Russian Invasion of Ukraine

[Keef]

I don't think they should unless there's iminent danger.

The proper reaction to a threat is to prepare for the possibility it could happen. You don't install a door lock on your house after a burglar breaks in. You lock the door to stop them in the first place. That's exactly what joining NATO does, it locks the door to a Russian attack. If any attack is even attempted, it gets stopped right there at the border by the full force of NATO. It's called defense.

 

[Joey D]

It wasn't due to the lack of trying. We'll never know what would've happened if Ukraine just agreed to be neutral, but it's a step that should've been taken. I'm not justifying what Putin did, but if he's the evil POS everyone thinks he is, why not just avoid the trouble? You don't see a bear in the woods and **** with it, even if you're armed and can kill it easily.

Finland has been neutral and Russia still provoked them. This is just one of many articles on the subject, but this is from 2020 when Russia Su-27's violated Finnish airspace:

2 Russian aircraft suspected of violating Finland's airspace

HELSINKI (AP) — Two Russian military aircraft are suspected of having violated Finland's airspace close to its capital city of Helsinki, Finland’s defense ministry said Tuesday. The ministry said in a brief statement that two Russian Su-27 fighter jets allegedly violated Finland’s airspace over...

apnews.com

Or you know, there was the incident in March where Russia violated Swedish airspace with two aircraft that were equipped with nuclear weapons:

Russian jets carrying nuclear weapons violated Swedish airspace - Euractiv

Two Russian warplanes loaded with nuclear weapons violated Swedish airspace earlier in March, according to information provided to news programme TV4 Nyheter. A total of four Russian aircraft violated Swedish airspace off Gotland on 2 March, when Finland and Sweden...

www.euractiv.com

Hell, this is an article going all the way to 2016 that talks about Russia provoking the Nordic countries:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2016-11-02/russias-ramping-up-for-war-where-nobodys-looking

Sweden and Finland getting to the point of joining NATO isn't something that they're just doing on a whim. Russia has been provoking them for decades.

Also, in the geopolitical sphere, simply ignoring an authoritarian dictator who's doing his best to LARP as Hitler, isn't the way you solve the issue. The only thing Putin is going to understand at this point is force because he sure as hell doesn't understand neutrality, diplomacy, or even complete and utter economic ruin.

 

[Brett]

It's a problem to antagonize Putin further. There's really no need voluntarily escalate the situation. Unless you believe Putin's intention is purely aggressive/territorial and has nothing to do with NATO's expansion.

Finland and Sweden joining NATO is not voluntarily escalating the situation. Putin did that already with his rhetoric towards Finland/Sweden and by invading Ukraine, among other former Soviet bloc countries. You seem to think Putin in the victim in this situation.

Any country would feel antagonized if another country on its borders starts arming up. The situation is bad enough and I don't see any signs that Putin would invade Finalnd. Joining NATO at this point is just unnecessarily provacative. Remember what we say about police officers, it's better to de-escalate than escalate, even if the other person/party is in the wrong.

Again, out the window. Putin already escalated the situation. Putin is not the victim.

It wasn't due to the lack of trying. We'll never know what would've happened if Ukraine just agreed to be neutral, but it's a step that should've been taken. I'm not justifying what Putin did, but if he's the evil POS everyone thinks he is, why not just avoid the trouble? You don't see a bear in the woods and **** with it, even if you're armed and can kill it easily.

We know exactly what would have happened if Ukraine agreed to be neutral. Putin would have continued to attempt to grab more and more of Ukraine.

Is that bear in the woods threatening me or acting in a peaceful manner? If the bear is acting like Putin is right now, then you better believe I am taking steps to protect myself in a potential confrontation with said bear.

 

[Tornado]

Did I kill your dog or something? I know I've been making a record number of friends the past couple of days here, but it's hilarious how you're reacting with the poop emoji to all my posts

Perhaps don't repeat the same talking points of the person who only posts in this thread to express his barely-restrained joy at how great a job his government is doing at bombing Ukrainian civilian centers, then.

 

[eran0004]

It's a problem to antagonize Putin further. There's really no need voluntarily escalate the situation. Unless you believe Putin's intention is purely aggressive/territorial and has nothing to do with NATO's expansion.

