This thread is permanently archived
This is a question for the Russians
| Fuck putin, saying this as a Russian. And I really doubt he's going to invade Ukraine.
| Wtf is happening
| Russians at it again tryin rush b
| I obviously don't want that. Why would I want anyone to start a war?
| Ukraine in NATO is an existential threat to the Russian security. Until the US and Europe pretend to not realize it, the only way to stop Ukraine from joining NATO is war.
This would hurt Russia a lot, but there is simply no other choice.
| Though, I would want the US and Europe shallow their pride and forbid Ukraine to join NATO for 50 years or something. If that is the case, I don't see any reason for a war.
| Like, yeah, you think you are the good guys and expanding NATO should not be a big deal for Russia.
However, Yugoslavia happened not too long ago. In case of a political crisis in my country, I don't want NATO to have more opportunities for expansion.
| >>00c87a
Fucking hell, no one's going to let us into NATO anyway. With all possible love and respect for my country, it kinda sucks, and would probably only be detrimental for US and Europe. Putin should be able to see this as well, I don't think a full-scale war is happening any time soon. If it actually does happen, Russia's gonna lose a whole lot more than it would gain. Not in the direct conflict, mind you, it totally can stomp us, but in international relationships.
| >>832497
>you should forbid this country from joining your group because it's bad for my country
Russia should have no say in it, it should be up to Ukraine. Stop acting like Ukraine still belongs to you.
| >>832499
I agree. I also think that this war will not happen, but it seems Putin wants some guarantees from the west to sleep better at night.
>>832500
> Russia should have no say in it
Like I said, Ukraine in NATO is an existential threat to the Russian security. You see, my country's safety worth more than an abstract belief that a foreign country should have a right to decide it's own fate.
| Also, Ukraine doesn't belong to me. Even Russia doesn't belong to me. I even don't like Putin.
However, I think in this case his actions make sense if you know enough history.
| >>832507 Even if they did invade, capturing is another story. Not every country will bend the knee for another country invading it's territory. And even IF Putin did succeed, what is there to gain? You even have Russian citizens who are against the idea of confrontation. No one see's this as a good thing at all, and just want things to be at peace.
| >>832505
> Ukraine in NATO is an existential threat to the Russian security.
NATO is a defensive alliance, nothing more. NATO is only a threat to Russia if Russia plans to start wars with Europe, in which case the threat to "Russias security" is 100% warranted.
You're a product of propaganda, sonny.
| >>832529 every alliance calls itself defensive. By the way, did Yugoslavia attack any NATO member? It didn't. It was bombed by NATO anyway.
I am not saying it was wrong to bomb Yugoslavia. I am saying there was a precedent of aggression from NATO.
NATO also "helped" Afghanistan with intervention. Where is Afghanistan now? It is now being controlled by a fucking Taliban...
| >>00c87a
>I even don't like Putin
>Approves Russia reclaiming their former soviet country that doesn't want to be assimilated
You're definitely on crack lol
| >>832538
>did Yugoslavia attack any NATO member? It didn't. It was bombed by NATO anyway.
Yugoslavia commited fucking genocide on civilians and was bombed by NATO as a direct retaliation. A retaliation that ended the war and saved millions of lives, no less. All on the behalf of UNs security council.
Trying to paint NATO as the aggressors in this case is inherently dishonest and only proves that you do not even understand the core principle behind the alliance, or even UN.
| >>832539
>Russia reclaiming their former soviet country that doesn't want to be assimilated
Sorry, g/u/rl, you have no idea what you are talking about.
| >>832540
To specify, it was the Bosnian Serb Army that commited genocide and was bombed as a retaliation.
| >>832540 like I said, I don't judge the bombings. I just don't want a "defensive" alliance near my borders that can bomb me if it doesn't like my internal politics. Your core principles are good and all, but keep them to yourself.
| >>832538
By the way, just because you ignored this argument it doesn't make it any less true:
NATO is only a threat to Russia if Russia plans to start wars with Europe, in which case the threat to "Russias security" is 100% warranted.
*Everybody* knows that Russia doesn't want NATO on their doorsteps because their long-term plan is to dismantle their sovereignty and expand its borders into those countries, and NATO would rightfully prevent that.
| >>832544
>I just don't want a "defensive" alliance near my borders that can bomb me if it doesn't like my internal politics.
