2022: The year the world returns to war?

[Language]

Originally Posted by Ducay

I don't get it - if Ukraine is so desperate for direct support, is there something holding back any western (Nato) nation from sending soldiers to Ukraine as 'peacekeepers'? I know there is the Minsk monitors there, but I'm talking a real amount of soldiers.

Certainly having "allied" armies present would deter and piss off Russia all the same (hence their desire to have Ukraine banned from NATO); but isn't that the perfect solution? Or why not just admit them to NATO, post up a few battlegroups and let Russia deal with it. Not like they'd attack a NATO country.

I think the issue is that no country wants to risk getting sucked into war. Even sending “peacekeepers” in has the ability to escalate if Russia somehow kills them.

Unfortunately, Ukraine is in a bit of a tough spot. While NATO is In Ukraine’s aspirations, secretly, I don’t believe the West has a large appetite for it. They know it will rile Russia up. Look at what is happening now, and NATO membership wasn’t even on the horizon.

At the same time, having Ukraine fall into Russia’s sphere again would be disastrous. We’re talking about a sovereign nation potentially being invaded here. If Russia is able to do this with almost zero material consequences, it’s making the entire alliance look weak.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Pointman

How? Being power junkie and habitually murdering anyone who is even remotely a threat to his position does not necessarily imply that Putin is bad at actually doing his job. Conversely, a democratically elected president voted in by The People may turn out to be horrible president. This is why Russians don't want to fight for the sake of some Freedom and Democracy. They look at USA and how they've got to vote for either keeping Trump or replacing him with Biden, and no other options, and wonder whether Democracy and Free Elections would really give us any better leaders than what we have now

Putin is not a competent leader, nor is he a competent head of state.

He's a competent con-man and psychopath. That's it. Same with Trump.

America only has partial freedom & democracy. Trump did not win the popular vote in 2016 and would not have become president if the US election system didn't have an archaic, incoherent anti-majoritarian mechanism built into it.

Biden (or even Hillary) is miles better than either Putin or Trump.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Because no one in NATO wants to get forced into a (potentially nuclear) war to protect an unstable place like Ukraine. The US will dangle the prospect of Ukraine joining NATO to keep them friendly with the West and to undermine Russia, but it has little to no chance of ever happening. They're just using Ukraine to further their geopolitical goals.

Probably the only real way for long term stability is where Ukraine is a more or less neutral buffer state between Europe and Russia. But that's far easier to achieve in theory than in reality.

You're right, but I suppose my main confusion is around why some western power just doesn't go and get themselves involved? Like realistically, Russia isn't dumb enough to get itself in a war with the West, not even Putin is that dumb. So basically all you have to do is call his bluff and post troops up there and Putin's hands are tied.

[Language]

Originally Posted by btimbit

With parts of Ukraine seemingly supporting a NATO bid and parts seemingly supporting Russia I could just see a civil war/proxy war that results in the country splitting in two

I said it before earlier in this thread, but Putin already achieved victory back in 2014 when the proxy war started.

Even if NATO membership was being discussed with Ukraine, it would never get anywhere while parts of the country were in a completely unstable state like they are in Luhansk and Donetsk regions. The instability that Russia created there already all but assured that NATO would never be possible, unless the country was fractured and split up, and I don’t see Ukraine ever agreeing to that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

I'm genuinely interested in how that itinerary went. Toronto, Winnipeg, Saskatoon and Vancouver in the span on a single week? Ok. Was it by car? Plane? Have to take travel time into account given how far apart VAN and TO are, with 2 stops in between. Time to travel from each location, get to your destination, then travel around to visit and get a feel for each place. 4 cities in 7 days in a big task for any traveler, even in small countries.

Who the hell comes to visit Canada and visits those exact 4 places in a week, unless there is some kind of crazy business deal that requires all that?

The answer is simple and is right there in the original post. The plan was to tour cities so to get an idea on whether I should or should not try to immigrate there. I only had a week because it was new year national holiday in Russia. I was flying east to west on planes between cities. I have spent most of my time either walking around or taking a public bus. Then I flew to NY from VAN and back to Moscow. it was January 2017. I still have pictures on my Facebook page if you are interested.

https://m.facebook.com/igor.livshin/...8694115910549/

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

I'm not sure why... Russia currency has tanked in value and they are under sanctions. All this despite been rich in resources.

