|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
posted October 15, 2023 06:41 PM |
|
Edited by Ben80 at 19:00, 15 Oct 2023.
|
Doomforge said:
Putin is living in some sort of nostalgia trip. He's defending something that no longer has relevance or meaning.
Quite the opposite - the real development of the situation in the world has brought back an understanding of the true sad state of affairs. Any person is actually quite complex, especially Putin. He is also a man from the 80s and 90s, when Russia believed in a happy future together with the West. He even asked to join NATO. Perhaps he knew in advance that he would be refused and asked precisely in order to receive a public refusal. But the fact is a fact - he really received a refusal.
Doomforge said:
So what exactly is the danger Putin is rambling about?
2 trends over the past 30 years: 1) numerous violations of the sovereignty of other countries by the United States (with fatal consequences) 2) the movement of American military bases in Europe to the East. Connect these two facts and Russia’s fears will become clear. Add to this the US projects to deploy missile defense components in Eastern Europe (the US said that this is not against Russia, but against Iran  )
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 07:20 PM |
|
|
Ben80 said:
JollyJoker said:
Budapest Memorandum
Enough with the jesuitism.
Right, pointing to existing signed treaties is "jusuitism" for Russia and their bots spreading fake news, falsehoods amd outright lies.
Fits the picture. Whom do you hope to unsettle with this kind of dishonesty?
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 07:26 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
Whom do you hope to unsettle with this kind of dishonesty?
You. Every time you talk about bots, you admit your powerlessness and stupidity.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 15, 2023 08:51 PM |
|
|
|
Forlorn hope. And truth is neither stuoid now powerless.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 10:03 AM |
|
|
Look, Ben80 is obviously strongly opinionated against the West to the point of losing objectivity. But he clearly isnt a bot, his replies arent algorithmical. And not everything he says is propaganda. After the Cold War, USA did remain the sole super power which led it to enhance its military complex and zone of influence more and more, to the point Russia percieved it as an existential threat. It happens to all the empires. They overgrow, then their proxies dismantle because the center tries to overreach. And after the Cold War, Russia did try to remain in good terms with the West, that is also true. But that can not happen if USA cant face the fact that Russia is not this completely torn out, weak country from the 1990’s. What’s happening is basically a redistribution of the balance of power over a region whether we like it or not. Saying USA also did this and that, overthrowing pro-Russian governments in its neighbors etc is not whataboutism because international politics and that balance of power and influance are all interlinked. They are all pieces of the same political ecosystem.
One thing is certain, Ukraine isnt important enough for NATO to go “all in” and it is important enough and historically tied to Russia, for it to keep pressing. Putin is not Hitler, he is not this complete lunatic who will keep on invading more and more countries. So think of it like this, after WW1 France insists that Germany should pay and be crushed completely despite USA and UK suggesting a more balanced approach. France insists and what does that lead to, another conflict in 20 years. Because Germany is a major player in Europe, it will eventually break the shell if the shell is designed too small for it, which is what exactly happened. Now try to imagine what would have happened if they only invaded Austria and then stopped, it is speculative of course but this is kind of similar to the situation we are in.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 11:05 AM |
|
|
Everything Ben80 says which is NOT propaganda and which has a grain of truth in it (which isn't much) is used only to make his propaganda and outright lies more "plausible", if you can call it that, same as the best lies are those built around truths, so it's not worth it to discuss them.
To the rest of what you say I disagree and in parts very strongly. What I see is a Russia that in 2014 annexed part of a country whose territorial integrity it had guaranteed in a binding treaty.
Due to Russia having strong ties with the EC and because no one at the time was interested in crashing the party the 2010s were that went quite well for Russia with no or no important repercussions.
Naturally that did NOT went well in the rest of the Ukraine; obviously, all those guaranteeing of their territorial integrity and all the treaties were null and void, so what could THEY do?
