This message was self-deleted by its author

[WarGamer]

This message was self-deleted by its author (WarGamer) on Fri Feb 11, 2022, 03:08 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[lagomorph777]

1. He's forcing NATO to admit Ukraine.

Pretty poor strategy if his goal is what you believe it is.

[WarGamer]

2. lol.. won't happen.

NO possible way that Germany and France will support it.

They have close diplomatic and economic ties to Russia.

ZERO chance.

Putins worry is that Biden will pressure NATO... if Putin only had to worry about the EU nations, he's not worried.

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. You mean "they're reliant on Russian natural gas" (n/t)

[WarGamer]

32. that's part of it...

But I don't know if it's the emotional damage from what the Russians did inside Germany in 1945... or the close ties between the German Left leaning parties and Russia...

But Germany and Russia actually have pretty close ties and the new German PM is from the Left Leaning Party that is more friendly to Russia

[Bucky]

67. There's just no way on God's Green Earth Ukraine can join NATO. Sorry.

It just makes no sense for NATO to extend itself that far east into Russia's security sphere.
That would be a perfect example of imperial overreach. Worse than trying to occupy Afghanistan for 20 years.

We should definitely support democracies and friendly trading partners. But the best we can strive for is economic sanctions.

[ItsjustMe]

3. Russia's Military, Once Creaky, Is Modern and Lethal

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100216294733

[WarGamer]

4. that thread looks familiar...

[Happy Hoosier]

11. Yeah, largely overblown.

While certainly better equipped and trained that the Ukrainian army, the percentage of Russian forces that would be considered trained to a professional standard is still pretty damned small.

For example Russian pilots get less than 1/4 the flying hours U.S. Pilots do per year, and their aircraft availability percentage is often below 50%.

I'm not saying they aren't dangerous, but I am saying that they have a history of grossly exaggerating their capability, and there is a lot of reason to believe they are doing so again.

After all, rattling a saber isn't effective if the saber is all rusty and dull.

[uponit7771]

50. +1, US still is the 800 lb gorilla when it comes to stand military especially navy

[thatdemguy]

5. I think

There is alot of stuff with fees or taxes or control of the nat gas pipe lines that go to Europe. IIRC they have to pay a lot of fees/taxes to Ukraine that they probably dont want to pay.

Looked it up, its 1.8 billion a year in "transit fees"

[Buckeyeblue]

6. Your explanation makes sense but...

It seems like there are better ways to accomplish that goal. Putting 200K soldiers on the boarder just reminds everyone that Putin is crazy and maybe the region needs to increase their defenses. Why not offer peaceful solutions that don't create incentives for Ukraine to be invited into NATO.

[Bucky]

69. Putin isn't "crazy". He's hungry and greedy, but he's also historically literate.

Russia's in a more stable position than it was 10 years ago.
His aggressive foreign policy, while risky, is working for him. At some point, he'll overreach, but he's controlling a lot of the most important variables. The Ukraine border is probably 80% bluff, but he's definitely keeping his options open. He can't afford to take an "L" on another national border. He's probably not given up on trying to get a friendly regime in the Baltic states. That still hurts the Russian ego.

[Takket]

7. Russia can have a fucking shit sandwich

They got brexit. They got drumpf. They got Canadian truckers. I’m sick to death of them undermining ever country on earth. The west doesn’t owe Putin a damn thing. Go back to Moscow if you don’t want to invade. We’re not giving you anything.

[WarGamer]

8. You need to understand the EU... particularly Germany

The current German leader and the leader before Merkel are from the Center-Left SPD party... here's a common motto from their party:

“America is indispensable, but Russia is immovable”.

That quote tell you everything you need to know about Russia-EU relations.

[EndlessWire]

36. What tells me everything I need to know

about Russia-EU relations is the fact that Putin has surrounded a non-threatening country with invasion strength troops and equipment, including MASH hospitals to care for their wounded. And, he's parked a flotilla up next to the undersea cables. What else do I need to know?

There's no use pretending that this isn't happening.

[iemanja]

53. Merkel is a member of the Chrisitan Democratic Union

a conservative party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_Germany

[muriel_volestrangler]

99. Yes, that is the point - Merkel has retired

though I have no idea if the 'motto' in the post you replied to has genuine currency in the SPD.

[WarGamer]

106. Which is why... if you read my post...

I said the current PM and the one BEFORE Merkel are SPD.

