re: Exactly how did Zelensky start his war with Russia?

quote:

---

The "risks" were relatively incomprehensible in terms of the post-Cold War world.

---

The only reason they were "incomprehensible" is because a cacophony of propaganda drowned them out, and a horrid dearth of consequence discussion resulted.

Putin and Russia had made their concerns about Ukraine and Georgia well-known since 2008. They were crystal clear.

Now you might not agree with them, but your agreement is beyond irrelevant.

To say the concerns were "incomprehensible" is basically to say, either Russian concerns received no public hearing, or they were ignored. Just frankly as the Russian nuclear threat is being ignored here.

quote:

---

All states in the former USSR sphere of influence (except maybe Malta)

---

... and none of which were singled out like Ukraine/Georgia from the get-go as red lines not to be crossed.

quote:

---

The only reason they were "incomprehensible" is because a cacophony of propaganda drowned them out,

---

Horrible propaganda claiming rogue states like Russia wouldn't invade without actual provocation within the borders of Russia?

quote:

---

To say the concerns were "incomprehensible" is basically to say, either Russian concerns received no public hearing, or they were ignored.

---

No. The risk of an invasion was incomprehensible to modern society, especially for no rational reason or aggression within the borders of Rusia.

quote:

---

. and none of which were singled out like Ukraine/Georgia from the get-go as red lines not to be crossed.

---

For EU membership?

Go back to what we're discussing (with your response about propaganda)

quote:

---

EU integration was EXTREMELY popular

---

We aren't talking NATO

It’s clear that Putin has been planning this for many years, to be conducted in stages. It was inevitable that he would invade. Because in his mind, Russia has the right to claim Ukraine for themselves.

So getting Trump to blame Zelensky for it is quite convenient.

quote:

---

AGGIES

---

Ms. Nuland appreciates your carrying water for her.

quote:

---

especially for no rational reason or aggression within the borders of Rusia.

---

You are editorializing.

(1) The entire Russian body politic holds that NATO to Georgia and/or Ukraine means war. Your pining about Russian rationale notwithstanding, the Russian position was and is crystal clear. There was nothing incomprehensible about it.

(2) For years prior to 2010 POR victories, Ukraine treated Russian speakers in the Eastern Oblasts horribly. It was a driving factor in the 2010 election. It's also why civil war broke out there with the western backed coup d'état overthrowing their 'favorite son' President. Subsequently various phony Minsk Agreements were supposedly protective of Ukraine's Russian speaking population in the east. However Ukraine was never held to those agreements, because the agreement's intent was never actually to protect Russian speakers in the first place. Rather they were intended to duplicitously bide time, dissuading Russian invasion, so Ukraine could ramp up its military to better deal with invasion when it eventually did occur.

quote:

---

We aren't talking NATO

---

Yes, we are talking NATO, not the EU, because we are discussing Russo basis for the invasions

The EU issue did not mean squat in terms of invasions in either 2014 or 2022.

I presume you know this, but Russian trade retaliation for Ukraine switching deals to the EU was going to massively impact Ukraine to the tune of around $160B over the first 3yrs. Yanukovych sought financial compensation from the EU to offset those losses. The EU refused. At the same time, the EU demanded release Yulia Tymoshenko from prison following multiple convictions for political corruption and bribery. Yanukovych refused. As a result the EU, not Yanukovych, broke off talks. The EU accused Kiev of engaging in a "bidding war" between Brussels and Moscow, which ironically was exactly what the EU was attempting itself.

The EU deal was never going to result in invasion though, any more than our current trade transactions would be the cause for a US invasion of Canada or Mexico. The sole importance of the EU issue was its use to spur the unconstitutional overthrow of Yanukovych. It was that illegal overthrow, not the EU deal, which triggered Russia's 2014 invasion.

quote:

---

As that's what started the aggression in 2013.

---

I just laid out, the Russian ""aggression"" in terms of Ukraine moving away from Russia to the EU, was ENTIRELY ECONOMIC. Your conflation of that fact with Russian military actions is wrongheaded, to be polite.

Where in the world is a single quote by a Russian leader, much less Putin, saying Ukraine to the EU would mean war?

quote:

---

where even those eastern oblasts supported EU integration

---

The EU broke off those talks

quote:

---

Crimea would like to have a word with you

---

I feel like I'm dealing with Spidy debate here, SFP.

Crimea happened because the West audaciously underwrote and aided a coup d'état against Viktor Yanukovych, a democratically elected head of state in a neighboring country. Yanukovych was undoubtedly more aligned with Russian interests than his installed replacements would be. After years of Ukraine playing footsie with NATO, Russia was taking no chances of ceding its entire Soviet Era Black Sea Naval base presence to NATO. Plus, your EU whataboutisms aside, Crimeans all but threw a parade for the Russo "invaders" as they arrived. Russian speakers in the Eastern Oblasts would have absolutely done the same, EU affiliation be damned.

quote:

---

What if, and I know this may be shocking, the same Parliament that approved EU integration at over 90% in 2013 was upset with the President who lied to them and unilaterally and without Parliamentary approval, rejected EU integration

---

I know this may be shocking, but the Ukraiian President DID NOT REJECT EU INTEGRATION. The EU did that.