankspotting-t-90as-donbass/ There's also the problem of the actual "Councils" for the areas. None of them involve the actual insurgents. Nearly every one is composed of Russian members. There's also the Wagner mercenary groups who are also composed of a lot of out-and-out Nazis. Gripweed posted:Basically yeah. The idea that America has to always "do something" in response to bad things or potential bad things in other countries has been one of the most destructive urges in recent history. But other than evacuating and telling people to leave? Are we doing anything? CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 21:47 on Feb 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I don't understand how you can say we are avoiding escalation while we are actively arming one side. We are trying to keep our own troops out, sure, but that's different from avoiding escalation. Escalation in this context means a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia. NATO will nevertheless happily cheer for Ukraine, sell them weapons, provide token aid, offer juicy defense contracts to rebuild their military after its annihilated, and sound the war drums because they don't give a single poo poo about Ukrainians and are hoping Russia bleeds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Red and Black posted:Can someone give me a run down on what evidence there is that Russia even invaded the Donbass? Here's a good video from back in the day. https://video.vice.com/alps/video/selfie-soldiers-russia-checks-into-ukraine/55ba5014018008e821c71e52
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:46
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/11/13/136-brigade-in-donbass/ Paladinus posted:Here's a good video from back in the day. Thank you
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:47
|
|
|
Red and Black posted:Can someone give me a run down on what evidence there is that Russia even invaded the Donbass? https://www.bellingcat.com/category/resources/case-studies/?fwp_tags=russia%2Cukraine
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:49
|
|
|
Red and Black posted:Can someone give me a run down on what evidence there is that Russia even invaded the Donbass? If you go down to the section on "Russian Involvement" there are a lot of sources cited that you can review.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Escalation in this context means a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia. But again, remind me: who is invading?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:51
|
|
|
TipTow posted:I think that's a naieve view of (at least) the U.S.' intentions. Security umbrellas aren't free, and I very seriously doubt that Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia would be significant contributors to the alliance should the time come. Baltics are fulfilling their obligations, including 2% expenditure. Which cannot be said for the majority of NATO members.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:52
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:That's an interesting kind of opposition. It reminds me of a libertrarian saying 'i'm opposed to poverty, but doing anything about it would be tyranny' OK. I know you're trying to make my position look bad by comparing it do a completely unrelated bad position, but you're not going to trick me into saying that yes actually the US should arm nazi war criminals in Ukraine. CommieGIR posted:But other than evacuating and telling people to leave? Are we doing anything? Aren't we sending "lethal aid" to Ukraine?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:52
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:But again, remind me: who is invading? Sinteres posted:I'll admit that I've fallen short of this before, but at least under the current D&D guidelines my understanding is that we're meant to engage with each other's arguments, not what we imagine to be in their heads.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:52
|
|
|
Red and Black posted:Can someone give me a run down on what evidence there is that Russia even invaded the Donbass? This guy's the one who dragged Russia into the Donbass war, if you believe him: https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2014/11/21/russias-igor-strelkov-i-am-responsible-for-war-in-eastern-ukraine-a41598 https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1491120509299347461 Flavahbeast fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Feb 14, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:54
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Baltics are fulfilling their obligations, including 2% expenditure. Which cannot be said for the majority of NATO members. And how big are their government budgets? Even if they're fulfilling their treaty obligations (and I have no doubt they are), that still leaves me wondering: what could these countries meaningfully contribute to a hot war involving NATO? Each of the Baltic nations are smaller than the one (1) state I live in, which is ranked 28th out of the 50 in population. These countries are tiny and are not, nor ever will be, big contributors to NATO's military capabilities.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:That's an interesting kind of opposition. It reminds me of a libertrarian saying 'i'm opposed to poverty, but doing anything about it would be tyranny' I'm not sure how it's interesting. The vast majority of times the United States has made any kind of military intervention in the last 70 years, it's ended up making the world worse off for it. I think the only one I wouldn't feel comfortable arguing about is Bosnia. The idea that the US sticking its dick in Ukraine would actually make things go better for Ukraine and the rest of the world than not has to fight upstream against all of that history, and particularly, the horrifying last 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 21:59
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:OK. I know you're trying to make my position look bad by comparing it do a completely unrelated bad position, but you're not going to trick me into saying that yes actually the US should arm nazi war criminals in Ukraine. Are you sure Azov specifically get American weapons? I am legitimately not sure if it's the case, considering there was a push the US State Department to designate Azov a foreign terrorist organisation. Would it be fine if America only gave weapons to be used by non-nazi military units?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 19:31 |
|
|
Paladinus posted:Are you sure Azov specifically get American weapons? I am legitimately not sure if it's the case, considering there was a push the US State Department to designate Azov a foreign terrorist organisation. Would it be fine if America only gave weapons to be used by non-nazi military units? They did until 2018 when the Pentagon stopped succeeding in getting Congress to strip out a provision in aid to Ukraine that made is so Azov Battalion wouldn't get it. If that was something the US was officially willing to overlook until 2018, I don't think it's super implausible that something might still trickle down today, whether through less official channels or corruption on Ukraine's end, but I can't prove it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2022 22:00
|
|
