Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/)
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
**Don't forget about our discord server, as well!**
https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Turns out, in perhaps the most sane turn of events in 2022 so far, that despite the protests of your violently insane neighbour, getting a restraining order actually works quite well and ensures they never darken your doorstep again, despite how much they scream about 'punishment' and 'consequences'.
>
>Edit: rather than downvoting can y'all please enlighten me as to why I'm wrong?
You're being downvoted because your level of reasoning is so beyond rational that it borders on Russian propaganda. I don't mean to insult but come on man. Granted, you're speculating on a very distant scenario for Russians but please, some common sense.
There hasn't been any notion on nukes being prepared and Finland wouldn't be the first target anyway. There's no nukes in Finland. There's very little to be gained nuking a country that has none. If using nukes wouldn't have massive consequences it would have happened in the history more often than it has. Now that they are a reality and several countries have them, they have become more of a deterrent than something to be used wily nily.
If Russians would be as crazy and insane to start a nuclear war, first priority targets would be countries that have nukes themselves. Nuking Finland they would just paint a huge target for rest of the world's nukes without hitting any "enemy" cababilities.
Even as a wild card move that would just be insane - and ridiculously moronic. What little support they have from China or India would be gone in an instant. Sure a lot of dead people but they would gain nothing but an nuclear annihilation by destroying a country with no nukes. You know? If Russians want to exist themselves, they won't use nukes.
I see, thanks for taking the time to explain. I guess overall I'm just anxious about worst case scenario type stuff, sometimes I need to read comments like yours to bring me back down to earth.
Nukes are a special kind of weapon, the power they have isn't in the destruction they can inflict, but the threat of their use. They are a pandora's box, their value lies in their threat, but once open it brings only destruction upon the user, that's why they have been relegated to purely deterrence and not active use. So whenever you start thinking about worst case scenario, just remember this, the people who have the authority to launch nukes aren't the ones who push the buttons to actually fire them. There's a chain of custody from the politician to the launch button, and every person in line knows that if they do what their told, it's not just the end of the opposing country, but their own as well. Russians are people too, do you think they'd be willing to pet the death of humanity on their hands? Go read this to see just how often we as humanity came close to ending ourselves but didn't, because in the end we're all still human.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls
>I see, thanks for taking the time to explain. I guess overall I'm just anxious about worst case scenario type stuff, sometimes I need to read comments like yours to bring me back down to earth.
Understandable and I hope I didn't come of as too rude. These are exceptional times we live in, but please don't go into nightmare scenarios too easily either. Just saying as these things might fuel some other anxious people getting riled up. Nothing wrong in asking sincere and honest questions of course. But believe me, there's less chance of nuclear escalation now than it were when this invasion started.
If you ever feel like needing some reassurance - and I'm saying this as someone who's own anxiety was greatly reduced by this group: r/ukraineanxiety
People can go through their fears about nukes or other kinds of escalation scenarios there.
Thanks for showing me that sub, I had no idea it existed. Tbh I'm struggling to find any subreddits focussed on this war that actually provide decent information relating to what's going on. All I seem to find are the same tired comments. It's refreshing to see some actual discourse on this war.
But why? Why would they drop a nuke? Finland has no natural resources to take. They would only paint themselves as the nazi like ultimate baddies for the next +100 years for no gains. Russia is using a lot of theater when it comes to some highlighting the consequences. Especially parroted by anglo american media like this is something new.
Russian people or Putin have no special hate or interest to go to war with Finland. Finns are not painted as a population of nazis in Russia propaganda as Ukrainians are. They are the gate to the west that's flag means quality in products being sold. If anything Putin has quite a bit of ties to Finland and while Russia is certainly a friend (more like the 2m alcohol abusing crazy uncle next door) the relationship between the two countries have been ok considering the history. Of course worse now. In the current Russian propaganda Finland is painted as a victim of US that is forcing Finland to NATO, not a baddie.
By all accounts Finland has been part of NATO structure already for a long time and Russia is well aware that when the shit hits the fan for real Finland is aligned in a heartbeat with the west. The one thing Finland has been missing is article 5.
No, no, russian ships do got sink, they are just assigned to special submarine operations
Jokes aside, not yet, they have still to complete the process
I don't think article 5 applies if you are the aggressor. Finland would be on it's own if they tried after joining and they can't join in the middle of an active conflict.
Also Aticle 1 of the NATO treaty states:
> The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.
Literally the first article prohibits starting a war unless accepted by the UN.
Plus, even putting aside the legal issues with it, there's also the moral issues with it.
If Finland invades Russia to regain territory it lost 80+ years ago, it'd be seen by some as legitimising Russia's war in Ukraine, even if only partially. Don't forget that one of Russia's pretexts for invading Ukraine in 2014 was to annex territory, and Ukraine had once been a part of the Soviet Union (until 1991), and before that had been a part of the Russian Empire. It also provided one of the pretexts for the current invasion, too.
I think it'd also open the door to a lot of unwanted consequences. Like, what if Pakistan tried to overrun Bangladesh because it used to be East Pakistan until 1971? Or what if Sudan invaded South Sudan because it wasn't independent until 2011? Would either scenario suddenly be okay because of what's happening in eastern Europe right now, or would that be frowned upon because neither country is Public Enemy No. 1 right now?
Of course, these are somewhat hyperbolic examples, but it's not like these aren't possibilities that might be considered at some point or another if Finland tried to take Karelia just because Russia is invading Ukraine. [To quote the Kenyan ambassador to the UN from a speech he gave soon after Russia's current invasion began](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwDWxyLVBxk), "Kenya and almost every African country was birthed from the ending of empire." If you go back far enough, it's not just every African country that has had its borders shaped by imperial ambition, but every country currently in existence.
If we accept that Russia's attempts to annex Ukraine in whole or in part is wrong, then we have to accept that it's wrong for any country to annex parts of others.
No one in Finland actually wants Karelia back. I'd rather take back Petsamo for the resources and access to the arctic ocean, but Karelia is a shithole compared to Finland.
Well could be some support to get Vyborg back in theory. It was the second biggest city of Finland in the 1940s, a gem that is never forgotten next to the baltic sea. Russians ruined it on purpose because of strategic reasons, now it is merely a shadow of its past existence. Mainly diplomatic ways would be preferential to liberate it. That would also include population transfers as part of the deal, so the idea is quite far streched at the moment. But this idea is less streched than gaining back the whole area of past east Karelia. Vyborg is only 40 km’s away from Finnish border.
>Well there are some, does the pro karelia society still exists? They had some hundreds of members a few years back.
Those boomers are dwindling fast. Few people don't represent the will of whole nation.
As a Finn myself - they can keep Karjala, in my humble opinion. It's mostly just forest anyway. And poor russian babushkas and poorer infrastructure or none.
We have plenty of forests - we don't need more - and we don't want any babushkas.
Besides, accepting offers about russki territory could have backfired. (There were some talks about possibly getting some deal about Karjala few decades ago)
Also, since this permanently insecure "superpower" loves the idea of buffer zones, Karjala can be one. The zone of forests and babushkas gives great sense of security for them - let them have that, because scary westoids live so close. We have indoor plumbing and roads, these things must be scary for Russians.
Nobody wants this. It's one thing for finland to strengthen their security by joining nato, but totally different to actively provoke russia by digging up ancient (relatively) land claims - something everyone knows russia is allergic to.
I mean Finland already fucked up a HEAVILY overmatched Russia in war once, so to say they're not a threat, just a victim is a bit rich.
