6
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2023
6 points (100.0% liked)
World News
32285 readers
1234 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Of course, the people of the Donbas were just sitting there peacefully doing nothing when all of a sudden the Ukranians started shelling them. That was the start of the military action, silly me. Good thing all those vacationing Russian soldiers happened to be there a the time to defend them.
In 2022 it also just happened that russia was hosting possibly the largest military excercise in recent memory right on Ukraine's border when the situation turned too menacing. Good they happened to have all those cruise missiles ready as if they hadn't acted, russia would have been wiped out or something...
Occam's razor cuts well on the two "possible" viewpoints of this war.
First is that big country sees an opportunity to capture land from a smaller one. In multiple stages between 2014 and 2022. A very limited amount of assumptions that can explain what is happening...
Second presumes that all the occupied areas secretly wanted to be a part of russia, nato is threatening russian territory while not being present, non affiliated soldiers with russian (but not russian) equipment occupy areas, a jewish president turns out to be in charge of a genocidial nazi regime that just has to be replaced with a peaceful one, and finally all of this is best achieved by a 3 day (actually 476) special military operation that has a goal of achieving something, but nobody actually knows what.
You really need to stop sniffing your own farts.
Every world leader and military strategist since the 1930s has understood Ukraine to be critical to the national security of Russia. That's why the Third Reich invaded Russia across the Ukrainian border. When the USSR was being dismantled, all world leaders understood Ukrainian neutrality to be a critical component of Russian national security. It was openly discussed. It's been a known component of international security for decades.
And yet, when we got access to leaks, we learned that simultaneously while NATO was telling Gorbie that Ukraine would remain neutral, Clinton was working internally to figure out to get NATO to establish presence in Ukraine. Despite Russia telling NATO and the world that Ukraine is critical to their national security, the war machine just kept on rolling. Despite Russia not reacting to all other border occupations by NATO in the Baltic states, this was the one red line that everyone knew about publicly that would tip Russia over the edge.
And that's exactly what happened. The idea that NATO wasn't threatening Russia because it wasn't physically installed yet is such a ridiculous point. Are you proposing that Russia would only have a casus belli after NATO finished installing nuclear capabilities? Are you proposing that Russia should wait until NATO is ready to fight before choosing to fight?
It's clear that you've only read analysis from the last year and only from Western sources. Just go read about this history from the 90s. Actually engage with the historical context here.