Russian invasion of Ukraine

[Pann]

Johnson's government has been antagonistic towards Russia from day one, and they've not been diplomatic about it; remember weirdly having a BBC crew on a warship when they crossed into contested waters and "surprisingly" got buzzed by Russian warplanes?, and sudden coverage of Russian aircraft on routine patrols 'a bit too close to our airspace' in spite of it being a more than weekly event for years? It feels like theatrics at this point, we've been building this propaganda campaign up over the past couple of years, and now suddenly there's a war on? And yet, same government that refused to release a report on Russian influence and finance in UK politics, same government that worked so hard, and continues to work to destabilise the EU? Makes you wonder what side they're on. Feel like we're the perfect fucking patsy for it.

I think you are confusing Johnson with Putin. And the report into Russian influence was released last year.

[Mihalik]

Also we can't be sure if whole NATO will stand as one. Hungary is pro Russia, what about Turkey?. Maybe they're small but they're in the middle of Europe.

Hungary is not "pro-Russia", Orban is pro-autocracy, but those are two distinctly different things, especially if the Russians roll into Ukraine.

Hungarians as a whole are very much not pro-Russian. See Hungary 1848, WW1 and WW2 and 1956. If put up against a wall, Orban will toe the line with NATO.


Much of the Hungarian diaspora in the west and ESPECIALLY are descendants of refugees from the various Russian invasions, and those are the people who got away and didn't have to live through the bad years.

[Azadina]

Mostly due to US purposefully torpedoing independent European initiatives ("Why would you need them? We'll always defend you if necessary!") and channeling everything into NATO - which they then enlarged to gain more entirely dependent voices there from East Europe after Iraq.

See MIT Open Access: "Land rush: American grand strategy, NATO enlargement, and European fragmentation"

Throughout the 1990s and 2000s US administrations pursued three ambitious policies: they expanded NATO, but also its geographic scope, and they ensured that no alternative European security architectures could compete with NATO. Through interviews with US officials, the article shows a preoccupation with instability in Europe and elsewhere, an institutional predisposition to maintaining the centrality of NATO, and a lack of constraints on US policies by Russia or Europe. In the end, these contradictory policies diluted European strategic cohesion and overburdened European militaries, while expanding the commitments inherent to the Alliance

NATO enlargement also ended up undermining European security, for reasons related to how enlargement was implemented. Enlargement was one of several concurrent foreign policy initiatives that the United States pursued in order to capitalize on the advantageous position it found itself in. US officials were not only impatient to fill the security vacuum in Central and Eastern Europe; they also considered NATO the instrument to spread stability to adjacent regions. To accomplish these goals, the United States pushed its European allies to transform their militaries toward lighter, expeditionary forces for operations outside the treaty area. In turn, Europeans offered several alternative security architectures to improve their crisis response ...
Yet, though US officials considered the European Union to be a complementary tool for bringing stability to Central and Eastern Europe through economic and institutional means, they were adamant that NATO remained the central organization to provide security in Europe. In short, the United States simultaneously pursued (1) NATO enlargement and (2) the expansion of the geographic scope of NATO’s missions, while it also (3) prevented the establishment of serious European institutional alternatives for any of NATO’s missions, let alone NATO as an institution.

A long way of simply saying "yeah, you can't trust the US to defend from our attacks, nor can you trust us not to attack, so build the militaries up"

Thanks for confirming.

[Biglog]

The Russian security council video today and Putin's last press conference with Lukashenko have not been very positive for the outlook of peace.

-Putin said that the West is just trying to keep Russia down economically
-The threat of more sanctions for invading is irrelevant and illegal because Putin said that the West will find an excuse to do them anyway, to keep them down
-They are proceeding as though severe sanctions are already in place from now and are working on adjusting to import substitutions, etc.
-That they believe Ukraine is trying to acquire or build nukes to put on Russia's borders
-Putin said he'll make a decision on the invasion today
-Afterwards, one leading Russian journalist ominously said that she believes Putin has already made his decision
-Meanwhile on the border, more troops are moving into tactical positions and Russia has changed their withdrawal "for exercises" to indefinite

