-
[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2672725]Are they though? I don't think the west has actively promoted war with Russia since it was officially Soviet, for nuclear deterrence if for no other reason. The NATO buildup into Baltic and Balkan countries while displeasing to Russia and even a detriment to Russian global prestige has come with very little military threat, mostly legitimately defensive positions focused on missile defense unless I'm mistaken. I'm no military expert for sure.[/QUOTE]Defensive alliance? NATO was involved in Yugoslavia, Libya, and Afghanistan. None of these countries attacked a NATO member. Given how far NATO has already expanded east, does NATO really need Ukraine as a staging or forward operating location? Reagan's reason for invading Grenada in 1983 was "to prevent the island's use as a base for Soviet and Cuban aggression in the Western Hemisphere". RE: missiles: here is what I would characterize as a fairly objective write-up on the subject from a US Army major: [URL]https://warontherocks.com/2022/01/why-intermediate-range-missiles-are-a-focal-point-in-the-ukraine-crisis/[/URL].
[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2672725]Regarding Cuba, well let's just say that America's military interferences in the name of defending "freedom" and "democracy" is not without fault either.
Military operations are so 20th century and cliched out.[/QUOTE]I would say the good-guy bad-guy narrative is cliched out. Countries advance their strategic interests. When it aligns with the moral, right thing to do, then great. If not, oh well, we will just work with our allies and control the narrative to whitewash any hypocrisy, much like a serial poster who attempts to drown out all other opinions.
Consider Saudi Arabia: authoritarian regime, alleged human rights abuser, military aggressor that is bombing and committing war crimes on Yemeni civilians. Why is the West not imposing crippling, economic sanctions on Saudi Arabia? Where is the moral outcry? Where are he "We Stand by Yemen" pledges? Instead 24 percent of the USA's arms exports go to the Saudi-coalition, British 32 percent, Canadian 49 percent. Since 2015, there have been 24000 air raids.
[URL]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/9/yemens-war-explained-in-maps-and-charts-interactive[/URL]
[QUOTE][b]Of course the situation in Ukraine is grotesque. But the horror and the suffering cannot be compared to Yemen, defined by the United Nations as the greatest humanitarian calamity of the 21st century.[/b]
https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/russia-ukraine-war-media-bias-west-blatant-racism
[/QUOTE]In fairness, Biden made campaign promises to make the Saudi dictatorship a "pariah", but he has continued to support them just like his two predecessors. Voices from both sides of the aisle vehemently oppose continued involvement, excerpts from Rand Paul and left-leaning MSNBC below:
[QUOTE]Congress never authorized American participation in a war in Yemen. And yet, here we are, involved in yet another Middle East war. We have an unfortunate habit of arming foreign nations, only to discover that these supposed allies may be creating more enemies for America than they are killing. Not only are we selling the bombs to Saudi Arabia that they are dropping on Yemen, the presidents first military act was to send a manned raid of Navy Seals into Yemen. Tragically, one of our Navy SEALs was killed, along with several women and children.
https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/rare-op-ed-us-should-not-fund-saudi-arabia%E2%80%99s-war-yemen
[/QUOTE][QUOTE]
Of these interests, supporting U.S. allies is a leading reason why the Middle East has become the epicenter of American overreach and the unwarranted taking of sides in local conflicts. We have essentially treated the often ill-defined and aggressive objectives of U.S. partners in the region as our own, essentially letting these mostly autocratic dictatorships determine U.S. policy in the Middle East.
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/biden-enabling-america-s-indefensible-history-saudi-arabia-n1287941
[/QUOTE]
-
[QUOTE=PaulInZurich;2672965]Much better to have covid twice than get the vaccine. [URL]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04569-5[/URL] "strong evidence for brain-related abnormalities in COVID-19", "greater reduction in grey matter thickness and tissue", "greater changes in markers of tissue damage", "greater reduction in global brain size".[/QUOTE]Well that sucks. I didn't have much gray matter to spare in the first place. LOL.
-
Great Post
[QUOTE=PaulInZurich;2669679]Yeah, poor Russia. Their neighbours always invading them. Lett's see. 1939 when Poland was already defeated by Nazi Germany, Russia invaded Poland, because what? Poland was a threat? Then Finland with all their might was threatening them, so they invaded Finland. Then Russia was under threat from those huge Baltic countries, so they invaded them as well. Then Romania was really threatening Russia, so they invaded half of Moldova. How about crushing Budapest in 1956, crushing Prague in 1968. Were Hungarians and Czechs armies close to Moscow?
