To be fair, we are here to discuss opinions.
This is true, none of us really know what’s going on or what will happen. We’re just sharing what we interpret. Purely academic discussion.
Oh , I know, just saying that I’m aware of the relative value of mine to other people.
Actually, something I haven’t picked up on before… This is a very naive point of view. It has never been about a buffer or NATO, those 2 are just a pretext or an excuse. It has always been (and there’s a lot of evidence to that which I’m not going to look for) about putins legacy of reunification and “making russia great again”. Totally understand your point of view if that’s an assumption that you are working of. However, an incorrect one.
I’ll shut up now.
Buffer zones are a thing but. Remember the cuban missile crisis. The yanks went a but silly about Russian weapons on their borders.
Yes, they are a thing… But in this case it is not the reason, it’s an excuse. He’s written essays and spoke about reunification for quite a while.
Maybe, no one knows what his plans or drivers are. Could be a tonne of reasons, we only know shit that we get fed and likely everyone’s differing opinions are driven by this.
What’s crazy is he actually asked to be part of NATO when Clinton was pres and got told no.
Yeah, true, who knows…
That’s true and the reason for their ultimate rejection was their invasion/annexation of Crimea.
They were given plenty of chances over 2 decades but they just screwed the pooch by their innate nature.
They were invited into North Atlantic Cooperation Council in 1991, the Partnership for Peace in 1994 then in 2002 the International Security Assistance Force. All the while causing almost as much chaos as the US, who are already a member and who feel free to interfere with anyone at will.
It takes over a decade to get membership and dozens of strict preconditions under the best of circumstances, none of which Russia was willing to meet.
They may now be The Russian Federation but their behaviour has and I suspect will always remain totally Soviet style.
Timeline doesn’t line up with crimea. Bill wasn’t president then. This was earlier.
They may have asked to join in the Clinton administration but as it’s not his to grant and takes at least a decade in a best case scenario, added to their continued fuckery in the interim delaying it, the time frame was dictated by their own actions.
I did point out that their eventual rejection was Crimea as it was just the final straw in a chain.
Waiting for this article to hit the news.
Call it confirmation bias on my behalf but after reading about attacks in the middle East where the Taliban claimed civilian casualties from hospital or school strikes and then hearing from the coalition forces saying attacks were launched from these places really has made me sceptical when the media say “indiscriminate” attacks on schools and hospitals.
Anti personnel mines known as ‘petal’ ‘butterfly’ ‘parrot’ among others appeared on several streets of Donetsk late last month. Ukraine Accuses Russia of doing it, Russia accuses Ukraine of launching missiles that drop them from the skies.
Russia used these indiscriminately in the Afghan war.
The media isn’t talking about it much.
Well, let’s be a little more accurate here. Soviets did that in Afghanistan, not Russians. And Soviests also booby trapped toys. Russia is definitely following in the footsteps. There’s two fronts there. One is as is. The other is pressure on the civilians, which just breaks their will to go on and ask for full surrender. It’s their strategy from the 1800s.
Watched another video from task and purpose describing the military aid actually coming from the US being similar to China and Russia support to North Vietnam. They didn’t actually fight but supplied equipment to prolong and stagnate the larger fighting force to make them look weak in a global level. Which some would say definately worked after Vietnam.
Re Amnesty @Gregfiddich - such is nature of urban warfare I guess, no?
Second video, all for the clicks. Don’t even know where to start with it, so much wrong there. Gun guy trying to be an intellectual. Absolute lack of understanding in logistics and supply chain. Not even talking about lack of qualifications. This video made me stupider.
But you don’t see any similarities and why one super power would want another to look bad?
The guy does preface most videos saying he is just an ex infantry guy so i generally don’t take the whole context but sometimes the thoughts created does interest me.
This whole conflict I’ve been trying to keep an open mind and draw comparisons to previous conflicts. This is not new, countries have been invading countries since humans had countries.
Certainly see similarities (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Nth Korea, Iraq when Sadam was installed, Iraq when Sadam was uninstalled lol. Certainly. However, the ‘why’ seems to be fundamentally different.