The *OFFICIAL* Russia Is About To Invade Ukraine Thread

[Gameface]

Maybe. I don't blame Biden alone (or much at all really under his tenure as president, but the U.S. and NATO pushed Russia to do this. This was decades in the making.

Does anyone recally everything going on in Ukraine in the past? It seems like the media is ignoring it.

Putin warned Bush in 2004 that if Ukraine joined NATO, there would be no Ukraine.

The U.S (through public and private funds) has poured millions to influence Ukraine to become a western democracy.

There is confirmed leaked data that the US influenced the coup/ouster of Ukraine's pro-Russian president in 2014 (may have happened anyway, but we influenced it), tried to influence who would be the replacement, and celebrated the successful coup (yes, there was evidently Russian influence too, but basically the former Pres backed out of a deal with the EU in exhange for a $15b agreement w Russia). Obama said they would continue to push for their entrance to NATO or the EU, despite Putin's continued warning that U.S./NATO influences on Russia's border would be a sign as a threat that would be responded to with force. Obama responded by saying we are no longer in a cold war, and there is no reason to act as such, and the U.S. will continue to push for western democracy in Ukraine. An idealistic approach, but somewhat naive if you think Russia and Putin will just stand by and let it happen.

Before this current war started, Putin again stated there would be no escalation if Ukraine agreed not to join NATO. Russia does not want Nato weapons on its border.

If Trump were still president, this likely would have still happened, as Putin has been around long enough to know U.S. interests can change every 4 years, so despite Trump's feelings on NATO, we'd still be here, and Trump would have likely escalated things to an even more dangerous level, as he lacks any tact or skills in diplomacy.

If we flip the script, and Putin spent years to influence Mexico and it's elections to be pro-communist and pro-Russia, and perhaps wanted to station pro-Russian weapons on Mexican soil, how would we respond? Most likely the way we did during the Cuban missle crisis. Threaten war unless there was an agreement to disarm.

Ukraine covers a lot of Russian border, and would leave them exposed if Ukraine joined NATO. Russians have even told Ukrainians their war is not with Ukraine, it is with the U.S. and NATO. I wish Putin was more diplomatic, but it is easy to see why he decided to attack.

I dislike Putin and hope for his quick demise, but western goverments definitely shoulder some blame.

We (along w Russia) also agreed as part of the Bangladesh Accords to protect Ukraine in exchange for nuclear disarmament. Russia essentially has said that western influence has changed Ukraine so much that it is not the same country therefore the agreement is void. Are we holding up our end of the promise?

It reminds me of the common western movie theme when a good guy comes to town and takes out a couple bad guys, but when the whole gang comes and punishes the town for retribution, the heros are gone, or retreat/are defeated. Often in the movies the hero comes back and saves the day.

So because Putin made threats telling the U.S. and NATO not to do things that we were perfectly justified to do it is our fault that Putin invaded a peaceful neighbor?

 

[fishonjazz]

Maybe. I don't blame Biden alone (or much at all really under his tenure as president, but the U.S. and NATO pushed Russia to do this. This was decades in the making.

Does anyone recally everything going on in Ukraine in the past? It seems like the media is ignoring it.

Putin warned Bush in 2004 that if Ukraine joined NATO, there would be no Ukraine.

The U.S (through public and private funds) has poured millions to influence Ukraine to become a western democracy.

There is confirmed leaked data that the US influenced the coup/ouster of Ukraine's pro-Russian president in 2014 (may have happened anyway, but we influenced it), tried to influence who would be the replacement, and celebrated the successful coup (yes, there was evidently Russian influence too, but basically the former Pres backed out of a deal with the EU in exhange for a $15b agreement w Russia). Obama said they would continue to push for their entrance to NATO or the EU, despite Putin's continued warning that U.S./NATO influences on Russia's border would be a sign as a threat that would be responded to with force. Obama responded by saying we are no longer in a cold war, and there is no reason to act as such, and the U.S. will continue to push for western democracy in Ukraine. An idealistic approach, but somewhat naive if you think Russia and Putin will just stand by and let it happen.

Before this current war started, Putin again stated there would be no escalation if Ukraine agreed not to join NATO. Russia does not want Nato weapons on its border.

If Trump were still president, this likely would have still happened, as Putin has been around long enough to know U.S. interests can change every 4 years, so despite Trump's feelings on NATO, we'd still be here, and Trump would have likely escalated things to an even more dangerous level, as he lacks any tact or skills in diplomacy.

