• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The War in Ukraine

KevinB said:
2004 if not sooner.
Click to expand...
Ever since March 24 1999 when NATO started bombing Yugoslavia without security council approval (such a badly designed system!) thus ending the believability of the NATO stance that they are a purely defensive alliance. That placed in the future wannabe tsarina the belief that NATO was an active enemy military with designs on the motherland. Once his satellite/puppet buffer states were no longer there, and worse had joined the enemy, that cemented that opinion. With the 1000 plus year history of invading armies from all directions and now having few easily dependable physical barriers or sacrificial buffer states, that fear while misplaced in our worldview was logical in his worldview. (we really need to stop assuming everybody shares our beliefs and perceptions of motivations and objective reality). Multiple warning signals were sent over the years culminating in the 2008 speech to NATO in Bucharest.

Subsequently he used NATO's rules against them for the first time in Georgia thus essentially permanently stopping any chance of joining NATO. Ukraine then was a compliant satellite with Russian leanings so only soft power and hybrid operations were started to ensure its allegiance. With each additional invasion - Chechnya twice, Ukraine twice and arguably Moldova - the belief that NATO was a fundamentally flawed organisation with little appetite for kinetic action or tolerance of casualties/costs and an inability to think let alone plan for the strategic long term was reinforced. In his world, all NATO wanted was financial coercive control, resource extraction and profits.

So logically he used the current wests belief in unfettered free speech and naivete with great power machinations to establish and imbed agents and influence idiots throughout the west to keep their political elites and populations misinformed or confused and divided amongst themselves. The lack of critical thinking skills amongst most populations, decreasing international 'literacy' particularly in the US and the rise of social media made Russian info operations his most cost effective weapon. And they excell at them.
 
SeaKingTacco said:
Well, they can either leave Ukraine or bring it.

Russia’s choice.
Click to expand...
They can't handle a bunch of rapidly trained Ukrainian brigades ripping through their border regions. I highly doubt they want the smoke that comes with a NATO No Fly Zone over Ukraine.
 
Skysix said:
Ever since March 24 1999 when NATO started bombing Yugoslavia without security council approval (such a badly designed system!) thus ending the believability of the NATO stance that they are a purely defensive alliance. That placed in the future wannabe tsarina the belief that NATO was an active enemy military with designs on the motherland.
Once his satellite/puppet buffer states were no longer there, and worse had joined the enemy, that cemented that opinion. With the 1000 plus year history of invading armies from all directions and now having few easily dependable physical barriers or sacrificial buffer states, that fear while misplaced in our worldview was logical in his worldview. (we really need to stop assuming everybody shares our beliefs and perceptions of motivations and objective reality). Multiple warning signals were sent over the years culminating in the 2008 speech to NATO in Bucharest.

Subsequently he used NATO's rules against them for the first time in Georgia thus essentially permanently stopping any chance of joining NATO. Ukraine then was a compliant satellite with Russian leanings so only soft power and hybrid operations were started to ensure its allegiance. With each additional invasion - Chechnya twice, Ukraine twice and arguably Moldova - the belief that NATO was a fundamentally flawed organisation with little appetite for kinetic action or tolerance of casualties/costs and an inability to think let alone plan for the strategic long term was reinforced. In his world, all NATO wanted was financial coercive control, resource extraction and profits.

So logically he used the current wests belief in unfettered free speech and naivete with great power machinations to establish and imbed agents and influence idiots throughout the west to keep their political elites and populations misinformed or confused and divided amongst themselves. The lack of critical thinking skills amongst most populations, decreasing international 'literacy' particularly in the US and the rise of social media made Russian info operations his most cost effective weapon. And they excell at them.
Click to expand...
The only aspect I’d have added to that was that NATO acted in the FYR with UNGA approval and Resolutions.
The Security Council may not have authorized force, but there was a majority of the UN General Assembly that supported the action.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bruce Monkhouse
    • Like
    • Wow
Looking For Ukraine-Superthread?
Replies
17
Views
6K
Maxman1
Maxman1
B
Canadian Senate- appointments and discussion
2
Replies
22
Views
582
Halifax Tar
Halifax Tar
Alan
    • Like
Clothing Donations to Ukrainian Front
Replies
12
Views
14K
Alan
Alan
T
Awaiting doctor form result.
Replies
6
Views
2K
T_rob
T
C
Does anyone know if you can elect to take your IPR during IREM?
Replies
1
Views
298
CountDC
CountDC
Back
Top