Nepal - the worst
Should the US shed blood for Ukraine
- Thread starter Jimdamick
- Start date
Sativied
Well-Known Member
This week will show how slow the EU is. UK will come with sanctions tomorrow, within hours really. US tomorrow too? EU will propose it tomorrow probably but it will have to be approved by every individual member state. There will be some countries who will want a limited package (like Italy, Hungary), to keep some sactions as a threat, others will want to go all in. By the time they agree it’ll be March.
Whatever happens here, US is in a win-win situation, all others will feel it to some extent, while the biggest losers will be Ukraine and Russia. Divide and rule
*This whole conflict, I mean.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
How do you figure this is a win-win situation for the US? And who is dividing who and rules?Whatever happens here, US is in a win-win situation, all others will feel it to some extent, while the biggest losers will be Ukraine and Russia. Divide and rule
*This whole conflict, I mean.
Lucky Luke
Well-Known Member
So, let me get this straight.
A bit of Russia, that had been part of Russia for literally centuries, decided it wanted to be its own country, thus giving birth to The Ukraine as a country.
And we, in the west, approve of this mightily, and are getting all excited about defending these proud folk with might of arms.
Right.
Except two quite large bits of the Ukraine actually decided they don’t, in fact, WANT to be ‘Ukrainian’, what with having centuries of being part of Russia, being Russian native speakers and all, so they declare themselves sovereign states too.
(Exactly what Ukraine did to Russia)
And the Russians are prepared to back them up with might of arms.
But that’s bad, because, actually, no idea.
Right.
Is that more or less the situation?
A bit of Russia, that had been part of Russia for literally centuries, decided it wanted to be its own country, thus giving birth to The Ukraine as a country.
And we, in the west, approve of this mightily, and are getting all excited about defending these proud folk with might of arms.
Right.
Except two quite large bits of the Ukraine actually decided they don’t, in fact, WANT to be ‘Ukrainian’, what with having centuries of being part of Russia, being Russian native speakers and all, so they declare themselves sovereign states too.
(Exactly what Ukraine did to Russia)
And the Russians are prepared to back them up with might of arms.
But that’s bad, because, actually, no idea.
Right.
Is that more or less the situation?
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure I can't do that
Sir Napsalot
Well-Known Member
not for 30 seconds anyway
Well, kind of, but not exactly. Ukraine and Russia do have long history together, like 1000+ years, but that was in a pre-nations Europe. There wasn't any Russia or Ukraine back then, but somewhere around that time, Kievan Rus came to be - homeland to both modern-day Ukrainians, Russians and other peoples with whom they shared culture, language, religion...
So it's pretty obvious as to who's being divided. I resent Russia for threatening with an attack on, who they claim to be, their brothers. Not cool. Now let's move on to the provoker, the divider, the US
BTW in my posts I often associate NATO with the US (obvious reasons). So, NATO was created after WW2 to counter influence of Russia in Europe, which is a zone of interest to the US. If Ukraine join NATO, they could right away install American rockets on their territory, which would be able to hit Moscow in 5 minutes. NATO has already been placing rockets in Romania and radars in Poland, and Russia rightfully views it as a threat, as it drastically reduces its ballistic weapons potential. Ffs, why is Cuba under sanctions for 50 years? Because they once tried to install Russian rockets. Americans responded by blocking the whole Atlantic. They've been sanctioning any nation that decided to buy a Russian anti-air defense system, starting with Turkey (which is their ally )... All legitimate, power-wise. So now, Russia is in a situation where it has to react, and it will come at a high cost. Russia will most definitely suffer and this will have horrible economical, political and technological consequences. Even though they can get hold of roughly half of Ukraine's territory, they're making a permanent (Poland grade) enemy of the other half. And that's a lose-lose situation for both sides. It's very important to foster friendly relations with your neighbors.And that's why it's stupidly bad idea for Ukraine to strive toward NATO, it will get it no good. It's ambitions to enter NATO or EU are equal to a fairy tale. Countries with territorial issues simply can't get in. Plus the country has never really been under any dictatorship, yet people there live like dogs. Even worse after their revolutions. 200$ average salary and massive corruption. Now it'll be even worse, the people will live in fear for decades to come.Well, kind of, but not exactly. Ukraine and Russia do have long history together, like 1000+ years, but that was in a pre-nations Europe. There wasn't any Russia or Ukraine back then, but somewhere around that time, Kievan Rus came to be - homeland to both modern-day Ukrainians, Russians and other peoples with whom they shared culture, language, religion...