If we flip the script, and Putin spent years to influence Mexico and it's elections to be pro-communist and pro-Russia, and perhaps wanted to station pro-Russian weapons on Mexican soil, how would we respond? Most likely the way we did during the Cuban missle crisis. Threaten war unless there was an agreement to disarm.

Ukraine covers a lot of Russian border, and would leave them exposed if Ukraine joined NATO. Russians have even told Ukrainians their war is not with Ukraine, it is with the U.S. and NATO. I wish Putin was more diplomatic, but it is easy to see why he decided to attack.

I dislike Putin and hope for his quick demise, but western goverments definitely shoulder some blame.

We (along w Russia) also agreed as part of the Bangladesh Accords to protect Ukraine in exchange for nuclear disarmament. Russia essentially has said that western influence has changed Ukraine so much that it is not the same country therefore the agreement is void. Are we holding up our end of the promise?

It reminds me of the common western movie theme when a good guy comes to town and takes out a couple bad guys, but when the whole gang comes and punishes the town for retribution, the heros are gone, or retreat/are defeated. Often in the movies the hero comes back and saves the day.

Imo russian shouldnt be in charge of whether another country wants to be a part of nato. Its their choice not russias imo.
Same goes for if mexico decided to be communist.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[TheGoldStandard]

So because Putin made threats telling the U.S. and NATO not to do things that we were perfectly justified to do it is our fault that Putin invaded a peaceful neighbor?

When you have a superpower that consistently threatens a response to an action, and you continue with that action, you have some blame.

I didn't say we should or should not have done it, but our actions and meddling have caused the response.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

Imo russian shouldnt be in charge of whether another country wants to be a part of nato. Its their choice not russias imo.
Same goes for if mexico decided to be communist.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

You really think we wouldn't attempt to interfere if Mexico became pro-Russian, and like NATO, wanted to stockpile weapons on the border? We didn't allow it in Cuba, to the effect of going to war until they backed down.

 

[Gameface]

When you have a superpower that consistently threatens a response to an action, and you continue with that action, you have some blame.

I didn't say we should or should not have done it, but our actions and meddling have caused the response.

I don't agree.

 

[fishonjazz]

You really think we wouldn't attempt to interfere if Mexico became pro-Russian, and like NATO, wanted to stockpile weapons on the border? We didn't allow it in Cuba, to the effect of going to war until they backed down.

I dont think we should interfere if mexico decides that they want to change their government.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Rubashov]

Saw a news flash tonight, saying Russia's latest offensive was taking a beating. Anyone got details?

 

[TheGoldStandard]

I dont think we should interfere if mexico decides that they want to change their government.


Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app

But what if that change was decided by Russia pushing lots of influence/interference to make it happen? We have seen how the U.S. responds to weapons on our doorstep. Unreasonable or not, we did it in Cuba. I don't agree with Putin, but I am not surprised, he just followed through on what he said he would do. Hell, we went to Vietnam to try and stop Communism. According to a 2020 study, Americans "are more likely to condemn foreign involvement, lose faith in democracy, and seek retaliation when a foreign power sides with the opposition, than when a foreign power aids their own party. At the same time, Americans reject military responses to electoral attacks on the United States, even when their own political party is targeted." Tomz, Michael; Weeks, Jessica L. P. (2020). "Public Opinion and Foreign Electoral Intervention". American Political Science Review. 114 (3): 856–873. doi:10.1017/S0003055420000064. ISSN 0003-0554.

Putin inferred he was fine with Ukraine becoming a western democracy, as long as they were not part of the EU and NATO, that was his line. He doesn't want NATO on his doorstep. I really don't think the U.S. would react any differently if the roles were reversed.

We went full war mode during the Cuban missile crisis until they disarmed. We are safer because our borders are not a threat.

This article does not touch on everything I mentioned above, and brings up others, definitely worth a read:

Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine

For years, the political scientist has claimed that Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is caused by Western intervention. Have recent events changed his mind?

www.newyorker.com

Mearsheimer has been analyzing the Ukraine situation for years, and I think his analysis is spot on.