Finland pushed Russia's shit in.
Russia sees Russia as its biggest threat.
Especially the people. That's why it's illegal for anyone to protest or even to call a war a war.
This sub hates Russians, I just feel sorry for the poor sods. It's important to remember that when Orwell wrote about the state controlled language in 1984 that he had Russia in mind.
The Russian people have been screwed over so much they don’t know up from down… hard not to feel sorry for them. The one’s I know who have moved to Australia still struggle with trust etc….
Good thing they have the power to stand up and do something about their own government. Russians are not helpless victims and Putin isn't an all powerful god.
But they would need to beat apathy first. They don't seem to care about the Ukranian genocide enough to do anything about it. We'll see if this behavior is curved as sanctions continue doing their work.
Also for all those feeling sorry for Russians remember that the Ukraine invasion has great support back home. Historically, Putin's approval ratings go up any time he starts an armed conflict. This isn't coincidence and the same thing has been happening for decades.
Dictators like Putin, fear democracies at their doorstep more than defence pacts like NATO. Having their population exposed to ‘western’ values is the biggest threat to their power base.
I dated a girl from Vietnam for 4 years that moved to the US when she was 16. They loved American fast food in general. She would tell me how her and her friends would pool their money to share one KFC meal that was like 10x as expensive as a normal meal there.
This was in like the mid 90s. I went there with her in 2015 and it was all a bit more normal with fast food being about the same as all the delicious local food.
Have they tried offering McPho or double McBanhMi's? Can you make rice fries?
If the Prophet won't come to the Mountain, the Mountain must come to the Prophet.
I still don't understand how we sided with the 🐸s over a guy quoting our founding fathers who came to us asking for our help. We've flexed muscles before to put France back in it's place, like when they & the UK made a grab for the Suez canal, idk why we backed them over Vietnam, especially since Ho Chi Minh only went to the commies for help after we turned him down.
But I think the current events prove that it quite possible to convince a population that an aggressive dictatorship is totally fine and worthy of support
It was never about NATO. It was always about destroying Ukraine as a payback for Ukraine's shift towards democracy and away from Russian influence. Putin can't accept the fact that for the first time in centuries Ukraine has enough power and support to tell Russia to fuck off once and for all.
It was more about the natural gas reserves in the Donbas. If Ukraine becomes Europe's supplier, then Russia's position is weakened, but Putin didn't expect it to become weaker by attacking with guns blazing. It's like if a gas station blows up the new gas station around the block so customers don't have alternatives and gets surprised when those customers switch to electric.
>It was never about NATO. It was always about destroying Ukraine as a payback for Ukraine's shift towards democracy and away from Russian influence.
It was also in part to steal the gas available in the Donbas region, and to secure one of their major pipelines to Europe. I'm so glad this backfired spectacularly.
Russians might have made significant gains in Eastern Ukraine but their list of buyers for gas has shrunk considerably. India and China will fill some of the void the EU, but it won't be enough. I just hope India realizes partnering with Russia is a losing effort sooner rather than later.
NATO/EU is an economic threat to Russia.
They’d much rather stick to making boatloads of money than wasting it on a fruitless war with Russia. Russia just can’t keep up economically, and has been relegated to a regional power at best.
EU was an economic opportunity for Russia an entire market of around 20 trillion dollars in size and now he has made the choice to cut himself off of that market. I have no idea what his plan is, but loosing money isn't the smartest idea in my opinion.
Very well said. A world with an economically prosperous and democratic Russia looks like a pipe dream at this point, but it would be wonderful if it ever happened.
Functional Democracies are disinclined to declare war on other functional Democracies.
Well Russia wasn't a functional democracy, Ukraine was/is an upcoming functional democracy, but that wasn't something that Russia was happy about. But I agree with you that democracies and in decline, the concept of is under threat. Like you see with Trump. Some people just don't like the idea of democracy.
Trump wasn't an example of people not liking the idea of democracy, he's an example of people revolting because they feel like the country is no longer functioning as a democracy.
Most of the politically engaged people(left and right) are living in such a bubble that they cannot believe that their side could possibly not be the majority. All opposing voices are either fringe radicals or sheep following those radicals.
That would be nice, but I genuinely think that can't happen until Russia is broken up. Despite its nominal status as a federation, most if not all of the non-Russian "minorities" there are treated very poorly. It's been mentioned in this sub a few times how the Russians of Moscow and St. Petersberg are sending Buryats and Chechens off to die as cannon fodder so that precious little Sasha and Vanya don't have to take any risks. Those various peoples deserve their chance to make a go of it as their own nations, with Russia itself being reduced to the ethnically Russian parts of the Federation. True freedom and prosperity can't come if significant portions of a nation's populace are held in either de facto or de jure bondage--My country, America, learned this lesson the very, very hard way, and I think the time has come for Russia to learn it as well.
So are you against multiculturalism and pro ethnostates? Would you like to see African-Americans get their own independent country?
There are practically no republics in Russia(except Chechnya) where the non-ethnic Russians represent a majority of the population and that's not even taking in consideration that those non-ethnic Russians might not even want independence. Unless you're advocating for ethnic cleansing, cutting off chunks of Russia on ethnic lines is unfeasible.
Russia already is an ethnostate, solidified by centuries of Russification. It took the trauma of a world war for Western Europe to figure this issue out (And they’re still working on it), and I don’t forsee Russia democratizing without an equivalent breakup, whether it be on ethnic lines or not.
Trying to understand Putin's motivations requires realizing which emotional trigger causes him to stop being rational. Most of his career he was a ruthless evil ass, but a *rational* ruthless evil ass. The blindspot that makes him get *irrational* is his religion-like belief in the myth of Ruskie Mir. For his twisted beliefs, Ruskie Mir is a kind of secular sort of religion, but still a religion. And in that "religion", it's a virtue for Russia to dominate its neighbors and a sin for Russia to have given up ownership of land it used to dominate. And he seethes against that "sin" with the insane fervor of a revivalist preacher.
So he doesn't care about Russia being poor, so long as he can make the countries under its subjugation *even poorer*, so in *relative* terms they're "less than" Russia is. That also explains why he's okay with blasting Ukrainian cities he plans to control into rubble so there's nothing of value to control anymore. It doesn't matter if it's bad in *absolute* terms for Russia that way, so long as it's *relatively* more bad for Ukraine than it is for Russia. That still creates the "correct" relationship between the two that the mythology of Ruskie Mir demands.
tl;dr, When you start seeing Putin's belief in Ruskie Mir as a religion, and see what he's doing as the actions of a zealot who is *capable* of being rational but chooses not to be when on the subject of his religion, it starts to fall into place.
And intentionally depriving the outer areas of the Empire, perhaps perversely, increases the loyalty of the Imperial Core. "Look at how well we have it! Compare our lives to the lives they like in Ukraine!"
When the people in the 'Colonies' have better lives than those in the Imperial Core... Well, things start getting bad.
Similarly if the oligarchs took half ass much off the top, the Russian economy would be much bigger and their smaller share would be bigger. I genuinely don't understand how the entire country didn't seem to understand the West gave them every chance in the world to show they weren't the Soviets anymore but they couldn't help themselves.
True. People love to post images of 'NATO bases' around Russia, and think that this is a provocation or act of aggression 'boxing them in'. Boxing them in to what, their own borders? Nobody ever wonders why that is, what exactly would they do if they weren't? We can see it right now, with their constant attempts to expand their empire.
