The situation in Ukraine...

[pustal]

Nato isn't anti Russian but the U.S. has started many wars in the name of national security. Whether it's justified or not.

Putin has gave his reasons why he's at war with Ukraine he said its for his nations security.

If Ukraine joins nato then the U.S. can place nuclear weapons in Ukraine directed at Russia basically at Russians door steps.

Countries joining Nato and Nato countries has been surrounding Russia. Ukraine is the last country before Russia is completely surrounded. And Putin hates nato.

Putin started this war to maintain his power and security for his nation. Putin is an oligarch wanting power. He also failed to diversify his economy and is too reliant on gas and oil. And doesn't want Ukrainian oil to impact his economy.

(This is not me agreeing with Russia. I'm just stating Russians reasons for war. He may be a bit paranoid with Nato)

These are the NATO countries:

Russa isn't surrounded. NATO is what it is: a North Atlantic military union.

I not the person you should be asking these questions. As I didnt come up with this line of thinking. It's putin that you should look toward. He always felt ukraine was a part of Russia.

Putin may be a bit paranoid. Because why else would you invade ukraine and have the whole world band against you and destroy your economy from sanctions. You don't risk all that for nothing. We're trying to rationalise a man whose gone mad.

Why else? I stated above:

This book comes to discussion each time Russia does something like this: 'The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia' - written in 1997, drafted by the Russian Ministry of Defence and that is used as a textbook to higher Russian officials. It sounds like crazy talk and was written by a lunatic but foreshadowed the russian influence in the years to come until now.

Particularly about Ukraine:

Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because "Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics". Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[9]

Ukraine joining NATO stops being a 'cordon sanitaire', so by their own logic should invade. Helps that Ukraine has lots of relevant natural resources to explore like oil, gas or neon.
And from the brief I shared:

In addition, Russian annexation of some or all of Ukraine would increase Russian manpower, industrial capacity, and natural resources to a level that could make it a global threat. The United States and Europe cannot make this mistake again.

 

[pustal]

Russia deploys thermobaric bombs to Ukraine.

Talk about escalation...

 

[smf]

Serious enough? I thought so.

You seem to have too many logical fallacies. Let me know when you've gotten rid of them.

 

[smf]

And from the brief I shared:

It's no good having a work force that just last week you shot at & killed their family.

It's no good having natural resources, if you end up in economic sanctions forever.

If it's ok for them to steal land, then we just take all their money forever & prevent them doing anything. IMO they shouldn't have taken down swift, they should have intercepted all the transactions. It would have taken russia a while to figure that out.

 

[Flame]

@smf do you know how to use an edit button?

ive seen you do this across the forum.

 

[smf]

@smf do you know how to use an edit button?

ive seen you do this across the forum.

I do & with the old forum it was easy. Cutting and pasting quotes from a new post to a previous post does not always work with the new forum and so we're stuck with multiple posts.

I don't know where the delete post button has gone though.

 

[SG854]

... But i am looking at Putin. That's why i was wondering if you knew a reasoning of what you said. But that's okay.


Paranoia is just too simple of an explanation. He's a dictator, but i think we'd see a similar situation in the kremlin as in the white house in the Trump days if he was really 'just a mad man'. Putin doesn't have a history of stupid mistakes behind him, so i don't anticipate he's suddenly going full retard.
(it's also better. If we're wrong in that assessment, victory will come eventually. But underestimating could mean many more unnecessary deaths).

So... What's the long term plan here? Where does he hope to land?

Just stating the reasoning but not the why behind this reasoning.



But here are some quotes. Putin sees Nato as a threat.

"We believe that the eastward expansion of NATO is a mistake and a serious one at that," Boris Yeltsin, Russia's first post-Soviet president, told reporters at a 1997 news conference with US President Bill Clinton

NATO carried out an aerial bombing campaign against Serbia in 1999 during the Kosovo war. Serbia was a Russian ally. Vladimir Putin was elected president not long thereafter.

He still cites the bombing as proof of NATO aggression — also in the context of the current crisis.

Russia's sensitivities over NATO's possible eastward expansion were well known. "No matter how nuanced, if NATO adopts a policy which envisions expansion into Central and Eastern Europe without holding the door open to Russia, it would be universally interpreted in Moscow as directed against Russia," US diplomat James Collins wrote in a State Department cable in 1993.

