US and NATO escalation of conflict with Russia is leading to war

[IndigoIdentity]

Gotta love it when people make claims about NATO "extending its borders" when those extensions have come from new member nations voluntarily joining it... Why doesn't Russia revive the Warsaw pact and get nations to join that, or are they afraid no one else will join if they can't compel nations like in the old days?

Well, the problem is not that the countries have joined it, simply that Russia sees this as a historical betrayal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Final_Settlement_with_Respect_to_Germany (see the section titled Eastward expansion of NATO)

Some further reading if interested: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ief-in-nato-betrayal-and-why-it-matters-today

 

[ShaunSA]

So has the war started yet?

 

[IndigoIdentity]

Putin rues Soviet collapse as demise of 'historical Russia'

President Vladimir Putin has lamented the collapse of the Soviet Union three decades ago as the demise of what he called "historical Russia" and said the economic crisis that followed was so bad he was forced to moonlight as a taxi driver.

www.reuters.com

Putin laments the lost borders of ''historical Russia'' as well as the millions of Russians ''cut off'' from Russia.

South Ossetia, Abkhazia, Transnistria, Crimea and the Donbas. Russia is slowly trying to claw back the borders of ''historical Russia''.

Perhaps I am missing your point here, but mine was simply that those minorities do exist, the threats against them do exist. The western bloc has on many occasions used this as a pretense for border incursions and even all out war.

You're saying that because those areas were once part of the soviet union that this is the sole reason Russia wants to have a war with Ukraine now, so as to reclaim some lost bits of land?

Personally I don't buy it buy it, isn't it great that we can actually have this discussion though.

 

[thestaggy]

Perhaps I am missing your point here, but mine was simply that those minorities do exist, the threats against them do exist. The western bloc has on many occasions used this as a pretense for border incursions and even all out war.

You're saying that because those areas were once part of the soviet union that this is the sole reason Russia wants to have a war with Ukraine now, so as to reclaim some lost bits of land?

Personally I don't buy it buy it, isn't it great that we can actually have this discussion though.

Of course there are Russian minorities across the former Soviet Republics, I'm not arguing that. What I am saying is this; Russia is using minorities - which they allege are threatened - as a disguise for their ambition to restore ''historical'' (Putin's word) Russian borders.

And if indeed these Russian minorities are being threatened, you don't think Russia's increasingly aggressive revanchism is playing a part? None of their neighbours feel safe. They have interfered in Georgia, they are in Moldova, the Baltics are spooked and then of course their well-documented involvement in Ukraine. Right now, any country with a significant Russian minority is at risk of having Russia destabilise them.

 

[Blu82]

So has the war started yet?

The next new moon is the 1st of February which makes it a prime candidate for military work.

 

[thestaggy]

Well, the problem is not that the countries have joined it, simply that Russia sees this as a historical betrayal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Final_Settlement_with_Respect_to_Germany (see the section titled Eastward expansion of NATO)

Some further reading if interested: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ief-in-nato-betrayal-and-why-it-matters-today

To be fair, your linked Wikipedia doesn't fully support your argument.

However, in a 2014 interview Gorbachev reversed himself by saying that the topic of "NATO expansion" as such was "not discussed at all", although he maintained that the decision to expand NATO into the east was a "violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990".

In 1997, NATO and Russia signed a treaty stating that each country had a sovereign right to seek alliances

So the only thing actually signed was Russia agreeing that countries on its border had the sovereign right to seek alliances. And that is what they are doing.

Sure NATO may have verbally misled Russia, but they didn't actually put it on paper that they would not expand.

 

[IndigoIdentity]

Of course there are Russian minorities across the former Soviet Republics, I'm not arguing that. What I am saying is this; Russia is using minorities - which they allege are threatened - as a disguise for their ambition to restore ''historical'' (Putin's word) Russian borders.

Well, that's the thing. They allege this because there is documented fact that supports the claim, i.e. indiscriminate shelling of populated areas within the separatist controlled region which has caused loss of life and destruction to civilian properties, etc. To my own understanding, both sides are at fault here as they are doing things that are generally not permissible during a war time situation but that does not mean that it simply doesn't exist.

If you read carefully the quoted parts of the article that you had linked, it actually says nothing about aspirations of Putin to restore these historically Russian areas to modern day Russia. Simply put, it was never something that he had said so I am unsure of why this is being used as a justification here when you say that this is being used as a guise for it.

I will quote the article on this:

"The Kremlin has said Russia has no plans to launch a fresh attack on Ukraine and that the West appears to have convinced itself of Moscow's aggressive intentions based on what it calls false Western media stories."

And if indeed these Russian minorities are being threatened, you don't think Russia's increasingly aggressive revanchism is playing a part?

Well, I clearly disagree on this one.

None of their neighbours feel safe.

Why would they, the West has been trumpeting war stories for so long now it's more than enough to leave them scared ***tless.

