Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NATO expansion isn’t the cause. It’s the effect. Countries want in NATO and the EU because Russia won’t leave them alone, militarily or economically. They don’t want to be puppet states with Russia installing thei leaders and looting their economies.
Yes, this is the tl;dr explanation for those with short attention spans. I would just say they don’t want to “go back to” being puppet states—been there done that. Freedom was hard won and they’re not giving it back.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NATO expansion is one of the causes of the conflict. It was expanded recklessly
I do not think NATO will be able to stand up for the small member states, should the need arise
I agree with you, but we are the minority opinion.
I think the optimal approach -- that is, the approach that would have been most likely to produce a lasting peace -- would have been to leave any countries that directly border Russia out of NATO and out of any NATO discussions. These areas should have been a neutral area in which neither NATO nor Russia would place military equipment.
The US has the luxury of having two large oceans that act as natural insulation against enemy attack. This makes it more difficult, I think, for Americans to understand the concerns of countries that must rub shoulders with opposing powers.
I think this strategic agreement between the US and Ukraine -- signed on Nov 10, 2021 -- was as boneheaded move that was likely the precipitating event that led Putin to invade Ukraine:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=us+strategic+partnership+ukraine+nov+10
It was foolish to make this sort of agreement public. If we wished to help Ukraine militarily, we should have worked at it quietly, out of public view.
That sounds great, but Putin has proven that he has no respect for international agreements Russia has made. Just read the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, where, in exchange for Ukraine giving up the nuclear weapons it inherited from the Soviet Union, Russia committed “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine” and “to refrain from the threat or use of force” against the country. How's that working out?
If the Baltic countries of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia weren't in NATO, you better believe that Russian tanks would be there now.
And look at a map. On the border of Poland and Lithuania there's a strategic strip of land called the Suwalski Gap, which could connect Belarus to Russia's port of Kaliningrad on the Baltic Sea. Don't think Putin wants that? Why won't he try? Because it's in NATO territory. NATO is serving its purpose of preventing another World War.
Anonymous wrote:Tabloids say Putin’s mistress with their kids are in Switzerland. Could it be true?
https://pagesix.com/2022/03/06/vladimir-putin-hiding-alina-kabaeva-kids-in-switzerland/amp/
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:All the bickering on this thread just tells me that the Russian effort to weaken the US by encouraging political fighting among US citizens is working.
Who knew we were so easy to weaken. Or that Republicans would be easily manipulated toRussia.
Honestly, this whole thread tells me that Americans are largely ignorant of the actual facts of post-WWII Europe and Russian history. Both Republicans who accept the kind of fake news descriptions of European and Russian history and alliances and the Democrats who have so little knowledge they cannot effectively pre-but or re-but these fake news, a-historical descriptions of past events.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NATO expansion is one of the causes of the conflict. It was expanded recklessly
I do not think NATO will be able to stand up for the small member states, should the need arise
I agree with you, but we are the minority opinion.
I think the optimal approach -- that is, the approach that would have been most likely to produce a lasting peace -- would have been to leave any countries that directly border Russia out of NATO and out of any NATO discussions. These areas should have been a neutral area in which neither NATO nor Russia would place military equipment.
The US has the luxury of having two large oceans that act as natural insulation against enemy attack. This makes it more difficult, I think, for Americans to understand the concerns of countries that must rub shoulders with opposing powers.
I think this strategic agreement between the US and Ukraine -- signed on Nov 10, 2021 -- was as boneheaded move that was likely the precipitating event that led Putin to invade Ukraine:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=us+strategic+partnership+ukraine+nov+10
It was foolish to make this sort of agreement public. If we wished to help Ukraine militarily, we should have worked at it quietly, out of public view.

Anonymous wrote:Tabloids say Putin’s mistress with their kids are in Switzerland. Could it be true?
https://pagesix.com/2022/03/06/vladimir-putin-hiding-alina-kabaeva-kids-in-switzerland/amp/
Anonymous wrote:NATO expansion isn’t the cause. It’s the effect. Countries want in NATO and the EU because Russia won’t leave them alone, militarily or economically. They don’t want to be puppet states with Russia installing thei leaders and looting their economies.
Anonymous wrote:Thank you very much for this explanation. Very helpful for understanding. The ignorant rantings on these threads are very confusing. Saying something loud & mean doesn't mean it's true.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:All the bickering on this thread just tells me that the Russian effort to weaken the US by encouraging political fighting among US citizens is working.
Who knew we were so easy to weaken. Or that Republicans would be easily manipulated toRussia.