The Invasion of Ukraine, Russia Threatens Finland/Sweden

[TheFlyingDutchman]

Yeah. It's interesting how both America and Russia think that they are goodies and that the other are the badies. From an outside perspective, it looks less like Batman vs Mr. Freeze and more like the Joker vs Mr. Freeze.

So America is frequently guilty of doing terrible things, and we shouldn't sugar-coat that.

But comparing things that the US did 170 years ago, to things that the Russian Federation is doing now, is a bit silly.

Didn't America and some other Western countries invade Iraq and Afghanistan just a couple decades ago?

[Umeria]

It's like George Orwell's 1984.

It really isn't.

1984 was, at its core, a book about how empires need endless war to sustain themselves.

[Port Caverton]

So America is frequently guilty of doing terrible things, and we shouldn't sugar-coat that.

But comparing things that the US did 170 years ago, to things that the Russian Federation is doing now, is a bit silly.

Didn't America and some other Western countries invade Iraq and Afghanistan just a couple decades ago?

Yes and it was based, but that doesn't mean that Russia should invade Ukraine even further. Plus it's a completely differently situation.

[Neanderthaland]

So America is frequently guilty of doing terrible things, and we shouldn't sugar-coat that.

But comparing things that the US did 170 years ago, to things that the Russian Federation is doing now, is a bit silly.

Didn't America and some other Western countries invade Iraq and Afghanistan just a couple decades ago?

Sure, but that's not remotely similar to taking territory from Mexico. Which is what you were talking about.

The Iraq war was one of the worst things the US has done in living memory. And again, we shouldn't sugar-coat it, but if you think that makes it fine for Russia to just waltz into any country they share a border with whenever they feel like it, for any reason they feel like it. And to control the internal politics of every country on their border. And never allow those countries to make treaties with any countries that aren't them....

Well then what you're doing is simping for Russia. Not pointing out "the grand hypocrisy of it all!"

[TheFlyingDutchman]

Didn't America and some other Western countries invade Iraq and Afghanistan just a couple decades ago?

Sure, but that's not remotely similar to taking territory from Mexico. Which is what you were talking about.

The Iraq war was one of the worst things the US has done in living memory. And again, we shouldn't sugar-coat it, but if you think that makes it fine for Russia to just waltz into any country they share a border with whenever they feel like it, for any reason they feel like it. And to control the internal politics of every country on their border. And never allow those countries to make treaties with any countries that aren't them....

Well then what you're doing is simping for Russia. Not pointing out "the grand hypocrisy of it all!"

Which brings me back to my first point: I wonder how Biden would react if Mexico joined the CSTO and allowed Russia to build permnanent military bases there. Would he respect Mexico's sovereignty and decision, or would he act the same way that Putin has at NATO's continuous expansion to Russian borders? I am really curious.

[Neanderthaland]

It really isn't.

1984 was, at its core, a book about how empires need endless war to sustain themselves.

I challenge that interpretation. While that is a theme in 1984, it is not the core or only theme of the book. And is actually kind of the least interesting interpretation of the reading.

But it's enough to say that we don't live in the world of 1984. And while it's fashionable to compare every little thing to 1984, we shouldn't make that comparison so lightly.

[Neanderthaland]

Sure, but that's not remotely similar to taking territory from Mexico. Which is what you were talking about.

The Iraq war was one of the worst things the US has done in living memory. And again, we shouldn't sugar-coat it, but if you think that makes it fine for Russia to just waltz into any country they share a border with whenever they feel like it, for any reason they feel like it. And to control the internal politics of every country on their border. And never allow those countries to make treaties with any countries that aren't them....

Well then what you're doing is simping for Russia. Not pointing out "the grand hypocrisy of it all!"

Which brings me back to my first point: I wonder how Biden would react if Mexico joined the CSTO and allowed Russia to build permnanent military bases there. Would he respect Mexico's sovereignty and decision, or would he act the same way that Putin has at NATO's continuous expansion to Russian borders? I am really curious.

As I pointed out: the last time that happened the country was allowed to remain in the Russian sphere of influence.

[Senkaku]

Didn't America and some other Western countries invade Iraq and Afghanistan just a couple decades ago?