I fully support Ukraine, and based on the Bangladesh Accords alone I think we have a duty to protect them. Even more so as we have influenced their current political climate. To say we didn't foresee this, or even contribute to the tension that lead to this war does not mesh with reality. We continue to influence countries at a political level, with differing levels of interference. The CIA provided Saddam with arms, money and political backing, which of course was a major backfire. We funded insurgents, which allegedly included Osama Bin Laden when Russia was fighting in Afghanistan. According to a 2016 study, either through covert or overt actions, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections while Russia intervened in 36, which a follow up study found the interventions determined "in many cases" the identity of the winner.

1. Levin, Dov (2018). "A Vote for Freedom? The Effects of Partisan Electoral Interventions on Regime Type". Journal of Conflict Resolution. 63 (4): 839–868. doi:10.1177/0022002718770507. S2CID 158135517.

From Putin's view, our influence in the 2014 Ukraine coup, removed a pro-Russian president for an anti-Russian president which we also had influence in getting appointed, and this interference has led to potential border issues which he has responded to. I don't agree with Putin, I don't think NATO is going to attack Putin, but this is his reasoning, which has been consistent for decades regarding how he would respond if this happened. If we had never interfered with the 2014 coup and follow-up elections, then perhaps we would have no culpability, but you when inject yourself into foreign policy to this degree, the outcome will partially rest on your shoulders.

So while Ukraine made their own decisions, they did so with our influence. As such, we owe them much more than what we are currently providing.

It is a fact that Russia and China both have a cold war mentality. If we ignore this, the results will not be pretty. President Xi has stated that the U.S. and NATO both have a cold war mentality, and believe Russia is permanently threatened by NATO, and both oppose its expansion. In a joint statement, the leaders said they opposed the "further expansion of NATO," while calling on the alliance to "abandon its ideologized Cold War approaches, respect the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries and the diversity of their civilizational, cultural and historical backgrounds, and adopt a fair and objective attitude toward the peaceful development of other countries."

Bill Perry, Clinton's Defense Secretary understood:

Opinion | This Is Putin’s War. But America and NATO Aren’t Innocent Bystanders. (Published 2022)

Russia’s president is trying to hide his poor leadership by becoming a nationalist avenger.

www.nytimes.com

 

[leftyjace]

When you have a superpower that consistently threatens a response to an action, and you continue with that action, you have some blame.

I didn't say we should or should not have done it, but our actions and meddling have caused the response.

So… the blame goes not on the aggressor, but on the person who the aggressor says was at fault for provoking their proactive bad behavior.

And so that means you probably believe that girls who dress up provocatively deserve to be sexually assaulted...Right?

 

[fishonjazz]

But what if that change was decided by Russia pushing lots of influence/interference to make it happen? We have seen how the U.S. responds to weapons on our doorstep. Unreasonable or not, we did it in Cuba. I don't agree with Putin, but I am not surprised, he just followed through on what he said he would do. Hell, we went to Vietnam to try and stop Communism. According to a 2020 study, Americans "are more likely to condemn foreign involvement, lose faith in democracy, and seek retaliation when a foreign power sides with the opposition, than when a foreign power aids their own party. At the same time, Americans reject military responses to electoral attacks on the United States, even when their own political party is targeted." Tomz, Michael; Weeks, Jessica L. P. (2020). "Public Opinion and Foreign Electoral Intervention". American Political Science Review. 114 (3): 856–873. doi:10.1017/S0003055420000064. ISSN 0003-0554.

Putin inferred he was fine with Ukraine becoming a western democracy, as long as they were not part of the EU and NATO, that was his line. He doesn't want NATO on his doorstep. I really don't think the U.S. would react any differently if the roles were reversed.

We went full war mode during the Cuban missile crisis until they disarmed. We are safer because our borders are not a threat.

This article does not touch on everything I mentioned above, and brings up others, definitely worth a read:

Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine

For years, the political scientist has claimed that Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is caused by Western intervention. Have recent events changed his mind?

www.newyorker.com

Mearsheimer has been analyzing the Ukraine situation for years, and I think his analysis is spot on.

I fully support Ukraine, and based on the Bangladesh Accords alone I think we have a duty to protect them. Even more so as we have influenced their current political climate. To say we didn't foresee this, or even contribute to the tension that lead to this war does not mesh with reality. We continue to influence countries at a political level, with differing levels of interference. The CIA provided Saddam with arms, money and political backing, which of course was a major backfire. We funded insurgents, which allegedly included Osama Bin Laden when Russia was fighting in Afghanistan. According to a 2016 study, either through covert or overt actions, the U.S. intervened in 81 foreign elections while Russia intervened in 36, which a follow up study found the interventions determined "in many cases" the identity of the winner.

