Educate yourselves on Ukraine, it's not what your government says

What's the propaganda we hear from our government and media?

Putin is main cause. He's a crazy, power hungry authoritarian who wants to restore Soviet Union.

Let's just go over basic history and facts. Yes Putin is an authoritarian who most likely is responsible for even killing his political rivals BUT.... other facts do matter.

The US has been hostile towards Russia for over 50 years

NATO is viewed as a threat to Russia, just was we view China or Russia as threat to us

Ukraine is of strategic importance to Russia and largest neighboring Country to the west. There are strong ties between two countries.

Russia WILL NOT ACCEPT Ukraine to expand into NATO or EU. Question, would US allow Mexico or Canada to become part of Russia/China unions or would US allow Russian/China forces to occupy Mexico or Canada? Go back o Cuban Missile crisis to find out how US would respond. Russia views NATO expansion into Ukraine as a threat, rightly so

Monroe Doctrine. Message delivered by James Monroe in 1823 that Europe was not to interfere in affairs of Western Hemisphere. Through the years, this expanded to not just Europe. It was invoked during 1962 cuban missile crisis when US did not accept Russia expansion into Cuba.

Russia warned West about this and made it clear it will NOT accept Ukraine becoming a NATO or EU member. The US was very clear on this and so was Europe

2008 Bucharest NATO summit. It was declared that Ukraine, Georgia were to become a member of NATO, against Russia's warnings. It had ramifications. The Russian-Goergian conflict was due to, in part, this.

NATO. Keep in mind that incorporating Ukraine into NATO, you give them article 5 guarantee to promise to defend them. How does this sound to Russia? How would we feel if it were Mexico or Canada instead of Ukraine and it was russia/China instead of NATO?

2013/2014 Ukraine crisis. President Yanukovych negotiates with EU to form an association to bring Ukraine closer to EU. Russia is left out of agreement and makes it clear it's unacceptable. Yanukovych backs out of deal and there are protests. Eventually, president of Ukraine is ousted. This ends with Russia taking full control of Crimea. It wasn't an invasion, Russian forces were already there.

Fast forward. Ukraine's current leadership still seeking to become NATO member and become integrated into EU.

Here's the reality. The west has as much blame as Russia here. They have tried to push for something that US themselves will NEVER accept but asking Russia to accept it. Once again, i ask you to consider the opposite. There is a China/Russian force, call it EATO and Mexico or Canada are threatening to join it, with Russian/China forces about to have a strong presence with guarantees to defend Mexico or Canada against US? Anyone think US wouldn't stop this? if we were willing to go into Vietnam or Iraq and almost started a nuclear war over Cuban Missile crisis, would we hesitate to go to war with Canada and Mexico? don't fool yourselves

The west has largely created this and doubled down on it by spreading propaganda as they will never admit they are wrong. What we should've done is try to be an ally to Russia because our new threat will be China, not Russia. We need to respect Russia's status as a superpower, it's sovereignty and defense, just as we ask others to respect our right to protect ourselves and not be threatened. We cannot ask Russia to accept things we WOULD NEVER ACCEPT.

 

Putin has absolutely no right to determine what any other independent world country and it's citizens do and which alliances they choose to join or gain membership in.

 

Falcon is right. The hallmark of international relations is sovereignty. To say that it’s the wests fault for refusal to let Russia dominate them would be to deny their sovereignty. Ukraine has a right as a sovereign state to make its own decisions.”Russia won’t allow Ukraine” is just code for letting Russia dominate Ukraine politically, economically and militarily.

 

1. When The Soviet Union placed missles in Cuba President Kennedy did not invade Cuba. Instead he confronted the Soviet Union and got them to take them out.
2. Ukraine is not a part of NATO and there are no NATO forces in the Ukraine.
3. History shows with the taking of the Crimea by force in 2014 that there interest is not NATO, but territory.

 

Yet the US does and they have done so for over 50 years and continue to do, always looking to topple regimes and put in place governments they support...

 

yet US has interfered with other country's sovereign rights for over 50 years, constantly which brings me back to propaganda, you seem to always believe US has a right to invade and topple regimes, interfere, Russia cannot

Why did US not allow Russia missiles in Cuba yet they had missiles in Turkey pointed at Russia?

