He is not dodging you he is simply frustrated (as am I) that you cannot see Putins' view point. We are not agreeing with Putin's world view or asking you to agree with Putin's world view, we are just asking you to comprehend it. All I am seeing from you is : Your all mindless sheep that have no clue what you are talking about, listen to me I am right and you are wrong, end of debate, i win again. In that case:

What Option did Russia have re: Ukraine, if not invasion, to maintain its strategic military position in the region.

This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 15 2022 12:25pm

Well it isn't... US wars in the Middle East can be seen from that perspective.
Regardless, why do you think dirty tactics are okay as long as they are none violent? Why should the US issue trade tariffs, and sanctions, instigate manufactured coups and "revolutions" (this is violent or not, gets kinda gray imo), instead of slowly going out of business the free-market way?
Are these your personal rules for the dividing line of sportsmanship international conduct and do you expect all to play by these rules?

The questions are rhetorical... centers of power big and small are only bound by rules as long as it serves their interest and this is the way it has always been.
When you maneuver yourself and rival great power into a position where it is in your rival's interest to break the established rules... that is either a failure of diplomacy or a very dirty move

well said.

If the leaked Lukashenko map is correct, Transnistria and areas of Eastern Moldova would be the next target. Makes sense to target the Russian speaking area of a non-NATO country that is also extremely poor with a poor military

No one in their right mind thinks Russia would attack a NATO country, they would be annihilated within a week. It's just a soundbite the pro-WW3 camp are repeating

if Germany left NATO would russia do more or less business with Germany?

if Ukraine joined NATO would russia do more or less business with Ukraine?

Don't flatter yourself. I know the festering Leftist PARD hive loves to thinking everyone is always mad all the time, your posts are way too ineffective and ignorable. They're basically Sean Hannity tier of thoughtfulness. As in, not worth engaging with.

the same option russia had before poland joined and the baltic states: NOT to invade them. can you not read?!

how often do i have to explain it to you? i DO see where pootin is coming from, but i reject YOUR framing that his discontent with ukraine looking for protection from HIM "inevitably" had to result in an invasion. it's a stupid talking point trying to bothsides a war.

you might not outright "agree" with it, but you sure do a lot of mental gymnastics in order to blame everyone but the guy who actually started the war. ukraine seeking protection from russia is perfectly reasonable when you look at recent history. NATO considering their request also is. the west refusing to be blackmailed by russia, not to outright "sacrifice" a whole country, tens of millions of people who want to be free, just to appease an aggressive expansionist dictator for a while, also makes a lot of sense - so what is your obsession with trying to portray the situation like pootin had no choice but start a war, like it is "the west's" fault that he is murdering women and children in ukraine now?

pootin being mad because "the west" refused to give in to his demands is a fair statement to make. claiming that he had no other option but start a war, and that therefore "the west" is to blame for it is moronic.



if russia invades ukraine, bombs their infrastructure to pieces, kills tens of thousands of ukrainians, including women and children... do you think they would do more or less business with them?

oh wait, we already know what russia's "business" intentions are, they showed us in 2014.

again, NATO does not regulate trade between nations. i genuinely can't think of a simpler way to explain that.

This post was edited by fender on Mar 15 2022 01:28pm

all of that would be really relevant, but im making the point that Russia does less business as the NATO sphere of influence grows.

i'm not saying that this justifies the invasion of Ukraine, nor that we're in a binary. Russia wants Ukraine for its own, as a puppet, rather than a pro-western country. I've been calling it a land grab all along. but the sphere of influence for the west growing, and the sphere of influence for russia shrinking, is inarguably bad for russian business. war or not. they just happened to make it even worse from an international business perspective by invading, a strange misstep for Putin.

doesn't ring true at all tbh. post cold war decrease of tensions between russia and the west was extremely profitable for russian business, especially trade with european NATO members, so quite the opposite of your claim.

i will reiterate: What other option did russia have, in your opinion, to maintain its security concerns.

note that i had asked this of you already here ->



This post was edited by ferdia on Mar 15 2022 01:48pm