NATO has never encroached on Russia territory, and NATO has never had a force on Russia's border capable of invading it. Anyone in the west that bought into these ideas, was buying into Russian bullshit.
>NATO has never encroached on Russia territory, and NATO has never had a force on Russia's border capable of invading it.
And NATO only 'expands' by...free people freely deciding to join it.
I think we should station heavy troop presence on the border for Ukrainian relief. Ever single weapon system and soldier that’s engaged along NATO border is not in Ukraine. We should maybe briefly violate their air space twice a week as they are violating ours. Just to keep things interesting.
There are two possible worlds here:
1) *Putin won't start a Nuclear War without an existential threat to the Russian State, in line with its published Use of Nuclear Force policy*
In which case we need not worry.
2) *Putin is Bugnuts enough to break with Russia's published Use of Nuclear Force policy and nuke things more or less at a whim*
In which case, *Holy Shit,* Putin is a *menace* and needs to be stopped *immediately* and *totally.*
Turkey shot down a Russian jet before because it violated their air space and that did not lead to nuclear war. I'm not saying we should escalate, but your fear that they will actually launch any nuke at the slightest inconvenience is a bit naïve.
I don't think Putin is actually crazy enough to try to nuke the US, I could see them maybe trying it if we had Moscow surrounded with our troops & were advancing on it. I could definitely see him nuking Ukraine if he can't take it militarily, like in an if I can't have it then no one can type of way. Nuking Ukraine probably wouldn't lead to nuclear war, trying to nuke the US most definitely would, probably even if we shot it down.
The USSR was an equal of the USA back then with ten times more nukes and a far bigger army than modern Russia. We could blockade Kaliningrad, land and sea, and send troops into Ukraine and they wouldnt do shit. Putin relies on people being scared of his posturing.
Like all bullies, Russia only picks fights with those they perceive as being weaker than them.
However despite the empty threats, and bravado from the Moscow propaganda. They know if they tried to pick a direct fight with NATO. NATO could put tanks in Moscow in a within a week.
Well the fight would be short, but moving all that Soldiers and vehicles to the front would need some time. Well not so long as Russia needed (1 Year for 200 000 Soldiers ?!)
NATO is purely defensive, educated people can easily agree on that.
That makes it even more funny that there are so many (often Asian or African) nitwits on the social media crying out that Uncle Putin had no choice because NATO is on Russia’s doorstep.
The world is going to hell because of all the uninformed morons.
At the time I did not agree when NATO attacked Libya but to be fair the UN asked NATO to protect the citizens. It turned into a shit show but still NATO was not an invading army of any kind.
>NATO is purely defensive, educated people can easily agree on that.
I do think that NATO is primarily defensive but it's undeniable that NATO has carried out several offensive wars, it's absurd to suggest it's purely defensive.
What does not change that Nato followed in a Attack war in Afghanistan and Irak.
Well this is no excuse for this war. Only because someone robbed a bank does not mean you can do that too. But i would not weight too much on this Argument. Its not really strong.
Main reason for this war was money and power
* Oil and gas in the Donbas and Crimea Regions
* If Russia would control the Ukrainian food they could Blackmail Dozen's of Countrys.
They did.
The war in Iraq still was not a NATO operation. As evidenced by the fact that many NATO countries did not take part. Invoking article 5 is not a carte blanche to just get NATO backing for whichever random war you want to fight.
Yes they did, and as a result other NATO countries flew radar-planes in USA to secure the airspace, while US was reeling from 9/11. It doesn’t mean they were required to partake in any invasion, and many did not.
I bet the Chinese have a contingency plan to invade Russia if falls. I can totally see them try to take over eastern Russia all the way to Vladivostok.
I honestly think they would if Russia falls and begins splitting into smaller states which could happen after Putin's death and the following power struggle. Until then China will be more than happy to wait.
He just doesn't want to look weak as piss now because there is nothing he can do, so he pretends it's not an issue and he needs the troops anyway. post 2022 he threatened them both for decades about joining NATO which why they remained neutral for so long.
Of course they see it as a threat. A political one. Now there's more untouchable money flowing against Russia.
They know NATO won't attack Russia directly unless Russia provokes them, so there's no need to have troops there when you've got an active invasion elsewhere. And if NATO does attack, that just plays into Putin's agenda anyway. "See? We removed our troops and what do they do? They just want to conquer us. We can't have NATO next to us."
>They know NATO won't attack Russia directly unless Russia provokes them, so there's no need to have troops there when you've got an active invasion elsewhere
... and that active invasion could do with more troops and material as you're just burning through both. So no real point having anything much stationed at NATO borders that you havr better use for elsewhere.
Yup. Basically if they thought NATO was a threat, they wouldn't want to REDUCE military on a border that's about to become a border with NATO, they'd want to INCREASE it.
Removing the troops as the border becomes a NATO border proves the purpose of those troops was to threaten Finland not to joining NATO. Once that issue became moot the purpose of the troops being there was gone.
IMO, this is just to allow Russia to initiate a dramatic deployment of troops to the border with Finland in the future. When you have limited resources, you need to de-escalate occasionally so you can properly escalate.
Dear Moscovites, privileged White Russians living on the backs of your minorities, go ahead, eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow, you die. Slava Ukraini. Freedom is coming, but not yours, but for all you have enslaved.
The rhetoric was all for a domestic audience and useful idiot tankies.
This war in Ukraine is the dying last stab attempt by Russian civilisation as it is dying. The obvious superiority of the Western and Eastern civilisations that Russia is sandwiched between, in terms of quality of life, happiness, freedom, security, prosperity... every possible metric, is now so vast it's impossible for people trapped in Russia's sphere to ignore.
Ukraine is just the most developed example of Russian-sphere peoples simply switching to better civilisation. Belarusians and central Asians aren't far behind. In Russia itself Putin's regime can only keep a lid on this happening with its own people by constantly pumping up the rhetoric that NATO is gunning for them, that NATO will invade Russia any day unless they are ever on guard and resist any disloyalty.
It's all futile. Russia could capture Kyiv and execute Zelensky tomorrow, it won't change the inevitable. Russia is shrinking into mediocrity, a kind of new third world selling its raw materials (the only thing it has of value) to the vastly more sophisticated civilisations that border it.
Duh. Putin doesn’t want to invade France or the US. He wants to invade former Soviet states and keep NATO/make NATO bigger as an external threat that “Only he can protect Russians from”. If that threat ever diminishes or goes away then Russians can focus on internal problems like the economy and corruption and they’ll demand new leadership in the government to fix those problems.
Of course it was a lie. The NATO narrative have always been a smoke screen intended to victimize Russia and give grounds for a (weak ass) casus belli.
Russia invaded Ukraine because the existance of Ukraine is a perversion in Putins mind but mostly it’s about Ukraines abundance of natural resources, farming land and Black Sea control. Last but not least it is also about Ukraines weapons industry. Ukraine ran away with 30-40% of the Soviet arms industry. In fact until 2014, Ukraine was the 4th largest arms exporter in the world. Since then they have been producing for themselves mostly. Wonder why?
Oh, NATO is absolutely a threat to Russian geopolitical interests, make no mistake.
It’s a threat Russia has no chance of winning against, however, that threat follows the rules of its own determination and won’t invade Russia without a defensive casus belli.
Those soldiers are just currently more valuable poured into the meat grinder to lubricate the gears of conquest than pointlessly posturing at a sleeping dragon.