[iemanja]

107. fair enough

[leftstreet]

18. Russia's behind the Canadian truckers?

lol I hadn't heard that one

[lagomorph777]

25. They're behind every right-wing scheme lately. If in doubt, look at the next trucker target:

NATO headquarters in Europe. It couldn't be more obvious that Putin's behind it.

[Bucky]

76. They support a LOT of right wing shenanigans. Especially in central Europe.

It's a McCarthyistic stretch to say "they're behind it all."

Putin's running a well funded disruption machine, but he's not casting seeds on sterile soil.

[BlueCheeseAgain]

9. Didn't they take Crimea?

[Tommy Carcetti]

30. Yup. nt

[Bucky]

81. You gotta understand the history, however.

Crimea was and is 2/3rds ethnic Russian. It had only been reassigned to Ukraine as an administrative district in the 1950s under Khrushchev as an internal political maneuver (and it was then ethnically Russian already). Ukrainians were powerful players in the Communist Party. 13 years later they were critical to shifting power from the Khrushchev to the Brezhnev factions of the Party. Crimea was a buy-off. Historically it'd been Russian. And without it, Russia would have been choked off from the Black Sea. Russian control of it makes more sense than, say, British control of Gibralter or American control of Guantanamo.

Imperial powers are gonna imperiate. Interfering in Russia's access to the Black Sea would only fuel a bigger conflict down the pike. It's not terribly respectful of the locals' desire to self-determine (at least among the non-Russian minority) but Americans have been so in control of our borders for so long, I don't think we appreciate the importance of allowing regional powers in Eurasia to have the benefit of stable borders. It actually serves our long term interests to let Russia hold a secure position.

[Sur Zobra]

112. That was the same excuse that Hitler used to take

over the Sudetenland: most of the residents of the Sudetenland(Czechoslovakia) were ethnic German. Did it make sense then for Germany to invade Czechoslovakia, as you say that it makes sense for Putin to have seized Crimea?

[Hoyt]

10. Honestly, we'd raise hell too if Putin tried to put troops or missles in Cuba, South America, etc.

We've invaded countries without provication before-- Vietnam, Iraq, etc.

[WarGamer]

12. precisely.

[Happy Hoosier]

14. Errr what's your point?

Are you justifying Russia's action or just playing the "whatabout" card?

[Hoyt]

15. I'm against all the war-drum BS. It's that simple, Hoosier. I guarantee if

trump were beating the war-drums, we'd be calling for a 3rd Impeachment, and rightfully so.

[Happy Hoosier]

17. Okay, why not just say that?

I don't agree with you, but I can at least understand that position. The passive-aggressive approach not so much.

Impeachment would not be likely IMO. I very much doubt US Troops will be directly involved in combat, whatever the case.

The most likely scenario is we knuckle under to Putin's unjustified threats, which is a very bad idea, IMO.

[Hoyt]

20. I did. Thought I was pretty clear.

[iemanja]

54. What about Putin's war on the Ukraine

Does it somehow not count when Russians do the killing?
The US will not enter into a direct conflict with Russia. They will impose sanctions and take refugees.

[Hoyt]

56. We've done some killing too. I support sanctions, but not sending troops.

[EndlessWire]

39. None of that justifies

what Putin is doing. He gave away his hand when he took Crimea. And, Ukraine hasn't done any of that, anyway.

[uponit7771]

55. yep

[Hoyt]

59. Why even pretend we are going to engage them. Did they engage us when we invaded

Iraq?

[Bucky]

70. Yes, we DO have to play the game & assert we'll protect Nato's flanks.

No one at all is saying fight the Russians in Ukraine. But you have to deter any aggression against a democracy. The threats of economic sanctions have to be followed through on.

And yes, there was a Russian "retaliation" of sorts following the invasion of Iraq. It took a while, but Russia's expanded role in the region, especially support for Syria, ramped up dramatically because of Iraq, including putting troops on the ground there in 2015 and a once-unthinkable reproachment with Turkey, giving them a free pass to hammer the Kurds along the Iraq/Syria/Turkey border.

[rockfordfile]

41. Russia has basically attacked our country with interfering in our elections

Russia is a major threat to democracy around the world.

[Hoyt]

45. Yeah, like we haven't meddled in their and other country's elections.

[uponit7771]

58. Is your overt whataboutism saying it was OK for them to do so? Yeah, we're hypocrits and Putin

... is still not justified in his actions and that's a fact.