Sure, it might be a problem to antagonise Putin, but it’s a far smaller problem than the problem of abandoning the souvereignity of your country because of fear of what Russia may do. Ukraine is proof that Russia has no moral issues* with invading their neighbours for no reason, Russia has gone from a hypothetical threat to a very real threat.

Russia is absolutely the aggressor here, not NATO. Russia is the only country who has invaded Ukraine because of their desire to join NATO. Is it really NATO that is the problem, or is it Russia?

(*although they have run into plenty of other issues)

 

[Dotini]

Is it really NATO that is the problem, or is it Russia?

Russia is the problem. We cannot allow a multipolar world. We need a rules-based unipolar world order.

 

[axletramp]

If Russia wasn’t the problem, then why have they brought in a new law that sends there own people to prison for up to 15 years for reporting anything other than what Putin deems the “truth”? Doesn’t that make even the most patriotic Russian question that perhaps he’s the bad guy here?

He did that. Not NATO, not Ukraine, not anyone.

 

[Blitz24]

Perhaps don't repeat the same talking points of the person who only posts in this thread to express his barely-restrained joy at how great a job his government is doing at bombing Ukrainian civilian centers, then.

Plus the other person who feels NATO caused all of this, including the desertification of the Sahel, probably.

 

[UKMikey]

Did I kill your dog or something? I know I've been making a record number of friends the past couple of days here, but it's hilarious how you're reacting with the poop emoji to all my posts 😂

That was a mistake. I only meant to poo your first post and took the second one back off. Blaming Finland and Sweden for antagonising Putin by wanting to join NATO is a pretty **** take though. Hopefully the other replies you received have clued you into why we think that way.

 

[TexRex]

Hopefully the other replies you received have clued you into why we think that way.

That's optimistic. I think it's more likely to affirm their victimhood and reinforce the feeling that they're outnumbered.

 

[inCloud]

 

[Carbonox]

The orcs know of nothing but further escalation.

 

[Blitz24]

The orcs know of nothing but further escalation.

This is threat number 15 to NATO now, correct? I've lost count.

 

[Joey D]

Well, that's certainly bold of Russia to go after a NATO country. A war with Poland would last maybe a couple of days before Moscow is a smoldering crater in the ground. Seem like it's just Russia blowing smoke up everyone's backside again because they don't have a real military to do anything or effective leadership.

 

[axletramp]

We’ll, at least Russia have won the Irony War.

 

[Tornado]

The orcs know of nothing but further escalation.

To be fair, Poland shouldn't have antagonized Putin further by joining NATO...


In 1999.

 

[McLaren]

You just said it yourself. They're reacting. I don't think they should unless there's iminent danger. They're of course free to do whatever they like, but it's a risky game and could end up causing an unnecessary death toll and for what? What does anyone gain out of this? Other than arms dealers..

So, what's the alternative? Wait around as Russia continuously screws around their borders with military equipment?

It's weird your asking questions that should be directed at Putin instead.

 

[Blitz24]

To be fair, Poland shouldn't have antagonized Putin further by joining NATO...


In 1999.

News travels slowly these days. They apparently just found out. I wonder when they will claim they must "denazify" Germany?

 

[Touring Mars]

Well, that's certainly bold of Russia to go after a NATO country. A war with Poland would last maybe a couple of days before Moscow is a smoldering crater in the ground. Seem like it's just Russia blowing smoke up everyone's backside again because they don't have a real military to do anything or effective leadership.

Putin's calculus has always been that the 'decadent West' has no appetite for the kinds of war Russia can bring upon them, either a war of attrition that could last for years or nuclear holocaust.

Putin is going for broke here, and he's spent decades manoeuvring himself into a position of absolute power with access to the ultimate power - he is now exactly where he has always wanted to be, and now finally he has the opportunity to do what he has always wanted to do... exact revenge on the West for the humiliation of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and wreck the current global status quo, starting with the destabilisation of Europe and, ultimately, what Putin perceives as a US-led world order.

Putin is arguably right insomuch as no-one wants nuclear holocaust, but the alternative is pretty horrible too - an emboldened nuclear aggressor state that is willing to threaten nuclear holocaust if anyone stands in their way. Sadly, the only way to stop Putin is to stand up to him - if he really is bluffing, then his bluff must be called - and if he is not bluffing, he can't be stopped anyway.

