|
How are u posted:Do you think the United States and/or NATO are willing to or interested in invading Russia today? That's an interesting question. I was told in the other thread that Poland, the Baltics, et al. were interested in joining NATO due to a history of Russian aggression against them. Totally valid point. If that logic holds true, then, why wouldn't Russia have viewed the expansion of NATO into those countries in the aughts--well before Georgia, Donbas, or the current crisis, when Russia showed no signs of revanchism--as anything but aggressive, considering their proximity to Russia? Specifically the Baltics. Why do some countries get to react to historical animosity and others don't? 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?
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
HonorableTB posted:All of the Russian bluster about NATO security concerns is a moot point because Russia, as a nuclear armed state with ICBMs and SLBMs, is not, and will not, find itself in a situation where they are facing an existential threat. They know this. America knows this. NATO knows this, and Ukraine knows it too. 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.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Might be because if you don't join NATO, Russia has a habit of invading, pulling a color revolution, or whatever is the flavor of the day for Putin. Mysteriously, very few cases where NATO does the same. Can you cite an example of this happening prior to the Baltics' ascension?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:24
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:It is not really complicated guys..everyone is loving bad, and innocent people always suffer due to it. I agree 100%. But there's a cadre of people that become apoplectic at the insinuation there aren't "good guys" in this crisis. It's just "bad guys" and victims.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:27
|
|
|
How are u posted:If a democracy wants to join NATO and the existing members agree, why shouldn't they be allowed? It is a defensive alliance. More nations joining together in a defensive alliance seems like a good thing, in and of itself. It's only a bad thing for nations that are interested in conquest, who might be thwarted by a defensive alliance of nations that they would otherwise be interested in conquering. 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.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
Fair enough, thank you.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 21:29
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:I’m very interested to see nuanced evidence of NATO pursuing having a land border with Russia in the Baltics. Here, let me dig up all the classified docs from the State Department and DoD I have access to discussing this  You tell me, then: what did the U.S. et al gain from adding the Baltics to their security umbrella? It's not the 2% military spending on their puny budgets.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:07
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:If you’re dissatisfied with our membership terms, ask more or kick us out. We’re doing everything that is being asked of us, and we were not shy to kill our citizens for your sake in Iraq and elsewhere. You are getting very, very weirdly personal about this. And besides, as I've stated multiple times, it's not about the Baltics' military capabilities. They don't exist. My government (not me, just lmao) is not concerned at all at what the Baltics bring to the table other than Russian containment. But hey, I'll be sure to write my Members of Congress demanding the expulsion of Latvia from NATO. I have total agency over my government, they'll listen to me.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Let us assume that NATO is inviting nations bordering Russia into their alliance for this nefarious purpose of getting a securing a land border with them. Why should Russia be allowed to us military force and imperial subjugation to remove their sovereignty as a means to prevent this? They shouldn't. Sanguinia posted:Are you contending this recruitment effort is a prelude to an invasion of Russia and this is a pre-emptive strike? The land border is a potential resource in the event of a war, yes. cinci zoo sniper posted:I apologise for having the audacity to inquire if there’s any whatsoever basis to your claims that seemingly were presented as facts. Where are the demands to see proof that adding the Baltics was all about peace, freedom, and democracy? I'd like to see that evidence. cinci zoo sniper posted:I’m have no clue why you feel that I’m taking this personally. Propriety of our contributions to NATO is trivially verifiable. cinci zoo sniper posted:If you’re dissatisfied with our membership terms, ask more or kick us out. We’re doing everything that is being asked of us, and we were not shy to kill our citizens for your sake in Iraq and elsewhere. And don't give me any bullshit about a "royal" you. Unless you believe all us Americans are a monolith or operate with some kind of hive mind.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:24
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:It's as if if you assume that NATO is a nefarious selfish US hegemony project then it makes no sense at all to bring in the Baltic states, but if it is a defensive alliance of liberal democracies born out of the repeated experience of the 20th century that non-aligned democracies that do not take defence seriously find themselves prey to authoritarian neighbours then it makes a lot more sense. I mean, other than the loaded language, this seemed like a good-faith effort at trying to bridge the understanding gap. I do believe NATO to be an arm of U.S. (and by extension French and British at least) hegemony. That in no way excuses Putin's actions right now, though it certainly does help to inform why he's acting the way he is. More informative than "Putin lusts for Ukrainian blood."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:28