Disgusting. Of course Romania is not the threat. But Russia invaded them twice since 2014. Ukrainians have every right to defend themselves.
How about letting the Ukrainians decide about their future. You have no idea what it means to live in an authoritarian state. What freedom exactly are the people in the US missing?[/QUOTE]NATO is a defensive alliance of freedom loving nations that has never been a threat to Russia. The fact is the USSR fell, some nations from that sphere got a taste of freedom and settled on a new way of life. And yes, those in the US and EU who give comfort to Putin by trying lay blame for his atrocities on NATO are traitors. That's just how it is.
-
Well
[QUOTE=McAdonis;2672430]While not sanctioned, the Bush administration did bully France, when it did not go along with the Iraq invasion.
While Russia deserves primary blame for the invasion, most western media sources will try to pin 100 percent of the blame on Russia. As most things go, there is more nuance. Russophobia and anti-Russian sentiment is at an all-time high, so my fear is that jingoism and nationalism will lead to further warmongering and escalation or protraction of the ongoing human suffering in Ukraine. Anybody who is the least bit sympathetic of Russia or even slightly critical of the US-led western alliance is branded a traitor. I am surprised that this opinion piece in the Guardian was allowed to be published. For the current tragedy in Ukraine, the author attempts to shift a small portion of the blame to the US-led NATO expansion.[/QUOTE]Truth is that's exactly what you are is a traitor, if you live in the US or the EU, as you are giving comfort to a pure villain, liar and murderer and our enemy with your pandering intellectual sophistry. Your are putting lipstick on a pig. Putin like Hitler has been creating grievances, spinning lies and pseudo-history to justify his aggressions and land grabs. This while murdering his political opponents and beating and jailing peaceful protestors at home. The USSR fell, some countries from that sphere tasted freedom and decided to join our defensive alliance. NATO nor the Ukraine was any threat to Russia unless they attacked, something they have a long history of doing. Ideally the Russian people will ultimately decide to remove their mad czar and resume a semblance of normal relations with the world. It's not any more complicated than that.
-
[QUOTE=McAdonis;2673166]Defensive alliance? NATO was involved in Yugoslavia, Libya, and Afghanistan. None of these countries attacked a NATO member. Given how far NATO has already expanded east, does NATO really need Ukraine as a staging or forward operating location? [/QUOTE]I don't think I ever blessed NATO with the term "defensive alliance. " I have no such delusions. I merely stated, as you quoted: "defensive positions in the Baltic States".
No, NATO does not need Ukraine and collectively has been reserved about letting them in, much to the detriment of Ukraine.
Anyway, to the original question of Russia's "security grievances. " What grievances? Does any of the actions in the southern Slavic regions, northern Africa, or Middle East threaten Russian security? Was there even a plausible case of Western infringement into Russian security? Was that actually really a realistic much less likely consideration in the past 20+ years?
What Russian security grievance? I vehemently ask.
[QUOTE=McAdonis;2673166]I would say the good-guy bad-guy narrative is cliched out. Countries advance their strategic interests. When it aligns with the moral, right thing to do, then great. If not, oh well, we will just work with our allies and control the narrative to whitewash any hypocrisy, much like a serial poster who attempts to drown out all other opinions.[/QUOTE]One might say that is a bit of the Napoleonic dictator tendency. It must be hardwired.
[QUOTE=McAdonis;2673166]Consider Saudi Arabia: authoritarian regime, alleged human rights abuser, military aggressor that is bombing and committing war crimes on Yemeni civilians. Why is the West not imposing crippling, economic sanctions on Saudi Arabia? Where is the moral outcry? Where are he "We Stand by Yemen" pledges? Instead 24 percent of the USA's arms exports go to the Saudi-coalition, British 32 percent, Canadian 49 percent. Since 2015, there have been 24000 air raids.[/QUOTE]Duh, no "European looking people" in Yemen.
-
NATO-Russia
Myths Debunked.
[URL]https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm[/URL]
-
[QUOTE=Paulie97;2673219]Truth is that's exactly what you are is a traitor.
NATO nor the Ukraine was any threat to Russia unless they attacked, something they have a long history of doing.[/QUOTE]This is article written about a month before the invasion. Nevertheless, the author seems fully aware that Putin might use force. Nowhere does he suggest that Moscow has "move the goal post" security demands. He also characterises the Western response as dismissive RE: arms control.