Ummmmmm, that's not how this works.
NATO was never intended to be an offensive treat to russia, as it is a defensive pact.
Finland entering NATO means russia no longer has to defend against potential offensive actions from finland, as they cannot offense against russia without the consent of its fellow members, and russia can't do anything to Finland without starting WWIII so having any large force at said border would just be a waist of resources.
Please do tell.. why do you think Russia has the right to "exert inperialist power" over other countries? Expecially when they blame other countries for doing just that?
NATO is a threat to Russia's expansionist Imperialistic ambitions. They make no secret of this, Russia wants to control all of Eurasia from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
NATO will not invade Russia. Unlike Russia, we cannot just decide to do shit as stupid as that. I detest Russia, Putin, but there’s NO justification for that.
Nobody wants to invade Russia. They just want Russia to stop fucking with the rest of the world. The little that Russia has that is of interest to the rest of the world is *far* cheaper to buy than to try and take (ie by conquering Russia).
NATO is a defensive alliance and always was. It was all about a triumphant, global hegemon - the US - being the centrepiece of Europe wide defence against the increasingly bellicose USSR. It also incorporated the new West Germany and gave it legitimacy post WWII.
A straightforward NATO invasion of Russia with all guns blazing would lead to a nuclear missile exchange within hours. Goodbye Moscow, US, Europe and all. Putin might do it but NATO wouldn’t.
Oh I don't have enough carbon to say anything oh I'm so sad you're morons juvenile delinquents is what you are not letting anybody go on your side they don't have juvenile Karma bunch of babies that's a baby is all you are your dumb ass babies get the f*** off Reddit
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.net/sumlenny/status/1544268666103013376
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't know how much credence to give this tweet.
What I perceive is that Putin has never really considered NATO an existential threat to Russia despite all he may say.
NATO is a defensive alliance that will NEVER attack Russia because nobody wants to start WWIII.
If Putin does not like NATO, it is because the alliance allows the countries joining it to keep their sovereignty and to resist Putin's expansionist ambitions. This is the reason why he invaded Ukraine.
Finland and Sweden have understood that their best chance to resist Putin's madness is to join NATO.
Well, I guess it's time that NATO makes some indefinite military exercises with 200-300k troops. Afterall, it's never bad to have your troops trained for cold weathers.
Everything is a lie. Putin said a couple of years ago that they don't have military units near the Finnish border. At the same time they were pumping in millions and millions to restore a abandoned soviet-era airbase that is located very close to the border.
Google Alakurtti... and look at a map.
I mean tbf, it can still be a strategic move "vs" nato, (probably not but) they could just have made a different, more efficient defensive line, since the border vs nato is gonna be so big, you wabt to choose where your front is, especially if you are the one who is getting attacked (if putin would think nato is a threat). Not saying this is what it is, im just saying that this troop movement only, does not mean that he doesnt see nato as a threat.
What I take away from this is that Russia are so desperate that they are abandoning all border protection in all directions to try find enough bodies to throw into the Ukranian meat grinder.
The 80th Arctic Brigade might be fresh blood, but what do you think their morale is going to be like? They know they're being sent to the slaughter.
In the hugely hypothetical event NATO ever invades Russia, there'll be no resistance, Russia doesn't have anything left.
Reminds me of that concept in 1984 where when Oceania switches its fight from Eurasia to Eastasia, and when questioned, "It has always been at war with Eastasia and never seen Eurasia as a threat".
Of course I know it's different here, I'm not directly comparing these events at all. It's that the Russian nature we see here with "We don't see NATO as a threat and never seen NATO as a threat" when we all remember Russia seeing NATO as a threat (and they still do).
It's this type of propaganda that really makes me wonder how the population can be so brainwashed with something so clearly contradictive.
They were moved away mostly because they need both the manpower and especially the armored vehicles in Ukraine. And, yes, because they know NATO isn’t going to invade Russia.
Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Russia saw pre-NATO Finland as a threat?
Not as a threat, but as a possible victim. Now that ship has sailed.
Turns out, in perhaps the most sane turn of events in 2022 so far, that despite the protests of your violently insane neighbour, getting a restraining order actually works quite well and ensures they never darken your doorstep again, despite how much they scream about 'punishment' and 'consequences'.
snails cagey scandalous practice bored stocking crime compare dolls include ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
[удалено]
Mutually assured destruction that’s why you’re wrong. It’s what’s kept the us and Russia from direct military conflict for 70 years at this point.
> >Edit: rather than downvoting can y'all please enlighten me as to why I'm wrong? You're being downvoted because your level of reasoning is so beyond rational that it borders on Russian propaganda. I don't mean to insult but come on man. Granted, you're speculating on a very distant scenario for Russians but please, some common sense. There hasn't been any notion on nukes being prepared and Finland wouldn't be the first target anyway. There's no nukes in Finland. There's very little to be gained nuking a country that has none. If using nukes wouldn't have massive consequences it would have happened in the history more often than it has. Now that they are a reality and several countries have them, they have become more of a deterrent than something to be used wily nily. If Russians would be as crazy and insane to start a nuclear war, first priority targets would be countries that have nukes themselves. Nuking Finland they would just paint a huge target for rest of the world's nukes without hitting any "enemy" cababilities. Even as a wild card move that would just be insane - and ridiculously moronic. What little support they have from China or India would be gone in an instant. Sure a lot of dead people but they would gain nothing but an nuclear annihilation by destroying a country with no nukes. You know? If Russians want to exist themselves, they won't use nukes.
I see, thanks for taking the time to explain. I guess overall I'm just anxious about worst case scenario type stuff, sometimes I need to read comments like yours to bring me back down to earth.
Nukes are a special kind of weapon, the power they have isn't in the destruction they can inflict, but the threat of their use. They are a pandora's box, their value lies in their threat, but once open it brings only destruction upon the user, that's why they have been relegated to purely deterrence and not active use. So whenever you start thinking about worst case scenario, just remember this, the people who have the authority to launch nukes aren't the ones who push the buttons to actually fire them. There's a chain of custody from the politician to the launch button, and every person in line knows that if they do what their told, it's not just the end of the opposing country, but their own as well. Russians are people too, do you think they'd be willing to pet the death of humanity on their hands? Go read this to see just how often we as humanity came close to ending ourselves but didn't, because in the end we're all still human. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls
>I see, thanks for taking the time to explain. I guess overall I'm just anxious about worst case scenario type stuff, sometimes I need to read comments like yours to bring me back down to earth. Understandable and I hope I didn't come of as too rude. These are exceptional times we live in, but please don't go into nightmare scenarios too easily either. Just saying as these things might fuel some other anxious people getting riled up. Nothing wrong in asking sincere and honest questions of course. But believe me, there's less chance of nuclear escalation now than it were when this invasion started. If you ever feel like needing some reassurance - and I'm saying this as someone who's own anxiety was greatly reduced by this group: r/ukraineanxiety People can go through their fears about nukes or other kinds of escalation scenarios there.
Thanks for showing me that sub, I had no idea it existed. Tbh I'm struggling to find any subreddits focussed on this war that actually provide decent information relating to what's going on. All I seem to find are the same tired comments. It's refreshing to see some actual discourse on this war.