[Hoyt]

60. Russia didn't give us trump. Democrats not showing up at polls and

voting for trump directly or indirectly are what gave us trump.

[uponit7771]

64. No one said they did, they helped Trump and that was bad enough. Also, Clinton only got 100k less...

... votes than Obama got in 12 so the dems "didn't show up at the polls" isn't true at all.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/hillary-clinton-margin-loss-votes

The problem was in counties Obama lost Clinton lost WORSE than he did, she needed to hit red counties and as we know she didn't even go to the places Bill Clinton went to in 92 and 96

[Hoyt]

65. The problem was Democrats pouting because Sanders or Warren weren't nominated

and attacks from Democrats on Obama and Clinton’s support for TPP.

Sure would be nice having TPP as we try to deal with China.

[Tommy Carcetti]

77. And those tensions were intentionally exploited by Russian propagandists. nt

[Hoyt]

79. Well, those "tensions" weren't necessary, and came first. As I said,

we did it to ourselves.

[Tommy Carcetti]

100. Just because someone else spilled the gasoline...

…doesn’t absolve the guy who lit the match.

[NurseJackie]

104. 👍

[yardwork]

131. Not Warren voters. I don't think there was an issue there.

[Tommy Carcetti]

68. Russia depressed the vote due to their active disinformation campaign

Which was intended to help Trump and hurt Clinton.

So, yes, they helped give us Trump.

[Captain Stern]

61. Now, be fair. We've pretty much stayed out of elections in other countries.

It's only after the those elections didn't go the way we wanted them to, that we stepped in (err..I mean spoke up) and made our opinions known by having folks killed

[Hoyt]

63. Yeah sure.

Q: Which country is the biggest election meddler?

Levin: The U.S. has intervened in the most elections between 1946 to 2000: 81 elections in total, followed by the Soviet Union/Russia with 36 examples of interference. Other countries, such as Iran since 1979, Libya under former dictator Muammar Gaddafi and Venezuela under the late authoritarian leader Hugo Chavez are known to have also to have occasionally intervened in elections.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2020/09/04/u-s-interferes-more-elections-than-russia-meddling-author-says/5700657002/

[Bucky]

71. Dang, did you deliberately miss the point of the post you responded to?

Go back and read it again, slower this time.

[Hoyt]

74. Didn't miss a thing. We've been meddling in foreign countries for decades.

[Bucky]

75. Yes, but you're still missing the point if you think the Captain was disagreeing with you.

How have you existed this long on DU and still not learned to pick up on sarcasm? *SMH*

Reading skills can be your friend, Hoyt.

[Captain Stern]

95. I think we agree. Evidently, I just made my point poorly. n/t

[Hoyt]

105. Should have read your whole post. Jumped to conclusion you were one of

the warmongers who seem to think our position is always right, which is laughable.

[harumph]

13. What about a 10 year mutually agreed hiatus on possible

admittance of Ukraine to NATO? After 10 years, a UN supervised Ukrainian national referendum is held -
and both sides agree to respect the outcome.
Much can happen in 10 years. Possibly, both
Russian and the US can concentrate on climate change that offers
peril and opportunities for both nations. If Ukraine hadn't gotten rid
of their nukes - we wouldn't be having the conversation.

[WarGamer]

19. I don't think you understand...

NATO would probably vote NO to admit Ukraine right now... your idea wouldn't happen.

[Bucky]

72. Ukraine simply can't ever be part of Nato. It'd be folly to ever try.

Foreign policy means doing things that make your country safer. Bringing Ukraine into NATO would be the equivalent of Russia forming a defensive alliance with a newly independent Quebec and stationing troops there. We'd shit bricks.

[Leith]

16. Russia needs to understand

that the rest of the world is sick to death of his bullying, lies, provocations, and troll armies.

Though he is not a stupid person, he seems to have a mindset that nothing but shouts and threats can work. He needs to try diplomacy and negotiating with other countries because nothing else he has done has worked very well.

Or he can just continue to be the belligerent warlord of a backward country.

[marie999]

120. He is negotiating with other countries.

[msongs]

21. one suspects the real goal is to re-establish the old soviet union with dictator putin nt

[roamer65]

22. I can see Putin invading the Russian speaking area of Ukraine.

The southeast (Donbas) and southern region across to Moldova.

