Russia vs. Ukraine Part 2

[BigRed]

I think people should be worried about the defeat of the United States instead of the defeat of Russia.

Should be.....

 

[SEIndSAM]

 

[Hawkeye]

When your country throws the entire world into chaos, don't be surprised when the consequences are harsh.

Never respond to AM! He;'s looking for an excuse to wrte a book back to you!

 

[AndreusMaximus]

NATO is a defense pact...not an offense pact. It's a group of countries that say they will help defend each other if attacked not that they will dog pile on to attack anyone else. Russia can only feel threatened because they intended to attack the countries that joined the defense pact and now it will cost them more.

And if Russia or China signed a "defense pact" with Mexico or Canada that on paper only said they would defend each other if attacked, but allowed Russia to station missiles and troops and stuff in those countries, would we feel threatened by that, do you think? Or would you still say that if we had no plans to invade Mexico or Canada we should be just fine with that?

 

[AndreusMaximus]

Never respond to AM! He;'s looking for an excuse to wrte a book back to you!

Oh come on, I've been better at being more concise lately, haven't I?

 

[DadSmith]

 

[DadSmith]

Russia nearly SHOT DOWN British RAF spy plane over Black Sea

On September 29, an RAF RC-135 Rivet Joint surveillance plane was flying through international airspace close to Crimea peninsula when it was buzzed by Moscow's Su-27 fighters

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[oze]

Russia nearly SHOT DOWN British RAF spy plane over Black Sea

On September 29, an RAF RC-135 Rivet Joint surveillance plane was flying through international airspace close to Crimea peninsula when it was buzzed by Moscow's Su-27 fighters

www.dailymail.co.uk

"A "technical malfunction" caused the fighter to fire a missile".

 

[oze]

And if Russia or China signed a "defense pact" with Mexico or Canada that on paper only said they would defend each other if attacked, but allowed Russia to station missiles and troops and stuff in those countries, would we feel threatened by that, do you think? Or would you still say that if we had no plans to invade Mexico or Canada we should be just fine with that?

Umm, not quite the same thing. If you meant to say that assume Russia and Canada have had a defense pact since 1949, and granted Mexico's request to join, well, that would be closer. But still much different.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

Umm, not quite the same thing. If you meant to say that assume Russia and Canada have had a defense pact since 1949, and granted Mexico's request to join, well, that would be closer. But still much different.

The analogy is still close enough to make my point, which is that it is silly to claim that Russia not wanting countries to join NATO is proof that they were intent on invading said countries. NATO is a rival power with Russia, as are we, and while Russia is clearly in the wrong in their invasion of Ukraine, broad statements like "Russia would have no reason to oppose a county joining NATO unless they were already planning to invade that country" are simply not a fair assessment.

 

[oze]

The analogy is still close enough to make my point, which is that it is silly to claim that Russia not wanting countries to join NATO is proof that they were intent on invading said countries. NATO is a rival power with Russia, as are we, and while Russia is clearly in the wrong in their invasion of Ukraine, broad statements like "Russia would have no reason to oppose a county joining NATO unless they were already planning to invade that country" are simply not a fair assessment.

Sorry, I didn't see that point in the quoted text.

 

[Shadow01]

Russia nearly SHOT DOWN British RAF spy plane over Black Sea

On September 29, an RAF RC-135 Rivet Joint surveillance plane was flying through international airspace close to Crimea peninsula when it was buzzed by Moscow's Su-27 fighters

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[JettaKnight]

NATO is a defense pact...not an offense pact. It's a group of countries that say they will help defend each other if attacked not that they will dog pile on to attack anyone else. Russia can only feel threatened because they intended to attack the countries that joined the defense pact and now it will cost them more.

I mean, yes and no.

Things start off defensively, and suddenly take a sharp turn when it comes to international politics. I really can't fault Russia for being extremely worried when a pack [intended] of counties allied surrounds them and throws money and munitions to their enemies all while being "defensive".

Don't get me wrong, Putin is a ****, but I can't expect the Russian people to see things from our point of view.

 

[Thor]

And if Russia or China signed a "defense pact" with Mexico or Canada that on paper only said they would defend each other if attacked, but allowed Russia to station missiles and troops and stuff in those countries, would we feel threatened by that, do you think? Or would you still say that if we had no plans to invade Mexico or Canada we should be just fine with that?