Would US allow Mexico to be part of a Russian/China united military force, hostile to US? Think about that one.... you and i both know US would invade Mexico in a heartbeat and do what they they have done for 50 years, topple regimes and put in place governments they support. Unites States WOULD NEVER accept what Unites States is asking Russia to accept. Why can't Ukraine just be independent and not be a NATO member? Putin would allow that.

 

So is this thread about Putin, or about the US?

The US is a democracy. We are morally superior to Putin. Not perfect, but morally superior to that dictator. Unless Trump manages to make us LIKE Putin's Russia, we can morally do a lot of things that Putin cannot morally do.

You make a false moral equivalence.

 

You ask the wrong question. The question is not if the US would allow it. The question is if it would morally justifiable to allow it. Looks like you have been listening to RT propaganda. But the US and Russia/China are not morally equivalent.

 

No, but president Kennedy tried to orchestrate an invasion of Cuba just prior to Cuban missile crisis, Bay of Pigs. Given this, United States would've not hesitated to invade Cuba if it weren't for threat of nuclear war. Cuba had a right to defend themselves from Unites States after US attempted an invasion. The missiles were largely to deter further invasions, US couldn't accept it even though they had missiles in Turkey, pointed at Russia.

Again, he had orchestrated an invasion of Cuba before and would've 100% invaded Cuba had not been for threat of nuclear war, something we came close to, just because Russia put missiles in Cuba. Russia now has to accept Ukraine allowing NATO forces, hostile to Russia, to be part of Ukraine.

But they want to be part of NATO and EU, that's what the leadership has expressed. That's the problem. The west has largely pushed for it too.

besides the point, after 08 NATO declaration, there have been plans to integrate Ukraine into EU and make them NATO member, something Ukraine's leadership supports. Putin has warned that's a red line and it has been the main cause of all the conflict. If Mexico threatened to become part of Russia/China military alliance, you and i both know US would unleash all their military might into Mexico if this ever was a threat. If they were willing to go into Iraq under false pretenses, it's a forgone conclusion that they would destroy Mexico if Mexico ever tried to have a russian/china force from within, hostile to US.

 

Prove it. Prove my position on things.

Didn’t Russia send troops into Kazakhstan because the pro Russian government there was unable to keep oil prices affordable for citizens? In effect meaning Russia did a regime change a couple of weeks before invading Ukraine? Isn’t the reason that Ukraine so upset with Russia is because Russia is demanding they be allowed to dictate Ukraines foreign policy by saying they can’t join other countries?

That’s not how the Cuban missile crisis happened. Neither side was allowed to keep nukes in Cuba or Turkey in the end.

Does that make it legal? It seems like you’re trying to describe a situation where it’s morally equivalent. It’s not. The US doesn’t control Mexicos foreign policy. Heck Mexican foreign policy has many times been centered on giving the US the middle finger. But the US and Mexico have worked together to make sure it doesn’t turn violent. The US doesn’t take Mexicos land or demand compliance. They work together. Russia didn’t want to work with Ukraine and respect its election results. Not much more to it than that.

 

This is RT propaganda. And unfortunately we’re spreading it by responding to it.

 

NATO is a defensive force. Russia is an aggressor. So clearly Russia is wrong and we are right.

 

again, you just are unwilling to see other side's viewpoint.

Imagine Mexico tomorrow expressed interest of becoming an alliance with China/Russia and join a military force that promises to defend Mexico against US. Pls don't tell me US wouldn't act

but it's worse that this because Ukraine and Russia were part of same union once

It's more like Texas separating from US and then going to Russia/China to protect themselves from US, seeking to join a Russia/China military force. HA.. now let that sink in. You can go on with all the gibberish that 'Texas' now is independent and has a right to join Russia and China but then you better be ready to oppose United States when they make this a red line and invade Texas to prevent it, everyone here knows that would happen. Unites States would never allow Russian/China forces to stand foot in a state like Texas after it chooses to separate itself from US. Ukraine is about size of Texas and was once part of Russia, as a union.