[leftstreet]

23. DURec

[Tommy Carcetti]

24. They seemed fine with seeking territory in Crimea.

So I don't think that's entirely accurate.

Now, does Russia want all of Ukraine? Probably not. The Western part, where the Ukrainian national sentiment and language is the very strongest, would undoubtedly put up a very strong fight. And the mountainous terrain in that section of the country would favor them heavily.

But I think Putin would certainly not mind at least part of Ukraine.

Including Kyiv, the birthplace of the ancient Rus empire to which both Ukraine and Russia draw their roots but which is firmly in the hands of Ukraine and Ukraine alone.

Notably though, any move by Russia against Kyiv or another more easterly city of Ukraine--such as Kharkiv or Odessa--would likely not be the cakewalk Moscow thinks it would. Ukrainian national sentiment in those cities is also very strong, even as there is more of a linguistic mix of Ukrainian and Russian being spoken.

[WarGamer]

27. Crimea was a different cat... no invasion.

Just a fake referendum after promising the veterans in the area increased pensions and more benefits.

Very pro-Russia region with little geographical connection to Ukraine.

And LITERALLY territory INSIDE the borders of Russia...

[Tommy Carcetti]

28. Well, it is attached to the Ukrainian mainland, so I would beg to differ there.

Even Russia can't say that.

And while ethnic Russians were a majority in Crimea, there was still a sizable minority of Ukrainians and Tatars living there.

Also, there was absolutely an invasion of Crimea in 2014. Russian troops and tanks--sans insignia--took over every major governmental and military installation in the peninsula. There was not a "hot" invasion with battles between Ukrainian and Russian military, but there was absolutely a military invasion nonetheless.

Remember than just four days before the Russian tanks pulled into Simferopol and Sevastopol was when Yanukovych decided to leave Ukraine. The country was in no shape for any sort of military response against Russia at the time. Which is obviously why Putin decided to move in when he did.

[WarGamer]

29. Yes I should have said "around 5 miles of geographic connection to Ukraine..."

Nonetheless, deep inside Russian "territory" from a historical sense.

And yes, I meant "no invasion" meaning no battles or fighting.

But appreciate your knowledge of the facts. :salute:

Many would argue the cultural and historical "bridge" between Krasnodar and Crimea is more "real" than the thin landmass linking Crimea to Ukriane.

[lagomorph777]

33. You express Putin's positions very well.

RT couldn't do it any better.

[Bucky]

73. Thank you, Senator McCarthy

Someone explaining geopolitical facts to you isn't disloyalty. Don't be shallow.

[iemanja]

87. What he "explained" is counterfactual

Crimea was sovereign territory of the Ukraine. As were the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine.

The entire Southwest of the US was historically part of Mexico. Does that mean Mexico should invade and claim it back? His POV is straight from RT. It isn't close to factual.

[Bucky]

91. if "Crimea was sovereign territory of the Ukraine" then it was their sovereign right to realign.

Which they did (albeit in a dubious election).

That said, it's an ethnic Russian province and now it's part of Russia. It had only been jigsawed into Ukraine in 1954 under the post-Stalin Communists as part of a political deal. Historically and ethnically it was Russian. It was Russia's Black Sea port and, once Ukraine started economically cozying up to Eurozone, keeping Crimea out of Russia's hands was the equivalent of trying to pen up a rhinoceros in your neighborhood dog park.

[iemanja]

103. They took it by force

Historically is bullshit, it's justification for war and bloodshed.
You keep defending their wars. The fact is it's repeating Putin's propaganda as well as that pushed by Fox. Congratulations.

I take it you're willing to cede the entire Southwest back to Mexico given your obsession with "historical" territory. The US is going to have a hell of a time getting by without California's economy, and of course the GOP will permanently hold power.

But then Mexico doesn't have Russia's military might, which is precisely what you are justifying.

[EndlessWire]

34. Your reference to "historical"

just backs up the idea that Putin wants to take back all previous land masses that were part of the old Soviet Union. That's not possible now, but still he tries.

He'll still have NATO countries on his border, unless he plans to take them, too.

You can't justify Crimea on that premise. Crimea doesn't belong to him. He's just running around trying to make more land available to Russia, one way or another.

