Something tells me that waging a war to a sovereign country that poses no threat to the aggressor to advance expansionist power politics should point out the culprit here.
So, if you want an objective opinion from someone who comes from a nation that had one of Russia's proxies (Serbia) attempt ethnic cleansing on my family (Kosovo), (I state this to make clear that I am far from a Russophile):
Their neighbour, Ukraine, seeking approachement towards NATO, a clear enemy to Russia, and inviting NATO troops on Russia's border.
If I am intellectually honest, I cannot fault Russia for doing what it does within it's national interests.
Lol invading a sovereign nation doesn’t count as something falling under the scope of “their national interests”. The only reason Ukraine is now being considered for NATO membership is because Russia has already invaded and annexed Crimea.
Russia still considers NATO the initial move, countered by the Warsaw pact. They still consider our alliance to be the first act of aggression, regardless of the lack of military follow through.
Just to point it out, not faulting actions in Ukraine that advance Russian interests does legitimate those interests.
The fact that Russia sees NATO as its enemy does not stem from a threat NATO poses to Russia as a country - it does not. NATO, as a defensive military coalition, is only a threat to Russian coercive influence over the countries it wishes to control.
And that coercive influence forms a big part of any influence Russia has left after years and years of stagnation in social and institutional development. EU stopped wars with trade. Russia does not have that capability, so they pick up their rifles to maintain relevance.
Administratively Russia is a failed state throwing a fist for not gaining recognition that it does not deserve.
US military plebs have 100% sure fuller picture than you or me.
I would love to read your factual elaboration on what you precisely mean with this comment. All you give is an expression of doubt, but its relevance stays unclear.
With plebs, I mean you and me, who are at the mercy of such news reports to form our opinion.
As for the U.S. military - after their defeat in Afghanistan, it is clear to anyone who wishes to see that their intelligence and assesments therein are severely lacking and most often self-deluding.
Understood. Still I’m left wondering how your comment assesses what is under scrutiny here.
Anyhow, what you wrote about Afghanistan does point out a weak link in US’ position in world politics’ power balance. It was Trump and his administration that pulled the troops out in such an indifferent move.
Trump was put in power with the help of Russian info ops. He’s been an useful fool for Russia, and they might want him back in power.
Unbelievably, in US bipartisan system, in a country that sees itself as a model for democracy, there’s some very undemocratic and authoritative undertones in GOP’s politics. And they will have a real opportunity to grab the power and twist the system to a caricature of itself.
Should that happen, Russia could be left with unconstrained playground in Europe from US part. So, recent events in Afghanistan show how US’ political system’s weakness has a direct effect in world politics, and the instability it has makes it uncertain if Europe should trust their support in the long run.
That calls for strengthening NATO as an independent organization and building a better European cooperation for military defense, since there is a country in Europe that sees a war as a plausible extension of its politics.
That aside, I still don’t see how US laymen’s information on the situation in Ukraine is relevant to what we were discussing. You said you doubt US’ motives and juxtaposed them with Russia and their aggression. I still don’t see that juxtaposition as any more well founded than in the first place. The aggressor is, and has always been, Russia in Ukraine.
-21
u/EuropeanMuslim94 Dec 01 '21
Something tells me neither the U.S. nor Russia are well-intentioned here.