So again, this is the problem. Governments are fantastic at spreading propaganda because they need the people's support. Remember Vietnam? We were the 'good' guys fighting evil yet we destroyed villages and bombed innocent people. Iraq? We were the good guys yet went into war under false pretense. Kosovo? US backed KLA separatists (some were terrorists) but when Russia supports separatists, Russia is wrong. Russia lies to their people too, that Ukraine are nazis etc... China does the same thing. We all just buy it..

have to look at all view points. The way i look at it is Unites States WOULD NEVER ACCEPT what Unites States wants Russia to accept. Think Texas, instead of Ukraine and China/Russia military instead of NATO.

 

No you said what my position is. Prove it.

 

yes, facts are propaganda.. look at my OP, mostly facts and i pose the question, would Unites States accept what they want Russia to accept?

it's not propaganda, it's anti-propaganda and your struggle is an internal one, the OP makes you challenge propaganda you have uncritically accepted. Time to question it.

Do not ignore history... Unites States took us to Vietnam and Iraq with propaganda... seems you buy US propaganda, never question it and you fail to even attempt to see the other side's viewpoint. You have to challenge your views sometimes, in order to see things more clearly. Yeah, US also spreads propaganda... they have to, in order to get people's support. Face this reality.

lastly, this OP has nothing in it that supports this war, it's about putting blame where it belongs... It's not just Russia. Ukraine and west have deliberately crossed red lines they themselves would draw and not want others to cross.

 

Now you're changing your argument. Does the US influence other countries to have leaders that align with US interests.....yep. Does Russia.....yep....as recently in the Ukraine which someone like you will point out how Biden laughed about it but the point is we didn't grab land. We didn't send in tanks and planes.

 

yes just as we were right to invade Vietnam and Iraq... and back separatists in Kosovo, bomb belgrade and topple regimes for 50 years. US is a benign force for good, everyone else evil. I pity your gullibility but not surprising, you even bought Russia Collusion nonsense, that/s the degree of your gullibility.

 

Yeah what you’re doing is a series of false equivalency’s and slights of hand. Good day.

 

Educate yourselves on Ukraine, it's not what your government says

It isn't what you say either. Let's try some common sense. Putin fears having NATO on his border, you say. He already has NATO on his border. The Baltic countries are an example. Ukraine is a buffer currently between Russia and NATO nations such as Poland and Romania. If he takes Ukraine he will add those to his border. Certainly you can see that, while Putin hates NATO, it isn't the reason he invaded Ukraine. He invaded it because it is the single largest target in his effort to restore the geography under Russia's sphere of influence when the soviet union failed. Think about it. He isn't protecting Russia. He is trying to expand it.

 

just like we did in Vietnam? when we tried to back up invasion of Cuba? Iraq? yeah,.... US never grabs land or puts tanks everywhere. What are you arguing anyway? seems off topic. That US never invades, sends tanks in, takes land but Russia does? Ignoring a lot of history here pal, stick to core points of this thread.

 

Not just hostile, but overtly aggressive toward Russia.

Ukraine is of importance to Russia as a buffer-State.

Ukraine is of importance to the US, because the US needs Ukraine to base aircraft to enforce the future No-Fly Zone the US and Brits will set up in the eastern Russian republics.

You have it wrong.

Russia was not the aggressor. It was the US who was the aggressor.

It was Eisenhoward who authorized the deployment of Jupiter IRBMs to Turkey and Italy (and the Matador non-ballistic missile to Britain and Germany), not Kennedy.

Eisenhoward suspended the deployments after Castro rebuffed the US by legally seizing US corporate and private assets for non-payment of taxes owed and for non-payment of royalties owed under treaty.

Eisenhoward repeatedly warned Kennedy not to deploy the Jupiters until Castro had been "dealt with."

Kennedy ignored Eisenhoward and moved forward with the deployment anyway, and then gave Russia the green-light when he said in an address by radio and TV to the whole freaking world that he guaranteed the US would not invade Cuba.

For the Russians, it was a "Win-Win-Win" situation:

1) Russia deploys SS-4/SS-5 IRBMs to Cuba and achieves parity with the US, meaning if a Jupiter lands in Moscow, then an SS-4/SS-5 lands in Washington DC.