They have interfered in Georgia

Was it completely unjustified for them to have launched a peace keeping operation? Other countries have done similar things within countries that do not even share a border with them, when Russia does it then it's deemed as aggression.

they are in Moldova

They maintain relations with a break away region of Moldova, how is that any different from say, that of the USA in their support of Taiwan?

Right now, any country with a significant Russian minority is at risk of having Russia destabilise them.

What destablised Ukraine, and this is my own opinion, is their affection for ultra-nationalism with a mix of external interference by more than one external entity / country.

 

[IndigoIdentity]

To be fair, your linked Wikipedia doesn't fully support your argument.

In all fairness, it was not an argument to begin with. The author of the post that I had responded to had seemed as if they did not understand why this was a big deal.

I was simply trying to shed some light / insight into this. The big deal is historical in nature / relates to the Russian belief that they were betrayed by NATO.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Let’s Not Have a War

The American foreign policy establishment, chasing decades of failures, appears to be seriously considering the unthinkable in Ukraine

taibbi.substack.com

a good article by Matt Taibi who worked as a journalists in Russia just after the Soviet Union collapsed.

The American foreign policy establishment, chasing decades of failures, appears to be seriously considering the unthinkable in Ukraine

Joe Biden last week said the American response in Ukraine would be proportional to Vladimir Putin’s actions. “It depends,” the president posited, thoughts drifting like blobs in a lava lamp. “It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion…”

Alarms sounded all over Washington. The rip in the national political illusion was so severe, Republicans and Democrats were forced to come out agreeing, leaping into each other’s arms in panic. Secretary of State Tony Blinken, who increasingly looks like a man about to miss a historically important free throw, said of a potential Russian invasion, “We can make crystal clear the stark consequences of that choice.” Republican Senator Ted Cruz said Biden “shocked the world by giving Putin a green light to invade Ukraine.” The National Security Council issued a statement through Jen Psaki that any Russian move into Ukraine would be “met with a swift, severe, and united response.”

In a later press conference, Biden explained he had to cut things short because, “You guys will ask me all about Russia.” He appears days from pulling his pants down to show reporters the electrodes White House chief of staff Ron Klain has probably attached to his testicles by now.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Gotta love it when people make claims about NATO "extending its borders" when those extensions have come from new member nations voluntarily joining it... Why doesn't Russia revive the Warsaw pact and get nations to join that, or are they afraid no one else will join if they can't compel nations like in the old days?

first of all it was the USA that supported a coup d'état in ukraine in 2014 after Yanakovic decided to make a deal with Russia and not the EU. That "democraticly elected" government that was infiltrated by neo nazi forced were heavily funded by the national endowment for democracy, the US's main method of instigating regime change and tensions. It's not really voluntary if you first organise a coup d'état.

Secondly, I would like to see if that argument holds up if Mexico decides to join a military alliance with China or Russia.

France, which is the primary military power on the continent is also not going to allow Ukraine to join Nato as it would pose a threat to its own security.

The best deal that the Ukraine can get is to revive the Minhs Protocol that would guarantee its own security as well as settle the Dombas region dispute. The deal was agreed on by all the big nato members, the UN security council, Russia and the US.

it just need to be recalled from memory and implemented.

 

[Nicodeamus]

This is going to be a big issue in the French election as the country is quite divided on Russia. Lots of back and forth in the media.

 

[Cray]

first of all it was the USA that supported a coup d'état in ukraine in 2014 after Yanakovic decided to make a deal with Russia and not the EU. That "democraticly elected" government that was infiltrated by neo nazi forced were heavily funded by the national endowment for democracy, the US's main method of instigating regime change and tensions. It's not really voluntary if you first organise a coup d'état.

The current Ukrainian government was democratically elected, are they not allowed to make their own choice about their future?

 

[Nicodeamus]

The current Ukrainian government was democratically elected, are they not allowed to make their own choice about their future?

Again the counter example would be, would Mexico be allowed to join a military alliance with Russia? Would America enforce the Monroe doctrine if China starts putting military basis in South America,
unless you can honestly say yes so that question, then you're not serious.

France is not going to allow the "democratic will of the Ukraine" to take place, because it's a major security threat.


Then your definition of democratic and mine isn't exactly the same. The national endowment for democracy did help bring that government to power and instigate tensions in the region. It's just imperialism.

Inside America’s meddling machine: NED, the US-funded org interfering in elections around the globe
The NED’s first success was the defeat of the Sandinista government in Nicaragua’s 1990 elections, replacing it with the neoliberal party of Violeta Chamorro.

Since then, the NED’s advanced US interests in countless countries: it helped swing a Russian election for Boris Yeltsin in 1996, it drove a failed coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002, it orchestrated a successful one in Haiti in 2004, and another one in Ukraine in 2014, which paved the way for neo-Nazis to move into the mainstream.