So, the idea that NATO should back down and hope that Putin 'sees sense' and suddenly reverts to a peaceful attitude towards, well, anyone... is frankly nonsensical and will not deliver anything good. On the contrary, NATO and many others besides are faced with the spectre of a nuclear terrorist state that will literally stop at nothing to get their way, which must be met with equal/greater force.

If Russia attacks Poland or any other NATO state, Russia will be wiped out. Every nation on Earth must now be ready to confront this horrible prospect, because sadly Russia's 'assured destruction' is the only card that Putin is leaving the rest of the world to play. Let's hope the mad ****** dies before it comes to that.

 

[Blitz24]

Putin's calculus has always been that the 'decadent West' has no appetite for the kinds of war Russia can bring upon them, either a war of attrition that could last for years or nuclear holocaust.

Putin is going for broke here, and he's spent decades manoeuvring himself into a position of absolute power with access to the ultimate power - he is now exactly where he has always wanted to be, and now finally he has the opportunity to do what he has always wanted to do... exact revenge on the West for the humiliation of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and wreck the current global status quo, starting with the destabilisation of Europe and, ultimately, what Putin perceives as a US-led world order.

Putin is arguably right insomuch as no-one wants nuclear holocaust, but the alternative is pretty horrible - an emboldened nuclear aggressor state that is willing to threaten nuclear holocaust if anyone stands in their way. Sadly, the only way to stop Putin is to stand up to him - if he really is bluffing, then his bluff must be called - and if he is not bluffing, he can't be stopped anyway.

So, the idea that NATO should back down and hope that Putin 'sees sense' and suddenly reverts to a peaceful attitude towards, well, anyone... is frankly nonsensical and will not deliver anything good. On the contrary, NATO and many others besides are faced with the spectre of a nuclear terrorist state that will literally stop at nothing to get their way, which must be met with equal/greater force. if Russia attacks Poland or any other NATO state, Russia will be wiped out. Every nation on Earth must now be ready to confront this horrible prospect, because sadly Russia's 'assured destruction' is the only card that Putin is leaving the rest of the world to play. Let's hope the mad ****** dies before it comes to that.

Well, there will be an axis here. Iran and North Korea might use the cover to use their own nukes (or finish up and then use them).

 

[McLaren]

Well, there will be an axis here. Iran and North Korea might use the cover to use their own nukes (or finish up and then use them).

N. Korea might be having other issues to worry about as it went into lockdown following a "mysterious" virus that's starting to ravage a country w/ no Covid vaccinations & weak population.

 

[unit-one]

News travels slowly these days. They apparently just found out. I wonder when they will claim they must "denazify" Germany?

 

[R3V]

Not sure I agree with that. To date, Russia hasn't backed up any threat beyond Ukraine. That's why their threats are always so vague.

They're backed into a corner now and can only afford to be patient. It's never a good idea to put someone into a corner. And no, admitting defeat or anything like that is not an exit (in their mind). Not after what's happened. Sunk cost fallacy kicks in hard even with someone without a massive ego.

Saying "You can never join NATO because you're too close to me" is scarily akin to a preschool playground fight...which isn't gonna work-out when such petulance is backed-up with nuclear arms.

Out of all the responses I saw, yours is just not reasonable. Are you seriously suggesting that a neighbboring country declaring an intention to join your "enemies" is like a preschol fight? Seriously? What did your country do when others in Latin America even hinted at aligning with the Soviets? You didn't even have to share a border....

Finland has been neutral and Russia still provoked them. This is just one of many articles on the subject, but this is from 2020 when Russia Su-27's violated Finnish airspace:

2 Russian aircraft suspected of violating Finland's airspace

HELSINKI (AP) — Two Russian military aircraft are suspected of having violated Finland's airspace close to its capital city of Helsinki, Finland’s defense ministry said Tuesday. The ministry said in a brief statement that two Russian Su-27 fighter jets allegedly violated Finland’s airspace over...

apnews.com

Or you know, there was the incident in March where Russia violated Swedish airspace with two aircraft that were equipped with nuclear weapons:

Russian jets carrying nuclear weapons violated Swedish airspace - Euractiv

Two Russian warplanes loaded with nuclear weapons violated Swedish airspace earlier in March, according to information provided to news programme TV4 Nyheter. A total of four Russian aircraft violated Swedish airspace off Gotland on 2 March, when Finland and Sweden...

www.euractiv.com

Hell, this is an article going all the way to 2016 that talks about Russia provoking the Nordic countries:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2016-11-02/russias-ramping-up-for-war-where-nobodys-looking

Sweden and Finland getting to the point of joining NATO isn't something that they're just doing on a whim. Russia has been provoking them for decades.

