[michaelmrose]

Of what relevance is it what percentage wanted to join NATO in 2010? NATO expansion didn't force Russia to invade Ukraine. Nor did internal conflict over the disposition of Crimea force Russia to invade. You steadily bring up irrelevant complexities to paper over the simple truth. Russia is solely at fault and only Russia can end it. Until then let the western world continue to support Ukraine until Russia breaks.

[EGreg]

I have been answering you point by point, showing you where you're wrong.

If a solid majority of Ukrainians do not want to join NATO in the period 1990-2010, but Bush pushed for it in 2007, then a lot of questions arise:

1) Why does NATO push for Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO?

2) Why did they not welcome Russia as well? Was it more corrupt than Ukraine, or less democratic than Turkey, an existing member?

Most people outside the Western bubble know the real reason. The goal was always to gradually surround Russia with NATO bases. Russia needed to be the enemy. If Russia was part of NATO, then NATO wouldn't have an enemy to defend against. Also then Europe's security would be very strong, and there would be no need for USA's weapons to keep the peace. And the bases USA has around the world would have to be reduced, too.

In doing so, US presidents ignored Russian presidents (including Yeltsin, Putin and Medvedev.) They also ignored everyone's warnings, and even the original architects of the USSR containment strategy:

https://theconversation.com/ukraine-war-follows-decades-of-w...

Clinton ignored 50 top foreign policy experts:

https://www.armscontrol.org/act/1997-06/arms-control-today/o...

Bush ignored pretty much everybody, including his own ambassadors and experts:

https://nonzero.substack.com/p/the-memo-that-failed-to-preve...

I hope this addresses what relevance NATO expansion has. Every expert knew the predictable outcome. They said it for DECADES.

And even today, billions of people around the world think like me ... according to polls:

https://thewire.in/world/more-indians-hold-us-nato-responsib...

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2022/06/14/italy-vat...

You can repeat the words "unprovoked and unjustified" many times but that's just a verbatim phrase that you've been taught to repeat, obviously it was provoked. NATO expansion was systematic provocation. As was buzzing airspace. As was the rhetoric and the drone warfare, which worked so well in Nagorno Karabakh against Armenia. And so on.

Obviously if the shoe was on the other foot, USA would do the same. In fact, they did, and does often. The Cuban Missile Crisis is an example.

USA takes far less provocation to attack. Sometimes none. Like in Laos, halfway around the world. No other country does that. You seem to operate on a complete double-standard.

So no, Russia isn't solely at fault. Russia can surely end it, but the consequences will be that Russia will be surrounded in short order by NATO bases, and in a decade or so, nuclear weapons pointed straight at Moscow. Maybe even broken up.

While as a libertarian, I don't have a horse in this race, I can tell you that no country (especially not USA) would ever allow anything close to that to happen. Russia does not want Ukraine to become a NATO member.

[michaelmrose]

Nuclear weapons would have been enough of a detergent for the foreseeable future. Invading increased security not one whit nor was it expected to. It was expected to increase wealth and power at the expense of decreasing security.

In fact invasion has actually done more to advance the cause of NATO than the US could have done. They are already and were always going to be surrounded by enemies due to being surrounded by former vassal states. Russia was never going to be in NATO because it's primarily a defensive alliance vs Russia. Nobody wants to give Russia a vote in an alliance that exists for mutual defense against Russia.

Who gives a fuck what the Indian man on the street thinks? Greater truth isn't decided by surveying as many ignorant people as possible. Shall we next survey Kentucky or London to achieve critical rube mass? Worse India profits greatly from cheap Russian gas. May as well ask farmers about the wisdom of subsidies or johns about whether prostitution ought to be legalized.

This is all more chaff.

This conflict exists so that Russia can trade it's citizens blood for power. Nothing else necessitates it. It serves no other end. It has no other interest.

Every other end is damaged by this war save one.

You go on without end while ignoring this fundamental fact. If you can't address it properly then you may see yourself out of the conversation.

[EGreg]

I could give you similar polls for China, too. That is billions of people. Who cares what they think? How about who cares what YOU think! You’re in a media bubble and not seeing any other coverage around the world. You’re being told what to think and say, and all the mainstream media is in total agreement and no dissent is allowed (with the glaring exception of Tucker Carlson’s prime time slot on Fox, which otherwise proves the rule).

Literally everything you’re saying is just parroting CIA / US establishment talking points word for word, just like in every other proxy war against Russia (Afghanistan, Syria).

No there isn’t “just one side” that unilaterally began this conflict. Not even close. And the rest of the world outside the media bubble you’re in realized it. That’s billions of people who realize NATO expansion is responsible. Western leaders too:

There was a war going on in Donbas since 2014 for 8 years before Russia invaded. Russia negotiated Minsk and Minsk II but it was never implemented. USA fomented a revolution in 2014 and Ukraine’s new government was using cluster munitions against civilians in the Donbas as early as 2014:

https://www.hrw.org/news/2014/10/20/ukraine-widespread-use-c...