Very good social services. Medicine is good in general and excellent in Moscow. Safety is good. Public transport is world class. Moscow has the best public transit I've seen anywhere. Government services like getting paperwork done and such are excellent. Compared to West, far far less homeless men on streets. Lots of new and fairly quality living buildings. Job security is high, compared to the west, you can't just be fired for no reason. 28 days a year paid vacation. Maternal leave for 3 years, 1.5 of them paid. Shops are open late till 10-11PM. Mundane life in Moscow is very easy and good.

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Best public transit in the world, why it's better then anything I used during my trip to San Diego *looks at map* Ogden, Chattanooga and NEW YORK CITY

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by FormerPresJamesTaylor

Best public transit in the world, why it's better then anything I used during my trip to San Diego *looks at map* Ogden, Chattanooga and NEW YORK CITY

If you are trying to mock my trip to Canada, I have posted pictures from it just above.

[Locke]

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by SebC

I think the fundamental conflict that will be difficult to resolve pertains to human rights. The West (ostensibly, at least) believes in rights for minorities, democracy, and that it has a responsibility to advance these rights for all people, no matter where they may be. That presents an existential threat to the Russian autocrats. Even while the threat can be mitigated through power or the pragmatism of deal-making, the underlying conflict remains unresolved. I don't think the West can or should compromise on these values, so the path to truly set the Cold War behind us lies in further Russian progress on these files.

When in USA sitting president wanted to remain in power, he was removed rather decisively. In Russia sitting president wanted to remain in power and he easily changed constitution so that he can stay forever. So yes, Russia is clearly miles behind when it comes to democracy.

That being said, is it, does it really worth a war? Or even a trade war? Merkel led Germany for 16 years, and she wasn't even elected by people - but rather by parliament - and somehow that's ok. I get the idea that if on some distant country people are suffering because of tyrannical government, being tortured and such, the West feels like it's their responsibility to step in and help those poor people. Is it the case in Russia though? And if it is - shouldn't open borders, free trade and cultural exchange heal that? The west was fairly effective in helping poorest counties with medicals, education and such. The west was brutally ineffective when is comes to installing democracy by force.

Russia is unstable politically for sure and nobody knows where we're going to pivot after Putin dies (which is the only reason he would quit). I myself would prefer some kind of stable political system. That being said, Russia is neither a threat to other countries - until provoked by what is perceived as West aggression, nor does it torture or impoverish its citizens as if their only hope is for West to step in. Russia sure has some maturing to do, but it's arguably best to leave it alone and let it grow up.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Locke

We are NOT trying to re-create a Soviet Union. We couldn't care less if Moldova is going to join us back. Or Kyrgyzstan. Crimea is a bit of a special case, as it is historically a Russian, not Ukrainian, land. And even Crimea annexation happened as a response to the coup that toppled an elected president. Otherwise though, no reasonable Russian wants a war just so we could look at the map and say "Look, Armenia is in the same country as us now, cool. I can go visit there. Wait, I could do it before the war anyway, so what was the point".

[btimbit]

I appreciate discussion and your perspective Pointman.

I'm curious, what are your thoughts on Russia invading Crimea in 2014? What are the reasons given for it from your point of view?

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Language

I said it before earlier in this thread, but Putin already achieved victory back in 2014 when the proxy war started.

Even if NATO membership was being discussed with Ukraine, it would never get anywhere while parts of the country were in a completely unstable state like they are in Luhansk and Donetsk regions. The instability that Russia created there already all but assured that NATO would never be possible, unless the country was fractured and split up, and I don’t see Ukraine ever agreeing to that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a good point. It could be that Putin wants to keep the east unstable so that Ukraine can't join NATO. Conversely, it seems like NATO's aim is to keep Russia in check. Because Russia is unpredictable, and it's not even that Putin is unpredictable, but more that his successor is unknown and could easily be some hawkish former general. West just feels safer with Russia being held at gunpoint. Which drives Russia nuts. And it becomes a vicious cycle.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Pointman

This is a good point. It could be that Putin wants to keep the east unstable so that Ukraine can't join NATO. Conversely, it seems like NATO's aim is to keep Russia in check. Because Russia is unpredictable, and it's not even that Putin is unpredictable, but more that his successor is unknown and could easily be some hawkish former general. West just feels safer with Russia being held at gunpoint. Which drives Russia nuts. And it becomes a vicious cycle.

From a Russian perspective, would it really be threatening or an existential threat if they completely democratized and joined the European community? What are the Russian leaders afraid of if they allied with the West?

