[thraneh]

What is NATO's objective except to defend the member countries from aggressors? As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, perhaps what is happening is about the control of natural resources. The entire situation is then politically motivated. Aren't NATO and Ukraine then simply actors that have been strung along? (Obviously at great cost to Ukraine now.) This would also explain why EU has been so quick to respond with sanctions. This is about cause and effect. Russia attacking Ukraine is obviously very wrong. It seems philosophical to discuss if the cause should be blamed. However, Mearsheimer has warned about this aggression for a very long time. The history seems to indicate that this outcome has been forced.

[s1artibartfast]

NATOs objective has always been to eliminate or minimize the Russian threat to NATO.

An armed an strong Ukraine furthers this goal.

A bloody war between Ukraine and Russia also furthers this goal.

[mc32]

I think Russia fears an Embrace, Extend, Extinguish approach to geopolitics where their historic power is diminished or extinguished by an encroaching NATO as it absorbs nations at the periphery of the previous local hegemon.

[s1artibartfast]

I think that is part of it, but I think they also fear direct attack, or the threat of direct attack being used to undermine their geopolitical goals and autonomy.

People who view this as paranoid are simply not being rational. MAD is a defense against complete invasion, but not a defense against strangulation via power projection. They are encircled by the US which has invaded and toppled more regimes than any other country in the world, and destroyed or destabilized several Russian allied countries in the last 2 decades alone.