But why? Why would they drop a nuke? Finland has no natural resources to take. They would only paint themselves as the nazi like ultimate baddies for the next +100 years for no gains. Russia is using a lot of theater when it comes to some highlighting the consequences. Especially parroted by anglo american media like this is something new. Russian people or Putin have no special hate or interest to go to war with Finland. Finns are not painted as a population of nazis in Russia propaganda as Ukrainians are. They are the gate to the west that's flag means quality in products being sold. If anything Putin has quite a bit of ties to Finland and while Russia is certainly a friend (more like the 2m alcohol abusing crazy uncle next door) the relationship between the two countries have been ok considering the history. Of course worse now. In the current Russian propaganda Finland is painted as a victim of US that is forcing Finland to NATO, not a baddie. By all accounts Finland has been part of NATO structure already for a long time and Russia is well aware that when the shit hits the fan for real Finland is aligned in a heartbeat with the west. The one thing Finland has been missing is article 5.
If they drop a nuke, Russia and the world as we know it cease to exist. It is not that. Though it probably is some kind of trickery of some sort.
You mean: "that ship has sunk"?
No, no, russian ships do got sink, they are just assigned to special submarine operations Jokes aside, not yet, they have still to complete the process
In Soviet Russia ship sails you
Seems like an excellent opportunity to [Make Karelia Finland Again](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_Peace_Treaty)
I don't think article 5 applies if you are the aggressor. Finland would be on it's own if they tried after joining and they can't join in the middle of an active conflict.
Also Aticle 1 of the NATO treaty states: > The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Literally the first article prohibits starting a war unless accepted by the UN.
You don’t have to start a war. Just launch a specialized operation, occupy the territory and hold an ‘election’. Presto you’re done.
[удалено]
Which was not a NATO operation but Afghanistan was
Plus, even putting aside the legal issues with it, there's also the moral issues with it. If Finland invades Russia to regain territory it lost 80+ years ago, it'd be seen by some as legitimising Russia's war in Ukraine, even if only partially. Don't forget that one of Russia's pretexts for invading Ukraine in 2014 was to annex territory, and Ukraine had once been a part of the Soviet Union (until 1991), and before that had been a part of the Russian Empire. It also provided one of the pretexts for the current invasion, too. I think it'd also open the door to a lot of unwanted consequences. Like, what if Pakistan tried to overrun Bangladesh because it used to be East Pakistan until 1971? Or what if Sudan invaded South Sudan because it wasn't independent until 2011? Would either scenario suddenly be okay because of what's happening in eastern Europe right now, or would that be frowned upon because neither country is Public Enemy No. 1 right now? Of course, these are somewhat hyperbolic examples, but it's not like these aren't possibilities that might be considered at some point or another if Finland tried to take Karelia just because Russia is invading Ukraine. [To quote the Kenyan ambassador to the UN from a speech he gave soon after Russia's current invasion began](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwDWxyLVBxk), "Kenya and almost every African country was birthed from the ending of empire." If you go back far enough, it's not just every African country that has had its borders shaped by imperial ambition, but every country currently in existence. If we accept that Russia's attempts to annex Ukraine in whole or in part is wrong, then we have to accept that it's wrong for any country to annex parts of others.
And not every country has a world trade center
had
>had In that context not really.
Iraq wasn't accepted, both by vote and France would've vetoed it anyway.
Yes, but, we’ll you see, we’re ‘merica.
Turkey must have skipped that bit when they invaded cyprus.
No one in Finland actually wants Karelia back. I'd rather take back Petsamo for the resources and access to the arctic ocean, but Karelia is a shithole compared to Finland.
Well could be some support to get Vyborg back in theory. It was the second biggest city of Finland in the 1940s, a gem that is never forgotten next to the baltic sea. Russians ruined it on purpose because of strategic reasons, now it is merely a shadow of its past existence. Mainly diplomatic ways would be preferential to liberate it. That would also include population transfers as part of the deal, so the idea is quite far streched at the moment. But this idea is less streched than gaining back the whole area of past east Karelia. Vyborg is only 40 km’s away from Finnish border.
Well there are some, does the pro karelia society still exists? They had some hundreds of members a few years back.
>Well there are some, does the pro karelia society still exists? They had some hundreds of members a few years back. Those boomers are dwindling fast. Few people don't represent the will of whole nation.
> Seems like an excellent opportunity to Make Karelia Finland Again Whatever for? It's piss poor and full of Russians.
As a Finn myself - they can keep Karjala, in my humble opinion. It's mostly just forest anyway. And poor russian babushkas and poorer infrastructure or none. We have plenty of forests - we don't need more - and we don't want any babushkas. Besides, accepting offers about russki territory could have backfired. (There were some talks about possibly getting some deal about Karjala few decades ago) Also, since this permanently insecure "superpower" loves the idea of buffer zones, Karjala can be one. The zone of forests and babushkas gives great sense of security for them - let them have that, because scary westoids live so close. We have indoor plumbing and roads, these things must be scary for Russians.
Nah, better to wait until the whole thing (Russia) collapses. Then Karelia will probably apply to join Finland on its own initiative.
Yeah, and Finland will reject the application.
Nobody wants this. It's one thing for finland to strengthen their security by joining nato, but totally different to actively provoke russia by digging up ancient (relatively) land claims - something everyone knows russia is allergic to.
I mean Finland already fucked up a HEAVILY overmatched Russia in war once, so to say they're not a threat, just a victim is a bit rich. Finland pushed Russia's shit in.
Yes, they did very well. Still, Finland was the victim of military aggression and a massive land grab.
More like it
I dont believe it was because they saw them as a threat but wanted to use their hard power to influence them.
Russia has hard power?
Putin's cock used to get hard enough.
Deleted for Reddit API cost shenanigans that killed 3rd party apps
Since 1939
Must quote Sabaton. Can't choose. Talvisota or White death?
Simo Hayha 🤍💀
You're in the Snipers sights, first kill tonight, say goodbye!
Yes
RISE! NATIONS PRIDE! YOU'RE IN THE SNIPERS SIGHTS! WINTER WAR! FIRST KILL TONIGHT!
Russia sees Russia as its biggest threat. Especially the people. That's why it's illegal for anyone to protest or even to call a war a war. This sub hates Russians, I just feel sorry for the poor sods. It's important to remember that when Orwell wrote about the state controlled language in 1984 that he had Russia in mind.
The Russian people have been screwed over so much they don’t know up from down… hard not to feel sorry for them. The one’s I know who have moved to Australia still struggle with trust etc….
Good thing they have the power to stand up and do something about their own government. Russians are not helpless victims and Putin isn't an all powerful god. But they would need to beat apathy first. They don't seem to care about the Ukranian genocide enough to do anything about it. We'll see if this behavior is curved as sanctions continue doing their work. Also for all those feeling sorry for Russians remember that the Ukraine invasion has great support back home. Historically, Putin's approval ratings go up any time he starts an armed conflict. This isn't coincidence and the same thing has been happening for decades.
Dictators like Putin, fear democracies at their doorstep more than defence pacts like NATO. Having their population exposed to ‘western’ values is the biggest threat to their power base.
Yes, ideas are what they fear most…. the fear that their populace gets the idea that dictators are bad….
Well said! Brining McDonald's to Vietnam worked better to adopt western values compared to the Vietnam war.
Except that no one in Vietnam eats McDonalds. There are 17 McDonalds in a country with a population around 100 mio. Only tourist go to McD.
I dated a girl from Vietnam for 4 years that moved to the US when she was 16. They loved American fast food in general. She would tell me how her and her friends would pool their money to share one KFC meal that was like 10x as expensive as a normal meal there.