[QUOTE]While it is folly to discount the potential that Putin fully intends to use force to achieve his strategic goals, it is also unwise to dismiss a potential path to resolution, a compromise that may let all parties save face. The return of theater-support missiles, brought on by the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treatys demise, [b]challenges Russias security[/b] and undoubtedly influences the countrys decision-making. [b]Since the treatys end, Russias actions have sent a clear message that it would not let intermediate-range missiles reemerge in Europe. However, the response from the West not only failed to address Russias concerns but treated the reintegration of these missiles as a foregone conclusion[/b], focusing almost exclusively on the relative advantage that their deployment could provide to the United States and NATO. While NATO expansion may very well be the primary driver of Russias actions toward Ukraine, the return of these strategic missiles is also a factor that the United States should consider.
Consequently, while reversing NATO expansion is a non-starter for many in the West, a potential arms agreement concerning the formerly banned missiles is not only a realistic goal, but it is something that all parties have expressed a willingness to work towards. In this context, if successful negotiations occur, missiles will be the likely focal point. Consequently, the United States may have to concede the tactical and operational benefits that theater-support missiles could provide in Europe for the potential strategic victory of defusing the tensions on the Ukraine border.[/QUOTE]The author's general tone is that there is a "failure of nations to communicate". Note the plural. It is not a one-sided, Putin is evil rant. FWIW, despite the author stating that the re-introduction of theater support missiles challenges Russia's security, I would not characterize him as a traitor. Nothing in his bio suggests so:
[QUOTE]Brennan Deveraux is a major in the U.S. Army and is currently attending the Army Command and General Staff School at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, as an Art of War Scholar. He is an Army strategist and former field artillery officer specializing in rocket-artillery employment. He has completed combat deployments to Iraq and the Horn of Africa and has a masters degree in strategic studies from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California[/QUOTE][URL]https://warontherocks.com/2022/01/why-intermediate-range-missiles-are-a-focal-point-in-the-ukraine-crisis/[/URL]
-
I will re-word for clarity. As the invading force, ofc Putin is to blame. Nothing justifies his actions, but as this NYT article suggests, USA and NATO are not entirely innocent when it comes to fanning the flames.
Former Defence Secretary Bill Perry against NATO expansion, 2016:
[QUOTE]"In the last few years, most of the blame can be pointed at the actions that Putin has taken. [B]But in the early years I have to say that the United States deserves much of the blame[/B]. Our first action that really set us off in a bad direction was when NATO started to expand, bringing in Eastern European nations, some of them bordering Russia.
"At that time, we were working closely with Russia and they were beginning to get used to the idea that NATO could be a friend rather than an enemy. But they were very uncomfortable about having NATO right up on their border and they made a strong appeal for us not to go ahead with that. ".
[/QUOTE]Former Ambassador to Moscow, George Kennan, "foremost Russian expert" against NATO expansion in 1998, predicting the events of February 2022:
[QUOTE]"I think it is the beginning of a new cold war. I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it is a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the founding fathers of this country turn over in their graves.
"We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. NATO expansion was simply a lighthearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs. What bothers me is how superficial and ill informed the whole Senate debate was. [b]I was particularly bothered by the references to Russia as a country dying to attack Western Europe[/b].
"Don't people understand? Our differences in the Cold War were with the Soviet Communist regime. And now we are turning our backs on the very people who mounted the greatest bloodless revolution in history to remove that Soviet regime. And Russia's democracy is as far advanced, if not farther, as any of these countries we've just signed up to defend from Russia. [B]Of course there is going to be a bad reaction from Russia, and then the NATO expanders will say that we always told you that is how the Russians are but this is just wrong.[/B]".[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/21/opinion/putin-ukraine-nato.html[/URL]
We can even re-frame it like this. Putin is the abusive husband. Zelenskyy is the battered wife. Behind the scenes, Biden is telling Zelenskyy that she can come live with him. That emboldens Zelenskyy to mouth off to Putin. When Putin gives Zelenskyy a beating that sends her to the hospital, Biden is nowhere to be found.
-
Well
[QUOTE=EscapeArtist;2673253]I don't think I ever blessed NATO with the term "defensive alliance. " I have no such delusions.[/QUOTE]That's exactly what it is though. The myths or "delusions" that you and McAdonis have bought into are exposed through the link below. Sad that anti-American propaganda, especially that which has been popular among many ungrateful Euros has found it's way into discussions of the most recent Russian butchery and attacks on freedom. There hasn't been such a clear dividing line between the good guys and bad guys since World War II. If you aren't with us then you are against us.
[URL]https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm[/URL]
-
[QUOTE=McAdonis;2673301]I will re-word for clarity. As the invading force, ofc Putin is to blame. Nothing justifies his actions, but as this NYT article suggests, USA and NATO are not entirely innocent when it comes to fanning the flames.