This wasn’t “unprovoked”. Even in mainstream Western Europe many leaders clearly warned Russia was being provoked:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KqE7UTptgGg

And still say now that it was provoked by NATO:

https://www.upi.com/amp/Top_News/World-News/2022/06/14/italy...

I could go on. I could cite experts and leaders in USA and in Europe all of whom say the war was provoked and there is more than “one side”. They say it was very easy to avoid:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OF5oPNjMZw4

But it won’t make a dent. You won’t care what billions of people think. Or what leaders think. Or what experts think. Because they’re all wrong. You in your media bubble have it right: the causes are super simplistic and only one side is at fault. This is fed to you to justify ANY LEVEL of escalation, up to and including the destruction of the entire world. It’s pretty ridiculous and scary actually. But the US military industrial complex has successfully co-opted most of its mainstream media to make sure only one narrative is allowed in the minds of most people. This has been a phenomenon that already was honed with other issues, such as vaccine hesitancy immediately prior.

We have seen proxy wars happen (in Yemen for instance, an incredibly destructive war), we know how they occur… one side foments a revolution, the other props up the counterrevolutionaries, and both sides funnel weapons to the region for years. One side bombs the country and the other delivers weapons from afar.

No thougutful person thinks there is “one side that attacked in an unprovoked way” and so on. Especially in this case, where Russia is defending its security against being surrounded by a hostile military alliance led by its geopolitical enemy, while USA simply went around the world 3000 miles away to bomb countries to the stone age to prevent, I dunno, communism I guess.

[mopsi]

> Russia is defending its security against being surrounded by a hostile military alliance led by its geopolitical enemy

This is nothing but typical authoritarian fear-mongering about being surrounded and under attack. It's not true at all, not even remotely. After the Cold War, European countries reduced their armed forces up to 10x. For example, Germany went from 3800 tanks in 1980s to some 200 today, and the US moved its last tanks out of Europe in 2013. This only began to change in 2014 after Russia invaded Eastern Ukraine. What security was there to defend, if Europe was unilaterally disarming itself? What security are they currently defending by shooting missiles into apartment buildings in Lviv, a thousand kilometers away from Russia? If anything, the arms reduction in Europe was seen as weakness and provoked Russia to attack Ukraine in the first place.

> You won’t care what billions of people think. Or what leaders think. Or what experts think.

Speaking of leaders, the only UN members who buy the entire Russian narrative are Syria and North Korea, while 141 countries out of 193 voted explicitly against it. Take a look at the map, it really does speak for itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembl...

You are rehashing Russian propaganda narrative that has virtually no support in the world except for professional contrarians and other fringe groups. How did you get sucked into this? Youtube videos? Social media influencers?

[EGreg]

To hear you (and other “true believers”) tell it, everyone’s a Putin agent. The Pope is a Putin agent. Leaders and people of countries with billions of people. Hundreds of thousands of protestors in Eastern European countries. And even of thousands of protestors in every Western European country. And even here in the US. Republicans. Progressives. Everyone is spouting Russian propaganda when they call for a resumption of diplomatic discussions and negotiated settlement, and blame NATO for instigating this?

https://www.reuters.com/world/us-congress-progressives-withd...

I have a different theory (as does most of the world outside your bubble). You are the one repeating propaganda. Let me count the ways:

1. NATO attacks Yugoslavia, declares Kosovo independent, destroys Libya and turns it into a failed state, you say very little. You keep repeating it’s “purely defensive” and Russia has nothing to fear.

2. CIA fomented a regime change revolution in Ukraine to overthrow the sitting president, helped train and arm far right extremist paramilitary groups, and you say nothing about it. They likely tried to do the same in Kazakhstan and Belarus, too, but were so far unable. (Russian agencies do this as well btw.) The reality is much more complex than your simplistic one dimensional analysis which ignores all these factors.

4. US/UK forces blow up the pipelines sending gas from Russia to Europe, try to pin it on Russia initially (it failed) and you don’t even care that they screwed European industry and economy etc.

5. Nearly ALL the people with actual domain experience have warned Clinton, Bush, etc. that NATO enlargement will likely lead to war with Russia, especially with Ukraine. And that is exactly what they wanted — Ukraine. You think they care deeply about Ukraine? They cared deeply about Afghanistan? NO, they are simply useful for making Russia bleed, “for as hard and as long as possible,” in the words of Brezhinski. They consider you a “useful idiot” and lie to their own public about their covert actions (eg #4). And then later they declassify it but by that time it’s too late to care:

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/how-jimmy-carter-...

This is the architects of these proxy wars, all the way up to the US President — wars like Afghanistan in which 2 million civilians died just so we can stick it to the Soviets! But during that war they lied to you and then declassified it — and they have NO REGRETS. Two million dead civilians bro. This is the “collateral damage” you are willing to pay cause you’re not the one paying it right?

Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

You dismiss calls for peace talks and valuing human beings’ lives as being “Russian propaganda”. I say you are perpetuating US warmonger propaganda. Would you like to stop carrying water for thr CIA and military industrial complex?

Their track record neafly 100% of the time reveals they were behind making sure conflicts commenced and perpetuated them at the cost of real human lives abroad, while you with your one dimensional moralizing sit here and barely notice it. Laos. Nicaragua. Iraq. Afghanistan. Libya. Syria. This time it’s different, right? Wait until they declassify it in 2030 and by then you’ll just say “oh mistakes were made” and by then it will be ANOTHER war that is “different this time”. That is, if there is no nuclear war by then.

[mopsi]

Only Russia, Syria and North Korea support this narrative, while 141 out of 193 UN members have explicitly called this bullshit and demanded Russia to get the fuck out of Ukraine.

It's a simple, yet powerful reminder where Russia stands in the world: 3 vs 141. Even Nazi Germany had more international support.

[michaelmrose]

I'm not interested in a forest of time wasting links when you can't attend to simple conversation. "I could give you similar polls for China, too. That is billions of people. Who cares what they think? " We established prior that polls are a poor way to determine truth. If sand is a poor way to slake your thirst then pouring more of it down your gullet wont improve your situation.

Let's be real and acknowledge that you are sympathetic to the country of your birth. Where other people see monsters rampaging through Ukraine, raping women and girls, shelling hospitals ,you see excuses. I'm sure after all the footage of the death camps came out some people of German heritage felt ashamed of their countrymen while others focused on making excuses for them.

Stop. Making. Excuses.

[EGreg]

You’re the one making excuses for the most warmongering country in the last 100 years, involved in 80% of all the wars in the entire world, with more spent on the military industry than the next 10 countries combined, and maintaining 800 bases around the world while the rest of the world has 30.

The links are to back up everything I am saying with MAINSTREAM SOURCES and quotes from the very people who admitted lied to you and thought of you as a “useful idiot”. If you don’t want to click them, simply don’t. The cognitive dissonance might be too great. The polls show what actual people think who actually live in these countries. The links are all to mainstream and experts. In any other area of life, backing up your points would be normal and praiseworthy. But you are so afraid of challenging the official propaganda narrative, that you won’t open yourself up to more information.

Let’s be clear. I don’t care about countries or flags nearly as much as I care about human beings, their lives, safety, a good economy etc.

I have seen this exact same game play out multiple times in proxy wars between USA and USSR. Countries got razed to the ground. Civilians died. I don’t want that for Ukrainians.

It’s true that I was born in Russia but that is not behind what I am saying. For example, when Russia went to war in Chechnya and razed their capital city TO THE GROUND, I unequivocally condemn Russia. Even though it is “an internal matter” according to the International Community, and Chechnya had “no right” to become independent of Russia, I consider that bullshit. I would much prefer a resolution that has less violence, less wanton destruction. And that typically involves letting the region have more autonomy and yes, even independence. My approach is CONSISTENT.

I have defended Iran, for instance, in the past against such simplistic analysis. I have praised Hezbollah and Iran and Russia for coming to the aid of Syria against rampaging Jihadists with Saudi money and US weaponry. I call things as they are and my commitment is to the truth.

North Korea had an agreement with Clinton, not to develop a nuke. GWB and the Republicans called it expensive “appeasement” and let the deal die on the vine. North Korea got a nuke. Who is better off? Is it more expensive to deal with them now? Yes. Same with Iran and JCPOA. It was foolishness to nix the best DIPLOMATIC solution that placed more inspectors than any country, ever. Now Iran will develop a nuke! Many nukes! And it’s all because of Trump and Bibi Netanyahu.

I am Jewish yet I can criticize Bibi and Trump. I am born in Russia yet I can criticize Russia, condemn their invasion and arming “moderate rebels” in the Donbas, etc. I live in USA and I do the same thing here. MY SIDE IS REGULAR PEOPLE AND MY SOLUTION IS DIPLOMACY. And most of the world outside your bubble agrees with me. Or at the very least 30% of the world does. So your narrative — just like all other sad attempts to coerce others into one official propaganda line — have failed and will fail. You can’t fool all the people all the time:

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/05/us-threat-demo...

[michaelmrose]

What diplomatic solution? Will you suggest we give the Russians part of Ukraine which isn't ours to give or shall we threaten the Ukrainians with starving them of help and demand that they capitulate? Either option leaves millions subjugated and subject to "filtration", torture,privation and makes further conflict inevitable. They have specifically laid claim to a much broader territory than merely Ukraine and 150M people live in Independent nations they claim as their vassals. Even if such an agreement were possible and moral there is no reason to believe they should keep it.