@kevcvs57 saidYou seem to think by "buffer state" i meant a magical neutral country that doesn't get involved with anyone and everyone leaves alone. That doesn't exist except Switzerland because it has money and you can't bully . Ofc Putin wanted to dominate Ukraine.
It’s not interested in buffer states it wants a huge chunk of Europe that it can dominate politically, economically and militarily. That’s why it stepped in when Ukraine wanted to join the EU beaus even it lose economic and political influence over Ukraine and in future a fully democratic, economically successful Slavic nation right in its border for its own population to witness and ponder about IMO
You're not saying anything different than what i did.
@kevcvs57 saidI've already pointed out the folly of this argument; Ukraine is an economic basket case with a GDP per capita of about 1/3 of Russia. It hardly works as a shining example of the wonders tossing your lot with the West will bring you.
It’s not interested in buffer states it wants a huge chunk of Europe that it can dominate politically, economically and militarily. That’s why it stepped in when Ukraine wanted to join the EU beaus even it lose economic and political influence over Ukraine and in future a fully democratic, economically successful Slavic nation right in its border for its own population to witness and ponder about IMO
@no1marauder saidWhat's your point here?
I've already pointed out the folly of this argument; Ukraine is an economic basket case with a GDP per capita of about 1/3 of Russia. It hardly works as a shining example of the wonders tossing your lot with the West will bring you.
"Tossing one's lot with the West" isn't an insta win button, yes. But the option to choose the best offer between two or more parties instead of being the stooge of one is a rather important boon to have.
@zahlanzi saidYanukovych, Ukraine's elected President, was illegally overthrown for using IHO " the option to choose the best offer between two or more parties."
What's your point here?
"Tossing one's lot with the West" isn't an insta win button, yes. But the option to choose the best offer between two or more parties instead of being the stooge of one is a rather important boon to have.
Anyway, the criticism is of Kev's far-fetched idea that the Russian invasion was motivated by economic jealously.
@zahlanzi saidSome history is in order here.
I concede that it looks more and more that any peace will require a declaration of neutrality from Ukraine.
I am curious though on what your stance is on the reasonablity of this demand. Is Moldova next to be invaded if it doesn't declare itself neutral? How about Finland? Sweeden? Given the latest "military operations" in Ukraine, these last two don't find it as ludicro ...[text shortened]... ght invade them next.
Is Russia entitled to buffer states between itself and an imaginary enemy?
When the USSR agreed to relinquish its grip on Eastern Europe, Western leaders (including from the US and UK) essentially promised them a neutral buffer zone by stating NATO would not expand past Germany to the East. Then as part of its agreement to recognize Ukraine as a separate State with its existing borders, Ukraine put into its Constitution a requirement that it would not enter into military alliances. Both promises were violated (the first extremely quickly).
Moreover, after the fall of the USSR, NATO has conducted a series of offensive operations including humbling Russia's ally Serbia, overthrowing the government of Libya and militarily supporting the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. The threat from it hardly looks "imaginary" from Russian eyes.
And while it seems to be considered crude now for a power to desire States around it that it does not perceive as hostile to it and friendly to aggressive military alliances, that seems to only go so far in Western eyes. I don't intend to play "whataboutism" but US invasions to overthrow governments in the Western hemisphere such as Grenada, Panama, Haiti etc. etc. don't seem to have triggered the same type of Euro outrage as similar Russian operations.
All in all, it would do well to try and consider what the world looks like from the Kremlin rather than falling to the "good guy, bad guy" simplistic vision Kev, Shallow and others have adopted.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@averagejoe1 saidNo, we don't. He lost. Get over it.
Let’s all agree….. no good answers. After all, we have a Hitleresque madman to deal with.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
@no1marauder saidEven your dishonest, far-right sources put the lie to your defence of Putin.
There's numerous stories from Western news agencies reporting the peace talks; here's a sample:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/ukraine-says-russia-verbally-agreed-to-its-proposals-except-on-crimea/ ("Ukraine’s top negotiator in peace talks with Russia said Saturday that Moscow had “verbally” agreed
Moscow had "verbally" - and those scare quotes are not mine, they come from your source - agreed to... well, who cares? Anything Moscow "verbally" agrees to is worth a fart in the wind. Putin has gone back on his "verbal" agreements so often, the only thing any country could trust on his part is a contract signed in his blood, and his children held in hostage. If not - he will, will go back on his "promise".
@shallow-blue saidReuters, the New York Times, Financial Times and Times of Israel are all "far right sources"?
Even your dishonest, far-right sources put the lie to your defence of Putin.
Moscow had "verbally" - and those scare quotes are not mine, they come from your source - agreed to... well, who cares? Anything Moscow "verbally" agrees to is worth a fart in the wind. Putin has gone back on his "verbal" agreements so often, the only thing any country could trust on his part ...[text shortened]... his blood, and his children held in hostage. If not - he will, will go back on his "promise".
Yes, they were negotiations which are generally verbal. There seems to have been a good possibility that these verbal negotiations could have brought an end to the war except for Western meddling based on a desire to bleed Russia.
@no1marauder said"Anyway, the criticism is of Kev's far-fetched idea that the Russian invasion was motivated by economic jealously."
Yanukovych, Ukraine's elected President, was illegally overthrown for using IHO " the option to choose the best offer between two or more parties."
Anyway, the criticism is of Kev's far-fetched idea that the Russian invasion was motivated by economic jealously.
