Russia-Ukraine War

[Vertigo 7]

If what EGO_Aut says is accurate, then why was Poland, Hungary, and Czechia admitted in 99? They were members of the Warsaw Pact that had an agreement with the Soviet Union (that, again, no longer exists).

It seems like only Russia wanted the Warsaw Pact to remain but none of the European countries had an interest. It was declared ended in 91 when the USSR collapsed by the Warsaw Pact members, who then later joined NATO and there have been a bunch of other countries admitted into NATO since.

[EGO_Aut]

Apparently the west wants to put RU under pressure again with a cold war. It's sad that somebody always has to be bad and that the media is brainwashed with belief.
Does anyone really believe that RU wants to conquer Ukraine? RU wants / will create a buffer zone or DMZ, nothing more. At the beginning of the crisis, Ukraine spat on the Donbas and strangled the people financially, then they were surprised that the RU reacted and grabbed the Crimea (important port) and supported Donbas (RU minority).

@Vertigo7
Warsaw pact was too expensive for RU. Michail Gorbatschow tried to bring peace with Glasnost/Perestroika, he was blinded and got fooled. He thought its enough to have a nuclear arsenal and some troops, nato on the other hand was a agressive/expansionist and the only remaining power block.

Poland, Hungary, and Czechia had been corrupted by nato, RU always mentioned that a east expansion of Nato will not be acepted. If i remember correct Estland , Letland, Litauen did the same before-i am not sure atm , maybe they left warsaw pact first and joined Nato later.

[Vertigo 7]

Ohhhhhh, now everything makes sense.

I'm sure the country that never dopes its Olympic athletes, or never tires to assassinate popular rivals to its glorious leader is only interested in harmony and peace and absolutely needs space in someone else's country to create a buffer cuz there's just not enough room in that tiny itty bitty country they're currently occupying.

You'll forgive me if after everything that's happened from Russia, especially over the last 6 years and change, that I remain highly skeptical of Russian propaganda.

[Cpt.Jericho]

So, you're saying NATO members never has doped athletes? NATO partners don't assassinate unpopular people? NATO partners don't create "buffer" zones to protect its borders?
Excuse me, but all that is true in for our Western side, too. Our media are just too busy to tell all the dirty details Russia does, but neglects the atrocities being done in the name of freedom and democracy.
Just because Russia may be the bad guy in this story doesn't mean that the NATO is the good guys.
We tried to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq and Afghanistan and ditched our partners there. We're just as bad as them.

[Vertigo 7]

I'm not aware of NATO members assassinating their own political rivals or the member states running state sponsored doping programs for their athletes. I'm not saying that, for example, the CIA hasn't assassinated enemies of the US or people like Lance Armstrong getting caught using steroids, or whatever it was, doesn't and hasn't happened. It's absolutely true those things have happened. However, that's a far cry from Putin's multiple assassinations/arrests/etc of anyone who challenges his presidency and so forth.

At the end of the day, however, it comes down to this. NATO is invited to Ukraine, Russia isn't. Ukraine asked years ago for help with defense against Russia. The US, and others, have provided arms and tech advisors. Russia is now demanding a full withdrawal of NATO, which likely won't happen.

Claiming they need a buffer zone is ludicrous on its face. Russia hasn't been attacked. They've got miles upon miles of their own country they can build a buffer in if they really wanted one, but no.. it HAS to be in Ukraine. Russia, on the other hand, has openly attacked Ukraine and has been doing so for years. Now they've moved thousands of troops to the boarder and are hurling demands at NATO? Come on... who really can't see this for what it is?

[Warenwolf]

Poland, Hungary, and Czechia had been corrupted by nato, RU always mentioned that a east expansion of Nato will not be acepted. If i remember correct Estland , Letland, Litauen did the same before-i am not sure atm , maybe they left warsaw pact first and joined Nato later.

That is very convient propaganda, claiming that democratic processes in post-communist east europe were corruption by Nato. Why should former soviet states in Baltic be interested in defense relationships with nation that occupied them after ww2? Or nations in east europe who were under soviet boot for 45 years seek an alliance that will keep the Moscow away?

Also Hungarian Orban and his fidesz party are extremly friendly towards Putin and many in west europe consider him Putin's man.

[EGO_Aut]

Why is there a need for a NATO at all if there is no longer a Warsaw Pact?
Shouldn't the UN take on the task of securing peace and abolish veto rights?
Why does the media always have to report about the bad RU, while the good ones are allowed to do anything and the same is dismissed as a preventive necessity? (Which non-NATO country do I mean).
Some time ago, RU tried to place Atomrockets in Kuba-like US does in Europe. You know what happend?
RU or USSR dismounted their security block-peacefully.
Why did the "west" expand Nato and breaks agreements?

