Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Shalcker]

The US isn't threatning to invade Russia.

There are a lot of other threats then invasion.

- - - Updated - - -

It’s not up to the US whether Ukraine joins or not. It’s up to Ukraine.

No, it is also up to US. With US opposition no Ukraine in NATO would ever happen - because it is corrupt shithole.

US continued pressure is the only thing that keeps Ukrainian "NATO dream" alive.

[Swnem]

There are a lot of other threats then invasion.

So, what? You are afraid they finance opposition against the Putin government or something? Funny, cause that is what Russia has been doing in Ukraine for years. Talk about being able to dish it out but not being able to take it.
The US cannot do anything against the will of Russian citizens, nor will they. Russia is not in danger (as long as they don'tstart a war). Perhaps Putin's job would be at worst? And that is the real issue isn't it? It's what all this is about. The Ego of one man. It's very reminiscent of another one that plunged Europe into war.

- - - Updated - - -

- - - Updated - - -

No, it is also up to US. With US opposition no Ukraine in NATO would ever happen - because it is corrupt shithole.

US continued pressure is the only thing that keeps Ukrainian "NATO dream" alive.

That and the fact Russia keeps bullying them innit?
There is corruption in every country in the world btw. Russia is no exception. That is not an excuse.

Like dude... millions of Russians died fighting against territorial war bs in WW2. Why so eager to make it all meaningless? No one wins from it.
Let Ukraine be. Russia is under no threat from military action, so it makes no sense to take military action. More people will die for nothing, again, on all sides.
If you are afraid of internal issues guess what? It's your territory. You can do wtf you want. Otherwise this is just dragging the world into your internal affairs/insecurities.

[Shalcker]

So, what? You are afraid they finance opposition against the Putin government or something? Funny, cause that is what Russia has been doing in Ukraine for years. Talk about being able to dish it out but not being able to take it.

US pushes military expansion through NATO; "finance opposition" can be dealt with.

A specific threat frequently mentioned is US simply swapping "defensive" missiles in their ABM installations in Romania and Poland with offensive missiles that can use exact same launch tubes.

Which with hypersonic missiles and US out of intermediate range missile treaty means "5 minutes of decision time before Moscow gets nuked".

Installations to which US refused to even grant inspection rights to Russia.

The US cannot do anything against the will of Russian citizens, nor will they. Russia is not in danger (as long as they don'tstart a war).

That isn't how Russia sees that - and US knows that perfectly well.

Factors Affecting Russian Decisionmaking
Indeed, there is substantial evidence that Russia believes that long-range precision weapons constitute a threat. In 2012, Putin wrote that such systems

will provide fundamentally new instruments for achieving political and strategic goals in addition to nuclear weapons. Such weapon systems will be as effective as nuclear weapons but will be more “acceptable” from the political and military point of view. Therefore, the strategic balance of nuclear forces will gradually lose its significance in the matter of deterring aggression and chaos.

Writers of Russian strategic literature believe that U.S. and NATO missile defense systems are postured against Russia in an attempt to reduce the effectiveness of its strategic forces and upset strategic stability in favor of the West. There also exist the beliefs that BMD systems are offensive (or that they can be easily repurposed to launch conventional or nuclear strikes) and are being deployed merely as a pretext to position U.S. nuclear forces closer to possible Russian targets. Russia may fear that these systems could then be used for precipitous attacks against Russian command and control systems, including the Russian leadership. President Putin has routinely attacked the United States’ BMD plans and has expressed his doubts about U.S. intentions. Putin states that the rationale for BMD (defending against such states as Iran) is questionable and that BMD can be retooled for offensive operations. Objections to BMD feature heavily in official Russian policy documents as well. The 2013 Russian Foreign Policy Concept views “unilateral arbitrary actions” of BMD formation as compromising “strategic stability and international security.” The 2014 Russian Military Doctrine lists BMD as a “military danger” that upsets the nuclear balance.
Russia also fears that it could be a target of U.S. PGS, a set of high-speed, precision conventional weapons. The Russian fear is that a hypothetical U.S. first strike against Russian nuclear weapons or command and control systems using PGS would degrade its deterrent and complicate Russia’s response. Russia’s only comparable weapons are nuclear, so it would be unable to respond without starting a nuclear exchange. PGS could, in Russia’s view, allow the United States to achieve many of the same objectives as nuclear weapons but without the same level of risk.
Another Russian concern is the effect that PGS proliferation could have on current strategic armaments treaties that do not address this new category of weapons. Like BMD, PGS is referred to as a “military danger” in the 2014 Russian Military Doctrine. The 2015 Russian National Security Strategy also takes note of the ability of PGS to undermine strategic stability.