1. Levin, Dov (2018). "A Vote for Freedom? The Effects of Partisan Electoral Interventions on Regime Type". Journal of Conflict Resolution. 63 (4): 839–868. doi:10.1177/0022002718770507. S2CID 158135517.

From Putin's view, our influence in the 2014 Ukraine coup, removed a pro-Russian president for an anti-Russian president which we also had influence in getting appointed, and this interference has led to potential border issues which he has responded to. I don't agree with Putin, I don't think NATO is going to attack Putin, but this is his reasoning, which has been consistent for decades regarding how he would respond if this happened. If we had never interfered with the 2014 coup and follow-up elections, then perhaps we would have no culpability, but you when inject yourself into foreign policy to this degree, the outcome will partially rest on your shoulders.

So while Ukraine made their own decisions, they did so with our influence. As such, we owe them much more than what we are currently providing.

It is a fact that Russia and China both have a cold war mentality. If we ignore this, the results will not be pretty. President Xi has stated that the U.S. and NATO both have a cold war mentality, and believe Russia is permanently threatened by NATO, and both oppose its expansion. In a joint statement, the leaders said they opposed the "further expansion of NATO," while calling on the alliance to "abandon its ideologized Cold War approaches, respect the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries and the diversity of their civilizational, cultural and historical backgrounds, and adopt a fair and objective attitude toward the peaceful development of other countries."

Bill Perry, Clinton's Defense Secretary understood:

Opinion | This Is Putin’s War. But America and NATO Aren’t Innocent Bystanders. (Published 2022)

Russia’s president is trying to hide his poor leadership by becoming a nationalist avenger.

www.nytimes.com

In your scenario is communist Mexico leaving us alone? If the answer is yes then idgaf. Leave em alone.

 

[TheGoldStandard]

In your scenario is communist Mexico leaving us alone? If the answer is yes then idgaf. Leave em alone. Very reasonable, I would tend to do the same.

I agree, I would say do nothing. And if you ran for President, I would vote for you, but do you really expect such a reasonable response from our country or Russia?


We don't need another cold war. Unfortunately the U.S., Russia and China would all likely react similarly to such a move. Keep in mind, NATO has already accepted many former Soviet Union countries into NATO, but outside of very small slivers, none had borders with Russia as Ukraine does. Russia sees it as a critical threat to their security infrastructure.

NATO countries have weapons of war "for defensive purposes". If Russia put weapons bases on the Mexican border the claim are for defense only, I don't think our country would stand by idly. It would be seen as a risk to our national security, just like the Cuban missile crisis, which we were going to war over.

Unfortunately, superpowers tend to react negatively when adversaries put weapons of war on your doorstep.

I am not justifying Putin's actions, I am stating we shouldn't be surprised by them. And if we never interfered in Ukraine or pushed for them to join NATO, I don't think Ukraine would be under attack now.

We shouldn't be surprised. And right or wrong, our actions contributed to this. We owe it to the people of Ukraine to do more.

 

[fishonjazz]

I agree, I would say do nothing. And if you ran for President, I would vote for you, but do you really expect such a reasonable response from our country or Russia?


We don't need another cold war. Unfortunately the U.S., Russia and China would all likely react similarly to such a move. Keep in mind, NATO has already accepted many former Soviet Union countries into NATO, but outside of very small slivers, none had borders with Russia as Ukraine does. Russia sees it as a critical threat to their security infrastructure.

NATO countries have weapons of war "for defensive purposes". If Russia put weapons bases on the Mexican border the claim are for defense only, I don't think our country would stand by idly. It would be seen as a risk to our national security, just like the Cuban missile crisis, which we were going to war over.

Unfortunately, superpowers tend to react negatively when adversaries put weapons of war on your doorstep.

I am not justifying Putin's actions, I am stating we shouldn't be surprised by them. And if we never interfered in Ukraine or pushed for them to join NATO, I don't think Ukraine would be under attack now.

We shouldn't be surprised. And right or wrong, our actions contributed to this. We owe it to the people of Ukraine to do more.

Fair. I agree. Our government would probably try to stop Mexico.