[Bucky]

93. Regarding his NATO borders...

He's definitely stirring up shit in Estonia. I don't know about Latvia, but certainly would like those three little republics neutralized a bit more. He's certainly moving in as many directions as he can. He's got some whopping big allies in our own Republican Party. It's appalling.

But historically Crimea has been under Russian control, even when it was part of the Ukrainian SSR. Even under the Ukrainian democracy it was the main port of the Russian Navy. It was his Guam. So yes, the weird historical accident that put Sevastopol inside Ukraine's borders was bound to be corrected. In many ways, we and Ukraine are lucky it happened relatively bloodlessly.

[iemanja]

49. A historical sense is not the fact of its status at the time of the invasion

Factually, it was part of the Ukraine. We don't need your Russian propaganda.

[EndlessWire]

35. So, you're saying that

it was okay for Putin to seize Crimea because it wasn't smack in the middle of Ukraine?? What did he need troops for, then?

How about, he needed a route for his trade? He took what he needed, and built a connecting bridge. It doesn't have much to do with ethnic Russians, pensions, or pro-Russian sentiment. You have fallen for his false flag.

[48656c6c6f20]

42. Sure it should have appeased Putin

When he annexed the Sudetenland, err I mean Crimea. I'm sure that will satisfy Adoloh, err Putin I mean.

[iemanja]

47. It was an invasion

Crimea was part of the sovereign nation of the Ukraine. Are you getting your info from RT? Your take is exceedingly pro-Russian. Putin is not our friend.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation

[Emile]

26. Putin is not stupid. He has been running his country

for years and I'm sure he knows a lot of tricks to get what he wants.

[EndlessWire]

37. Really

"The Russian goals are obvious... except for the historically illiterate Twitter "experts" and others."

It's a mistake for EU to watch what Putin is doing--REALLY DOING--and then declare that it doesn't mean anything. Whatever happened in WWII, right now Putin via Russia is threatening a country for no good reason other than he wants the territory.

Historically speaking, we have seen other times, other places and other wars, and we KNOW what goes down. And, it's pretty impossible to "focus on internal UKRAINE politics," when we are looking down the barrels of Russian guns pointed at another hapless country. Especially since Putin annexed Crimea without a concern in the world.

If Putin just wants to be an influencer, he should PACK UP AND GO HOME. This is considerably more than an annual war game. We can hardly look away, "nothing happening here, move along." You have got to be kidding.

[William769]

38. Here we go again.

Same old shit again.

[Hortensis]

44. Yup. Basically Putin's once again reasonably seeking to protect Russia

from attack from nations that have forced Russia to invade them many times over the centuries, reluctantly take them over, and run them as Russia-controlled police states.

[William769]

48. Putin is looking for the glory days of the U.S,S.R.

Which wasn't so glory for the citizens.

[uponit7771]

62. +1, anyone who's heard the story of what he was doing on the day crap hit the fan in USSR ...

... knows Putin is an angry vengeful man.

[Hortensis]

66. Sure. Putin's PROMISED to restore the glory of the Soviet Union.

Not all want it, of course. But I've read that the image of a great empire (ignoring dreadful poverty and backwardness of all kinds), which has a right to maintain dozens of lesser states under its control, is baked into centuries of Russian culture. A sort of national megalomania.

[Bucky]

85. I'd say "Russian Empire"

He's an authoritarian, but probably not of a communist. Of course Russian Communism from Stalin on down was never terribly expansionist. It's the Tsars who took Siberia and the Caucuses and Poland. Except for Trotsky, they never really tried to export the revolution. Stalin accepted half of Europe when it fell into his lap, of course. But he wanted puppets, not new conquests. Soviet policy was rarely about more than reasserting control over what the Romanovs had. Stalin never picked a fight with anyone he didn't already control.

Putin's more expansionist than the Bolshies were. He's running an ace game destablizing the west democracies. But he wants more Belaruses, not territory.

[sarisataka]

96. USSR wasn't expansionist?

Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland and Finland would disagree.

As would Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria.

To say he didn't pick a fight is true (technically) of the second group, but their independence was mostly on paper for nearly half a century.

The first group were all victims of unprovoked Soviet aggression and were wholly or partially absorbed into the Soviet Union.

[Bucky]

101. You apparently skipped over parts of what I wrote.

I wrote:

Stalin accepted half of Europe when it fell into his lap, of course. But he wanted puppets, not new conquests. Soviet policy was rarely about more than reasserting control over what the Romanovs had. Stalin never picked a fight with anyone he didn't already control.

Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland and Finland were all part of the Russian Empire. Stalin took bits of Poland for Belarus, true. But only after Poland was dead on the ground. It was essentially a defensive repositioning against Germany.

In case you didn't understand, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Romania, Hungary and Bulgaria were the countries I described as falling into his lap. Where did he try to expand into new places? Not into western Europe. I guess you argue there were communist efforts in Greece, but that was locally driven. It was clearly not a hill Stalin was willing to fight on. Nor was there ever an effort to move into Western Europe after the Germans fell.

Did he push into India? Persia? No, he let the Brits and Americans move in there. Turkey, which should be a natural target for Russian expansion? Nope. Did he pursue the efforts of expansion in Korea? No, the Soviets abstained (instead of blocking) the Security Council's resolution to send in troops to resist Communism. All they needed to do was show up and say "nyet" but they wouldn't even do that to support Communist expansion. There's a world of difference between an expansionist policy into new conquests and simply filling a power vacuum on one's borders.

The actions in Eastern Europe to suppress anti-communist uprisings were purely defensive actions. There were terrible and brutal, of course, but to say communists were evil is not the same thing as saying they were expansionist. They accepted what fell to them, but communist expansion really wasn't on Stalin's agenda. It was arguably on Dzerzhinsky's agenda, but Stalin kept him on a leash. It was on Trotsky's agenda and Stalin had him run out of town.

[sarisataka]

102. That "defensive repositioning"

Is an interesting way to dismiss the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact that pre-arranged the division of independent countries between Hitler and Stalin.

As for the rest, the Soviets didn’t need to annex when they had de facto control. Pushing into countries south would have risked direct conflict with the west. Instead the Soviets chose, as we did, to fight via proxies. Troops ("advisors&quot would only be used where the risks were low.

[rockfordfile]

40. Putin is never to be trusted.

What "Russia wants" is never to be accepted as the truth.

[electric_blue68]

43. I heard earlier that Ukraine is starting up their own military exercises...

is that normal for them at this this particular time of year?
If they have a more, or less known yearly schedule?
Ice vs early mud of Spring?

[Bucky]

86. Maybe they're feeling vulnerable at the moment.

I know, I know, I'm probably going out on a limb here.

[electric_blue68]

113. I imagine some (?many, ?most) of them are for sure. Sigh

[iemanja]

46. They already invaded the Ukraine

remember Crimea? Why wouldn't they do it again?

[lanlady]

82. and the Donbas region of East Ukraine

Beginning in 2014, Russia flooded the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine with paramilitary forces, backed up by criminal gangs that literally carted off the area's wealth (coal, machinery, and other goods) to Russia by rail. They've essentially been annexed, much like Crimea. The currency was switched to the Russian ruble, the administrations are Russian, and citizens are being issued Russian passports.

[iemanja]

83. Did you see this?

https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=16332282

I don't see why Russian wouldn't invade, given the history you discussed.

[Kingofalldems]

84. So they ARE interested in territory?

[denbot]

51. Fuck Russia and their apologists.

From a vet, not a gamer.

[Hekate]

52. Crimea?

[sarisataka]

57. You are partially correct

Russia does want a buffer zone around itself. They prefer any fight begins as far from Moscow as possible.

Their preference is allies and well controlled satellites, such as Belarus. If that is not possible however they are more than willing to seize buffer territory by negotiation or, if necessary, force.

Speaking of laughing, l will bet one shiny dime the news tonight will show Biden talking about an invasion. Should I laugh at him for being a historically illiterate "expert"?

[lanlady]

78. not seeking territory?

It already stole Crimea, the Donbass region of Ukraine, and parts of Moldova and Georgia. Of course Russia wants territory. It's a corrupt, predatory state run by the Russian version of mafia dons. For these people, taking what doesn't belong to them is irresistible.

Russia has no right to dictate to its neighbors what sort of government they should or should not have. It would be one thing if Russia were a well-run state that other states could look up to and emulate. But unless your name is Donald Trump, no one aspires to follow the Russian "model" of extreme kleptocracy coupled with utter disregard for rule of law and human rights.

If Russia wants genuinely Moscow-friendly governments on its perimeter, it needs to undergo a radical transformation and start acting like a state that is worthy of respect, not a bully with anger management issues. Until then they can go f**k themselves.