"If Ukraine were to join NATO, it would serve as a direct threat to the security of Russia," Putin said in televised remarks on Monday, during which he described Ukraine as a "springboard" for a NATO strike against Russia.

https://www.dw.com/en/nato-why-russia-has-a-problem-with-its-eastward-expansion/a-60891681

These are the NATO countries:
View attachment 300017
Russa isn't surrounded. NATO is what it is: a North Atlantic military union.

Why else? I stated above:

Particularly about Ukraine:

Ukraine joining NATO stops being a 'cordon sanitaire', so by their own logic should invade. Helps that Ukraine has lots of relevant natural resources to explore like oil, gas or neon.
And from the brief I shared:

Russia is completely surrounded on the left side of their country. Putin sees that as a threat. Look at all those gray areas left of Russia.

 

[pustal]

It's no good having a work force that just last week you shot at & killed their family.

It's no good having natural resources, if you end up in economic sanctions forever.

If it's ok for them to steal land, then we just take all their money forever & prevent them doing anything. IMO they shouldn't have taken down swift, they should have intercepted all the transactions. It would have taken russia a while to figure that out.

Their intention and the outcome that is coming out of it is widely going in different directions.

Same way that Russia wanted the finlandization of Europe and they have led Finland to start discussing joining NATO.

Putin thought of making Ukraine a Chechnya II, he badly misfired. Now he is only keeping the war because he doesn't want to show weakness, because he knows, historically, losing a war is the quickest way to lose power in Russia. This is Putin clinging to power now more than anything else.

That is what makes him so dangerous, and, counterintuitively, why is ever so much important to strengthen the opposition against him.

 

[pustal]

Just stating the reasoning but not the why behind this reasoning.



But here are some quotes. Putin sees Nato as a threat.









https://www.dw.com/en/nato-why-russia-has-a-problem-with-its-eastward-expansion/a-60891681


Russia is completely surrounded on the left side of their country. Putin sees that as a threat. Look at all those gray areas left of Russia.

Surround literally means all-around. NATO was made to ensure North American and European safety in a cold war setting still.

There was a discussion that NATO should have dissolved in the post-Berlin wall but Russia has put itself in a perpetual war-expansionist state.

Despite existing ocasional NATO misuses, it is a reaction force and countries join in for protection, not for waging war.

The Russian claim that NATO is a threat to Russia is a facade for what truly is: a threat to Russian expansionism - else would NATO never be willing to start a war with a as big as a nuclear power as Russia is. It would be completely counterproductive for NATO-members security.

Now, part of this expansionism does have a certain paranoia to it. If you look at Russian expansion is always towards the mountains that surround it, aiming to take control of the passages between them.

Also a side note: the 1999 Serbian attack was a response to the ethnic cleansing of Albanians and Bosnians - may not have been an offense to NATO they certainly weren't the aggressors here.

 

[pustal]

Russia deploys thermobaric bombs to Ukraine.

Talk about escalation...

Kharkiv tonight:

@Flame back in PS3Hax we use to have a BB forum option enabled for automerge, that would be very helpful to prevent multi-posting. I'll avoid it too for myself from now on.

 

[KuntilanakMerah]

I Support Russia

 

[pustal]

I Support Russia

You just came here to heil Putler?

 

[BitMasterPlus]

It is hard to tell what's true and what's propaganda since the propaganda machines from news outlets and such have been in hyper drive the since this shitshow started, but one thing is true, the people of Ukraine are getting fucked hard, and it's a shame since so many innocent civilians had to lose their lives to all this bullshit with Putin and many others. And I know I've said before I gotta stop coming to this section, but I guess I'm a glutton for punishment, especially for my brain cells from the responses here, as well as some funny but sad responses as well.

 

[SG854]

Surround literally means all-around. NATO was made to ensure North American and European safety in a cold war setting still.

There was a discussion that NATO should have dissolved in the post-Berlin wall but Russia has put itself in a perpetual war-expansionist state.

Despite existing ocasional NATO misuses, it is a reaction force and countries join in for protection, not for waging war.

The Russian claim that NATO is a threat to Russia is a facade for what truly is: a threat to Russian expansionism - else would NATO never be willing to start a war with a as big as a nuclear power as Russia is. It would be completely counterproductive for NATO-members security.

Now, part of this expansionism does have a certain paranoia to it. If you look at Russian expansion is always towards the mountains that surround it, aiming to take control of the passages between them.

Also a side note: the 1999 Serbian attack was a response to the ethnic cleansing of Albanians and Bosnians - may not have been an offense to NATO they certainly weren't the aggressors here.