[bladeXcrasher]

-words-

Europe wouldn't need to collectively worry about their own defense, especially the former soviet bloc countrys, if you guys wouldn't sabre rattle and threaten and invade sovereign nations. NATO is a defense pac, the only "threat" NATO has is the threat of retaliation against larger bully nations.

[Shalcker]

Europe wouldn't need to collectively worry about their own defense, especially the former soviet bloc countrys, if you guys wouldn't sabre rattle and threaten and invade sovereign nations.

And Europe weren't worrying about it! Because Russia didn't!
That's why US made Europe weak - because you wanted power projection elsewhere and considered Europe "solved" and stable for foreseeable future, with Russia no longer a threat.

NATO is a defense pac, the only "threat" NATO has is the threat of retaliation against larger bully nations.

MAD is still a thing; the threat is always mutual, and "creeping" aggression is every bit as dangerous as invasions.

[Shadowferal]

Well I wasn't alive back in the 60's but I also wouldn't have supported what America did. The blockade, sanctions, invasion attempt and sundry hostilities did more harm than good for all involved, and that said blockade is still mostly active to this day is moronic as far as I'm concerned.

You'd be alone then. Soviet nuclear weapons in Cuba...no one supported that.

Doesn't mean Russia doing the same shit now is a-OK.

Ukraine's president requested Biden to tone down the rhetoric. Zelenskiy Criticizes Biden: Talk of War With Russia a ‘Mistake’

Following a contentious phone call the day before, the Ukrainian president told reporters on Friday he hopes the U.S. will dial back its dramatic assessments of the threat Russia poses.

“Because the White House understands that there are risks, they keep articulating this, they keep supporting this theme, this topic, and they make it as acute, as burning as possible,” Zelenskiy said through a translator at an almost 90-minute press conference in the Ukrainian capital with foreign journalists. “In my opinion, this is a mistake.”

Ukrainian officials have in recent days attempted to quietly tamp down international fears of imminent war with Russia – an apparent extension of concerns in Kyiv that a panic could spur widespread economic and societal backlash. And it’s taken on new significance with the ongoing fallout of a call – the exact substance of which remains unclear – between the two leaders on Thursday.

[bladeXcrasher]

And Europe weren't worrying about it! Because Russia didn't!
That's why US made Europe weak - because you wanted power projection elsewhere and considered Europe "solved" and stable for foreseeable future, with Russia no longer a threat.

MAD is still a thing; the threat is always mutual, and "creeping" aggression is every bit as dangerous as invasions.

This is a you (Russia) problem. You guys made your bed when you invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea. Now you do a military buildup on their border and feign concern when Ukraine asks for protection. GTFO.

[MCMLXXXII]

Do people still respond to this troll farm account? Russian supported rebels shot a civilian airplane out of the sky. But NATO is the one that needs to stop aggressing

[Shalcker]

This is a you (Russia) problem. You guys made your bed when you invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea. Now you do a military buildup on their border and feign concern when Ukraine asks for protection. GTFO.

You built up you NATO presence all through 1990s and 2000s, way before Ukraine and Crimea.

GTFO yourself; it's our neighborhood, not yours.

We actually care about security; you only seem to care about slogans.

[bladeXcrasher]

You built up you NATO presence all through 1990s and 2000s, way before Ukraine and Crimea.

GTFO yourself; it's our neighborhood, not yours.

We actually care about security; you only seem to care about slogans.

The rest of Europe cares about their security from you...you know, the guys who actually invaded and annexed part of a sovereign country.

[Swnem]

US pushes military expansion through NATO; "finance opposition" can be dealt with.

A specific threat frequently mentioned is US simply swapping "defensive" missiles in their ABM installations in Romania and Poland with offensive missiles that can use exact same launch tubes.

Which with hypersonic missiles and US out of intermediate range missile treaty means "5 minutes of decision time before Moscow gets nuked".

Installations to which US refused to even grant inspection rights to Russia.

That isn't how Russia sees that - and US knows that perfectly well.

Factors Affecting Russian Decisionmaking
Indeed, there is substantial evidence that Russia believes that long-range precision weapons constitute a threat. In 2012, Putin wrote that such systems

will provide fundamentally new instruments for achieving political and strategic goals in addition to nuclear weapons. Such weapon systems will be as effective as nuclear weapons but will be more “acceptable” from the political and military point of view. Therefore, the strategic balance of nuclear forces will gradually lose its significance in the matter of deterring aggression and chaos.