Philip Agee, the late CIA whisteblower, described the work of the NED as a more sophisticated version of the old-fashioned covert operations that Langley used to engineer. “Nowadays, instead of having the CIA going around behind the scenes and trying to manipulate the process by inserting money here and giving instructions secretly and so forth, they have now a sidekick, which is this National Endowment for Democracy, NED.”

Inside America's meddling machine: NED, the US-funded org interfering in elections around the globe - The Grayzone

The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is a taxpayer-funded organization that has interfered in elections, mobilized coups, and orchestrated public relations campaigns against nations that resist Washington's agenda. By Max Blumenthal

thegrayzone.com

 

[Nicodeamus]

Why are Germany and France at odds with the Anglosphere over how to handle Russia?

Analysis: Differing views over Russia within Nato alliance resurface in Ukraine crisis

www.theguardian.com

Can the western alliance against Russia over its buildup of troops on the Ukrainian border hold together? It is a question that politicians and diplomats are increasingly grappling with amid fears that Germany and, to a lesser extent, France are in danger of dividing from the US and the UK, not only over how to respond to any future Russian act of aggression in Ukraine, but also in their assessment of the imminence of the threat.

Every effort is being made to minimise the differences within the Nato alliance, including through regular calls such as the one led by Joe Biden on Monday, but they may be impossible to avoid since they reflect not just different short-term assessments on intelligence, but a deep fissure going back decades about what Germany and France, as opposed to the Anglosphere, regard as the best way to handle Russia.


France, looking at the same intelligence provided by the CIA, does not see an imminent invasion, or a gathering of forces equipped to invade in the next three weeks – an assessment shared by the best Ukrainian defence analysts.

 

[thestaggy]

Well, that's the thing. They allege this because there is documented fact that supports the claim, i.e. indiscriminate shelling of populated areas within the separatist controlled region which has caused loss of life and destruction to civilian properties, etc. To my own understanding, both sides are at fault here as they are doing things that are generally not permissible during a war time situation but that does not mean that it simply doesn't exist.

If you read carefully the quoted parts of the article that you had linked, it actually says nothing about aspirations of Putin to restore these historically Russian areas to modern day Russia. Simply put, it was never something that he had said so I am unsure of why this is being used as a justification here when you say that this is being used as a guise for it.

I will quote the article on this:

"The Kremlin has said Russia has no plans to launch a fresh attack on Ukraine and that the West appears to have convinced itself of Moscow's aggressive intentions based on what it calls false Western media stories."

Well, I clearly disagree on this one.

Why would they, the West has been trumpeting war stories for so long now it's more than enough to leave them scared ***tless.

Was it completely unjustified for them to have launched a peace keeping operation? Other countries have done similar things within countries that do not even share a border with them, when Russia does it then it's deemed as aggression.

They maintain relations with a break away region of Moldova, how is that any different from say, that of the USA in their support of Taiwan?

What destablised Ukraine, and this is my own opinion, is their affection for ultra-nationalism with a mix of external interference by more than one external entity / country.

Okay. Russia are a great benevolent force in Eastern Europe.

 

[rvZA]

Russia threatens 'appropriate measures' if West's responses to demands aren't constructive​

Russia’s top diplomat on Wednesday promised to take appropriate measures if the West’s response to Moscow’s security demands is not found to be constructive.

The U.S. agreed with Russia that it would answer questions regarding NATO's military presence in the region. The Kremlin has accused the West of a military expansion that raises security concerns for Moscow, Reuters reported. The report said Ukraine had no objections to the U.S. responses.

"If we do not receive a constructive answer from the west on our security demands, Moscow will take appropriate measures," Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in a statement, Reuters reported.

Russia threatens 'appropriate measures' if West's responses to demands aren't constructive

Russia’s top diplomat on Wednesday promised to take appropriate measures if the West’s response to Moscow’s security demands is not found to be constructive.

www.foxnews.com

Bring it on Russia! Do not stand back to the West. You have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to take whatever you want.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Okay. Russia are a great benevolent force in Eastern Europe.

The counterfactual that you refuse to answer is, if Russia or China orchestrated a coup d'état in Mexico, would the US send it's troops to Texas?

 

[thestaggy]

The counterfactual that you refuse to answer is, if Russia or China orchestrated a coup d'état in Mexico, would the US send it's troops to Texas?

Yes, I know. Russia is minding its own business while the US/NATO aggressively encroaches on their borders.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Yes, I know. Russia is minding its own business while the US/NATO aggressively encroaches on their borders.

you're avoiding the question, it's elementary to understand the story.
The US did orchestrate a coup d'état in 2014 and bring a Neo Nazi infiltrated government to power. Do you condemn that ?

 

[Cray]

you're avoiding the question, it's elementary to understand the story.
The US did orchestrate a coup d'état in 2014 and bring a Neo Nazi infiltrated government to power. Do you condemn that ?

Ukraine had a presidential and parliamentary election in 2019, a new president was elected, and a new government was formed so why do you keep referring to the current government as being the same as the one in 2014? Or does that inconvenient fact not suit the narrative?