[Bucky]

94. People making it sound like Crimea was Putin's Sudetenland seriously need to read some history

[radius777]

111. +1. Russia/Putin is a hostile and cancerous force in this world,

and not in any way a legitimate regime. We should expand and strengthen NATO and support pro-Western governments - and force Putin into a subordinate position.

Just as our media normalized Trump the West has made a grievous mistake in normalizing Putin - a KGB thug and dictator who is waging war on the West.

[Kingofalldems]

80. Got a link on that?

Pentagon is wrong?

Link to tweet

[WarGamer]

108. The Pentagon is in the business of war... right KOAD?

[Bucky]

89. Mostly agree. But about China...

I think it's more accurate to say Moscow has a Chinese-friendly government than that China has a Russian-friendly government.

The Russians are too dependent on European fuel customers to be a dominating global threat on the scale China is. It's a marriage of convenience both ways, frankly, cause they feel equally intruded upon by the Atlantic alliance. But I think China has more influence with Russia than the other way around.

[tavernier]

90. I have family in the Baltics

and I spend time there. Putin would swallow up Latvia and the Baltics like a a wolf after little red riding hood if NATO wasn’t a deterrent. He has stirred the pot there daily since his arrival, through his well placed people.

He just wants to be a friendly neighbor?

[Hekate]

115. The OP keeps saying Putin's intent is neighborly, and we are silly alarmists to worry...

Strangely, I don’t believe that, unless it’s “neighborly” to disrupt and subjugate.

As far as disruption goes, born-and-raised-in-the-KGB Putin has done a nearly lethal amount of disruption right here in America. He clearly understands the old divide & conquer maxim, and has been busy in the EU, with NATO, and so on. He had a hand in Brexit, and several years ago the fellow who was heading up the Cal-Exit scheme to get Californians all eager to secede turned out to have his actual headquarters in …. Russia.

I don’t think war is a game, but over the years I have wondered what game some DUers are playing.

[tavernier]

116. Yes.

Most of my family, as well as their homes and possessions were destroyed under that regime. Perhaps some here who haven’t experienced what they did don’t see it as a threat to the USA. Or else… well, what you said about games.

[WarGamer]

121. That's not what I said... maybe you need to reread it.

He most certainly is NOT a good neighbor.

He's just not going to invade Ukraine.

[radius777]

128. He's already 'invaded' Ukraine.

He stole Crimea; he's supporting insurgents and separatists in the eastern part of the country; he's waging cyberwarfare; he's waging disinfo and false flag ops. All in attempt to weaken and install a pro-Russia/anti-NATO puppet govt - it's Putin's modus operandi. He did it to us by installing the ass-clown Trump.

The amassing of troops on their border is as much psychological warfare as anything else. Putin senses the West is at a weak point and is testing us, to see what type of unity and resolve the Western nations have to oppose him.

[WarGamer]

132. Obviously I'm talking about 2022... the current build up on the border.

There won't be an invasion. Even the gov't in Kiev is asking people to stop stoking tension and they don't believe there will be an invasion.

[IcyPeas]

92. didn't the access to the sea also come into play with Crimea?

I always thought Russia would like to have Ukraine because of it's coastline. also that nice big river going right through Ukraine from Belarus.

But I see what you are saying.

[Bucky]

97. The port of Sevastopol has always been the main Black Sea port of the Russian Navy...

....even after Ukraine left the C.I.S. and started cozying up to the west economically. Putin's agreement with Ukraine about the navy was looking precarious (and becoming an ace opportunity for Nato interference a/o espionage) as Ukraine started make trade agreements with the E.U.

Putin was protecting his 3rd largest fleet and his ability to project power into the middle east.

I don't endorse his actions, but they make absolute sense from the POV of his national defense.

[BlueIdaho]

98. Ask yourself why Hitler wanted the Ukraine

And you’ll understand why Putin wants the Ukraine.

[electric_blue68]

114. I don't know about metals or minerals resources but when I was growing up in the...

mid-60's+ the phrase I heard I always heard was -

"Ukraine is the bread basket of The Soviet Union".

[BlueIdaho]

118. Correct! And before that it was called

The breadbasket of Europe. It still has the most fertile soil in Europe. It also has a literal buried treasure in rare tactical resources.

[WarGamer]

119. Just a little piece of trivia... There IS NO "The Ukraine"

"The Ukraine" is an English translation of a Russian language slur for Ukraine.