The situation as such had been stable overall, even though the situation between Russia and Ukraine remained unresolved. But that has been good for RUSSIA - it actually INCREASED their safety, since a country being part of an ongoing conflict with a third country cannot become a member of NATO.
I cannot see ANY excuse for the attack in 2022, no mitigating circumstance, nothing whatsoever. It's not reasonable and makes sense only when you assume Putins wants to enlarge Russia to USSR dimensions again. And the "special operation" and the reasoning given by Putin and Lavrov didn't mention any safety concerns - it was a planned strike to remove the Ukrainian government, install a Russia-friendly one, secure the status of the new diplomatically recognized "states" on ex-Ukrainian territory and be done with it in a month or so - until rest-Ukraine would willingly join Russia a couple months or a few years later.
IF, Russia would have had safety concerns, after Sweden and Finland phrased theirs, and after the special operation didn't proceed as planned, Russia, in MY opinion, would have been a lot better advised to simply pull back after their advance had come to a grinding halt, declare the unsuccessful end of the denacification and be happy and satisfied to do everything possible to keep the two new independent states - do everything possible to affirm the rightfulness of their grip on them and come to terms with the rest of the world, making a couple of concessions, demanding a guarantee that Ukraine won't join NATO and so on.
Instead, Russia is becoming more dependent on China by the day - that cannot be what they wanted. That "special operation" was a massive blunder. If I was Putin, all those idiots who told him the Russian army would be able to take Kiev within a couple of weeks, would suffer an ignoble end in some backwater gulag in deepest Siberia, but I suppose they will already do that or are long dead and gone.
And the US? They have other problems. Their problem is CHINA, has been with Trump (who wanted to be on Putin's good side to have both hands free and concentrate in China) and is still with Biden. The China situation is WAY more critical than the Russia situation, which is first and foremost a EUROPEAN problem. What makes is awkward for the US is, that it strengthens CHINA even more.
So the US of A - in MY opinion - have at least since Trump NO interest whatsoever in a serious conflict with Russia, and the new Moscov-Beijing-axis is really bad news.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 11:23 AM |
|
|
Annexed? Crimea voted to leave Ukraine, then voted to join Russia. Those who keep saying Russia military forced Crimea to join are debunked by every independent source poll, without any exception. Also, when you say Ukraine could not join Nato because it was in conflict with Russia, then you basically admit there was nothing wrong with Russia sending an army in. You can't have your cake and eat it.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Ben80
Famous Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 12:11 PM |
|
Edited by Ben80 at 12:18, 16 Oct 2023.
|
JollyJoker said:
And the US? They have other problems. Their problem is CHINA, has been with Trump (who wanted to be on Putin's good side to have both hands free and concentrate in China) and is still with Biden. The China situation is WAY more critical than the Russia situation, which is first and foremost a EUROPEAN problem. What makes is awkward for the US is, that it strengthens CHINA even more.
What is China "problem" from the US point of view? Is it that China is developing too well ? Well, let the USA accelerate its development.
Do you really think that the US should solve some kind of Chinese "problem" ? Maybe they should still take care of their own country?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 12:42 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
Annexed? Crimea voted to leave Ukraine, then voted to join Russia. Those who keep saying Russia military forced Crimea to join are debunked by every independent source poll, without any exception. Also, when you say Ukraine could not join Nato because it was in conflict with Russia, then you basically admit there was nothing wrong with Russia sending an army in. You can't have your cake and eat it.
That was explained to you by doomforge. A couple hundred times. You have no point. The EU couldn't send troops to Scotland and declare them part of the EU because a majority wants that. Russia was treaty-bound to guarantee the territorial integrity of the Ukraine. They simply had no business there. It doesn't work that way, switching back and forth what country you want to be part of.
Second fallacy is that I would admit there being nothing wrong with Russia sending an army in. Of course it was wrong because it was a blatant breach of a signed treaty. But it developed well for Russia because no one really wanted to make a fuss about it except Ukraine. And THEN the situation was as it was - unresolved, but in a stable way. A few incidents here, a few grenades there, something that did bother only Ukraine, since THEY had just lost part of their territory. Just enough of a guarantee to make sure that Ukraine would never join NATO as long as that lasted.