Writers of Russian strategic literature believe that U.S. and NATO missile defense systems are postured against Russia in an attempt to reduce the effectiveness of its strategic forces and upset strategic stability in favor of the West. There also exist the beliefs that BMD systems are offensive (or that they can be easily repurposed to launch conventional or nuclear strikes) and are being deployed merely as a pretext to position U.S. nuclear forces closer to possible Russian targets. Russia may fear that these systems could then be used for precipitous attacks against Russian command and control systems, including the Russian leadership. President Putin has routinely attacked the United States’ BMD plans and has expressed his doubts about U.S. intentions. Putin states that the rationale for BMD (defending against such states as Iran) is questionable and that BMD can be retooled for offensive operations. Objections to BMD feature heavily in official Russian policy documents as well. The 2013 Russian Foreign Policy Concept views “unilateral arbitrary actions” of BMD formation as compromising “strategic stability and international security.” The 2014 Russian Military Doctrine lists BMD as a “military danger” that upsets the nuclear balance.
Russia also fears that it could be a target of U.S. PGS, a set of high-speed, precision conventional weapons. The Russian fear is that a hypothetical U.S. first strike against Russian nuclear weapons or command and control systems using PGS would degrade its deterrent and complicate Russia’s response. Russia’s only comparable weapons are nuclear, so it would be unable to respond without starting a nuclear exchange. PGS could, in Russia’s view, allow the United States to achieve many of the same objectives as nuclear weapons but without the same level of risk.
Another Russian concern is the effect that PGS proliferation could have on current strategic armaments treaties that do not address this new category of weapons. Like BMD, PGS is referred to as a “military danger” in the 2014 Russian Military Doctrine. The 2015 Russian National Security Strategy also takes note of the ability of PGS to undermine strategic stability.

Well, they should.
I am sorry that we cannot pander to Russian paranoia. No one is interested in invading Russia. This is all cold war BS. Nothing but Russia playing theoretical war games. None of those systems will matter in any way, unless Russia does stupid things like invading foreign sovereign nations. Which they did when they invaded Crimea and thus prompted defensive measures!

Honestly... if Russia just minded their own business these things would not even come up. Why is it so important to fight a theoretical war with NATO? We are not enemies and Russia isn't in any danger. It's just about control. Just come out and say it. You want to be able to control other countries through intimidation and NATO is an inconvenience for that. That is the truth of it. Is it really worth fighting a war for that? It's insane!

[bladeXcrasher]

Dude, that is next level of delusions. It is up to US. Without US permission no country can join NATO.

US inviting Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO at NATO summit in 2006 (or was it 2008???) is what started this shit.

This has never been about Russia vs Ukraine, this has always been about Russia vs US military bases near Russian border. Every other country is just a pawn in US military offensive.

Right, how else would Russia re-establish the Soviet era bloc of nations if a global super power wasn't there to provide lethal aid to countries that Russia could otherwise easily march straight over?

[Shalcker]

Well, they should.
I am sorry that we cannot pander to Russian paranoia. No one is interested in invading Russia. This is all cold war BS.

Where did you see "invading Russia" in the above?

Russia isn't interested in invading Europe (or Ukraine) either - that's US paranoia. Just limiting NATO expansion there.

Nothing but Russia playing theoretical war games. None of those systems will matter in any way, unless Russia does stupid things like invading foreign sovereign nations. Which they did when they invaded Crimea and thus prompted defensive measures!

Missile systems were up BEFORE Crimea. Your causation is backward.

Honestly... if Russia just minded their own business these things would not even come up.

Likewise for US - shit-stirrer of this century.

Why is it so important to fight a theoretical war with NATO? We are not enemies and Russia isn't in any danger.

You are enemies, and quite open about it too.

It's just about control. Just come out and say it. You want to be able to control other countries through intimidation and NATO is an inconvenience for that. That is the truth of it. Is it really worth fighting a war for that? It's insane!

You want to control countries through intimidation, and piss your pants when Russia doesn't want to buckle.

There is always an option of security cooperation instead; you cannot have your way all the time.

[Swnem]

Typical bullshit denying reality. Reality is, US is involved. US has started, or was involved in, vast majority of military conflicts this century. It is the biggest threat to anyone's security. NATO was created as anti-soviet block, then turned into anti-Russian block.

If Russia was not an enemy, there would be no problem removing bases further from Russian border and those bases wouldn't have been built in first place. Yet opposite has been happening for last 30 years - more and more US military bases close to Russian border.

No, NATO was created for countries/madmen to have a deterrent to cause territorial wars after WW2. The last century has seen the lowest number of wars ever. It works. Without it, there would be much more chaos in the world. No, you cannot defend your right to cause territorial wars. This is not the middle ages.
If Russia wasn't always acting in this dumb way, the bases would be abandoned in time. Russia is not an enemy, but it sure tries to make itself one.

[Mayhem]

Typical bullshit denying reality. Reality is, US is involved. US has started, or was involved in, vast majority of military conflicts this century. It is the biggest threat to anyone's security. NATO was created as anti-soviet block, then turned into anti-Russian block.

If Russia was not an enemy, there would be no problem removing bases further from Russian border and those bases wouldn't have been built in first place. Yet opposite has been happening for last 30 years - more and more US military bases close to Russian border.