It basically means "Our border" and Russians use that phrase as a pejorative.

Ukrainians would rather you call their country "Ukraine".

[BlueIdaho]

122. Hey Thanks!

That I did not know, so thanks for filling me in!

[WarGamer]

124. no problem!!

[Xolodno]

109. There is a bit more.

Zelenski also placed Medvedchuk under house arrest, froze his and his political parties assets, which was in opposition and brought down its media capabilities. It was probably on its way to win a good portion of the next elections.

And he hasn't stopped there, now he's going after Poroshenko.

So the ability to get a government that tilts towards Russia or even remains neutral at this point is fading.

It's obvious Putin isn't going to invade as its almost mid February, slow walked the build up and its starting to warm up. However, that doesn't mean they won't convert the stationed forces into a more permanent situation. Thereby, having a daily threat against Ukraine.

And Russia does have economic tools in the quiver. They may use those first during the rest of the year and next. But have a standing army as an ace in the hole, just in case.

[radius777]

110. Ukraine is a sovereign nation and should be in NATO. Putin can go F himself.

The West has appeased Putin for far too long, who annexed Crimea and then interfered in our 2016 elections which gave us Trump and a RW Supreme Court for the next 20 years.

Putin is an anti-Western white supremacist thug like Trump is, an existential threat to liberal democracy.

We should be expanding and strengthening NATO - power/dominance is the only thing thugs understand.

We should also be strongly supporting pro-democracy movements inside of Russian, eg Navalny.

[Roisin Ni Fiachra]

117. Right? Ukraine is a sovereign state. As such, they should be free to join NATO if it is the

democratic will of the majority of their citizenry, and NATO approves their admission.

Who appointed Putin the lord god imperial ruler over Ukraine's affairs? Ukraine should be free to make their own choices in the matter, and everyone else needs STFU and live with the choices Ukraine makes. Putin the Greedy has already invaded and stolen Crimea from Ukraine. So it is not unreasonable to be concerned that he may invade Ukraine again, in order to steal more, or all, of Ukraine's land, if Ukraine does not do what he wants.

How Much Land Does A Man Need?
snip----
"Ah, what a fine fellow!" exclaimed the Chief. "He has gained
much land!"

Pahom's servant came running up and tried to raise him, but he saw
that blood was flowing from his mouth. Pahom was dead!

The Bashkirs clicked their tongues to show their pity.

His servant picked up the spade and dug a grave long enough for
Pahom to lie in, and buried him in it. Six feet from his head to
his heels was all he needed.

https://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/2738/

[tenderfoot]

123. Leave Vladimir Putin ALONE!!!

eom

[William769]

125. People need to understand this is not a right-wing website.

That is all.

[William769]

127. Sometimes the truth hurts.

But the truth will always set you free.

[iemanja]

129. Your POV is echoed on Fox

and in Putin's authoritarian propaganda. It absolutely is right wing. It's not so much your prediction but your justification of that Russian propaganda, including falsifying facts about the Ukraine and Crimea. You clearly thought you were dealing with a bunch of idiots who wouldn't buy your misinformation campaign. You were dead wrong.

[iemanja]

133. There is nothing factual about anything you have posted in regard to this

Your post about Crimea up above was straight from Putin's mouth. You pretended that it wasn't part of the Ukraine when Putin invaded. Then you gave some bullshit to justify it by claiming it was "historically" part of Russia. That isn't justification for war and occupation, which is precisely what you are defending.

Your entire argument for claiming to know that Russia won't invade the Ukraine ignores the fact they have already done so twice, which you deny. Your posts are not truthful in anyway, and all but one or two people here can see it.

I will also note that you've ignored many of the factual posts in response to your misinformation about Russia and the Ukraine.

[sarisataka]

136. Biden tells U.S. citizens to leave Ukraine immediately amid 'troubling' signs of Russian escalation

***
On Friday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told a news conference in Melbourne, Australia, that the government was continuing to “draw down” its embassy in Ukraine amid “very troubling signs of Russian escalation.”

These signs included Moscow moving more troops to the Ukrainian border, Blinken said, reiterating the call for U.S. citizens to immediately leave Ukraine.
***

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/11/biden-tells-us-citizens-to-leave-ukraine-amid-tensions-with-russia.html

So do we laugh at Biden and the Secretary of State and believe Russia when they say they have no plans to invade?