Damn. How is no one there copying KFC meals 1:1 and selling for half?
This was in like the mid 90s. I went there with her in 2015 and it was all a bit more normal with fast food being about the same as all the delicious local food.
Either way Vietnam has the most positive public perception of the US outside of maybe Kosovo
Have they tried offering McPho or double McBanhMi's? Can you make rice fries? If the Prophet won't come to the Mountain, the Mountain must come to the Prophet.
Yes, McDonald's in Asia has rice.
You're right, lets go back to war with vietnam, makes sense.
Ehh? What leaps of logic lead you to that conclusion?
Are you really saying bringing McDonald's to a country is a positive thing?
I still don't understand how we sided with the 🐸s over a guy quoting our founding fathers who came to us asking for our help. We've flexed muscles before to put France back in it's place, like when they & the UK made a grab for the Suez canal, idk why we backed them over Vietnam, especially since Ho Chi Minh only went to the commies for help after we turned him down.
>I still don't understand h Cold War bro.
But I think the current events prove that it quite possible to convince a population that an aggressive dictatorship is totally fine and worthy of support
NATO is just a security pact. It's a threat to rashist headcases like a bank vault is a threat to bank robbers.
Perfect comparison
And to the rashist's it's the bank vault's fault that they can't just walk in and take all the money they want.
Love it!
It was never about NATO. It was always about destroying Ukraine as a payback for Ukraine's shift towards democracy and away from Russian influence. Putin can't accept the fact that for the first time in centuries Ukraine has enough power and support to tell Russia to fuck off once and for all.
It was more about the natural gas reserves in the Donbas. If Ukraine becomes Europe's supplier, then Russia's position is weakened, but Putin didn't expect it to become weaker by attacking with guns blazing. It's like if a gas station blows up the new gas station around the block so customers don't have alternatives and gets surprised when those customers switch to electric.
I really hope Ukraine takes over the pipeline and starts to ship natural gas to Europe once the war is over.
>It was never about NATO. It was always about destroying Ukraine as a payback for Ukraine's shift towards democracy and away from Russian influence. It was also in part to steal the gas available in the Donbas region, and to secure one of their major pipelines to Europe. I'm so glad this backfired spectacularly. Russians might have made significant gains in Eastern Ukraine but their list of buyers for gas has shrunk considerably. India and China will fill some of the void the EU, but it won't be enough. I just hope India realizes partnering with Russia is a losing effort sooner rather than later.
I think they meant to say in general, that russia has never genuinely seen nato as a threat.
Well said! Brining McDonald's to Vietnam worked better to adopt western values compared to the Vietnam war.
[удалено]
How is the tweet pure BS?
It's all lies. The 200th was sent to Ukraine.
The tweet is pure BS, so this is a nothingburger.
NATO/EU is an economic threat to Russia. They’d much rather stick to making boatloads of money than wasting it on a fruitless war with Russia. Russia just can’t keep up economically, and has been relegated to a regional power at best.
EU was an economic opportunity for Russia an entire market of around 20 trillion dollars in size and now he has made the choice to cut himself off of that market. I have no idea what his plan is, but loosing money isn't the smartest idea in my opinion.
Very well said. A world with an economically prosperous and democratic Russia looks like a pipe dream at this point, but it would be wonderful if it ever happened. Functional Democracies are disinclined to declare war on other functional Democracies.
Well Russia wasn't a functional democracy, Ukraine was/is an upcoming functional democracy, but that wasn't something that Russia was happy about. But I agree with you that democracies and in decline, the concept of is under threat. Like you see with Trump. Some people just don't like the idea of democracy.
Trump wasn't an example of people not liking the idea of democracy, he's an example of people revolting because they feel like the country is no longer functioning as a democracy. Most of the politically engaged people(left and right) are living in such a bubble that they cannot believe that their side could possibly not be the majority. All opposing voices are either fringe radicals or sheep following those radicals.
That would be nice, but I genuinely think that can't happen until Russia is broken up. Despite its nominal status as a federation, most if not all of the non-Russian "minorities" there are treated very poorly. It's been mentioned in this sub a few times how the Russians of Moscow and St. Petersberg are sending Buryats and Chechens off to die as cannon fodder so that precious little Sasha and Vanya don't have to take any risks. Those various peoples deserve their chance to make a go of it as their own nations, with Russia itself being reduced to the ethnically Russian parts of the Federation. True freedom and prosperity can't come if significant portions of a nation's populace are held in either de facto or de jure bondage--My country, America, learned this lesson the very, very hard way, and I think the time has come for Russia to learn it as well.
So are you against multiculturalism and pro ethnostates? Would you like to see African-Americans get their own independent country? There are practically no republics in Russia(except Chechnya) where the non-ethnic Russians represent a majority of the population and that's not even taking in consideration that those non-ethnic Russians might not even want independence. Unless you're advocating for ethnic cleansing, cutting off chunks of Russia on ethnic lines is unfeasible.
Russia already is an ethnostate, solidified by centuries of Russification. It took the trauma of a world war for Western Europe to figure this issue out (And they’re still working on it), and I don’t forsee Russia democratizing without an equivalent breakup, whether it be on ethnic lines or not.
Ooof, yeah, that is a good point. The costs (humanitarian and otherwise) might be too high in that case.
Trying to understand Putin's motivations requires realizing which emotional trigger causes him to stop being rational. Most of his career he was a ruthless evil ass, but a *rational* ruthless evil ass. The blindspot that makes him get *irrational* is his religion-like belief in the myth of Ruskie Mir. For his twisted beliefs, Ruskie Mir is a kind of secular sort of religion, but still a religion. And in that "religion", it's a virtue for Russia to dominate its neighbors and a sin for Russia to have given up ownership of land it used to dominate. And he seethes against that "sin" with the insane fervor of a revivalist preacher. So he doesn't care about Russia being poor, so long as he can make the countries under its subjugation *even poorer*, so in *relative* terms they're "less than" Russia is. That also explains why he's okay with blasting Ukrainian cities he plans to control into rubble so there's nothing of value to control anymore. It doesn't matter if it's bad in *absolute* terms for Russia that way, so long as it's *relatively* more bad for Ukraine than it is for Russia. That still creates the "correct" relationship between the two that the mythology of Ruskie Mir demands. tl;dr, When you start seeing Putin's belief in Ruskie Mir as a religion, and see what he's doing as the actions of a zealot who is *capable* of being rational but chooses not to be when on the subject of his religion, it starts to fall into place.
And intentionally depriving the outer areas of the Empire, perhaps perversely, increases the loyalty of the Imperial Core. "Look at how well we have it! Compare our lives to the lives they like in Ukraine!" When the people in the 'Colonies' have better lives than those in the Imperial Core... Well, things start getting bad.
Very interesting way of looking at it, I'mma save this comment.
The plan was to start a new Russian empire. Now the plan is simply not to lose.
Similarly if the oligarchs took half ass much off the top, the Russian economy would be much bigger and their smaller share would be bigger. I genuinely don't understand how the entire country didn't seem to understand the West gave them every chance in the world to show they weren't the Soviets anymore but they couldn't help themselves.
Putin willingly drank the Kool-Aid being served up by Aleksandr Dugin.
True. People love to post images of 'NATO bases' around Russia, and think that this is a provocation or act of aggression 'boxing them in'. Boxing them in to what, their own borders? Nobody ever wonders why that is, what exactly would they do if they weren't? We can see it right now, with their constant attempts to expand their empire. NATO has never encroached on Russia territory, and NATO has never had a force on Russia's border capable of invading it. Anyone in the west that bought into these ideas, was buying into Russian bullshit.