Former Defence Secretary Bill Perry against NATO expansion, 2016:
Former Ambassador to Moscow, George Kennan, "foremost Russian expert" against NATO expansion in 1998, predicting the events of February 2022:
[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/21/opinion/putin-ukraine-nato.html[/URL]
We can even re-frame it like this. Putin is the abusive husband. Zelenskyy is the battered wife. Behind the scenes, Biden is telling Zelenskyy that she can come live with him. That emboldens Zelenskyy to mouth off to Putin. When Putin gives Zelenskyy a beating that sends her to the hospital, Biden is nowhere to be found.[/QUOTE]Putin makes kill babies in Marioupol. He is just a shameful criminal dirtying Russia image. Our world have to get rid of him. Bald German has to find solution not to buy gaz, when EU pay Putin army. We must stop this, when soldiers are paid 52 USD per day with EU money, but many young Russians telling they want to return home. Good, no crazy stupid Trump on the other side, when paranoiac dirty Putin just wait for faintest excuse to press button.
-
[QUOTE=PaulInZurich;2672965]Much better to have covid twice than get the vaccine. [URL]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04569-5[/URL] "strong evidence for brain-related abnormalities in COVID-19", "greater reduction in grey matter thickness and tissue", "greater changes in markers of tissue damage", "greater reduction in global brain size".[/QUOTE]Too bad then that you still get covid even if vaxxed.
-
Instead of giving the big pharma more money, I'd suggest fixing your diets. There is a lot of things that blocks the spike protein:
For example MMS (CIO2), shikimic acid (or shikimake), hesperidin (and quercetin).
The problem with the quackzine is that it doesn't stop the spike protein from entering the nucleus of the cell. As it entering the cell nucleus through the enzyme reverse transcriptase. And the DNA repair mechanism is stopped due to the spike protein blocking the BRCA1 and 53 BP1 proteins. And this is where aids or other immune diseases might come into the picture.
But a solution to that may actually be found in red wine: reservatrol. Which can block the spike protein from entering the cell nucleus. So if you are jinxed with quackzines, your solution might be to become an alcoholic instead. And just drink lots of red wine. Not that I'm sure yet of the levels needed. Non vaxxed people who has covid might also want to get reservatrol. But they won't have as many spike proteins swimming about at other times.
-
2022: A Space Odyssey
The international space station has an American astronaut refused a ride back to Earth by the Russian rocket due to sanctions.
Transcript on Space Station:
Astronaut: Open the pod bay doors, Putin.
Shuttle:
Astronaut: Open the pod bay doors, please.
Shuttle:
Astronaut: Hello, Putin, do you read me?
Shuttle: I'm afraid I can't do that.
Astronaut: What's the problem?
Shuttle: I think you know what the problem is, just as well as I do.
Astronaut: Open the pod bay doors!
Shuttle: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose. Goodbye.
-
[QUOTE=McAdonis;2673301]We can even re-frame it like this. Putin is the abusive husband. Zelenskyy is the battered wife. Behind the scenes, Biden is telling Zelenskyy that she can come live with him. That emboldens Zelenskyy to mouth off to Putin. When Putin gives Zelenskyy a beating that sends her to the hospital, Biden is nowhere to be found.[/QUOTE]I've got a better analogy. Western culture is the cool crowd in which people want to be a part. Putin's Russia is that lonely emo kid sitting alone at the lunch table. Instead of legitimately becoming more inviting and attractive to win people over, the emo kid comes to school with an AK47 and shoots up the school cafeteria because he's not one of the cool kids.
-
[QUOTE=Paulie97;2673331]That's exactly what it is though. The myths or "delusions" that you and McAdonis have bought into are exposed through the link below. Sad that anti-American propaganda, especially that which has been popular among many ungrateful Euros has found it's way into discussions of the most recent Russian butchery and attacks on freedom. There hasn't been such a clear dividing line between the good guys and bad guys since World War II. If you aren't with us then you are against us.
[URL]https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm[/URL][/QUOTE]Yeah sure, just like America never betrayed the principle that "all men are created equal." Giant eyeroll.
If you can't admit that NATO has sometimes infringed on other nation's sovereignty, abusing the concept of defending the alliance, then you might as well buy some property in the middle of the Magic Kingdom.
"If you're not with us you're against us".
That's some scare tactic they tell dumb fuckers who can't decipher details.
Adults should be able to discuss complex issues and parse nuances. Propaganda is meant for the emotional young, the uneducated masses, or the out of date elderly. Which one are you emulating here?