Quote (ferdia @ Mar 11 2024 02:15pm)
i don't disagree with anything you said here. my only response is: if 99 ppl say one thing and 1 person says the opposite, that does not mean that the 99 people are right and the one person is wrong. The Mearsheimer position (that nato expansion was foolish and a recipe for disaster, and we should all note the position is from 2016, it was not dreamt up after the 2022 invasion) is born out by the maps of the ukraine war and the fact that Russia has not conscripted an extra 5million men (to invade and lay claim to all of ukraine).
Russia has created a land bridge to Crimea, Putin has laid claim to everything east of the dniepo river, and russia has not conscripted the men required to invade all of ukraine, much less poland and germany.
It is for this reason the argument of the mainstream just does not add up to me. the presumed narrative makes no logical sense.
Ukraine was clearly a very divided country, east and west, Ukrainian or Russian speaking.
Geography is obviously a factor in that, the legacy of the Soviet Union and historic closeness/cultural similarity.
Actually though after 2014 Ukrainian nationality was far more clear and together in opposition to Russia annexing Crimea and fueling separatism.
Anyway, can you describe what you think the presumed narrative is?
And maybe what it doesn't make logical sense.