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:You can demand that evidence from people claiming that Baltics were admitted to NATO on altruistic, moral grounds. So you believe I have the unilateral ability to kick out the Baltics?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:31
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:If you’re dissatisfied with our membership terms, ask more or kick us out. We’re doing everything that is being asked of us, and we were not shy to kill our citizens for your sake in Iraq and elsewhere. cinci zoo sniper posted:I think I was rather clearly talking to you in those posts. TipTow posted:So you believe I have the unilateral ability to kick out the Baltics? cinci zoo sniper posted:Of course I do, that’s how English language works.  By the way, get absolutely hosed at the insinuation that anybody died in Iraq for my sake.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 22:41
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:If someone tells me they lost a dad in Iraq I’ll let them know that it was for the lulz, since America didn’t request assistance. Now, you may argue that NATO and US are different things, but that would contradict your previous posts here. That doesn't contradict my post at all. NATO isn't the only security alliance the U.S. is involved in.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Either way, time to wrap up the chat about Latvian membership in NATO. This is Ukraine-Russia war thread, not NATO in Europe thread. gently caress you, you're not the idiot king of this thread. This is how you've dealt with people disagreeing with you for weeks, you try to compartmentalize their argument into something technically verboten ("Americaposting," etc.) and you don't get to do that here. Discussion of NATO is absolutely relevant to this topic. You managed to chase out all the Americans posting wrongthink in the (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2022 23:27
|
|
|
TheBuilder posted:West can afford it. Meanwhile Russians continue to live in poverty on levels that don't make sense for a nation with such resources Russia or the West? You decide!    
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 16:34
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:There's poverty in the US, therefore all countries are equally poor, QED You can make up whatever bullshit strawmans you like. Raskolnikov expressed displeasure at the money the U.S. has been and will be spending on this, TheBuilder said "the West can afford it" and tried to buttress that position by juxtapositioning Russian poverty, and I was pointing out that poverty exists in "the West," too, which is why some Westerners may be unhappy about their government spending money on more war.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2022 16:42
|
|
|
BoldFace posted:Very convenient for Zelensky to leave the country tomorrow for some conference. It's an annual security conference.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2022 21:42
|
|
|
I've been reasonably confident, though not totally sure, that war is likely for probably a week or so now. But the Biden administration has certainly discredited itself with the incessantly changing timetable for invasion. Beyond why it's wise to treat anything coming out of Washington with immediate skepticism, the way Joe has handled this adds yet another layer of doubt to anything the American foreign policy apparatus has to say.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2022 03:35
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:How has the time table changed? Last week the said the invasion was coming "next week" and now they're claiming it's coming in the next few days. Sure, they could still be wrong but there's no way you know that beyond a hunch. It's been "imminent" and "a few days" for several days. I understand fog of war and all but with the confidence they've been trying to project it still hasn't happened yet and the longer it doesn't the worse they look. Again, I do think war is likely. I'm talking how the U.S. administration appears in all this, which is to say fairly incredible. Crosby B. Alfred posted:And the whole point of this is calling out Putin ahead of time to make him look awful if he does an invasion. The administration doesn't care if they're wrong because they'd rather be wrong about an invasion than for one to actually occur. I strongly disagree that the administration doesn't care if they're wrong. The administration looks utterly bumbling and incompetent on all fronts. Bungling this crisis in any way is going to be yet another loss for Biden, and frankly it looks like it's going to be bungled one way or another at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2022 03:56
|
|
|
Rodiel posted:Russians are humans to, they have the same wants and needs as you. Stop this racist poo poo for real, its making the situation worse. I'm not inclined to be generous to that particular poster but literally nothing they said was racist. They're clearly referring to Putin and other Russian powers-that-be, not all Russians when they use the word "freaks."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Wistful of Dollars posted:Yeah CZS, why did *you* join NATO I mean, it's just meeting tit-for-tat. CZS pulled the exact same poo poo with me. cinci zoo sniper posted:If you’re dissatisfied with our membership terms, ask more or kick us out. We’re doing everything that is being asked of us, and we were not shy to kill our citizens for your sake in Iraq and elsewhere. TipTow posted:So you believe I have the unilateral ability to kick out the Baltics? cinci zoo sniper posted:Of course I do, that’s how English language works. If it's good enough for the ex post facto thread IK should be good for anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Are these missiles in Ukraine? He’s ostensibly trying to prevent missiles from being stationed in Ukraine. Lol you ninja edited your post to make it more hostile. Great loving debate and discussion thread we got here
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2022 19:28