As I said earlier, the only reason you fear this is because you're a product of propaganda. NATO has no history of bombing sovereign countries for their internal politics. It has never happened.
But maybe secessionist armies commiting actual real fucking genocide on civilians is nothing but "internal politics" in your apologist eyes??
| >>832505 I have an inkling of an idea as to why you consider such, but can you expand more upon what you think will threaten Russian security should Ukraine join NATO?
| >>00c87a >>c18e17
>in b4 this samefag ignores valid points that proves him wrong in leu of spamming anti-"western" propaganda with multiple IDs
| >>832529 The issue is made complex by the annexation of Crimea. The people there voted to join the Russian federation (allegedly, but the fact remains). However, neither Ukraine nor much of the west recognized this, seeing it as a Russian occupation, meaning NATO would then have to support Ukraine should they attempt to take back Crimea.
| After the fall of Soviet Union, Russia wanted to join the EU. You rejected it. Then Russia asked many times to stop NATO expansion. You didn't stop.
So, yeah, I get it, you are on the right side of history. Good for you. But I don't trust you and you core principles one bit. Europe is one thing, but to trust the US? No, not today. Better war and isolation.
| >>832549 nothing at first. However, in case of some internal conflict, NATO on behalf of the US can join in to one side. The side who is definitely good for the US and not Russia.
That is, of course, just a possibility. But you don't want to take any chances since Russia has a lot of internal issues that can fire at any time.
| For example, what if one part of Russia declares independence and the only way to suppress it is to use force? Then a good old principles of NATO might join to the party.
| Like, that happened many times to a lot of countries. You would have to be naive to believe that the west would just say "hey, let Russia just deal with it themselves".
| You will hear that:
1) Ukraine started it.
2) The Ukrainians are Nazis.
3) It's all the CIA/MI6/NATO's fault.
4) Russia's neighbors joining an alliance is a violation of russia's sovereignity/security/internal politics somehow
Each of these will be a lie. The people who make these claims - on the Right and the Left - are Russian stooges serving a murderous dictator.
| >>832553
It is highly unlikely that a complete stranger just happened to join the thread only to ask leading questions to >>00c87a right after he got debated into the ground. For the 30th time in a row...
Obvious samefag is obvious.
>>c18e17 >>00c87a
>>c18e17 >>00c87a
>>c18e17 >>00c87a
>>c18e17 >>00c87a
>>c18e17 >>00c87a
>>c18e17 >>00c87a
| Sorry, guys, you are retarded...
| >>832547 > *Everybody* knows that Russia doesn't want NATO on their doorsteps because their long-term plan is to dismantle their sovereignty and expand its borders into those countries
Gosh, and it is me who is a victim of propaganda. Where did you read this plan, I wonder?
> NATO has no history of bombing sovereign countries for their internal politics. It has never happened.
You meant to say it has never happened _yet_. Do you know the future or something?
| I can't type without any typos*
| >>832559 Ok, retard. I doubt you brainless assholes would think otherwise, so whatever.
>>832561 I think it's natural for a country to be imperialistic, I doubt Russia is any different.
| Did y'all niggers forget about russian troll farms? They're paid to do this.
| >>832565
Everyone knows... Well except for that one clueless troll who think's he's fooling anyone here. lol
| >>832579 >>832565
G/u/rls, it is a board from a cyberpunk bartender simulator for, like, 20 people. Take your meds. (>>00c87a)
| >>832560
You know what else has never happened yet?
Your next door neighbor hasn't kicked down your door and beat you for doing something that annoyed them.
But it might happen. So maybe you should kick your neighbors out before they can.