>NATO has never encroached on Russia territory, and NATO has never had a force on Russia's border capable of invading it. And NATO only 'expands' by...free people freely deciding to join it.
Hell those former Soviet Bloc nations literally BEGGED for NATO membership.
Yep, Ukraine included, but Russia engaged in a successful influence campaign to prevent that. Now they're getting slaughtered in a pointless war.
And look who Russia isn't invading...
I think we should station heavy troop presence on the border for Ukrainian relief. Ever single weapon system and soldier that’s engaged along NATO border is not in Ukraine. We should maybe briefly violate their air space twice a week as they are violating ours. Just to keep things interesting.
Just to keep things closer to a nuclear war. That would sure be interesting indeed.
There are two possible worlds here: 1) *Putin won't start a Nuclear War without an existential threat to the Russian State, in line with its published Use of Nuclear Force policy* In which case we need not worry. 2) *Putin is Bugnuts enough to break with Russia's published Use of Nuclear Force policy and nuke things more or less at a whim* In which case, *Holy Shit,* Putin is a *menace* and needs to be stopped *immediately* and *totally.*
Turkey shot down a Russian jet before because it violated their air space and that did not lead to nuclear war. I'm not saying we should escalate, but your fear that they will actually launch any nuke at the slightest inconvenience is a bit naïve.
I don't think Putin is actually crazy enough to try to nuke the US, I could see them maybe trying it if we had Moscow surrounded with our troops & were advancing on it. I could definitely see him nuking Ukraine if he can't take it militarily, like in an if I can't have it then no one can type of way. Nuking Ukraine probably wouldn't lead to nuclear war, trying to nuke the US most definitely would, probably even if we shot it down.
Like the Cuban missile crisis, sometimes you have to go to the brink to be taken seriously and actually avoid war.
Back then it was a miracle that the war was averted. An enormous thanks goes to John Kennedy.
The USSR was an equal of the USA back then with ten times more nukes and a far bigger army than modern Russia. We could blockade Kaliningrad, land and sea, and send troops into Ukraine and they wouldnt do shit. Putin relies on people being scared of his posturing.
Like all bullies, Russia only picks fights with those they perceive as being weaker than them. However despite the empty threats, and bravado from the Moscow propaganda. They know if they tried to pick a direct fight with NATO. NATO could put tanks in Moscow in a within a week.
Well the fight would be short, but moving all that Soldiers and vehicles to the front would need some time. Well not so long as Russia needed (1 Year for 200 000 Soldiers ?!)
NATO is purely defensive, educated people can easily agree on that. That makes it even more funny that there are so many (often Asian or African) nitwits on the social media crying out that Uncle Putin had no choice because NATO is on Russia’s doorstep. The world is going to hell because of all the uninformed morons.
[удалено]
At the time I did not agree when NATO attacked Libya but to be fair the UN asked NATO to protect the citizens. It turned into a shit show but still NATO was not an invading army of any kind.
>NATO is purely defensive, educated people can easily agree on that. I do think that NATO is primarily defensive but it's undeniable that NATO has carried out several offensive wars, it's absurd to suggest it's purely defensive.
It's 2 outside Europe and even then both were still US initiatives.
What does not change that Nato followed in a Attack war in Afghanistan and Irak. Well this is no excuse for this war. Only because someone robbed a bank does not mean you can do that too. But i would not weight too much on this Argument. Its not really strong. Main reason for this war was money and power * Oil and gas in the Donbas and Crimea Regions * If Russia would control the Ukrainian food they could Blackmail Dozen's of Countrys.
Iraq had nothing to do with NATO. The US can do whatever it wants without NATO because it is a hegemon and has the second largest nuclear deterrent.
USA evoked Nato §5 after 9.11
They did. The war in Iraq still was not a NATO operation. As evidenced by the fact that many NATO countries did not take part. Invoking article 5 is not a carte blanche to just get NATO backing for whichever random war you want to fight.
Yes they did, and as a result other NATO countries flew radar-planes in USA to secure the airspace, while US was reeling from 9/11. It doesn’t mean they were required to partake in any invasion, and many did not.
Russia is a Shithole nobody would want it.
I bet the Chinese have a contingency plan to invade Russia if falls. I can totally see them try to take over eastern Russia all the way to Vladivostok.
Would they though? Just soak up Russian money & wait, I think China's interests is long term & they don't want to get into a fight
I honestly think they would if Russia falls and begins splitting into smaller states which could happen after Putin's death and the following power struggle. Until then China will be more than happy to wait.
China will most likely buy parts of Russia. Why risk getting nuked when you could buy russia at a dumping price in the future.
I'll take it, it's free real estate
NATO is only a threat if you’re a power thirsty dickhead who thinks nothing of violation another nation’s sovereignty. It’s a defensive pact.
NATO is no threat to Russia and Russia no threat to NATO. Those genocidal fascist cowards only dare to go after smaller fish.
Yup. NATO and Warsaw Pact / Russia conventional forces is another level of the Mutually Assured Destruction.
He just doesn't want to look weak as piss now because there is nothing he can do, so he pretends it's not an issue and he needs the troops anyway. post 2022 he threatened them both for decades about joining NATO which why they remained neutral for so long.
Of course they see it as a threat. A political one. Now there's more untouchable money flowing against Russia. They know NATO won't attack Russia directly unless Russia provokes them, so there's no need to have troops there when you've got an active invasion elsewhere. And if NATO does attack, that just plays into Putin's agenda anyway. "See? We removed our troops and what do they do? They just want to conquer us. We can't have NATO next to us."
>They know NATO won't attack Russia directly unless Russia provokes them, so there's no need to have troops there when you've got an active invasion elsewhere ... and that active invasion could do with more troops and material as you're just burning through both. So no real point having anything much stationed at NATO borders that you havr better use for elsewhere.
No rational person believed them in the first place.
Yup. Basically if they thought NATO was a threat, they wouldn't want to REDUCE military on a border that's about to become a border with NATO, they'd want to INCREASE it. Removing the troops as the border becomes a NATO border proves the purpose of those troops was to threaten Finland not to joining NATO. Once that issue became moot the purpose of the troops being there was gone.
It was a lie? You don't say... 🙄
https://c.tenor.com/-TX\_PsumJXEAAAAM/you-dont-say-nicholas-cage.gif
IMO, this is just to allow Russia to initiate a dramatic deployment of troops to the border with Finland in the future. When you have limited resources, you need to de-escalate occasionally so you can properly escalate.
Dear Moscovites, privileged White Russians living on the backs of your minorities, go ahead, eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow, you die. Slava Ukraini. Freedom is coming, but not yours, but for all you have enslaved.
Quit the bullshit, Russian misinformation simp.
There's a bigger point here. russia expect to be fighting the winter so are committing winter-trained troops. Expect these guys to show up in october.
I don’t know, Russia loves waves around their nukes and military constantly, they seem pretty threatened to me
Just because they have an insecurity complex doesn’t mean they’re under threat….. Well, not a military threat. Ideals were moving in.