Sure, but that's not remotely similar to taking territory from Mexico. Which is what you were talking about.

Okay, how about practicing non-linear warfare across much of Latin America for the last half century/century

Plus you could argue Iraq is in fact much worse— the Russians have obvious reasons for wanting to control Ukraine, much as we have obvious reasons for wanting to dominate the entire Western Hemisphere; we had pretty much no coherent reason for wanting to reduce Iraq to cinders besides a swirl of grandiose delusions from the Blob-Cheney rightist axis

[TheFlyingDutchman]

Which brings me back to my first point: I wonder how Biden would react if Mexico joined the CSTO and allowed Russia to build permnanent military bases there. Would he respect Mexico's sovereignty and decision, or would he act the same way that Putin has at NATO's continuous expansion to Russian borders? I am really curious.

As I pointed out: the last time that happened the country was allowed to remain in the Russian sphere of influence.

Ukraine is not an island like Cuba. Ukraine and Russia share a long land border. Just like Russia and the the Baltic states.

[Neanderthaland]

Sure, but that's not remotely similar to taking territory from Mexico. Which is what you were talking about.

Okay, how about practicing non-linear warfare across much of Latin America for the last half century/century

Plus you could argue Iraq is in fact much worse— the Russians have obvious reasons for wanting to control Ukraine, much as we have obvious reasons for wanting to dominate the entire Western Hemisphere; we had pretty much no coherent reason for wanting to reduce Iraq to cinders besides a swirl of grandiose delusions from the Blob-Cheney rightist axis

Sure, argue it's worse. I don't care. Please do.

Is what Putin is doing good, acceptable, or in any way just?

No? Yeah, I didn't think so.

[Neanderthaland]

As I pointed out: the last time that happened the country was allowed to remain in the Russian sphere of influence.

Ukraine is not an island like Cuba. Ukraine and Russia share a long land border. Just like Russia and the the Baltic states.

Sure. There are other differences too. But it really doesn't matter much for the comparison. Since the thing everyone is worried about are missiles.

[Senkaku]

Okay, how about practicing non-linear warfare across much of Latin America for the last half century/century

Plus you could argue Iraq is in fact much worse— the Russians have obvious reasons for wanting to control Ukraine, much as we have obvious reasons for wanting to dominate the entire Western Hemisphere; we had pretty much no coherent reason for wanting to reduce Iraq to cinders besides a swirl of grandiose delusions from the Blob-Cheney rightist axis

Sure, argue it's worse. I don't care. Please do.

Is what Putin is doing good, acceptable, or in any way just?

No? Yeah, I didn't think so.

No, but goodness, acceptability, and justice aren’t really relevant when it comes to great powers jockeying over spheres of influence. Was the Guatemalan genocide “good”? I don’t particularly think so, but no other power thought it was worth standing up to the US in its own back yard over it

Poor Ukraine, so far from God and so close to the Russian Federation— I don’t see why I should have to risk getting vaporized because they have the bad luck to have such unpleasant neighbors

[Antipatros]

If we're going to talk about missiles: We need a new INF treaty (or a set of bilateral treaties) which includes Russia, the US, and China at a minimum.

I don't think it's going to happen (especially since Russia is insisting that a post-INF treaty must be considered together with a common security architecture), but it probably should.

[Umeria]

1984 was, at its core, a book about how empires need endless war to sustain themselves.

I challenge that interpretation. While that is a theme in 1984, it is not the core or only theme of the book. And is actually kind of the least interesting interpretation of the reading.

But it's enough to say that we don't live in the world of 1984. And while it's fashionable to compare every little thing to 1984, we shouldn't make that comparison so lightly.

The perpetual war with Eurasia/Eastasia is what allows the Inner Party to dictate every aspect of society. All of the propaganda revolves around hating the enemy. The resources used for the war effort create an artificial scarcity that keeps the people tired, hungry and defeated. Anyone who opposes the authority is accused of working for the enemy. War is repeatedly brought up in the book, pretty much from beginning to end, and Orwell explicitly states that without endless war the entire system would collapse.

[Neanderthaland]

Sure, argue it's worse. I don't care. Please do.

Is what Putin is doing good, acceptable, or in any way just?

No? Yeah, I didn't think so.

