Russia, US, Ukraine, and the Future

[PointOfViewGun]

I have yet to hear a proper argument on how Russia was provoked for this war. The entire conflict started with the toppling of the Russian puppet in heading the Ukrainian government. Was Russia provoked to invade an other country because it was not allowed to keep its puppet in charge?

[Sar1n]

I have yet to hear a proper argument on how Russia was provoked for this war. The entire conflict started with the toppling of the Russian puppet in heading the Ukrainian government. Was Russia provoked to invade an other country because it was not allowed to keep its puppet in charge?

Because there aren't any. Such arguments presuppose that Russia has some kind of right to interfere with Ukrainian internal affairs, restrict its sovereignty and keep it as a vassal against wishes of the country's population.

It has not. And Maidan or intent to apply for NATO membership were internal Ukrainian affairs to which it was entitled as sovereign country.

[conon394]

I have yet to hear a proper argument on how Russia was provoked for this war. The entire conflict started with the toppling of the Russian puppet in heading the Ukrainian government. Was Russia provoked to invade an other country because it was not allowed to keep its puppet in charge?

What its clear Russia is a great Power. Russia essentially has the inalienable right to dominate anything that was part of USSR or part of the Warsaw pact - that all are clearly part of the near abroad handed down by god to Stalin err or Catharine the Great or whomever is sitting in Moscow now. So you see even if they slip away briefly they have no right to make their own choices in any meaningful way as so as moscow desires them not to.

[Kyriakos]

Not very different from the Monroe doctrine. It's just that no european side managed to ally with Mexico. We saw what happened when the USSR propped up Cuba.
In the end, this is the end of the interwar period, only question is when the world war will happen. If nukes weren't an issue, it'd have already happened.

[Stario]

I would also argue there is no question that Ukraine has already lost. Even if they were to push Russia out of the Crimea (which is extremely unlikely) they will still be in ruins. But the US, well the US might still win indeed, on some level or other. In that case it will all end well, another win for the good guys, in their Washington ivory towers toasting to the Ukrainians that died for their victory while counting their dollars.

Pretty much this. Murica will somehow see itself as the victor. But Ukraine is already doomed (just too many here so brainwashed by the MSM propaganda they don't see it yet).
I wonder how many gold bars will Washington steal from Ukraine (like they did from Afghanistan), before they bail...

[Cyclops]

First up, the Russians are back, has Putin won?

Not very different from the Monroe doctrine. It's just that no european side managed to ally with Mexico. We saw what happened when the USSR propped up Cuba.
In the end, this is the end of the interwar period, only question is when the world war will happen. If nukes weren't an issue, it'd have already happened.

Putin threatened any interference would provoke immediate retaliation since day 1 of this farce: the US, Poland and UK have merrily ignored that empty thread with zero consequences, and matched Russian escalation with massively escalated support: still no nukes, not even when bases hundreds of Kms inside Russia were torched.

No red lines were crossed to start the war, the Russian brigand state doesn't seem to function well without regular raids, and Beijing seems to have at least permitted if not directed this one.

It's not "the end of the interwar period" unless China says so. They have wisely avoided war with the US since Korea froze.

I think Putin is a stick China has used to poke the Eagle. The stick is being chewed. It's looking disposable.

[Alastor]

Not very different from the Monroe doctrine. It's just that no european side managed to ally with Mexico. We saw what happened when the USSR propped up Cuba.
In the end, this is the end of the interwar period, only question is when the world war will happen. If nukes weren't an issue, it'd have already happened.

Wait until China builds a base in Mexico. After the balloon hysteria, it's rather clear how well that would go. The US mocking the idea of spheres of influence is quite rich though.

[Cyclops]

Wait until China builds a base in Mexico. After the balloon hysteria, it's rather clear how well that would go. The US mocking the idea of spheres of influence is quite rich though.