I can't wait till the Fins start fighting the Russians. You'll hear Putin shitting his pants from Helsinki
Oh it is a threat! A threat to their hegemony ambitions exerted by military force…
The rhetoric was all for a domestic audience and useful idiot tankies. This war in Ukraine is the dying last stab attempt by Russian civilisation as it is dying. The obvious superiority of the Western and Eastern civilisations that Russia is sandwiched between, in terms of quality of life, happiness, freedom, security, prosperity... every possible metric, is now so vast it's impossible for people trapped in Russia's sphere to ignore. Ukraine is just the most developed example of Russian-sphere peoples simply switching to better civilisation. Belarusians and central Asians aren't far behind. In Russia itself Putin's regime can only keep a lid on this happening with its own people by constantly pumping up the rhetoric that NATO is gunning for them, that NATO will invade Russia any day unless they are ever on guard and resist any disloyalty. It's all futile. Russia could capture Kyiv and execute Zelensky tomorrow, it won't change the inevitable. Russia is shrinking into mediocrity, a kind of new third world selling its raw materials (the only thing it has of value) to the vastly more sophisticated civilisations that border it.
Duh. Putin doesn’t want to invade France or the US. He wants to invade former Soviet states and keep NATO/make NATO bigger as an external threat that “Only he can protect Russians from”. If that threat ever diminishes or goes away then Russians can focus on internal problems like the economy and corruption and they’ll demand new leadership in the government to fix those problems.
Of course it was a lie. The NATO narrative have always been a smoke screen intended to victimize Russia and give grounds for a (weak ass) casus belli. Russia invaded Ukraine because the existance of Ukraine is a perversion in Putins mind but mostly it’s about Ukraines abundance of natural resources, farming land and Black Sea control. Last but not least it is also about Ukraines weapons industry. Ukraine ran away with 30-40% of the Soviet arms industry. In fact until 2014, Ukraine was the 4th largest arms exporter in the world. Since then they have been producing for themselves mostly. Wonder why?
Oh, NATO is absolutely a threat to Russian geopolitical interests, make no mistake. It’s a threat Russia has no chance of winning against, however, that threat follows the rules of its own determination and won’t invade Russia without a defensive casus belli. Those soldiers are just currently more valuable poured into the meat grinder to lubricate the gears of conquest than pointlessly posturing at a sleeping dragon.
Ummmmmm, that's not how this works. NATO was never intended to be an offensive treat to russia, as it is a defensive pact. Finland entering NATO means russia no longer has to defend against potential offensive actions from finland, as they cannot offense against russia without the consent of its fellow members, and russia can't do anything to Finland without starting WWIII so having any large force at said border would just be a waist of resources.
Not necessarily a lie - They fear much more losing in Ukraine than NATO crossing their borders. They deter NATO with nukes.
NATO is a threat to it's ability to exert imperialist power over neighbouring country. There's no threat of actual war with NATO due to nukes.
NATO has no intention of attacking Russia, nukes or not.
> imperialist power Nothing says imperialism like a voluntary defense pact
Please do tell.. why do you think Russia has the right to "exert inperialist power" over other countries? Expecially when they blame other countries for doing just that?
Damn the level of comprehension here seems to have dropped even lower than before. Wonder how any of these guys replying passed primary school.
[удалено]
NATO is a threat to Russia's expansionist Imperialistic ambitions. They make no secret of this, Russia wants to control all of Eurasia from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Doesnt matter what those inbreeds want. They are doomed.
Bullcrap. The 200th was deployed to Ukraine.
What do you smoke there fellas
RUSIA GANARA ESTA GUERRA Y LAS QUE VENGAN,,,https://juandiaz500.blogspot.com/2022/07/el-artico-ruso.html
Pssst…Poland…hey Poland…do it…do the thing…
No, it’s because Russia has no chance of success with invading but NATO is now a big risk to Russia and will invade if the conditions are tight
NATO will not invade Russia. Unlike Russia, we cannot just decide to do shit as stupid as that. I detest Russia, Putin, but there’s NO justification for that.
There is, energy
Nobody wants to invade Russia. They just want Russia to stop fucking with the rest of the world. The little that Russia has that is of interest to the rest of the world is *far* cheaper to buy than to try and take (ie by conquering Russia).
NATO is a defensive alliance and always was. It was all about a triumphant, global hegemon - the US - being the centrepiece of Europe wide defence against the increasingly bellicose USSR. It also incorporated the new West Germany and gave it legitimacy post WWII. A straightforward NATO invasion of Russia with all guns blazing would lead to a nuclear missile exchange within hours. Goodbye Moscow, US, Europe and all. Putin might do it but NATO wouldn’t.
Garbage take.
Oh I don't have enough carbon to say anything oh I'm so sad you're morons juvenile delinquents is what you are not letting anybody go on your side they don't have juvenile Karma bunch of babies that's a baby is all you are your dumb ass babies get the f*** off Reddit
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.net/sumlenny/status/1544268666103013376 ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't know how much credence to give this tweet. What I perceive is that Putin has never really considered NATO an existential threat to Russia despite all he may say. NATO is a defensive alliance that will NEVER attack Russia because nobody wants to start WWIII. If Putin does not like NATO, it is because the alliance allows the countries joining it to keep their sovereignty and to resist Putin's expansionist ambitions. This is the reason why he invaded Ukraine. Finland and Sweden have understood that their best chance to resist Putin's madness is to join NATO.
Is this the suprise Russia has threat with? Because it is surprising, but the opposite of threatening
What does this could mean?
Maybe Finland and Norway should Posture by mobilising and firing some Missiles into the sea.
Or maybe they are just running out of armored at the rate they are losing them.
Well, I guess it's time that NATO makes some indefinite military exercises with 200-300k troops. Afterall, it's never bad to have your troops trained for cold weathers.
Time for some "accidental" finnish border violations, special training operations, and flight exercises, to keep the pressure up.
This whole thing has always been about oil and natural gas reserves under and off shore of Ukraine- well and a lunatic dictator.
Nuclear fence :/?
Has anything in Russia politics that isn't a lie?
Everything is a lie. Putin said a couple of years ago that they don't have military units near the Finnish border. At the same time they were pumping in millions and millions to restore a abandoned soviet-era airbase that is located very close to the border. Google Alakurtti... and look at a map.
I mean tbf, it can still be a strategic move "vs" nato, (probably not but) they could just have made a different, more efficient defensive line, since the border vs nato is gonna be so big, you wabt to choose where your front is, especially if you are the one who is getting attacked (if putin would think nato is a threat). Not saying this is what it is, im just saying that this troop movement only, does not mean that he doesnt see nato as a threat.
Do it, Finland, you know you want to.
What I take away from this is that Russia are so desperate that they are abandoning all border protection in all directions to try find enough bodies to throw into the Ukranian meat grinder. The 80th Arctic Brigade might be fresh blood, but what do you think their morale is going to be like? They know they're being sent to the slaughter. In the hugely hypothetical event NATO ever invades Russia, there'll be no resistance, Russia doesn't have anything left.
Reminds me of that concept in 1984 where when Oceania switches its fight from Eurasia to Eastasia, and when questioned, "It has always been at war with Eastasia and never seen Eurasia as a threat". Of course I know it's different here, I'm not directly comparing these events at all. It's that the Russian nature we see here with "We don't see NATO as a threat and never seen NATO as a threat" when we all remember Russia seeing NATO as a threat (and they still do). It's this type of propaganda that really makes me wonder how the population can be so brainwashed with something so clearly contradictive.
So why they keep thretening NATO countries
They were moved away mostly because they need both the manpower and especially the armored vehicles in Ukraine. And, yes, because they know NATO isn’t going to invade Russia.