Also, in the geopolitical sphere, simply ignoring an authoritarian dictator who's doing his best to LARP as Hitler, isn't the way you solve the issue. The only thing Putin is going to understand at this point is force because he sure as hell doesn't understand neutrality, diplomacy, or even complete and utter economic ruin.

This is a chicken and egg thing that'll can go back over 100 years. It's beyond the point. When someone's waiting for an excuse to attack, you simply don't give it to him. Let him take the first punch if he dares. Finland joining NATO at this point would seem like a soft pre-emptive strike. I don't see the rush when the risk is so high.

Putin is not the victim.

No one said he is.

We know exactly what would have happened if Ukraine agreed to be neutral. Putin would have continued to attempt to grab more and more of Ukraine.

We don't. Dr. Strange is not on this board.

Perhaps don't repeat the same talking points of the person who only posts in this thread to express his barely-restrained joy at how great a job his government is doing at bombing Ukrainian civilian centers, then.

I'm sorry, who are you talking about here? I'm fairly new to this sub-forum and only recognize famine and the few others from the America thread.

Ukraine is proof that Russia has no moral issues* with invading their neighbours for no reason

But...

Russia is the only country who has invaded Ukraine because of their desire to join NATO.

You just mentioned a reason right there.

A reason is not an excuse btw, before anyone jumps at this.

Is it really NATO that is the problem, or is it Russia?

Prior to the invasion, I would've said NATO shares 80% of the blame. The invasion itself, I find inexcusable given the reality of what was happening. So yes, Russia?

What's sad is that the west is reacting to Putin the same way Putin reacted to the west. One can only wish a diplomatic solution is miraclously found before things get truly out of hand. There's no winners.

 

[axletramp]

They're backed into a corner now and can only afford to be patient. It's never a good idea to put someone into a corner. And no, admitting defeat or anything like that is not an exit (in their mind). Not after what's happened. Sunk cost fallacy kicks in hard even with someone without a massive ego.

A corner of their own making. But let’s just back it up here. I understand that you’re seeing this from Putin’s perspective - I get that. But how do you see it? Can you see that the world outside is perceiving this through facts and evidence, not political rhetoric?

 

[Touring Mars]

 

[Dotini]

The existential problem is, we have a multipolar world with 3 so-called superpowers, numerous smaller nuclear powers and many uncontrollable nationalist and/or religiously zealous states. The superpowers and some of the lesser nuclear and non-nuclear powers have "spheres of influence" in which they treat neighboring states aggressively. To me, this seems like a poor global system if the goal is peace, justice and prosperity for the many. We really should have a unipolar world order with no spheres of influence and no nuclear weapons. A good first step to achieving this vision would be to destroy Russia economically with sanctions while bleeding them to death in a limited battlefield such as Ukraine. Then rinse and repeat with China, and so on down the line. In order to have a new paradigm, we must first destroy the old one.

 

[R3V]

A corner of their own making. But let’s just back it up here. I understand that you’re seeing this from Putin’s perspective - I get that. But how do you see it? Can you see that the world outside is perceiving this through facts and evidence, not political rhetoric?

I'm not sure I made it clear. I see it as a **** show like a bad marriage. At some point it doesn't matter who started what and both parties need to stop making things worse.

 

[axletramp]

I'm not sure I made it clear. I see it as a **** show like a bad marriage. At some point it doesn't matter who started what and both parties need to stop making things worse.

It’s cool, you have made it clear. But it does matter who started it, very much so.

 

[R3V]

It’s cool, you have made it clear. But it does matter who started it, very much so.

Does it matter enough that you're willing to sacrifice 100,000* civilians of your compatriots? Even if there's only a 50% chance of Putin acting out on his threats, you're still putting a 100,000 lives to a coin flip. As I said earlier today, I understand the emotion behind this for regular citzens but restraint is usually the better option.

*random estimate.

 

[Darla Starch]

The orcs know of nothing but further escalation.

Poland: