Russia and Ukraine

[Jehanne]

And, so, when Ukraine wins and joins NATO, no issues then with nuclear weapons being in Ukraine?  Russia should just accept that??

How about if the United States should build ICBMs in Taiwan?  Should China just accept that?

There is a certain area of grey between accepting something and invading another country, dont you think?
Plus: Whom is NATO threatening? Did you ever bother to read the paragraphs of the treaty? NATO is simply unable to threaten anyone, since it is a defensive alliance, with everyone responding as soon as someone is attacked.

NATO is only a threat to you if you intend to threaten (or even start one) war with one of its members, but dont wanna deal with the rest.....oh, wait 

Oh, I agree, and so, no objections if Russia would decide to locate a thousand ICBMs in Cuba?? How about if they decide to abandon the START I & II treaties and build up their nuclear stockpiles to 50 or 60K of hydrogen bombs? What if they construct a set of dozens of nuclear launch platforms in international waters a few hundred miles off the coasts of the United States??

Your logic is that whatever NATO does is okay, as long as they do not fire the first savo; of course, no military analyst or commander in NATO thinks this way.

[Jehanne]

I don't know.  Why did Putin invade Ukraine?  Answer:  They (Ukraine) wanted to join NATO.  If that happens someday, what's to prevent NATO from stationing nuclear weapons in Ukraine??  In the early 60s, President Kennedy threatened nuclear war over the Soviets trying to pull a similar trick in Cuba.  Do you think that Kennedy was merely joking?  Or, was he serious??

Not sure how to reply to this.

So... if Russia 'Absorbes' the area that is currently Ukriane. Then Russia should not install any nuclear capability in that area, right?

Uhm... I don't think your over half a century old analogy quite works? 

After all Cuba was a very happy and willing Russian ally? Like, Russia didn't start amphibious opperations and landing tanks and paratroopers in Cuba back in the 60's to force Fidel and the Cuban's to allow the building of military infrasctructure and the housing of large, nuclear capable aircraft? , did they?

Sorry, like I said, I'm missing something in your analogy there.

My stance is that the Russian's started this and the Ukrainian's (After 2014) were as prepared as they could be which is thence showing that the current Russian leadership might be as competent as some Western Governments.

I could but hope my country could put up the same effort should some other country decides that we should change our flags etc.

Your mileage may vary.

Cheers.

Not at work.

I think that war is stupid. Period. In explaining behavior, I am trying to understand it, and am certainly NOT trying to justify it.

It's kind of like discussing Manifest Destiny, the belief that the United States of America was destined by Almighty God to expand from one great ocean to the other, a belief which, of course, contributed to the abhorrent treatment of the indigenous peoples who were already living here. Simply discussing Manifest Destiny does not cause one to become a theist. Trying to make sense of Putin's "reasons" does not make me a Russian apologist.

As for me, I believe in One World Government. I don't care if the idea is stupid (it's not) or impractical (it's not). In my scheme all national boundaries that existed prior to Russia's invasion (indeed, maybe even a tad earlier than that) would be frozen. A World parliament with a World Prime Minister would be chosen, along with a new World constitution & Universal Declaration of Human Rights & Liberties, and a World Court which would have jurisdiction over anyone & everyone. All militaries would be abolished, along with all nuclear weapons. One multinational police force would be created to deal with any local unrest, subject to the Court & Parliament.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Oh, I agree, and so, no objections if Russia would decide to locate a thousand ICBMs in Cuba?? How about if they decide to abandon the START I & II treaties and build up their nuclear stockpiles to 50 or 60K of hydrogen bombs? What if they construct a set of dozens of nuclear launch platforms in international waters a few hundred miles off the coasts of the United States??

Again this is moot as NATO has shown no signs of doing that in Ukraine 

Your logic is that whatever NATO does is okay, as long as they do not fire the first savo; of course, no military analyst or commander in NATO thinks this way.

No, his logic is Ukraine can join NATO if it wants and NATO does think that way .....

[The Architect Of Fate]

I think that war is stupid. Period. In explaining behavior, I am trying to understand it, and am certainly NOT trying to justify it.

It's kind of like discussing Manifest Destiny, the belief that the United States of America was destined by Almighty God to expand from one great ocean to the other, a belief which, of course, contributed to the abhorrent treatment of the indigenous peoples who were already living here. Simply discussing Manifest Destiny does not cause one to become a theist. Trying to make sense of Putin's "reasons" does not make me a Russian apologist.

As for me, I believe in One World Government. I don't care if the idea is stupid (it's not) or impractical (it's not). In my scheme all national boundaries that existed prior to Russia's invasion (indeed, maybe even a tad earlier than that) would be frozen. A World parliament with a World Prime Minister would be chosen, along with a new World constitution & Universal Declaration of Human Rights & Liberties, and a World Court which would have jurisdiction over anyone & everyone. All militaries would be abolished, along with all nuclear weapons. One multinational police force would be created to deal with any local unrest, subject to the Court & Parliament.

NATO isn't the United States it's a defensive alliance between nations against hostile powers and Putin's reasons aren't reasonable.