I'm sure if Mexico and Canada felt threatened by us they would do just that. The whole thing about international relations is that individual nations engage in them.

The reason NATO exists is because the Muscovite's have been a long standing threat to their neighbors. We haven't invaded Canada since about 1812 and the Mexican punitive expedition didn't result in us taking any land from Mexico...rather like any future punitive expedition against the drug cartels wouldn't either.

 

[Thor]

I mean, yes and no.

Things start off defensively, and suddenly take a sharp turn when it comes to international politics. I really can't fault Russia for being extremely worried when a pack [intended] of counties allied surrounds them and throws money and munitions to their enemies all while being "defensive".

Don't get me wrong, Putin is a ****, but I can't expect the Russian people to see things from our point of view.

And why would these countries be enemies? Because Putin wants to expand the Russian Federation borders to anyplace they have been in the past including taking Alaska back? They are only "enemies" because Putin sees them as future subjects. The Russian people don't see much of anything that the state doesn't want them to.

 

[AndreusMaximus]

I'm sure if Mexico and Canada felt threatened by us they would do just that. The whole thing about international relations is that individual nations engage in them.

The reason NATO exists is because the Muscovite's have been a long standing threat to their neighbors. We haven't invaded Canada since about 1812 and the Mexican punitive expedition didn't result in us taking any land from Mexico...rather like any future punitive expedition against the drug cartels wouldn't either.

My main point was merely that Russia has a long list of possible reasons for not wanting to see NATO expand to countries on her borders, and intentions of invading those countries is far from the only possible reason. At the end of the day NATO is a rival power to Russia, and the fact remains that expanding closer to Russia's borders can be objectively seen as a provocative action on the part of NATO, regardless of whether it is a justified action.

 

[Thor]

My main point was merely that Russia has a long list of possible reasons for not wanting to see NATO expand to countries on her borders, and intentions of invading those countries is far from the only possible reason. At the end of the day NATO is a rival power to Russia, and the fact remains that expanding closer to Russia's borders can be objectively seen as a provocative action on the part of NATO, regardless of whether it is a justified action.

It is only seen as a provocation because Russia wants to expand it's borders and nations jumping on the NATO band wagon only make that harder. NATO has never threatened to invade Russia...unlike Russia threatening to and actually invading its neighbors. NATO will however take the commie bastards to the mat when they cross that boundary. If they thought Finland was tough alone...

 

[KellyinAvon]

"A "technical malfunction" caused the fighter to fire a missile".

Was the stick-actuator's call-sign, "Technical"?

 

[DadSmith]

Ukraine war: Leak shows Western special forces on the ground

The UK has the largest contingent of military special forces in Ukraine, according to a leaked file.

www.bbc.com

 

[AndreusMaximus]

It is only seen as a provocation because Russia wants to expand it's borders and nations jumping on the NATO band wagon only make that harder.

This is easily disproven by the simple analogy that I gave you before: America obviously has no intentions of invading Mexico or Canada, but Russia signing a defensive treaty with them which involved sharing weapons and stationing troops in them would be a big problem for us, and certainly a source of provocation. So my only point is that even IF Russia had no intentions of invading the countries on their borders, they would still be mad about NATO expanding right up to their border.

Look, I'm not trying to take Russia's side here; it's a communist country ruled by an evil dictator, engaged in an unjustifiable invasion of a sovereign country. I certainly hope they get taken to the mat, and it'd be a bonus if Putin and his ilk get thrown out of power never to return.

The trouble I have is that I fear some people have narrowed their focus down so much onto how evil Russia is that they forget that NATO has its own fair share of faults. Most NATO member countries also seem to be heading pretty quickly in the direction of communism under a different name ("socialism" or whatever they want to call it) so things are just not as simple as "NATO good, Russia bad."

And while of course NATO hasn't come out and overtly threatened to invade Russia, they've certainly shown a willingness to meddle in other country's affairs in shady ways, including destabilizing existing governments in order to put in place a government more favorable to themselves. Many of us may very well see that as justified, but if you look at it objectively, think how it looks from the other side's perspective. Even going by the tone of many in this conversation, I have a feeling that if NATO gets comfortably established on Russia's border, things might go pretty quickly from "Oh, NATO has never threatened to do an evil thing like invade another country", to "NATO should invade Russia to free them from their evil communist overlords!"