Ukraine is not Russia. Eat shit.
Cuba was not the USA, but the USSR installing missiles in Cuba made the US go fucking berserk. Eat shit, idealist.
Sweet, so we should go park a bunch of nukes in Ukraine is what I hear since that apparently justifies intervening in the affairs of a foreign nation. Invasion of sovereign territory some might say is another but I guess that passes when it’s Russia right?
You’ve got it backwards. Russia literally invaded Ukraine because of the US/NATO threat of deploying nuclear capabilities and developing combat readiness in Ukraine which has historically been the vector for Western powers to invade Russia three times causing the death of millions of Russians. That’s why everyone was talking about Russia likely invading, because they were doing things that Russian intelligence flagged as the precursors of deploying natsec threats.
That’s why the USA has legislators and state department officials in Ukraine during the Euromaidan event. That’s why both Republicans (Trump and his 2016 advisors) and Democrats (like Hunter Biden) had deep ties to Ukraine prior to the SMO - because the USA has been preparing for Ukraine to be a forward operating base against Russia since Clinton.
And no, invasion of sovereign territory is not justification for open involvement. Mutual defense treaties are. But again, Ukraine’s alliance with the West was exactly what was under contention here. Because Ukraine is the passageway that both Hitler and Napoleon used to invade Russia, the natsec situation for Russia since the dissolution of the USSR is that Ukraine must remain unallied with the West (they called it neutral, but that’s because the West didn’t want Ukraine allied with Russia). As soon as Ukraine were to formalize mutual defense treaties with the West, that would pose a real strategic threat to Russian natsec. All sensible people who understood this analysis stated that since security is mutual, this redline must never be crossed. But the war hawks in the West said that our security must come at the expense of the security of others. They believe that Western security is only possible if they dominate everyone, Russia included. So, they require that Ukraine be a forward operating base for the US as part of their security framework, knowing full well that this means Russia becomes insecure.
Russia refuses to be national insecure, so, it appeased the West for 20 years until 2014 when it finally reacted for the first time by invading Crimea. From Crimea is monitored the continued build up of threat level on Ukraine until it reached a point requiring reaction and interpreted whatever was going on 2022 as that point, at which point they asserted their national security interest and disrupted the ongoing US/NATO operations with the SMO.
You need to actually analyze the situation instead of just vibing about it
That’s a mighty big revision from the original narrative that the people of Crimea and eastern Ukraine where actually Russian and wanted to join Russia, so Vlad needed to rescue them from a bunch of Nazis.
It’s literally what Putin and his staff said when they launched the SMO. They also said the thing about the ethnic Russians. You can cherry pick whatever you want from the English translations of Russian that the news media spins for you, but it doesn’t change the facts.
Primary source? Google translate is a thing I can take a look.
No need. The US media reported it briefly but memoryholed it.
https://tass.com/defense/1378631
As the Russian president emphasized, Moscow does not demand any special exclusive terms for itself. “Russia stands for equal and indivisible security in the entire Eurasian space,” Putin said.
Moscow says it is entitled to move its military freely within its borders and that it is taking precautionary steps because of increased NATO activity near its territory.
And just so we’re clear about military exercises - a military exercise is a combat readiness activity. It involves the deployment of troops, armor, planes, munitions, defenses, and logistics that are indistinguishable from preparing for invasion. That’s why militaries have to schedule them in advance and invite foreign heads of state to observe - they must do everything they can to assure people that these are just exercises and will not become invasions, because they are indistinguishable from invasion preparations from the perspective of military intelligence.
When you are Belgium, you don’t have billions of dollars of equipment on Thailand doing military exercises that simulate an invasion of China.
But when you’re the USA and you have control over a transnational nuclear military force across Europe, the transition from not having any presence in Ukraine to being able to conduct military exercises that simulate an attack on Russia is a significant escalation of threat level. The Western rhetoric may be that we should be allowed to exercise wherever we want because exercise is harmless, but military exercise is quite literally preparation for use of lethal force. There was a time when Ukraine did not have military exercises in Ukraine.
In fact, the first ever NATO exercise in Ukraine was Rapid Trident 21. Guess when that happened?
September 2021.
When did Russia launch the SMO?
Ukraine is not (yet?) NATO either, so why send troops there?
Wouldn’t sending troops actually just escalate things further and drag the whole of NATO into it if anything were to happen to those soldiers?
Ukraine needs a guaranteed security measure to prevent Russia from attacking again. It’s a stop gap to a more permanent solution. Either NATO membership or Nukes.
Perhaps Russia wouldn’t attack if it wasn’t provoked.
So what you’re saying is, there is nothing wrong with attacking Russia as they consistently provoke other nations? Or is it simply that only Russia is allowed to invade and its the fault of the victim once they do?
Why not both? Call the nukes a welcome to NATO bonus.
Peacekeepers keep the peace silly boy.
That is truly a 5 years old understanding of the current conflict