So it's pretty obvious as to who's being divided. I resent Russia for threatening with an attack on, who they claim to be, their brothers. Not cool. Now let's move on to the provoker, the divider, the US
Sativied
Well-Known Member
Go back to your own union!Well, kind of, but not exactly. Ukraine and Russia do have long history together, like 1000+ years, but that was in a pre-nations Europe. There wasn't any Russia or Ukraine back then, but somewhere around that time, Kievan Rus came to be - homeland to both modern-day Ukrainians, Russians and other peoples with whom they shared culture, language, religion...
So it's pretty obvious as to who's being divided. I resent Russia for threatening with an attack on, who they claim to be, their brothers. Not cool. Now let's move on to the provoker, the divider, the US
just kidding, sort of, not really.Russia attacks, is not cool, but NATO is wrong to see Russia as a threat? Russia wants to place missiles on Cuba pointing to the US but US is wrong to see Russia as a threat? And this threat Russia is then rightfully feeling threatened when their capability to threaten others is reduced?
Russia erected the iron curtain litterally dividing europe, obstructing your own country from recovering after WWII making it still one of the poorest areas in europe, economically, socially and appearantly intellectually, yet it’s the US who is the divider?
Russia was and still is the agressor. The defense shield in your country isn’t even effecfive against Russian ballistics. Do you really believe Russia wouldn’t have attacked if Ukraine was’t flirting with NATO? It’s just an excuse. You’re basically suggesting Russia has to react by attacking if the rest of Europe wants to defend themselves against their missiles. Sounds like Stockholm syndrome.
Not at all, I was drawing parallels. Completely the same, both ways
That's a fallacy, what does it have to do with this situation? Besides, Ukraine is responsible for its poverty, other ex soviets are doing much better.
And man, I've never been to nor do I have any relations to Ukraine
They absolutely wouldn't have attacked
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
naive
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Stockholm syndrome is a nice academic way of putting it. I'm searching for a description that attaches brutality to the abuser/aggressor/whatever.Go back to your own union!
Russia attacks, is not cool, but NATO is wrong to see Russia as a threat? Russia wants to place missiles on Cuba pointing to the US but US is wrong to see Russia as a threat? And this threat Russia is then rightfully feeling threatened when their capability to threaten others is reduced?
Russia erected the iron curtain litterally dividing europe, obstructing your own country from recovering after WWII making it still one of the poorest areas in europe, economically, socially and appearantly intellectually, yet it’s the US who is the divider?
Russia was and still is the agressor. The defense shield in your country isn’t even effecfive against Russian ballistics. Do you really believe Russia wouldn’t have attacked if Ukraine was’t flirting with NATO? It’s just an excuse. You’re basically suggesting Russia has to react by attacking if the rest of Europe wants to defend themselves against their missiles. Sounds like Stockholm syndrome.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Germany, Switzerland and to some extent, France have large banks that are well paid by Putin to handle his offshore accounts. US banks too. Plenty of foot dragging to be seen over the next week or so.
What is naive?
I never said it's wrong to see Russia as a threat, it is.
Sativied
Well-Known Member
I confused you with someone else (from Romania), 3 different threads same topic... You definitely sound from uhm behind the curtain. And not a fallacy, I’m just saying it’s odd to label the US a divider in Europe because it helps Europe defend against the actual divider and frequent provoker.That's a fallacy, what does it have to do with this situation? Besides, Ukraine is responsible for its poverty, other ex soviets are doing much better.
And man, I've never been to nor do I have any relations to Ukraine
But then it’s not the same. The missiles in Cuba were nukes from Russia, the missiles in east europe not capable of hitting Moscow or even defend against nukes from Russia. The threat level is nowhere near the same.
I think they would have done the exact same thing, turn Belarus’ government into puppets and send ”peace troops” to help the separatists in Ukraine. But I admit I do not understand Putin. His reasoning is as illogical to me as yours for pointing at the US/NATO as being the divider/provoker.
Again, I can't see any notion of Stockholm syndrome in my post. I wasn't defending Russia or accusing NATO. What's more, I'm from Croatia (never dealt with Russia or USSR) which is both in NATO and EU, but that doesn't stop me from seeing the whole picture. And although I'm Eurosceptic, I'm very pleases my country is in NATO.
But then again the Americans were the only ones that actually ever used it and blasted those poor japs
And yes, missiles in Ukr would be within the range. Btw balanced presence of nuclear weapons is the greatest peacekeeping mechanism, globally.