[Thumpalumpacus]

That's rather a non-answer. Do you not see how your arguments actually echo the might-makes-right argument?

Perhaps you could answer that point.

World War I, at least initially, got out of hand due to a failed assassination attempt succeeding in the end due to a freak coincidence.  Maybe such was inevitable due to other reasons.

Ukraine's freedom & independence is not worth WWIII, nor the risk of such.  As far as I am concerned, they are on their own.  The West needs to end its proxy war with Russia, sooner than later.

Again with a non-answer. I will ask you once more: do you not see how your own appeal to fear firmly echoes the might-makes-right that you would have others believe you do not like?

Please answer that question. Why is your argument here not an appeal to "Russia's going to win because they're too strong, we may as well quit supporting Ukraine now"?

[Jehanne]

Please answer that question. Why is your argument here not an appeal to "Russia's going to win because they're too strong, we may as well quit supporting Ukraine now"?

It's what I see happening, not what I hope happens. What I hope happens is that the war simply ends. If part of Ukraine gets absorbed into Russia, then people living there who are unhappy should leave. Likewise, if Ukraine regains all of its lost territory, those who wish to live under Russian rule could (and should) always move. In this respect, I see the entire conflict as having been absolutely pointless.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Oh, I agree, and so, no objections if Russia would decide to locate a thousand ICBMs in Cuba??  How about if they decide to abandon the START I & II treaties and build up their nuclear stockpiles to 50 or 60K of hydrogen bombs?  What if they construct a set of dozens of nuclear launch platforms in international waters a few hundred miles off the coasts of the United States??

So what if Russia were to invade your country, and kill civilians just 'cause, you know, and rape women, and kidnap 1.5 million people and forcibly remove them to Russia, and ... so you'd still advocate for not fighting?

You may as well collaborate with them for a slightly better food ration.

If Russia wants to waste its money building 50,000 H-bombs, no skin off my ass. The Russian people may wish to depose a tsar who so badly mismanages their limited resources, though.

The only argument I see you mounting is an appeal to fear.

[Jehanne]

I think that war is stupid. Period. In explaining behavior, I am trying to understand it, and am certainly NOT trying to justify it.

It's kind of like discussing Manifest Destiny, the belief that the United States of America was destined by Almighty God to expand from one great ocean to the other, a belief which, of course, contributed to the abhorrent treatment of the indigenous peoples who were already living here. Simply discussing Manifest Destiny does not cause one to become a theist. Trying to make sense of Putin's "reasons" does not make me a Russian apologist.

As for me, I believe in One World Government. I don't care if the idea is stupid (it's not) or impractical (it's not). In my scheme all national boundaries that existed prior to Russia's invasion (indeed, maybe even a tad earlier than that) would be frozen. A World parliament with a World Prime Minister would be chosen, along with a new World constitution & Universal Declaration of Human Rights & Liberties, and a World Court which would have jurisdiction over anyone & everyone. All militaries would be abolished, along with all nuclear weapons. One multinational police force would be created to deal with any local unrest, subject to the Court & Parliament.

NATO isn't the United States it's a defensive alliance between nations against hostile powers and Putin's reasons aren't reasonable.

Oh, I agree, absolutely. If Ukraine wants to join NATO, then Russia should let them. If Russia is concerned about their "national security", then abandon Start I & II and station a few thousand short & medium range thermonuclear hydrogen missiles along the border with Ukraine, pointing a few dozen hypersonic missiles straight at Kiev. Such will deter any NATO "aggression", real or imagined.

[arewethereyet]

Please answer that question. Why is your argument here not an appeal to "Russia's going to win because they're too strong, we may as well quit supporting Ukraine now"?

It's what I see happening, not what I hope happens.  What I hope happens is that the war simply ends.  If part of Ukraine gets absorbed into Russia, then people living there who are unhappy should leave.  Likewise, if Ukraine regains all of its lost territory, those who wish to live under Russian rule could (and should) always move.  In this respect, I see the entire conflict as having been absolutely pointless.

Do you really think that when a country is invaded and taken over by another that the people who don't like it can just grab their toothbrushes and go elsewhere?

[Jehanne]

Oh, I agree, and so, no objections if Russia would decide to locate a thousand ICBMs in Cuba??  How about if they decide to abandon the START I & II treaties and build up their nuclear stockpiles to 50 or 60K of hydrogen bombs?  What if they construct a set of dozens of nuclear launch platforms in international waters a few hundred miles off the coasts of the United States??

So what if Russia were to invade your country, and kill civilians just 'cause, you know, and rape women, and kidnap 1.5 million people and forcibly remove them to Russia, and ... so you'd still advocate for not fighting?

You may as well collaborate with them for a slightly better food ration.

If Russia wants to waste its money building 50,000 H-bombs, no skin off my ass. The Russian people may wish to depose a tsar who so badly mismanages their limited resources, though.

The only argument I see you mounting is an appeal to fear.

My appeal is to reason -- it's why the whole geopolitical situation needs to go and be replaced by a democratic One World Government.