You're implying it by only criticizing Russia, except in direct response to certain challenges. Maybe I just haven't been here long enough and you were equally critical of the Iraq war. I don't know. What I do know is that I'd do exactly the same thing as Russia is doing if I was in Russia's place.
Well not exactly. They've made some critical errors I like to think I wouldn't have. But if pushed into the corner enough, yeah I'd be wiping out Ukraine's infrastructure too. This is a red line for Russia. They will not back down. The more difficult it becomes the more force will be applied. Which is exactly what NATO seems to want, since they're barely giving Kiev enough to be capable of anything more than delaying the inevitable.

I criticized the US’ involvement many times already and I’ll gladly criticize most wars if there are threads open.

From a "selfish" perspective (maybe not the best word), Russia is doing what they think is best and I agree that they most likely won’t back down. The West’s aid to Ukraine and sanctions against Russia won’t stop either so this is bound to end badly. I just think that all this war could have been avoided.

If the orcs are upset over being called orcs perhaps they should learn to behave like civilized people...but that's expecting too much from an inferior race of subhuman neandrethals

I certainly agree it could have been avoided. There was a willingness to talk not so long ago that has become a lost art.

Do not insult neanderthals, despite the appearances they were artists.

Self interest is a better word and is basically how every country operates, even those within NATO/EU. It's not a black and white matter because what's good for one country may be bad for another. Joining the EU and NATO would be good for Ukraine because it would help their economy and ensure their security vs Russia, which they have very good historical reasons to fear.

Russia on the other hand has very good reason to fear Ukraine joining NATO, look up the many invasions of Russia throughout history and see where the armies attacked from, it is most definitely a security concern. What you or I think of NATO is irrelevant to how they view it and they see it as a threat to their society, they attempted for years before the annexation of crimea to deal with the situation diplomatically, and said many times it was a red line for them.

Not to mention NATO is essentially ran by a country who has been involved in the overthrow of many countries they don't agree with, who has been openly hostile to Russia in many ways while also ignoring their attempts at diplomacy regarding eastern Europe. Why would they be comfortable with that countries increasing involvement on their border?

If you genuinely want a non bombastic and grounded perspective of how the Russians view this whole thing you should look up Vladimir Pozner/Ukraine on YouTube, he is a radio host in Russia so take that however you will. I can't remember the exact title but it will be a top result if you search him.

Indeed the speed and ferocity with which NATO allied nations applied sanctions looks like the forefront of an invasion from Russia's perspective. First the US starts a civil war on the border, then they weaponize the US dollar and trade. That is incredibly hostile. Russians are scared at just how quickly the West turned against them and for so little reason. It makes no sense except as a pretext.

I get the NATO point of view as well, but the NATO point of view is not only absolutely blind to the Russian point of view, it doesn't even care to try and see the Russian point of view.

1. These invasions took place before Russia had nukes.
2. These invasions all failed miserably.
3. If NATO wanted to stage an invasion of Russia nowadays, they could just as well launch it from the Baltics, there is no pressing need to do it from Ukraine.
4. The NATO statutes are unmistakable, no country involved in an ongoing war can join the alliance. With his frozen conflicts in the Donbass, Putin had already achieved his goal of making it impossible for Ukraine to join NATO; if that had been his primary goal, there was no need to invade the rest of the country.
5. The current conflict boiled over when Ukraine wanted to join the EU, not NATO!

1. What does that have to do with it? You think Russia is keen to drop a nuke on their border? Show me which other nation gave up on all other security concerns after they obtained nuclear weapons and I'll give you this one.

2. And took a horrendous toll on the Russian people, which is the point you missed.

3. And I'm sure Russia sees the Baltics as a security concern, that doesn't make Ukraine any less of one, do you think a country can only have one at a time?

4. I guess they don't see the distinction between arming and training the Ukrainian army for years and being in NATO, odd. Or maybe it was the claims from the US that they would still be considering Ukraine application, despite those conflicts? You'd think the police of the world would be a bit more diplomatic.

5. Russia is concerned about western influence in Ukraine, whatever label it is given, does that help you understand?

This post was edited by DizzyBusiness on Nov 25 2022 11:45pm

They wouldn't drop a nuke on the invader's forces on their own border, they would drop a nuke on the invader's capital.


So the fact that Russian leaders from 100 years ago were despotic tyrants who recklessly sacrificed their troops for military gain is supposed to be a justification for Russia's present-day warfare?


Of course a country can have multiple security concerns. It's still a fact that the first border with a country belonging to a "hostile" military alliance (i.e. Estonia) has a much larger impact on their strategic outlook than the second one (i.e. Ukraine).


"Consider an application" is diplomat speak for "we don't want to demotivate you by shutting down your aspirations outright". Also note that NATO applications have to be confirmed unanimously. Even if the US (and England and Poland) had been willing to look the other way, there's just no chance that the Germans, French, Turks or Hungarians would have agreed to admitting Ukraine into NATO while there is an ongoing war with Russia in Donbass.


Of course they are concerned about western influence in Ukraine. That's understandable. This does not, however, give Russia the right to treat a sovereign country like a vassal state or a colony. Russia isn't "entitled" to a sphere of influence or a set of satellite states.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Nov 26 2022 12:03am