2) Russia agrees to withdraw the SS-4/SS-5 IRBMs if the US, Britain and France abandon Berlin, which would be a huge Soviet win

3) Russia agrees to withdraw the SS-4/SS-5 IRBMs if the US withdraws the Jupiters, and once again parity is restored

#3 happened.

Kennedy blinked and the US immediately began withdrawing the Jupiters, with the last missiles leaving in September 1964.

The Soviets began withdrawing the SS-4/SS-5 IRBMs in October 1964 with the last missiles leaving Cuba in August 1967 -- almost 4 years after Kennedy was killed.

In September 1967, the Jupiter was declared obsolete and removed from the US Army inventory.

Oh, and the ship that turned around? That was a nothing-burger.

Like the US Army and Air Force, the Soviet Army and Air Force never transported warheads by ship. They were always flown.

The warheads and missile components for the SS-4s and SS-5s were already in Cuba. The ship had only launchers for the SS-5, which is of little comfort since two batteries of SS-5s were already operational. When I was on Druzba '86, the Soviet officers told me the technical manual recommended no more than 3 reloads, but the launchers were capable of handling 4-6 reloads.

Russia did not "expand" into Cuba any more than the US "expanded" into Turkey or Germany or Spain or Italy. The Russians merely deployed IRBMs there and only after the US threatened Russia and every East Bloc State with Jupiter IRBMs and even then only after Kennedy told the whole freaking world that the US would not invade Cuba.

Yes, because everybody knows the US is after the eastern Russian republics.

That's why Russia went after Crimea.

Russia needs Crimea to port surface groups to screen against NATO aircraft coming out of Turkey, Bulgaria and Romania to enforce the No-Fly Zone in Russia.

The US needs Ukraine to counter that.

Well, the US is the World's Biggest Bully, so that ain't gonna happen.

The US needs Central Asia and the eastern Russian republics to keep your economy from collapsing and your Standard of Living devolving to the Standard of Living Russians have now -- which is where the US would be now if it wasn't the Biggest Bully in the World.

America has the right to consume 32% of the world's non-oil resources because Jesus said so, and if 10s of Millions have to die or suffer so Americans can continue to consume 32% of the world's non-oil resources or more, then that's a good thing.

 

wrong, propaganda you buy from US. Putin is smart, he knows he cannot occupy Ukraine, Russia couldn't even occupy Afghanistan. It's crystal clear Putin is no dummy and to me, his main issue is Ukraine becoming part of NATO, he has repeatedly stated this is a red line, people like you just ignore it.

To me his intentions here are clear, demilitarize Ukraine, topple the leaders who want to be part of NATO... then get out but continue to exert influence and disallow Ukraine from becoming an extension of US/West which has been hostile towards Russia. Putin IS NOT seeking to occupy Ukraine, that is clear to me, he cannot do that and every smart person knows he cannot. Russia couldn't even occupy Afghanistan. This is a short, go in, destroy military, topple leaders and keep Ukraine from becoming an extension of western powers hostile to Russia.

I honestly can't see what Putin's long term plan can be here but i guarantee you he has no plans to occupy Ukraine for a long time, he knows that is impossible.

 

Let's try dig in a little here as well. The U.S. views itself as the planetary police force. It is the reason it involved itself in Vietnam and other place like Panama. While I don't agree that we should be the planetary police force, at least that explains the "force for good" as the U.S. sees it. Vietnam was a costly mistake. Kosovo was a NATO operation and the U.S. is required by article 5 of the charger to be involved. I guess the question would be whether the world would be better or worse without such a police force.

 

He doesn't have a right just as the United States has no right to dictate to any neighboring country over here whom they have alliances with and who they want to have military bases on their soil but we would.

The United States would absolutely react through war if it had to to ensure that no Russian or Chinese base ever lands on the Western hemisphere

 

What nonsense! Vietnam was almost 60 years ago. And Russia invaded a democracy! The fact that a sloppy "Republican-style" invasion of a dictatorship was idiotic, that does not make both morally equivalent Unless, of course, you are a fan of dictatorships. And, at this point, looks like you are.

If you can't view the world except in binary terms like "benign force" vs "evil force", maybe you have waaaay to much to learn before you open a thread titled "Educate yourselves..."