- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is Henry Kissinger's reason for Russian invasion of Ukraine wrong?
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:14 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:14 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
NATO expansion isn’t the reason Russia invaded Ukraine. It’s just what excuse they packaged the invasion as to their public.
Of course it is. It is hard to imagine why anyone is taking the Russian stance so earnestly. Their position is idiotic on its face, yet people repeat it without even thinking. Putin can't exactly say, 'hey this is a land grab because my foreign policy elites are scared of a land invasion from the Eastern European Plain, and thus I need to secure my western frontier using the Carpathian Mountains in order to limit the chances of an invasion.'
0
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:15 pm to GumboPot
NATO expansion is viewed by Russians as encirclement.
NATO expansion is actually about securing more military contracts for the American MIC.
People are dying in Ukraine over billion dollar contracts for military equipment.
NATO expansion is actually about securing more military contracts for the American MIC.
People are dying in Ukraine over billion dollar contracts for military equipment.
This post was edited on 9/28/22 at 1:16 pm
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:15 pm to kingbob
quote:
Because there’s an old saying “don’t give your enemy a club to hit you with.”
Even if you know you’re dealing with an antagonistic liar, you still try not to give them easy narratives to spin into the lies they want to tell.
What in the hell are you talking about?
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:16 pm to jp4lsu
quote:
Ukraine helped instigate this as well.
quote:
I'm not pro-Russian at all
Obviously. TOTALLY not pro-Russian. You're just spouting the weakest of the non-crazy, pro-Russian talking points.
quote:
You had Russians getting killed by Ukrainians for year in the pro Russian regions.
This is Putin's "annexation" strategy. He floods areas with ethnic Russians (and Russian Russians posing as such) and then instigates a perceived civil war. That way, when Russia intervenes, they're totally not invading a sovereign nation...just protecting ethnic Russians.
The fact that you typed this out as a serious defense of Putin is mind-numbing.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:16 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:
The irony is that the West, by the offensive realist viewpoint, acted appropriately with a nearly defeated but still belligerent adversary. That viewpoint would suggest to continue expanding while they are weakened in order to ensure they could not possibly mount an effective response when finally confronted.
Of course it was the correct choice.
The problem came at the end during the early to mid 2000’s when the West had an opportunity to start integrating Russia more into Europe so as to make them a partner rather than a belligerent. There were a couple years there where it looked pretty plausible that Russia and Turkey might join the EU and adopt the Euro. However, stupid politics, a lot of that coming from Putin himself, submarined any chances at that happening. Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008 was basically the death of any hopes of Russia becoming a partner in the European system rather than an opponent.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:17 pm to kingbob
I know that you understand the situation, but many here do not and actually believe that NATO is the aggressor here. Not that Russia was given the pretext on a platter, but that NATO is an actual aggressor.
That is who I’m really addressing.
You’re completely correct on the PR standpoint. I just see no value in pretending that Russia wouldn’t have fabricated a pretext for this action no matter what NATO did vis a vis Ukraine.
Zelensky was leading them toward the EU, and Putin was never going to allow that
That is who I’m really addressing.
You’re completely correct on the PR standpoint. I just see no value in pretending that Russia wouldn’t have fabricated a pretext for this action no matter what NATO did vis a vis Ukraine.
Zelensky was leading them toward the EU, and Putin was never going to allow that
This post was edited on 9/28/22 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:17 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
Got it. So now all Russia has to do is unilaterally annex territory, proclaim it Russian, then invade it to protect Russians.
Worked in Georgia and Crimea
quote:
The country whose territory was annexed by Russia has no right to attempt to prevent the annexation.
Ukraine is now the "aggressor", per Putin, because they're re-taking land they lost in the war.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:18 pm to GumboPot
quote:What is Finland’s status?
I thought its best role was something like Finland.
“Joining NATO,” as I recall.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:19 pm to AggieHank86
They are now, but they weren’t prior to the invasion.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:19 pm to kingbob
quote:
The problem came at the end during the early to mid 2000’s when the West had an opportunity to start integrating Russia more into Europe so as to make them a partner rather than a belligerent.
Man, things don't happen in a vacuum. What happened during that time period that made most of Europe treat Russia as a pariah, before 2008? Integration is a two-way street.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:19 pm to Ronaldo Burgundiaz
quote:
NATO expansion is actually about securing more military contracts for the American MIC.
Then we suck at it because most of the recent additions either make their own shite for the most part (Sweden and Finland) or can’t afford US weapons en masse (the smaller Central European and Balkan states).
This post was edited on 9/28/22 at 1:22 pm
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:19 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:The desperation in your propaganda is odd.
SlowFlowPro
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:21 pm to JJJimmyJimJames
quote:
The desperation in your propaganda is odd.
What propaganda?
That's literally what Russia did in Georgia and Crimea.
Do you HONESTLY believe that Russia didn't take over Crimea by proxy in 2014?
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:21 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
You’re completely correct on the PR standpoint.
There is no PR standpoint to be had. Russian paranoia is so great there is no amount of delicate handling that would satisfy them. They are just a bad-faith party. Treating them as though they were ever acting in good-faith is part of the problem.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:22 pm to crazy4lsu
Are there any nations that are “good faith parties” on the international stage? Russia is an especially bad actor, but they are far from unique.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:23 pm to crazy4lsu
Not willing to go that far. I reject that Russia simply “has” to be an enemy. Our interests are not inherently out of line with theirs, bad policy by everyone involved for 100 years has simply made it so.
W telling them to frick off in the early 2000’s when they floated NATO cooperation was a mistake.
W telling them to frick off in the early 2000’s when they floated NATO cooperation was a mistake.
This post was edited on 9/28/22 at 1:24 pm
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:25 pm to kingbob
quote:
Are there any nations that are “good faith parties” on the international stage?
Uh, yeah. There's a reason the world has become so connected and developed post-Cold War. Normalizing relationships and acting in good faith is the backbone of this new liberal world order.
Covid and Russia are threatening it. This is after major stressors were put in place by the Iraq War and then Syrian War a decade later.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:26 pm to kingbob
quote:
Are there any nations that are “good faith parties” on the international stage? Russia is an especially bad actor, but they are far from unique.
I don't think there is a situation in recent memory where a nation was this obviously acting in bad-faith as Russia was before the invasion. There is a difference between looking out for interests and what Russia did before the invasion. They could have shored up their security situation for several years and still chose to invade.
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:28 pm to sta4ever
quote:seems to be a lot you do not know
Lol. I didn’t realize it was aggressive for countries to determine their own fate, and what alliances they choose…
such as the millennia of experience that enemies dont install camp next door to geopolitical powers
not surprised you have no understanding; you dont seem to be too bright
Posted on 9/28/22 at 1:29 pm to crazy4lsu
quote:same lack of understanding that will get your kids killed
I don't think there is a situation in recent memory where a nation was this obviously acting in bad-faith as Russia was before the invasion. There is a difference between looking out for interests and what Russia did before the invasion. They could have shored up their security situation for several years and still chose to invade.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News