re: Ukrainian Troops Staying Classy: Trolling Dead Russian Soldier's Mother Via Facetime

quote:

---

quote:
you are a fricking idiot.
No, I'm simply literate and intellectually curious, which is apparently a differentiator in this instance.

---

I'm not going to call you an idiot but thats a take I think you need to elaborate on. Do you really think Putin saw NATO as threat and that invaded Crimea was a way to some how blunt that threat?

quote:

---

So you have no idea why the Ukrainians should have ever aligned themselves in any way with the Russians? but you expected them to not do what is in there interest and accept Russian influence?

---

Ukraine cut imports from Russia by about 2/3rds in 2014/15, and since then they've only imported ~30% of their pre-2014 numbers.

But the catalytic ember was not trade; it was always NATO. Russians view NATO as their enemy. The vast Russian politick views NATO that way. It is not a view in any way peculiar to Putin.

When NATO audaciously announced in 2008 that Georgia and Ukraine will become members, Mother Russia took the safety off her gun and fingered the trigger. When Obama and Soros orchestrated a pro-Western coup d'etat in Kiev, and simultaneously rekindled Ukraine-to-NATO discussions, Russia walked into Crimea rather than risk ceding Black Sea control to NATO. Russian ethnics in Donbas, hopeful they too could separate, brought on a Civil War.

Trump stepped in, and changed the NATO conversation from risk-filled and senseless expansion, to fiscal accountability of major partners. Putin wasn't threatened. Ukraine was okay ... except for Donbas separatists and the defacto Crimean concession.

Fast fwd to the rigged US election and elevation of PotatoBrain to the Oval Office. NATO dialogue was reinitiated with Ukraine, Biden deliberately leaked those convos to Putin, and Russia predictably attacked.

quote:

---

Crimea was a way to some how blunt that threat?

---

100%. He's matter-of-factly stated that. Russia would not cede its most important Soviet-era Naval bases, and resultant control of the Black Sea to NATO.

quote:

---

I understand perception is reality but I can't figure out how NATO could be perceived as a real military threat to the Russian homeland when they still have the power to wipe every NATO country off the planet with the push of a button.

---

It's not just the military threat of NATO. It's the cultural rot the West brings. And the Russians aren't wrong to be afraid of that.

quote:

---

You're comparing a religious cult that was murdering innocent people over a guy forced to fight in a war against invaders.

---

Ehhh, not so fast. The Muslims would say that the US foreign policy was to maintain them in a constant state of oppression and religious persecution so that Arab dictators could keep selling oil to the west. This is fairly equivalent to invasion.

quote:

---

I understand perception is reality but I can't figure out how

---

Right.
It takes us back to the rattlesnake analogy. A hiker means no threat to the snake, but the snake doesn’t know it, and so it strikes.

Putin expressed his concerns about NATO expansion just after assuming office. As a remedy he offered to have Russia join the alliance. NATO refused to consider it. Putin rightly took that as meaning NATO would never be an ally.

Things declined from there, and so you’re correct, perception is reality. The Entire Russian political establishment made its perception clear. We ignored it.

quote:

---

a junior partner

---

Just for a little perspective lest we come across as cavalier, that "junior partner" brings more nukes to the table than the rest of the entire world combined.

quote:

---

But not real military threat..no?

---

Is the hiker a real threat to the rattlesnake?

NATO is a MILITARY alliance.
It's not a bridge group, basketball league, or debate club.

NATO, a MILITARY alliance, proclaimed it would not consider Russia, a major military power, as an alliance partner. Why?

How should a post-Soviet, post-cold war Russia view that proclamation?

The Soviets were promised NATO would not expand eastward into ex-Warsaw Pact countries. NATO broke that promise. How should a post-Soviet, post-cold war Russia view that breach?

NATO's broken assurances severely undercut Russia's first democratically elected leader, Boris Yeltsin, who by all rights could have been a post-cold-war ally. That NATO action forced Yeltsin, out of political expediency, to appoint a Russian nationalist as his heir apparent.

Who was the Russian nationalist NATO's needless actions brought on? He was a gentleman named Vlad Putin. Starting to see a pattern?

Meanwhile, NATO announced Ukraine, one of the most corrupt countries on the planet, WOULD BECOME a member. If you don't see a message in that for Russia, I don't know what to tell you.

The Art of Diplomacy demands its players thoroughly understand one another's positions. War is the failure of diplomacy. NATO failed in the former. Is that a surprise given NATO is .... wait4it .... a MILITARY alliance.

quote:

---

Not really true. There have been several close points but Russia has never formally applied to NATO

---

Putin made a PUBLIC inquiry.
He discussed it with Clinton. He also discussed it with George Robertson who headed NATO through 2003. Putin made it clear he wanted Russia to be part of western Europe and NATO. The ball was in NATO's court. NATO fumbled it.

Well at least you're off the "NATO won't let them join!" thing.

What you're recalling was an informal discussion with Bill Clinton. Years later Putin asked NATO publicly why they weren't invited and NATO responded they had to apply. They never did.