|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Russians might have been, but Russia itself? Maybe I'm wrong, but it never seemed like Russia tried to portray the USSR as a bad thing which they too were victims off, which kinda seems like a prerequisite for co-victim status. Why should it anyway, given the heavily pro-Russian character of the state? What "Russia" would have spoken out against the USSR? The Politburo? Dissenting Russians had no voice, that's the thing about an authoritarian state with no free press. I can guarantee you the million+ Russians murdered in Stalin's purges and the Gulags would've had some critiques of the USSR. Regardless, asking an entire people to account for the actions of a regime that came into power in 1917, underwent dramatic changes and reforms in the ensuing decades, and collapsed twenty years ago is nonsensical.
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 00:59 |
|
|
Are there any good readers online about the Ukrainian fascist groups? It seems there's a lot of genuine distrust in eastern Ukraine about them. Events are well out of an internal fix by now, but I'd be keen to know if the fascists were actually fascist.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:30
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:No decisions yet regarding a larger NATO presence (American bases) inside the Baltic states and Poland, correct? They're increasing NATO force presence in both.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:33
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:So a new Cold War then? Because Russia would lose (again), except this time it won't take forty years. That's not really the point, though - the point is nobody would benefit from that. (except for defense contractors)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:36
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:They're increasing NATO force presence in both. But nothing concrete has been approved yet, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
Here's an article from Anatol Lieven that's worth reading given how prescient he was in this article: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/04/opinion/a-way-out-for-kiev-and-moscow.html?_r=1
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:40
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:Obama's whole "reset" policy was an attempt to try and warm up relations with Russia with a more bi-lateral relationship but obviously it didn't pan out so well or was too little too late. Putin had already gone into full-on gently caress the West mode. It was way too late. Russians did suffer quite a bit during the 1990s, except for the oligarchs. They didn't receive the treatment that Germany or Japan did because Russia wasn't seen as a bulwark against any threat. Russians saw their influence abroad crumble into dust. There might be some Russians who want revenge and Putin embodies that in a sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:41
|
|
|
Malleum posted:Russians that have been dead for half a century. Russia was the head of the Soviet Union. Russia was not the Soviet Union. Germany was the head of the Third Reich, but everyone and their mother was eager to help them transition from a totalitarian state instead of isolate and punish them for their former misdeeds. What's the difference here? If a member of the SS had become supreme leader of Germany in 1955 you'd have a point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:43
|
|
|
Dusty Baker 2 posted:If a member of the SS had become supreme leader of Germany in 1955 you'd have a point. So Putin has been in control of Russia since the exact moment that the Union collapsed? All this stuff was happening during Yeltsin's days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
Hopefully today will bring an end to the violence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:50
|
|
|
Lucy Heartfilia posted:Hopefully today will bring an end to the violence. I would like that. I was pleased to see that the separatist leadership, such as it is, agreed to the ceasefire. Berke Negri posted:Obama's whole "reset" policy was an attempt to try and warm up relations with Russia with a more bi-lateral relationship but obviously it didn't pan out so well or was too little too late. I think it's more "too little too late" than anything else. Bush really, really, really hosed up the US' relations with Russia, and the fact that Obama kind of hemmed and hawed over the ABM sites in Eastern Europe didn't help.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
Majorian posted:That's not really the point, though - the point is nobody would benefit from that. (except for defense contractors) Cheatum the Evil Midget posted:Here's an article from Anatol Lieven that's worth reading given how prescient he was in this article:
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
Yeah, Russia should rebuild what Russia destroyed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
Germans have done plenty of repenting over their wartime actions, let alone the reparations. But getting any of that out of Russia.. not bloody likely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
Isn't the problem is that the East is the economic heartland of Ukraine so you're giving up a good deal of your economy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 07:59
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:So a new Cold War then? Because Russia would lose (again), except this time it won't take forty years. Russia would win so fast there wouldn't be time to call it a cold war. The only governments with worse debt problems than the US are in the EU. Russia is full of oil, which was $18/barrel when the Soviet Union started to crumble in 1989; it's $95/barrel now. If there were a limited proxy-state war, it would be in Ukraine, which would be like Vietnam if Vietnam had winter and bordered Russia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:00
|
|
|