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Pointman

The answer is simple and is right there in the original post. The plan was to tour cities so to get an idea on whether I should or should not try to immigrate there. I only had a week because it was new year national holiday in Russia. I was flying east to west on planes between cities. I have spent most of my time either walking around or taking a public bus. Then I flew to NY from VAN and back to Moscow. it was January 2017. I still have pictures on my Facebook page if you are interested.

https://m.facebook.com/igor.livshin/...8694115910549/

No worries . I didn't mean it in a malicious way or anything. Just seemed like a crazy itinerary in a short time. Makes sense.

[JoseCuervo]

Originally Posted by Pointman

We are NOT trying to re-create a Soviet Union. We couldn't care less if Moldova is going to join us back. Or Kyrgyzstan. Crimea is a bit of a special case, as it is historically a Russian, not Ukrainian, land. And even Crimea annexation happened as a response to the coup that toppled an elected president. Otherwise though, no reasonable Russian wants a war just so we could look at the map and say "Look, Armenia is in the same country as us now, cool. I can go visit there. Wait, I could do it before the war anyway, so what was the point".

Except, like Putin and Lukashenko he wasn’t elected by the people, so it wasn’t really a coup. It was democracy winning, and that is what Putin is going to destroy here in the next few days.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by JoseCuervo

Except, like Putin and Lukashenko he wasn’t elected by the people, so it wasn’t really a coup. It was democracy winning, and that is what Putin is going to destroy here in the next few days.

Yanukovich was elected by people of Ukraine. Toppling an elected president can not be framed as "democracy winning". The moment you say it's ok to illegally topple an elected president because he is corrupt or in any other way "bad", you pretty much admit that democracy doesn't work. If you believe in democracy, Ukrainians could elect a better leader next time. That guy, unlike Putin, wasn't trying to change constitution to rule forever or anything like that.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

From a Russian perspective, would it really be threatening or an existential threat if they completely democratized and joined the European community? What are the Russian leaders afraid of if they allied with the West?

I don't get it either. Unlike USSR, modern Russia isn't really much different from USA. We live pretty much western way, except for that we have no real politics or elections. Our laws are actually pretty democratic.

Fun trivia: in only one of those three countries head of state is being selected directly by the people. Which one is it:

1. USA
2. Canada
3. Russia


The correct answer is Russia. Head of state is being elected by the people, however rigged those elections may be. In USA people are only selecting "electioneers". In Canada head of state is the Queen. Obviously, it doesn't work like that because Putin made all elections a joke and Queen doesn't really rule. Although I could argue, choosing between Trump and Biden wasn't much better either.

All in all, there's nothing that prevents Russia from joining EU and becoming a full-fledged western nation. It's hopefully only a matter of time.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Pointman

I don't get it either. Unlike USSR, modern Russia isn't really much different from USA. We live pretty much western way, except for that we have no real politics or elections. Our laws are actually pretty democratic.

Fun trivia: in only one of those three countries head of state is being selected directly by the people. Which one is it:

1. USA
2. Canada
3. Russia


The correct answer is Russia. Head of state is being elected by the people, however rigged those elections may be. In USA people are only selecting "electioneers". In Canada head of state is the Queen. Obviously, it doesn't work like that because Putin made all elections a joke and Queen doesn't really rule. Although I could argue, choosing between Trump and Biden wasn't much better either.

All in all, there's nothing that prevents Russia from joining EU and becoming a full-fledged western nation. It's hopefully only a matter of time.

Putin prevents it. You'd have to get rid of Putin. And since you get do it through elections, your hope is lost. Do you accept you live in a dictatorship?

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I appreciate discussion and your perspective Pointman.

I'm curious, what are your thoughts on Russia invading Crimea in 2014? What are the reasons given for it from your point of view?

I believe it was almost entirely about two factors:

1. Ensure that Russia keeps its strategic naval base in Sevastopol
2. Posing a hard tough response to what we perceived as a western-backed coup.

Looking back at it, I would rather have it never happened.
We didn't seem to gain much by it and strain with the west hurt us. Annexing is also such an outdated thing to do, it should be banned really.

On the other hand though Crimea is really Russian region and should have been Russian all the way. It was like if Canadian's PM would declare that from now on Nova Scotia is a part of Quebec. And then some 50 years later Quebec decides to become independent. I guess, Canada would be like "Ok guys, you can go live as an independent country if you so wish, but you gotta give Nova Scotia back to Canada really".