The exact definition of what surround doesn't matter. What matters is what I'm trying to convey with the other words I used in conjunction with it. And the following explanation's to clarify as I couldn't find the right word to convey what I meant at the time so I used the next best thing I could think of. As you already know what I meant was the entire left side of Russia being surrounded not the entire Russia itself. Don't get too hung up at exact definitions. Focus overall on what I meant.


The entire left side is covered in Nato countries. Russia wants the countries to be united again. Putin got pissed that the countries that once was part of Soviet Russia is now a part of Nato. He feels betrayed. He's not going to stop at Ukraine, he going to go after the other countries near there. The world should continue in the future hit Russia's military force financially so that I wont expand into something bigger. We have to weaken the Russian threat.

 

[pustal]

The exact definition of what surround doesn't matter. What matters is what I'm trying to convey with the other words I used in conjunction with it. And following explanation's to clarify as I couldn't find the right word to convey what I meant at the time so I used the next best thing I could think of. As you already know what I meant was the entire left side of Russia being surrounded not the entire Russia itself. Don't get too hung up at exact definitions. Focus overall on what I meant.


The entire left side is covered in Nato countries. Russia wants the countries to be united again. Putin got pissed that the countries that once was part of Soviet Russia is now a part of Nato. He feels betrayed. He's not going to stop at Ukraine, he going to go after the other countries near there. The world should continue in the future hit Russia's military force financially so that I wont expand into something bigger. We have to weaken the Russian threat.

The entire left side is considered the north Atlantic region: North America and Europe, so it's not unexpected.

I get what you are saying, I'm just trying to convey that there is no "in his defense" here. Not only his actions, but his sentiment is undefensible. NATO is still an opposition force to Russa because Russia has presented itself as an antagonic force for global piece.

Nord Stream negotiations where in 2005. Fukushima was in 2011. Fukushima was an excuse to go through with the project, I'm sure it helped with Merkel, but it's naive to think she didn't have other pressures, political or otherwise. More than Merkel, Fukushima swaded the German public perception more than any political intentions.

Also, directly from Wikipedia:

For anyone interested:

Soviet Union back? No, no, no... He wants the Russian Empire back. He uses National Bolshevism foreign policy, but the internal policies have nothing to do with Bolshevism and he wants to be remember as a new tzar, a conqueror.

From the documentary above:

Sergei Kolesnikov: [through interpreter] I started saying that I'm not happy withall the finances going for this palace. And I was told that Putin is the czar and you are his serf.

 

[SG854]

The entire left side is considered the north Atlantic region: North America an Europe, so it's not unexpected.

I get what you are saying, I'm just trying to convey that there is no "in his defense" here. Not only his actions, but his sentiment is undefensible. NATO is still an opposition force to Russa because Russia has presented itself as an antagonic force for global piece.


For anyone interested:

I myself in a previous post directed at someone else said that I do not agree with what Putin is doing so that people won't get the wrong ideas. I'm only stating Putin's reasons to try to understand the why. Not whether I agree with it or not. I agree as well as majority of the first world that Putin's actions is indefensible.

 

[Viri]

People dying and here he is with orange man bad

See

Spoiler

View attachment 299407

I forgot how mentally ill the voice actor of Yukiko was. Also, she forgot the first Bush. lol

War is good, because it keeps orange Hitler out of office.

 

[BitMasterPlus]

See

War is good, because it keeps orange Hitler out of office.

That's right. We can't have that tyrant back in, so let's destroy the world and kill everybody to make sure it doesn't happen!

 

[Deleted member 586536]

War is good, because it keeps orange Hitler out of office.

Historical precedent: exists
Viri: how can I misconstrue this as leftists wanting war

That's right. We can't have that tyrant back in, so let's destroy the world and kill everybody to make sure it doesn't happen!

Considering that the republican party has turned into a fascist group, with trump hitting about 11-13 of the 14 characteristics of fascism (look it up)
with sexism (anti trans, or believing that there is something "wrong" with trans people, or still to this day, gay people) still being rampant
constant usage of scapegoats varying from "the illegals out to take your jobs" to "Social justice warriors out to take your guns" with communist, or leftist, or socialist thrown in between those statements without even consideration.
to a joining of religion and state to a horrifying degree, as church and state should be separated and remained that way.
That original statement (tweet in question)
was more trying to look at the end of the light in the tunnel in a dark period of time, the silverlinging in this mess. rather than "oh good war!"

 

[Deleted member 586536]

snipped