Malleum posted:So Putin has been in control of Russia since the exact moment that the Union collapsed? All this stuff was happening during Yeltsin's days. Yeltsin was no angel: whole world saw the supression of opposition (communist opposition, but still) in 1993, the brute force approach to Chechnya and, finally, a pretty hard line regarding Yugoslavia. FSB and military command at that point were old Soviet hawks (bears?) and everyone knew that they won't give a poo poo about declarative commitments to democracy and friendly realtions with the West given the chance. And here you go - Yeltsin declares an ex-KGB agent his heir.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:00
|
|
|
Civilians are punished by separatists with long times of forced labor for the tiniest infractions. Feels like Russia already. Separatists are truly out to improve the lifes of the people there. (Reported by Spiegel)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:I guess it really doesn't matter, since things seem to be heading in that direction regardless. I don't think it has to. If the US and its NATO allies would make an ironclad agreement with Russia that Ukraine and Georgia don't join NATO, and instead stay nonaligned, I think a new Cold War could be pretty easily averted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
Malleum posted:Russians that have been dead for half a century. Russia was the head of the Soviet Union. Russia was not the Soviet Union. Germany was the head of the Third Reich, but everyone and their mother was eager to help them transition from a totalitarian state instead of isolate and punish them for their former misdeeds. What's the difference here? Germany was the third reich, the third reich was never even a nominally federated structure incorporating different nation-states into one state. That being said, West Germany actually accepts German responsibility in WW2 and paid reparations, whereas the current Russian government basically don't seem to think there was anything wrong with Soviet foreign policy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:03
|
|
|
Ragingsheep posted:Isn't the problem is that the East is the economic heartland of Ukraine so you're giving up a good deal of your economy? Eastern Ukraine is a giant rust belt which was not profitable in the first place and is likely a money sinkhole for whoever rules it now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:04
|
|
|
straw man posted:Russia would win so fast there wouldn't be time to call it a cold war. The only governments with worse debt problems than the US are in the EU. Russia is full of oil, which was $18/barrel when the Soviet Union started to crumble in 1989; it's $95/barrel now. If there were a limited proxy-state war, it would be in Ukraine, which would be like Vietnam if Vietnam had winter and bordered Russia. Russia's economy isn't much bigger than Canada's let along US+EU and it's government/political economy is so dysfunctional (even compared to the west post-2008) trying to compare public debt between Russia and other countries is probably entirely pointless. Typo fucked around with this message at 08:10 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:05
|
|
|
Malleum posted:What is a country if not its people? Russia definitely portrayed the USSR as a bad thing for Russians. It was. It ruined their economy, murdered their people, and kept them prisoners in their own lives for a century. The pro-Russian inclinations of the state were to send Russians to die in work camps rather than firing squads. North Korea is described as pro-Korean, and the Kims are literally starving the country to keep their power. The Soviet Union was pro-Soviet Union, not Pro-Russian. Red Pyramid posted:What "Russia" would have spoken out against the USSR? The Politburo? Dissenting Russians had no voice, that's the thing about an authoritarian state with no free press. I can guarantee you the million+ Russians murdered in Stalin's purges and the Gulags would've had some critiques of the USSR. Regardless, asking an entire people to account for the actions of a regime that came into power in 1917, underwent dramatic changes and reforms in the ensuing decades, and collapsed twenty years ago is nonsensical. All that said, I do agree that the Russian people were hardly given a chance to reject anything, given the way the West and much of the Russian leadership approached the collapse of the USSR. This doesn't change the need for an active rejection of the ideals which have been at the core of the Russian state for centuries though, if Russia wishes to normalize its relations with its neighbors. I think maybe it should be noted too that the countries with the greatest justification for wanting to see this rejection happen had no hand in derailing Russia's attempt at a soft landing after the collapse of the USSR.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:06
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I don't think it has to. If the US and its NATO allies would make an ironclad agreement with Russia that Ukraine and Georgia don't join NATO, and instead stay nonaligned, I think a new Cold War could be pretty easily averted. A definitive statement like this would probably be almost as politically bad domestically as if Putin started acting in good faith in declaring not to invade Ukraine. By this point after everything Russia has done it is not really possible to back down in at least statements (even though the window for Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO was a decade ago and has long since closed and Ukraine was, at best, probably something twenty years away from actually joining the EU or NATO at the beginning of the year)
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:09
|
|
|
Typo posted:That being said, West Germany actually accepts German responsibility in WW2 and paid reparations, whereas the current Russian government basically don't seem to think there was anything wrong with Soviet foreign policy. They actually did seem pretty intent on turning over a new leaf on the foreign policy front in the early 90's. To the point where Yeltsin publicly stuck his neck out to try to join NATO, NATO blatantly snubbed him, and he had to backpedal humiliatingly. I honestly can't think of a better way to signal that trying to play by the West's rules would not work for Russia.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:10