No, but goodness, acceptability, and justice aren’t really relevant when it comes to great powers jockeying over spheres of influence. Was the Guatemalan genocide “good”? I don’t particularly think so, but no other power thought it was worth standing up to the US in its own back yard over it

That's a weird example. That's the US deciding it wasn't worth standing up to their own ally rather than anyone being reluctant to stand up to the US. The Soviets were actually perfectly happy to fund an insurgency there, "standing up" to the US. They just had a hard time doing it for logistical reasons.

Poor Ukraine, so far from God and so close to the Russian Federation— I don’t see why I should have to risk getting vaporized because they have the bad luck to have such unpleasant neighbors

Well dictators do this funny thing where, when they violate international law, and nobody does anything, they tend to do it again.

[Senkaku]

Sure, but that's not remotely similar to taking territory from Mexico. Which is what you were talking about.

The Iraq war was one of the worst things the US has done in living memory. And again, we shouldn't sugar-coat it, but if you think that makes it fine for Russia to just waltz into any country they share a border with whenever they feel like it, for any reason they feel like it. And to control the internal politics of every country on their border. And never allow those countries to make treaties with any countries that aren't them....

Well then what you're doing is simping for Russia. Not pointing out "the grand hypocrisy of it all!"

Which brings me back to my first point: I wonder how Biden would react if Mexico joined the CSTO and allowed Russia to build permnanent military bases there. Would he respect Mexico's sovereignty and decision, or would he act the same way that Putin has at NATO's continuous expansion to Russian borders? I am really curious.

We have a softer touch than the Russians. There’d be some payouts, some assassinations, a manufactured scandal or two among the Mexico City political elite, and they’d be back onside before anyone could even say “military-technical solution” (much less mobilize 100k troops lol)

[Neanderthaland]

I challenge that interpretation. While that is a theme in 1984, it is not the core or only theme of the book. And is actually kind of the least interesting interpretation of the reading.

But it's enough to say that we don't live in the world of 1984. And while it's fashionable to compare every little thing to 1984, we shouldn't make that comparison so lightly.

The perpetual war with Eurasia/Eastasia is what allows the Inner Party to dictate every aspect of society. All of the propaganda revolves around hating the enemy. The resources used for the war effort create an artificial scarcity that keeps the people tired, hungry and defeated. Anyone who opposes the authority is accused of working for the enemy. War is repeatedly brought up in the book, pretty much from beginning to end, and Orwell explicitly states that without endless war the entire system would collapse.

Again, I'm not saying that's not in there. I'm just saying that's the least interesting reading of the book. And is hardly the "core theme."

[Senkaku]

No, but goodness, acceptability, and justice aren’t really relevant when it comes to great powers jockeying over spheres of influence. Was the Guatemalan genocide “good”? I don’t particularly think so, but no other power thought it was worth standing up to the US in its own back yard over it

That's a weird example. That's the US deciding it wasn't worth standing up to their own ally rather than anyone being reluctant to stand up to the US. The Soviets were actually perfectly happy to fund an insurgency there, "standing up" to the US. They just had a hard time doing it for logistical reasons.

This is one of the most egregious Wikipedia-skim-level understanding of history posts I’ve seen on this site to date, as well as completely missing my point

Did the Soviets threaten us w nuclear war for enabling and collaborating with a literal genocide and one of the most corrupt & brutal military dictatorships of the 20th century? No? Then what possibly justifies us implicitly threatening Russia with the same for far more limited activities in Ukraine?

Poor Ukraine, so far from God and so close to the Russian Federation— I don’t see why I should have to risk getting vaporized because they have the bad luck to have such unpleasant neighbors

Well dictators do this funny thing where, when they violate international law, and nobody does anything, they tend to do it again.

Fucking please, this Munich shit was worn out even in ‘92 and ‘03 when the Bushes tried it with Saddam. Russia is a European gas colony run by abusive managers; if their asking price for keeping up a facade of power & autonomy for their grindingly miserable population is Ukraine I say let them have it— the idea that we’ll have some sort of 7 Days to the River Rhine situation in a couple years if we don’t draw a red line at Odessa is just deranged (did the US try to steamroll the whole Caribbean after we invaded Grenada?)