What bases are you talking about?

[Swnem]

Where did you see "invading Russia" in the above?

Russia isn't interested in invading Europe (or Ukraine) either - that's US paranoia. Just limiting NATO expansion there.

Missile systems were up BEFORE Crimea. Your causation is backward.

Likewise for US - shit-stirrer of this century.

You are enemies, and quite open about it too.

You want to control countries through intimidation, and piss your pants when Russia doesn't want to buckle.

There is always an option of security cooperation instead; you cannot have your way all the time.

Does NATO have it's forces all over Russian borders ready for an eventual attack? I don't think they do.

Even if it is. Crimea escalated the situation and that is the problem. Trust was lost. There is a difference between "i have missiles i could launch at you but i don't cause there is no reason to" and "oh i am gonna go and steal this territory here cause i feel you are threatening me cause you have missiles". Like WTF. It's like asking for it.

It's important to differentiate between US and NATO. Regardless, there were way less wars in the last century than the century before. The US isn't going around invading other countries and gaining territory. They COULD if they wanted. But they don't. Do you think Russia would act the same way if the role was reversed?

No we are not enemies. You want us to be enemies, it's different. You confuse caution for aggression cause lets be honest, you are always pulling s**t like this and it's why you aren't trusted. As i said before, your issue is one of power. Let the old aggressor tendencies go. Focus on your own business. You have a country to run. Why are you so interested in effin imaginary wars? Russia is escalating this. Not others. Just go home and leave Ukraine be. You know what they say: "Play stupid games, gain stupid prizes".

And don't worry. If the US ever becomes imperialist, guess what? The rest of the world would then join you fighting and resisting them. Just... give it a rest with the "what if" war scenarios.

[Shalcker]

Does NATO have it's forces all over Russian borders ready for an eventual attack? I don't think they do.

And neither does Russia.

Doesn't stop your fearmongering.

Even if it is. Crimea escalated the situation and that is the problem. Trust was lost. There is a difference between "i have missiles i could launch at you but i don't cause there is no reason to" and "oh i am gonna go and steal this territory here cause i feel you are threatening me cause you have missiles". Like WTF. It's like asking for it.

That isn't how it works.
In 2000s US and other Western countries argued vehemently that Kosovo has right of self-determination against Serbian wishes.
We simply repeated same argument with Crimea, but better - through actual referendum on Crimea rather then simple parliament vote.
We cautioned that US set terrible precedent; but it was set, and so we used it.
Which is why Crimean accession, unlike Kosovo, was never questioned in international courts - because everyone knew they'd lose by precedent.

As most pro-Yanukovich part of the country they wanted Russian protection from Ukrainian forces - as Crimean protesters were already intercepted and assaulted by far-righters, who promised to send "trains of friendship" there - and subsequent events in Odessa (where pro-Russian/anti-Maidan protesters were burned in a building) and Luhansk (where Ukrainians bombed city administration with missiles from bomber jet) have shown their fears to be quite warranted.

[Jastall]

You'd be alone then. Soviet nuclear weapons in Cuba...no one supported that. Ukraine's president requested Biden to tone down the rhetoric. Zelenskiy Criticizes Biden: Talk of War With Russia a ‘Mistake’

Following a contentious phone call the day before, the Ukrainian president told reporters on Friday he hopes the U.S. will dial back its dramatic assessments of the threat Russia poses.

“Because the White House understands that there are risks, they keep articulating this, they keep supporting this theme, this topic, and they make it as acute, as burning as possible,” Zelenskiy said through a translator at an almost 90-minute press conference in the Ukrainian capital with foreign journalists. “In my opinion, this is a mistake.”

Ukrainian officials have in recent days attempted to quietly tamp down international fears of imminent war with Russia – an apparent extension of concerns in Kyiv that a panic could spur widespread economic and societal backlash. And it’s taken on new significance with the ongoing fallout of a call – the exact substance of which remains unclear – between the two leaders on Thursday.

The shit started way before the nukes, tho. That part was obviously unacceptable and recklessly stupid, especially in the context of the 60s. Not gonna argue against that.

And Yeah, Biden using the situation to show US stronk isn't much better either. Again, I don't remember indicating otherwise. Obviously Ukraine wants no talk of a war, or smaller-scale conflict, that they can't possibly win.

[Sorshen]

Can we all just stop engaging? You can't reason with these people.

[Shalcker]

And Yeah, Biden using the situation to show US stronk isn't much better either. Again, I don't remember indicating otherwise. Obviously Ukraine wants no talk of a war, or smaller-scale conflict, that they can't possibly win.

From Russian side it looks like US wanting Ukraine to fight Russia until last Ukrainian - with guerilla action and all.

While not committing a single soldier of their own to the fight.

As cynical as it gets.