|
|
|
Majorian posted:They actually did seem pretty intent on turning over a new leaf on the foreign policy front in the early 90's. To the point where Yeltsin publicly stuck his neck out to try to join NATO, NATO blatantly snubbed him, and he had to backpedal humiliatingly. to be fair so did the Soviets back in the 1950s: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/molotovs-proposal-the-ussr-join-nato-march-1954 Bu yeah, the 90s were kiinda a bitch slap by the west to Russia, not that the Russians themselves handled the post-Communist era particularly well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I don't think it has to. If the US and its NATO allies would make an ironclad agreement with Russia that Ukraine and Georgia don't join NATO, and instead stay nonaligned, I think a new Cold War could be pretty easily averted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
straw man posted:Russia would win so fast there wouldn't be time to call it a cold war. The only governments with worse debt problems than the US are in the EU. Russia is full of oil, which was $18/barrel when the Soviet Union started to crumble in 1989; it's $95/barrel now. If there were a limited proxy-state war, it would be in Ukraine, which would be like Vietnam if Vietnam had winter and bordered Russia. This thread has the weirdest posts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:A definitive statement like this would probably be almost as politically bad domestically as if Putin started acting in good faith in declaring not to invade Ukraine. Eh, I don't think it would be that damaging - most Americans aren't really interested in committing NATO troops and money to Ukraine, and most Russians would probably be content with not having NATO troops, nukes, and ABMs stationed along the Russian border. quote:By this point after everything Russia has done it is not really possible to back down in at least statements (even though the window for Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO was a decade ago It was actually more like four years, and that was mostly because Yanukovych managed to get elected. When NATO issues a statement that quite literally says "NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO," (at the 2008 Bucharest Summit) you can't blame Moscow for being a little concerned. SoggyBobcat posted:Russia doesn't want just a "non-aligned" Ukraine though, it wants a Ukraine that's politcally neutered and subserviant to it's interests - see all of Russia's rhetoric about "federalizing" Ukraine. There's no way Ukraine agrees to that, even if the West does. And NATO doesn't just want Ukraine non-aligned either. That's why it's a compromise. Ukraine may still want to join NATO, but guess what? It's not only up to Ukraine. It's up to NATO as well. Majorian fucked around with this message at 08:19 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:16
|
|
|
Typo posted:Russia's economy isn't much bigger than Canada's let along US+EU and it's government/political economy is so dysfunctional (even compared to the west post-2008) trying to compare public debt between Russia and other countries is probably entirely pointless. I don't know - historically, big public debts have a way of weakening the central authority. Happened in Rome, happened in medieval England, happened in 1920s Germany. For whatever it's worth, during this cold war, the Chinese would align with the Russians too. And some parts of the Russian government seem to be functioning quite efficiently down in Crimea and Donbass  DarkCrawler posted:This thread has the weirdest posts. I just think the deck is stacked pretty hard in Putin's favor this time, and not by accident.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:32
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:But nothing concrete has been approved yet, right? USA has sent to four countries 150 soldiers each (totaling 600) from 173rd airborne, to be replaced soon by The Big Red One which will too have a company strength. With some tanks too. And US ministry of defense occasionally publishes stories such as this one. See how positive they are. Winning hearts and minds. I think just those 150 and their equipment will provide good learning opportunity for us. Sure beats renting those two T-55 tanks from Latvia every time we want to show our conscripts what tanks look like. There's also fighter jet rotation, recently Canada joined in, Danish planes recently departed and their PM said they would send 300 troops to Baltic states. Which I'm sure will also provide us with good training opportunities. Obviously defending the Baltic states is up to ourselves in those states foremost.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:39
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:But nothing concrete has been approved yet, right? Right now two things are being talked about. First, a new NATO aerial training centre in Ämari military airfield in Estonia, and five support bases across the Baltics that would be ready to receive a large number of troops on very short notice. jonnypeh posted:Germans have done plenty of repenting over their wartime actions, let alone the reparations. But getting any of that out of Russia.. not bloody likely. The psyche of the average Russian is very complicated, because there are two conflicting narratives trying to dominate. First, immense pride thanks to the victory against the nazis and winning WWII, and secondly a huge inferiority and persecution complex. The Russian intelligentsia have a pretty accurate understanding of their terribly violent and bloody history and they seem to have reflected on it, but in Russia they are a clear minority. Remember, intellgentsia were systematically harassed in the Soviet times. In that aspect Putin seems to follow in the footsteps of the Soviet ideologists. straw man posted:Russia would win so fast there wouldn't be time to call it a cold war. The only governments with worse debt problems than the US are in the EU. Russia is full of oil, which was $18/barrel when the Soviet Union started to crumble in 1989; it's $95/barrel now. If there were a limited proxy-state war, it would be in Ukraine, which would be like Vietnam if Vietnam had winter and bordered Russia. 70% of the world's defense spending is NATO countries. Russian economy is fragile because of their dependence on energy exports that it would take 2-3 months of coordinated international efforts to essentially bankrupt the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:40