What was telling was the dreary and worried look of all of the other governmental attendees at the Russian security conference today. They reason is they know that Russia and really the world is heading down a dark path with this move. It will kill many thousands on both sides and take us back 50 years literally to the isolation and Cold War hostility of Russia as with the Iron Curtain of the Soviet Union. The risk to the world of a small spark somewhere exploding into a world war will increase significantly. When you listen to Putin you realize it's really more to him than just Russia invading Ukraine. He is saying they are fine with stepping out of the world order because they believe they have been so severely wronged by the West that they are ok with becoming expansionist and going back to a Cold War. He has talked recently of increasing the arming of countries hostile to the West in their sphere such as Venezuela. The fear of a flash at any moment ending civilization with little warning is something we've mostly let dwindle away to thinking it'll never happen. But it's very much headed back to...it hopefully won't happen. Humanity's flaws always seem to make our evolution and progress two steps forward and one back.

[Mihalik]

NATO already spends 12 times more on military than Russia.

The issue fundamentally is one of scale and redundancies. There's a lot of money wasted on running 30 distinct and separate logistical chains, command and control infrastructures etc.

The EU really needs to gradually abolish national militaries and just create a unified structure. One Navy, Air Force, Army, logistical chain, command and control etc. By eliminating redundancies and such a much larger and much better equipped and trained military can be created without raising spending or possibly while even spending less.

[Shalcker]

A long way of simply saying "yeah, you can't trust the US to defend from our attacks, nor can you trust us not to attack, so build the militaries up"

Thanks for confirming.

Or you could build, you know, common security system that includes Russia and Russian security interests rather then being bound to NATO and associated US ambitions.

There were plenty of proposals about that you could revive.

[Mihalik]

-That they believe Ukraine is trying to acquire or build nukes to put on Russia's borders

-Hey if the WMD thing worked for the Americans it will work for us too!

-Putin said he'll make a decision on the invasion today

The past months. -We are totally not invading Ukraine.

OK Russia.

- - - Updated - - -

Or you could build, you know, common security system that includes Russia and Russian security interests rather then being bound to NATO and associated US ambitions.

There were plenty of proposals about that you could revive.

How about fuck no?

Russian interests have historically been a literal existential threat to all its neighbors. You're not getting it. YOU ARE THE PROBLEM EVERYONE ELSE IS HAVING.

[Shalcker]

-That they believe Ukraine is trying to acquire or build nukes to put on Russia's borders

Zelensky made very exploitable claim about not being bound by Budapest memorandum and thus potentially going back to nukes (basically "West, support us - or else!"); that's what they are referring to.

-Putin said he'll make a decision on the invasion today

On recognition of independence of LNR and DNR, not invasion. At least so far.

[Azadina]

Or you could build, you know, common security system that includes Russia and Russian security interests rather then being bound to NATO and associated US ambitions.

There were plenty of proposals about that you could revive.

Perfect idea. Common security system with Russia? Ok, I got this. Share the Russian nuclear weapons with EU. FULL access, launch control, etc, the whole package. There, common security system in place. Russia wants to invade; it gets a share of it's own arsenal launched at it.

Waiting on Russias stamp of approval. But certainly you'll agree, since you wanted shared common security system.

[Shalcker]

How about fuck no?

Then good luck, because you're going to need it.

Russian interests have historically been a literal existential threat to all its neighbors. You're not getting it. YOU ARE THE PROBLEM EVERYONE ELSE IS HAVING.

Russian interest historically have been development with hostile neighbors.

It is only a problem because you are ignoring Russian interests and try to force your own will at every opportunity.

- - - Updated - - -

Perfect idea. Common security system with Russia? Ok, I got this. Share the Russian nuclear weapons with EU. FULL access, launch control, etc, the whole package. There, common security system in place. Russia wants to invade; it gets a share of it's own arsenal launched at it.

Waiting on Russias stamp of approval. But certainly you'll agree, since you wanted shared common security system.

Yes, you could actually get it if that would make you feel safer.

Though some of Europeans still have their own nuclear arsenals, however small; we could help you expand it, then you wouldn't have to worry about Russian tech being somehow bugged in a way you didn't notice.

[Mihalik]

Then good luck, because you're going to need it.

Ah, so if you can't have it your way then threats of war. And you're still not seeing the problem?

Russian interest historically have been development with hostile neighbors.

That is the literal history of EVERY SINGLE EUROPEAN COUNTRY, NO FUCKING EXCEPTIONS.

It is only a problem because you are ignoring Russian interests and try to force your own will at every opportunity.