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:What missiles? The missiles that could be stationed in Ukraine were it to join NATO? Rodiel posted:there are missiles in Turkey and Germany at least. do you no nothing about the cold war?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2022 19:31
|
|
|
snip
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2022 00:13
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Since when is Putin anti-communist? Didn't he famously say the collapse of the USSR was one of the great tragedies of history? He specifically said it was a geopolitical disaster, which it absolutely was for the imperial core.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2022 01:36
|
|
|
khwarezm posted:I'm reading this and I'm curious about the oddly evasive Chinese reaction, do you think they are getting a bit browned off at how far the Russians are going with all of this? I can't see why they'd be happy about it, other than as a probe for a potential Western response to an attempt to reclaim Taiwan. It seems probable that this will cause economic and possibly even some political instability in Russia in the short- to medium term, and they already have one shaky regime with a bad relationship with the West and nukes on their border.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2022 02:53
|
|
|
theghostpt posted:I was thinking the same, there's no way this is going to get any attention in Russia right? The Internet exists in Russia
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2022 00:33
|
|
|
MikeC posted:Nope, why would you say so? CZS has a tendency to twist any statement grounded in a realist perspective into some kind of Russia/Putin apologism. To be fair, they aren't the only one in this thread. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2022 00:56
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Your guess is as good as ours. Is Vice Chair of Senate Intelligence Committee someone to talk about intelligence on Russian plans with knowledge? Yes, he would be. But also, eke out posted:it's exactly like Marco Rubio -- a tryhard little hawk desperate to look strong -- to immediately be the first to blab what they were briefed on so he can get the most attention
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2022 03:46
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:I don't know what the administrative process would be, but at least one congressperson is calling for it Yeah Kinzinger is a lame duck and a GOP pariah. He has absolutely zero clout. He gets to talk on TV a lot because he's a Republican who voted for Trump's second impeachment.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 17:13
|
|
|
BIG FLUFFY DOG posted:former child star of Silver Spoons, lead of Arrested development, has a fairly successful career now as a comic movie actor. was the voice of the fox in zootopia. hes in ozark too. hes p talented actually, not a lot of good straight men in comedy nowadays and honestly its a harder role than the clown. Is comedy suffering from a dearth of straight men or something? Kinda weird thing to write
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2022 17:18
|
|
|
Majorian posted:They mean the "straight man" stock character. (unless that was Nope, whoosh on me. Thanks, and apologies to BIG FLUFFY DOG.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2022 17:21
|
|
in which case, whoosh!)
|
Shes Not Impressed posted:So what? Clancychat is verbotten here for a reason. Pointing out Russia has nukes is not "Clancychat" and any analysis of Russian foreign policy (or the foreign policy of any country with nukes) that doesn't take their deterrence into account is going to be bad analysis. pippy posted:So does everyone else. Pray tell, who is "everyone"? NO gently caress YOU DAD posted:That they absolutely will not use. Nobody is going to end the world over Ukraine. This is almost certainly (hopefully!) true, but flippantly handwaving away nukes as if they don't matter seems egregiously myopic.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2022 22:22
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Bringing them up implies you think they'll be used, which is straight Clancychat. No one's going to use them, so they're irrelevant. If they're so irrelevant why doesn't every single country with a stockpile disarm? They cost money to maintain and secure.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2022 22:31
|
|
|
slowdave posted:The idea of not making them relevant Eric Cantonese posted:Because direct military assistance will make using nukes an option and, therefore, relevant. TulliusCicero posted:Besides the possible end of all human life on Earth, yeah nukes are irrelevant So just to be clear here, nukes are relevant because they inform the actions of the states involved in this conflict (i.e., no direct military involvement by NATO). NO gently caress YOU DAD posted:To be less flippant, this is the entire point of MAD. If Russia fired nukes at NATO, NATO would have their own nukes in the air before Russia's even cleared Russian airspace, and vice versa. No argument from me at all--I agree 100%. I'm not clutching my pearls over nuclear armageddon. I just saw someone attempting to backseat moderate using what I take to be extremely flawed logic and rather than smash the report button tried to engage in some discussion about it. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2022 22:59
|
|
|
What are people's thoughts on the medium-term future of the conflict? Are we looking at a WWI style conflict with dug-in positions with no real hope for changing the lines in any meaningful sense and just bleeding both sides out or will Russia eventually face up to the fact that conquest is out of reach (minus extreme poo poo like tactical nukes or whatever) and find some kind of offramp to this catastrophe?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 19:15 |
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:It's not really Russia as a whole that needs to face facts, it's Putin. I appreciate the other response to my question, but this pedantry is pointless. It's quite common jargon to refer to states by the name of the country they govern.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 03:50
|
|