Missed that particular one from your lengthy back and forth.
Yes, that's nonsense.
2 edits
@no1marauder said"When the USSR agreed to relinquish its grip on Eastern Europe, Western leaders (including from the US and UK) essentially promised them a neutral buffer zone by stating NATO would not expand past Germany to the East. "
Some history is in order here.
When the USSR agreed to relinquish its grip on Eastern Europe, Western leaders (including from the US and UK) essentially promised them a neutral buffer zone by stating NATO would not expand past Germany to the East. Then as part of its agreement to recognize Ukraine as a separate State with its existing borders, Ukraine put into its Cons ...[text shortened]... ther than falling to the "good guy, bad guy" simplistic vision Kev, Shallow and others have adopted.
And when the USSR broke and the treaty of Warsaw was tossed in the bin, those countries that were essentially hostages looked for a bigger, tougher, sugar daddy.
Russia has no claim over Ukraine and other former soviet states and it has no claim over Warsaw pact states.
Parts of my country swore vassalage to the Ottoman Empire and another was part of Austro Hungary. Is Turkey entitled to tribute? Do they have claim to our sea side resorts, because that territory was theirs?
"Then as part of its agreement to recognize Ukraine as a separate State with its existing borders, "
Russia annexed Crimea in 2014. Seems borders are merely a suggestion.
"Ukraine put into its Constitution a requirement that it would not enter into military alliances. Both promises were violated (the first extremely quickly). "
How long must Ukraine respect that promise? One more generation? 5? Until we live in a Mad Max world because of global warming?
"The threat from it hardly looks "imaginary" from Russian eyes."
I understood you argue that is an illogical fear, and just because US did X and Y doesn't mean they would do Z. Did i misunderstood?
"I don't intend to play "whataboutism" but US invasions to overthrow governments in the Western hemisphere such as Grenada, Panama, Haiti etc. etc. don't seem to have triggered the same type of Euro outrage as similar Russian operations."
Yes, that's hypocritical. We are all guilty of it.
Two wrongs don't make a right though. And US invasions seem to come with less war crimes than the Russians committed in Ukraine.
@no1marauder saidOh well if you pointed it out then it must be folly because your constantly ahead of game on this topic 🙄
I've already pointed out the folly of this argument; Ukraine is an economic basket case with a GDP per capita of about 1/3 of Russia. It hardly works as a shining example of the wonders tossing your lot with the West will bring you.
@zahlanzi saidNo I meant what I said, Putin is not interested in a buffer state his primary objective was to roll his tanks right through a pliant Ukrainian population and a cowardly NATO right up to the polish / nato border in the west and link up with its Moldovan based garrison beyond Odessa.
You seem to think by "buffer state" i meant a magical neutral country that doesn't get involved with anyone and everyone leaves alone. That doesn't exist except Switzerland because it has money and you can't bully . Ofc Putin wanted to dominate Ukraine.
You're not saying anything different than what i did.
It was NATO that did not think Ukraine joining its ranks was a good idea and preferred a buffer state between themselves and Russia.
Despite what No1 claims it was Ukraine's likely eventual EU status that put Russia on this path of invasion and occupation of Ukraine and nothing to do with Ukraine’s non existent pie in the sky NATO membership but as we’ve seen with Finland and Sweden it’s Russian aggression that will lead to NATO expansion to its border.
@kevcvs57 said"-Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday he had no objections to Ukraine joining the European Union following the European Commission’s historic decision to back Kyiv’s bid to become a member.
No I meant what I said, Putin is not interested in a buffer state his primary objective was to roll his tanks right through a pliant Ukrainian population and a cowardly NATO right up to the polish / nato border in the west and link up with its Moldovan based garrison beyond Odessa.
It was NATO that did not think Ukraine joining its ranks was a good idea and preferred a buff ...[text shortened]... seen with Finland and Sweden it’s Russian aggression that will lead to NATO expansion to its border.
“We have nothing against it. It is not a military bloc. It’s the right of any country to join economic unions,” Putin said on Friday when asked about the prospects of Ukraine joining the EU.
Russia has railed against Ukraine’s attempts to join the NATO military alliance for years, with the issue becoming a major stand-off between Moscow and the West.
Before he ordered tens of thousands of troops into Ukraine in late February, Putin had sought legal guarantees from the United States that Ukraine would not be admitted to the military alliance."
https://www.euronews.com/2022/06/18/uk-ukraine-crisis-eu-russia
@no1marauder saidNo not now probably, given how the war has gone for him, but he certainly did in 2014 and beyond because it means he would lose economic dominance of a neighbouring state.
"-Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday he had no objections to Ukraine joining the European Union following the European Commission’s historic decision to back Kyiv’s bid to become a member.
“We have nothing against it. It is not a military bloc. It’s the right of any country to join economic unions,” Putin said on Friday when asked about the prospect ...[text shortened]... ed to the military alliance.[/b]"
https://www.euronews.com/2022/06/18/uk-ukraine-crisis-eu-russia
You lie he lies quite a lot yeah!
Why are you even quoting his statements as evidence of what he:- thinks, believes or intends? Are we to be as gullible as you in order for your post to make sense.
I guess he really doesn’t know anything about the Skripal or Navalny poisonings or any of the extrajudicial murders and assassinations that have taken place under his watch.
Do you remember him saying that the idea of him invading Ukraine was western anti Russian propaganda a day or two before he invaded Ukraine?