|
|
|
straw man posted:I don't know - historically, big public debts have a way of weakening the central authority. Luxembourg, Norway or Austria should be having violent revolts if that ALONE weakened central authority. straw man posted:Happened in Rome, happened in medieval England, happened in 1920s Germany. Yeah, there were literally no other things or events that contributed to the problems in those countries, one day one guy just said "Hey, we sure have a lot of debt" and everyone just freaked out. straw man posted:For whatever it's worth, during this cold war, the Chinese would align with the Russians too. Why would they do that when their greatest trade partner is the EU and second greatest is the US? Because of their historically warm ties with the Soviets? straw man posted:And some parts of the Russian government seem to be functioning quite efficiently down in Crimea and Donbass Donbass is literally ruled by militias, and I don't have any idea what is going on in Crimea. straw man posted:I just think the deck is stacked pretty hard in Putin's favor this time, and not by accident. Because the U.S. and EU have...debts. Are you under the assumption they did not have debts when they won the first Cold War? You realize that UK alone has a larger economy then Russia? DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 08:44 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:40
|
|
|
Malleum posted:So Putin has been in control of Russia since the exact moment that the Union collapsed? All this stuff was happening during Yeltsin's days. That's why I said 55 instead of 45. hope this helps.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
Majorian posted:And NATO doesn't just want Ukraine non-aligned either. That's why it's a compromise. Ukraine may still want to join NATO, but guess what? It's not only up to Ukraine. It's up to NATO as well. Ukraine will continue to drift towards the E.U. (because Ukrainians have voices too, you know), and it will do so even faster with Russia under direct control of the most pro-Russian parts of the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:42
|
|
|
I'm sorry that Ukraine and Georgia had the gall to maybe think about signing treaties with other countries about not getting invaded as though they were sovereign nations that shouldn't be invaded.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
jonnypeh posted:USA has sent to four countries 150 soldiers each (totaling 600) from 173rd airborne, to be replaced soon by The Big Red One which will too have a company strength. With some tanks too. And US ministry of defense occasionally publishes stories such as this one. See how positive they are. Winning hearts and minds. We're also hosting joint exercises with Poland to coordinate a rapid military reaponse in Ukraine should the need arise. Contingency planning in case the Russkies push to Kyiv.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
Sergg posted:I'm sorry that Ukraine and Georgia had the gall to maybe think about signing treaties with other countries about not getting invaded as though they were sovereign nations that shouldn't be invaded. Pretty much this. The Russians are rightfully afraid of NATO expansion due to their long history of being invaded from the West. At the same time, Ukraine also is rightfully afraid of being taken over by Russia again, which is exactly what Russia is trying to do. Just like I don't blame the Russians for not wanting NATO on their border, I also don't blame Ukraine for wanting to get the gently caress away from Russia. The thing is, the Russians are in the wrong here because their concern is simply a fearful thought, whereas the Ukrainian concern is actually loving happening.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
If Ukraine didn't want me to hurt her, she wouldn't have looked at that other country like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 00:59 |
|
|
SoggyBobcat posted:What? How is this a "compromise" if Russia gets everything they want? Nope - they don't get Ukraine in their strategic orbit either. The Russian government would love to have Ukraine back as an integral part of the Russian Empire. If its status was codified to be more like Finland's, however, that would be a good compromise for both sides. quote:Ukraine will continue to drift towards the E.U. (because Ukrainians have voices too, you know), and it will do so even faster with Russia under direct control of the most pro-Russian parts of the country. And I think that's a good thing. The EU isn't the same thing as NATO. e: To elaborate, the EU isn't a strategic military alliance, as NATO is. It's political and economic, and it wasn't founded to be an anti-Russia coalition of states. It doesn't have the same baggage as NATO. Ukraine joining the EU is not nearly as provocative as it joining NATO. Sergg posted:If Ukraine didn't want me to hurt her, she wouldn't have looked at that other country like that. Yes, that's really what people are arguing here. Not that NATO promised too much to Ukraine and Georgia in the 90's and 2000's, and now should probably back off before it makes more unfulfillable promises. Majorian fucked around with this message at 08:57 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 08:48
|
|