I mean, comparing Russian and US history, neither are 'good guys'. But only one side still has artic prison camps that violate UN human rights standards.
| This thread was much better and much more civil before it got moved to /new/. Coincidence? I think not.
| 1
Imagine thinking that every sovereign state's interests are equally valued in geopolitics
The sovereignty of Ukraine after 1994 is built on the idea of it being a buffer between Western Europe (NATO (US)) and Russia who inherited nuclear weapons from USSR. Same for Belarus, and Baltic states. The latter joined NATO when Russia was unable to do anything about it but at least they're not being pumped full of modern defensive weapon systems with medium-range offensive capabilities.
| 2
Ukraine EU and NATO membership would mean
1) Disruption of the whole trade and customs agreements system which was established to keep Ukraine discouraged from leaving Russian SOI, particularly fuel prices;
2) NATO reign of Black Sea waters and loss of Sevastopol naval base which was being leased to Russia since the USSR fell. Hence, Crimea annex;
3) Another potential foothold for weapon systems on the Russian border, same as Baltics, which would continue to wreck nuclear parity.
| 3
So as soon as post-USSR status quo was tipped in Bucharest, 2008, Russia denied Georgia's control of South Osetia, and when it tipped again in Ukraine, supported separatist movements, to delay their NATO aspirations by years.
I have no idea why people don't see simularities to Monroe doctrine and instead jump to argue for Ukrainian right to join any military alliances, as if these questions are decided in a vacuum by well-informed citizens' vote.
| 4
It's the atomic club members whose security matters ultimately, even while no one wants using those weapons anytime soon. There was a great deal of joint work done in the cold war by diplomats and strategists to formulate those treaties and balances, and people forget them as if global nuclear armaments poofed out of existence in 1991 (refer to: "If you are good guys, then NATO is not a threat to you" reddit-tier take).
| 5
Obviously: the whole affair is ruinous for Ukrainian people, especially those who lost lives or livelihood. Half of my extended family lives in eastern Ukraine and I worry for them. Also sucks for anyone wishing to have an independent country and enjoy modern freedoms.
I'm only saying that geopolitics doesn't deal in human-scale tragedies and never will. If you hear sob stories or snappy analogies as opposed to boring pragmatism, it's propaganda talking or someone who ate it up.
| >>833213
>The sovereignty of Ukraine after 1994 is built on the idea of it being a buffer between Western Europe (NATO (US)) and Russia
Stopped reading right there. What a load of bullshit lol
| If youre from the USA, just imagine russia would have military bases in canada or mexico, performing military maneuvers regularly while being famous for playing world police and intervening in lots of other countries with military, secret services and economically. Would you feel secure?
Even people who don't like Putins policy in the country, acknowledge that he stabilized and hardened it, so that it could no become Yugoslavia 2.0 (where the USA/NATO where clearly aggressors)
| Yugoslavia 2.0 is a gargantuan stretch but yeah. The only reason you wouldn't see Ukrainian expansion to nato as aggression is if you see the west as unabashedly good.
| >>669d4f
Ukraine as a nation was invented from whole cloth by Russians (and cemented by Austro-Hungarians) during the 1800s to begin with.
No such thing as a historically Ukrainian nation existed, for what historiography now calls proto-Ukrainian states were not remotely related to the culture that was produced in order to legitimize post-1994 Ukraine.
The purpose of this was to first destabilize, and then prevent the restitution of Poland-Lithuania (viz. Khmelnytsky Uprising).
1/2
| I consider that the Russian view that Ukraine exists as a buffer state is valid, however the Russian should be aware that Ukrainian independence efforts are a result of their own propaganda. Likewise, efforts made by Ukrainians to preserve that independence are their own fault and whatever emerges of their doing so ought to be blamed on Russia itself.
>t. autism pro
2/2
| >>833307
Correction:
>Ukraine as a nation was invented from whole cloth by Russians (and cemented by Austro-Hungarians) during the 1800s to begin with.
should have been
>Ukraine as a nation was invented from whole cloth by Russians (and cemented by Austro-Hungarians during the 1800s) to begin with.
Thank you. <3
| >>a241c1
You are right in that it's absolutely the same as the Monroe doctrine in practice.
But it's also true that not every country matters on a geopolitical scale. Mismanagement of their own economy has effectively pushed Russia out of the top level. Sure, they've still got nukes, but so does France.
Neither country has the economic or cultural clout to stand toe to toe with the US or China.
| Putin just fails to recognize that.
| Once you let russia invade ukraine, you'll see china inventing stuff from their ancient chen long, pre-dinosaur map in which south east asia is part if china, therefore they have the right to invade.
This thread is permanently archived
| What's your stance on the whole thing with Putin wanting to invade Ukraine? I'm sure someone's already asked this question before, but are you for the idea; or just against it entirely?