"Ignore Russian interests" and "force your own will"...so you mean not accepting Russian domination and just wanting to do your own thing is a hostile act.

Dude...This is some anime comic book villain level shit. You are literally just throwing a nuclear armed temper tantrum because people don't want to be your subjects,

I've told you this before. This mentality is why Russia has absolutely no friends, just enemies and subjects and subject nations are always desperately looking for a way out.

[Shalcker]

Ah, so if you can't have it your way then threats of war. And you're still not seeing the problem?

You got 30 years of getting your way, and now you're throwing tantrums because you no longer can.

Maybe grow up and deal with it? Try some actual concessions rather then "our way or highway"?

"Ignore Russian interests" and "force your own will"...so you mean not accepting Russian domination and just wanting to do your own thing is a hostile act.

Accepting US domination while US is openly hostile is hostile act.

Where did Russia stop you from doing your own thing? Stopped you from doing what exactly?

[Azadina]

Yes, you could actually get it if that would make you feel safer.

Though some of Europeans still have their own nuclear arsenals, however small; we could help you expand it, then you wouldn't have to worry about Russian tech being somehow bugged in a way you didn't notice.

Sounds great. Now if you could forward this agreement of ours to your boss, so we can get to the making it all happen part of the deal.

[Jessicka]

I think you are confusing Johnson with Putin. And the report into Russian influence was released last year.

I’m suggesting Putin put Johnson where he is for a reason.

The report such as it was, wasn’t fully released and what was amounted to ‘we haven’t been looking very hard because decisions were made not to look’.

[Mihalik]

You got 30 years of getting your way, and now you're throwing tantrums because you no longer can.

Maybe grow up and deal with it? Try some actual concessions rather then "our way or highway"?

"Concessions" you mean accept subjugation? Fuck off. Fuck right off.

Accepting US domination while US is openly hostile is hostile act.

This is fucking exasperating. NATO is an alliance countries join FREEEEEEELY because your country is an existential threat.

Where did Russia stop you from doing your own thing? Stopped you from doing what exactly?

Holy fuck, you seriously just did a whole "Russia has never attacked, annexed, occupied etc any country" thing. My dude what the shit? What the fuck are all the "ex-Soviet" countries? The former Eastern Bloc? Georgia? Karelia? Crimea? THIS SHIT RIGHT NOW?


How many more little green men lies are you going to spew here? You aren't just a maniac, but also a pathological liar.

[Kreuger]

Looks like Putin will recognize LNR and DNR.

[Levelfive]

Staged or not, either way lol

"Russian spy chief stumbles and expresses support for eastern Ukraine's annexation, to which Putin responds: "That’s not what we're talking about""

https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1...iPS7IPrtJgqUiw

[Pann]

I’m suggesting Putin put Johnson where he is for a reason.

The report such as it was, wasn’t fully released and what was amounted to ‘we haven’t been looking very hard because decisions were made not to look’.

So Putin made Johnson PM (how?) so Johnson could go to war with Russia?!? That is a nonsense conspiracy theory. It doesn't even make sense.

You claimed the that the government refused to release the report which is false, and now, as expected, your argument shifts when you're proved wrong.

[Mihalik]

Staged or not, either way lol

"Russian spy chief stumbles and expresses support for eastern Ukraine's annexation, to which Putin responds: "That’s not what we're talking about""

https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1...iPS7IPrtJgqUiw

The sheer amount of gaslighting and lying the Russians engage in is absolutely monumental. If the Russians say anything whatsoever it's either a lie, a whataboutism or a threat.

I don't think they are even capable of honesty at this point.

[Shalcker]

"Concessions" you mean accept subjugation? Fuck off. Fuck right off.

Where did you see "subjugation" in "taking Russian interests into account"?

Are you incapable of imagining taking any other country's interests into account without being subjugated by them?

This is fucking exasperating. NATO is an alliance countries join FREEEEEEELY because your country is an existential threat.

And this alliance, in turn, is headed by country that acts as existential threat to Russia.

When two existential threats collide is being part of one really helpful?

Holy fuck, you seriously just did a whole "Russia has never attacked, annexed, occupied etc any country" thing. My dude what the shit? What the fuck are all the "ex-Soviet" countries? The former Eastern Bloc? Georgia? Karelia? Crimea? THIS SHIT RIGHT NOW?

Each of those situations aren't "your own thing"; they are multi-party conflicts. You just want "your side" to be unopposed.