Because - see it the other way round. Ukraine COULD have signed a peace treaty with Russia, accept the loss of the annexed area - and then apply for NATO membership.
So the war doesn't make sense from a safety point of view.
Russia had everything under THEIR control. All was fine and dandy, good business with everyone, fine relations, Ukraine was getting nowhere. In short - no safety problem.
|
|
Galaad
Hero of Order
Li mort as morz, li vif as vis
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 01:25 PM |
|
|
Ben80 said:
JollyJoker said:
Whom do you hope to unsettle with this kind of dishonesty?
You. Every time you talk about bots, you admit your powerlessness and stupidity.
Calling someone stupid is a breach but repeatedly calling someone a bot is also a breach. Both of you get off with a warning this time. Please treat each other with at least the minimum of respect.
____________
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 01:34 PM |
|
|
Nope, I was talking about February 2022, not 2014, so there was no longer any treaty as Ukraine cancelled it. You say they were in conflict, in any conflict there are armed forces involved.
In 2014, we can hardly speak about any Russian invasion, with around 50 military (two dozens reported on a road, 30 more in parliament) operating a 26 000 km² territory with a population of 2 millions.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
Gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 01:52 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
Also, when you say Ukraine could not join Nato because it was in conflict with Russia, then you basically admit there was nothing wrong with Russia sending an army in. You can't have your cake and eat it.
“Russia sending in more troops to invade Ukraine is totally moral and justified because Russia has been invading Ukraine for the past 9 years. You can’t be mad about this escalation of a long-sustained violation of sovereignty because Ukraine decided to fight back.”
-Sal, 2023, definitely making sense.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 02:01 PM |
|
|
Salamandre said:
Nope, I was talking about February 2022, not 2014, so there was no longer any treaty as Ukraine cancelled it. You say they were in conflict, in any conflict there are armed forces involved.
In 2014, we can hardly speak about any Russian invasion, with around 50 military (two dozens reported on a road, 30 more in parliament) operating a 26 000 km² territory with a population of 2 millions.
It seems your memory is failing you.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 02:13 PM |
|
|
|
Not really, your article says same thing as you, that they invaded. How many official troops?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 03:00 PM |
|
|
|
There were already, how many, 12.000? stationed in the Crimea. The initial additional influx were 200 Airborne special forces plus gunships. From March 1st onwards, additional troops were sent.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 03:24 PM |
|
|
|
There was a signed accord allowing up to 25 000 Russian troops to stay in Crimea. None of them was identified as participating in any invasion.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 04:02 PM |
|
|
They were already there, so they didn't need to "invade".
Russia sent troops, Russia occupied the seat of government and raised the Russian flag and Russia blocked access to the rest of Ukraine, ending in the occupation of a part of a country they had guaranteed their territorial integrity. It doesn't matter whether it started as a 200 special forces command raid. It was reinforced rapidly and was an act of war, leading to a war, that got a couple supposed pauses, but still wasn't resolved in 2022.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 05:04 PM |
|
|
But thats the gray part. There is a difference between reporting as "Russia invaded Crimea" or reporting that they legally had 12 000 troops stationed, and then around 50 military supposedly russians (source Kiev, no other) blocked one road then took place in parliament.
JollyJoker said:
they didn't need to "invade".
I knew you will finally see the light 
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 05:05 PM |
|
|
Noone claimed they "INVADED" in 2014. They ANNEXED Crimea, breaking an existing treaty, and OCCUPIED the area in question which is Ukrainian territory, therefore the annexation was an act of war, and war it is since then.
They INVADED in 2022.
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted October 16, 2023 05:39 PM |
|
|
 in chest..
Maybe we need Doomforce..
|
|
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