It is always good to hear both sides.

[Warenwolf]

Why is there a need for a NATO at all if there is no longer a Warsaw Pact?

Because Russia is as much threat to its neighbors as soviet was. It only respects strength and not agreements. Budapest agreement from 1994, stipulated clearly that Russia committed itself to "respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine". Now it occupies Ukrainian lands.
It has also financed extremist movements in neighboring countries and tried to influence elections. It has tried to foment coups and instability in most of Balkan countries and done targeted cyber attacks against ALL of European (+USA) countries.It has developed new nuclear devices (Status-6) and nuclear delivery systems (hypersonic missiles) which are all attempts to negate the nuclear balance and parity which Soviet and USA had during the cold war years.

During the Covid pandemic, it supported false information campaigns, aimed to increase the chaos and negative economic impact of pandemic (higher death toll).

NATO does not need to justify its existence in my eyes.

[Observe]

The issue is whether or not Russia will attack Ukraine, not whose propaganda machine is most effective, or whether any other countries can claim a higher standard of behavior than Russia. If Russia feels threatened, they will act as any other country in the same boat. Is Putin bluffing? Should the West give in to his demands? How unreasonable is Russia being and how much would Ukraine lose to keep Russia happy? I am rather uninformed on this topic, so please excuse my ignorance. Thank you.

[Vertigo 7]

Russia has been attacking Ukraine for years, albeit short of a full assault. The question is if Ukraine is valuable enough to Putin to ignite a 3rd world war.

[Olterin]

Russia has been attacking Ukraine for years, albeit short of a full assault. The question is if Ukraine is valuable enough to Putin to ignite a 3rd world war.

For all the rhetoric at play here, do you really believe that Russia invading Ukraine, which is not part of any major military alliance, would ignite an actual World War? I fail to see the connections that would cause such a wide-scale conflict. A second Cold War I will not doubt for one second... but a hot conflict? Russia has nukes, I very much doubt the other nuclear powers would want a direct war..?

[Vertigo 7]

And that is exactly what Putin is betting on, that the rest of the world just leaves Ukraine's fate up to Russia. NATO hasn't pulled out of Ukraine, yet, or signaled a willingness to do so. What do you think will happen if Putin decides to test NATO's resolve and attack?

[EGO_Aut]

It was provoked by NATO / US, so in my opinion it is logical that RU acts as the protective power of the Donbas areas.
At least RU passports will be delivered, then there will be elections and it will be decided whether there will be a stay, connection or independence. The result is then implemented using RU.
I don't know why you are so upset about it.
But i am 100% sure that UKR will not be conquered completely, max. RU minority areas like Donbas.

[Warenwolf]

Same arguments for occupation of Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia in other words. I just wait for some EU political imbecile to come and claim that we will have "peace in our times" too and we got 100% repetition of same farce we had in 1938.

[EGO_Aut]

Same arguments for occupation of Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia in other words. I just wait for some EU political imbecile to come and claim that we will have "peace in our times" too and we got 100% repetition of same farce we had in 1938.

No CZ had no civil war on their teritory like UKR now. And they did not stopped energy and pension money Transfer to the people befor the conflict started.

Here how it all started and involved parties.

[Vertigo 7]

So Russia attacking Ukraine is somehow NATO's fault? lol...

See, Olterin? The Russia propaganda machine has convinced its followers that Ukraine has to be under Russia's control and their aggression is all NATO's fault, despite NATO having never attacked Russia.

[EGO_Aut]

So Russia attacking Ukraine is somehow NATO's fault? lol...

Yes, if Ru would attack UKR.


............."How can you rely on equal relations when the United States and the West are in such a position?" Criticized Gorbachev in the interview. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the West appeared “arrogant and self-righteous”. “You declared yourself the winner of the Cold War.” As the “winner”, the West decided to build a “new empire”. That led to the expansion of NATO. Since then, this has been a source of tension between Russia and the West.
Michail Gorbatschow
Source

[Vertigo 7]

You don't need to explain it any further. You're convinced that Russia is justified to ignore the sovereignty of and attack Ukraine cuz 'reasons' and no one will be able to convince you otherwise.

[EGO_Aut]

You don't need to explain it any further. You're convinced that Russia is justified to ignore the sovereignty of and attack Ukraine cuz 'reasons' and no one will be able to convince you otherwise.

Well, that's the way it is in this world. No matter if Germany, USA, Israel or Russia etc. All have their 'reasons' to justify a 'Casus Belli', poor world .....

[Vertigo 7]

Maybe that's the way it is in Russia and other hostile countries. Most of the rest of the world doesn't attack their neighbors and blame others for it. Even most of the US's wars have been in retaliation for attacks. Sorry, comrade, you're wasting your efforts on me to try to justify Russia's bs.