[TheFlyingDutchman]

Sure, argue it's worse. I don't care. Please do.

Is what Putin is doing good, acceptable, or in any way just?

No? Yeah, I didn't think so.

No, but goodness, acceptability, and justice aren’t really relevant when it comes to great powers jockeying over spheres of influence. Was the Guatemalan genocide “good”? I don’t particularly think so, but no other power thought it was worth standing up to the US in its own back yard over it

Poor Ukraine, so far from God and so close to the Russian Federation— I don’t see why I should have to risk getting vaporized because they have the bad luck to have such unpleasant neighbors

Putting that aside, Ukraine is on the other side of the world from the US. When people enlist in the United States Armed Forces, it is protect the US, not to fight on the behalf of other nations. What does a farmer in Nebraska care about Ukraine? What does a factory worker in Michigan care about Ukraine? What does an oil refinery worker in Texas care about Ukraine? What does a computer programmer in California care about Ukraine? What does a retiree in Florida care about Ukraine?

Certainly not enough to risk a bloody war over it. Most Americans probably can't even find Ukraine in an unmarked map. But plenty are probably tired of Biden's saber rattling.

[Senkaku]

But plenty are probably tired of Biden's saber rattling.

The idea that this is all just US elite warmongering or European hysteria is just as delusional as the idea that this is our Sudetenland moment with Putin the Great Dictator— Biden isn’t the one stacking up armored divisions 200 miles from Kiev or making absurd & obvious nonstarter ultimatums to NATO. The Kremlin’s down bad at home and spoiling for what they hope will be a manageable war that’ll take everyone’s mind off 600,000 covid deaths or whatever they’re at now, and appears to have badly miscalculated the appetite for war profiteering in the American military-industrial complex (as well as the risk tolerance of America’s senile gerontocrats)

[GB and Ireland]

It's not worth the west getting involved.

Somebody made a good point about how the US would react to Russia constructing facilities in Mexico.

[TheFlyingDutchman]

It's not worth the west getting involved.

Somebody made a good point about how the US would react to Russia constructing facilities in Mexico.

Exactly. And that was me.

[-Astoria-]

It's not worth the west getting involved.

Somebody made a good point about how the US would react to Russia constructing facilities in Mexico.

Maybe they same way they did when nuclear missiles were on Cuba sixty years ago?

[Umeria]

The perpetual war with Eurasia/Eastasia is what allows the Inner Party to dictate every aspect of society. All of the propaganda revolves around hating the enemy. The resources used for the war effort create an artificial scarcity that keeps the people tired, hungry and defeated. Anyone who opposes the authority is accused of working for the enemy. War is repeatedly brought up in the book, pretty much from beginning to end, and Orwell explicitly states that without endless war the entire system would collapse.

Again, I'm not saying that's not in there. I'm just saying that's the least interesting reading of the book. And is hardly the "core theme."

I'm not sure what being "interesting" has to do with anything. War is what ties together every other aspect of the book, which in my opinion makes it the core theme.

[Hakinda Herseyi Duymak istiyorum]

Look, laws are binding texts. Do you think we will let the Montreux Convention perish? We do not want war, we do not want blood, those who pursue imperialist interests should stay away from the European Union states.Throughout their history, political Islamists have thought of money in their pockets, not people. The Channel Istanbul occupation project is both a political occupation project and an eco-genocide.

None of this has anything to do with "political islamists".

The political thought of those who came to power in Turkey in 2003 with the permission of the USA is political Islamist. Unfortunately, Turkey only acts in the interests of political people.

Look, laws are binding texts. Do you think we will let the Montreux Convention perish? We do not want war, we do not want blood, those who pursue imperialist interests should stay away from the European Union states.Throughout their history, political Islamists have thought of money in their pockets, not people. The Channel Istanbul occupation project is both a political occupation project and an eco-genocide.

Wut?

I’m literally saying I don’t think there’s going to be war in either that sea internal to Turkey or in the Black Sea - and especially not in the way of violations of said treaty. At most, maybe Russia goes after Ukraine with whatever navy they have there.

Look, I can't express myself. Universal agreements are truly binding diplomatic documents. For example, the clear indication of a crime in the law legally binds that action to the law. Assumptions are just assumptions, laws are protective.