Power politics is pretty horrible. From a pragmatic pov spheres of influences are a matter between peers, or near peers. Russia is nowhere near a peer of the US.

It seems more and more clear this conflict is the US ****ing with Chinas sphere of influence by busting Russia's balls.

[mishkin]

I read some time ago that Putin had perceived that he was aging. Some plant trees and sponsor children, others buy red sports cars, others decide to bring the Soviet Union back to glory. So much talk and everything can be reduced to the fact that the dictator did not want to die without seeing himself become the architect of the revival of the russian empire. all the chaos that have occurred, all the deaths, all the possible consequences, due to this.

[Alastor]

Power politics is pretty horrible. From a pragmatic pov spheres of influences are a matter between peers, or near peers. Russia is nowhere near a peer of the US.

It seems more and more clear this conflict is the US ****ing with Chinas sphere of influence by busting Russia's balls.

And Russia doesn't claim anywhere near the sphere of influence the US does. I would argue in fact that this dismissive attitude towards Russia is what inflamed the situation more.

[mishkin]

And Russia doesn't claim anywhere near the sphere of influence the US does. I would argue in fact that this dismissive attitude towards Russia is what inflamed the situation more.

i invaded ukraine because they told me i couldn't do it?

[Alastor]

i invaded ukraine because they told me i couldn't do it?

Rather because their interests and concerns were not being taken into account, since they are not a peer or near-peer.

[PointOfViewGun]

You wouldn't cite "interests and concerns were not being taken into account" to justify an invasion for any other country. Why do it for Russia?

[Alastor]

You wouldn't cite "interests and concerns were not being taken into account" to justify an invasion for any other country. Why do it for Russia?

I have said repeatedly and very clearly that I don't consider the invasion justified. There is few things, if any, I would consider just in geopolitics anyway. All I'm doing is explaining why it happened, what provoked it.

[mishkin]

Rather because their interests and concerns were not being taken into account, since they are not a peer or near-peer.

any examples of these concerns? Was the Russian economy being sabotaged or something?

[Muizer]

I have said repeatedly and very clearly that I don't consider the invasion justified. There is few things, if any, I would consider just in geopolitics anyway. All I'm doing is explaining why it happened, what provoked it.

Well we can either talk about justifications for the actions of all actors involved (i.e. have a political discussion) or we can sit back and observe which action lead to which (a scientific discussion). What makes no sense is to question the justifications for the actions of one actor and settle for dispassionately observing the actions of another...... unless of course the former has agency and the latter is an automaton with predictable and pre-programmed responses.

Edit: that's not a criticism of you btw, but it's worth pointing out because this confusion has muddied the waters on more than one occasion already in this thread.

[Alastor]

any examples of these concerns? Was the Russian economy being sabotaged or something?

Putin has expressed a litany of those. Going from Bush's withdrawal from the ABM treaty, all the way to the recent outreach towards a Ukrainian NATO membership. There is no shortage of examples.

Putin's Munich speech offers some interesting insight here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_M...Vladimir_Putin

[mishkin]

And none of that justifies the military invasion of Ukraine. We all know that all that (the fear of NATO expansion for example) is rubbish.

[Cyclops]

You wouldn't cite "interests and concerns were not being taken into account" to justify an invasion for any other country. Why do it for Russia?

My country does when the US does because we are loyal allies. I hat eating **** sandwiches like that. In a perfect world the US would GTFO out of Korea and China could reabsorb Taiwan, but in a perfect world China wouldn't be brainwashing every single Uighur.

[Alastor]

And none of that justifies the military invasion of Ukraine. We all know that all that (the fear of NATO expansion for example) is rubbish.

Except Putin disagreed. Concerns that were ignored remember. As for whether this justifies the invasion, I refer you to:

I have said repeatedly and very clearly that I don't consider the invasion justified. There is few things, if any, I would consider just in geopolitics anyway. All I'm doing is explaining why it happened, what provoked it.