The Russia is getting more evil thread

[SeaGreen]

Based on the available data I’d say that was 100% accurate.

[spiffy]

@Strollen

Seriously, you think a country that’s been invaded by at least 5 times, by 8 or 9 countries over the last two hundred years has no reason to fear an invasion.

Right, but ever since Nuclear weapons… zero, right?

And pretending the nuclear deterrent weren’t enough, given everything we’ve seen of the logistics and sheer amount of conventional hardware you’d need to even get anywhere in Russia, and then hold it, it would be so much more than any kind of NATO border force would ever have.

[SeaGreen]

I don’t think anyone would disagree with you. But unless I’m very wrong you’re not a Russian dictator. It appears he suspects stuff you don’t. ie he thinks he is being boxed in and he thinks that’s going to get worse and I suppose he also thinks then the dirty tricks dept is going to really get started here at home in Moscow and then we’re truly fxxxed. And you know, I get that line of thought.

But I don’t get the so let’s kill a ton of Ukrainians instead part.

[legowarrior]

I am sure all that Nazi gold does make it comfortable.

[SeaGreen]

Yup. And self-satisfied at the “Swiss miracle”. Some miracle.

[Banzai]

any nuclear country saying they are frightened about invasion seems to make no sense. the only reason so much of the world isnt sending troops to help ukraine us the fear of russian nukes. to say that russia is boxed in and scared if invasion is to say the same about any nuclear country. russia is not scared of nato invading russia, they are worried that the former ussr countries wont be invadable if they do join nato, and he wants them as russian proxy states.

[Aceris]

@draxen

Tweeter: Some totally random dude who is into Chinese medicine (?!).

It’s a mix of people who would find a way to blame NATO for saving puppies and people locked into old ways of thinking and perfectly happy to have a buffer zone.

NATO had really backed off from the idea of expansion to Ukraine after the Georgia debacle. But Ukrainians revolted and threw out Putin’s ally, and Putin retaliated by taking Crimea and setting up a frozen conflict. However, though this made NATO membership an even more distant propspect, it permanently shifted Ukraine’s perspective to a westward-facing one, creating the situation where Ukraine, even if not able to join the EU, was more and more becoming part of the EU sphere, inasmuch as such a thing exists.

While it’s entirely true that NATO expansion was “threatening” to Russia’s interests, that’s true inasmuch as Russia’s interests, at least under Putin, include control of a buffer region of states that act as satrapies. Which worked so well in the balkans at:

1. Preventing war, and
2. Promoting prosperity in those states

[abrandt]

The tweet said that’s Maria Butina, right?

@SeaGreen

And you know, I get that line of thought.

But I don’t get the so let’s kill a ton of Ukrainians instead part

Because they aren’t actually related other than NATO increasing Putin’s paranoia to some unknown degree and being a really fucking convenient grievance he can trot out and people will bite on every time. People in the West really love to react to horrible things by trying to figure out what they could have done differently to prevent it and therefore what they did to cause this. Putin provides the easiest answer to this people by bringing up NATO. Except that fucking puzzle piece just doesn’t fit into this Ukraine-shaped space.

Also, from the Russian perspective I’m sure at least some percentage of the population is happy to buy this line because it just means it’s the west’s fault and that’s that.

@Aceris

But Ukrainians revolted and threw out Putin’s ally, and Putin retaliated by taking Crimea and setting up a frozen conflict.

This much much more than NATO. Putin doesn’t want Ukraine looking west, he wants them to be subservient to Russia like they were always meant to be.

[Grifman]

One person’s journey to safety:

Bijan Hosseini

[Galdred]

@Strollen

@SeaGreen

Fair enough but you don’t have to be Henry Kissinger to understand a Nato tank in Estonia or Latvia is pretty threatening if you’re a Russian dictator.

Plenty of wise men have warned about NATO expansion, they have also warned about fighting land war in Asia, or the middle east. George Washingon made it simple, “Do not get involved in foreign entanglement.”

Here is the thing none of the wise men thought to ask the people of Ukraine what they thought of their plan, to keep their country permanently tied to an authoritarian regime, that has never been a functioning. democracy.

Generally, speaking protecting democracy, standing up to bullies and evil men is not the wise thing for individuals or countries. Being Switzerland is safer, and often highly profitable.

Realpoliticks is smart, it is also antithetical to US values, and we see the conflict in this thread.

@spiffy

Is it really though? the only invasion Russia has to worry about is immigrant displacement over the next 10-100 years of global warming. That’s it. No one is ever going to roll tanks into the country and try to subjugate the Russian people, ever, and you’re an idiot if you think someone would. It’s a garbage excuse.

Seriously, you think a country that’s been invaded by at least 5 times, by 8 or 9 countries over the last two hundred years has no reason to fear an invasion. Hell just US has taken down a dozen authoritarian regimes in the last 75 years. There are plenty of legitimate reasons for the Russia to fear the West, Japan, and China, especially if Russia remained anti-democratic.

Exactly: ignoring the opponent’s view is not a sound basis for diplomacy. Regardless of our view on the Russian system, thinking that they would not consider such options was bad miscalculations (I too was convinced they would never go that far, though).

At the time I studied Sino-Russian relations in 2004, the anti missile shield program of the US and its deployment in Europe was one of the main concerns of Russian leadership, fearing it would negate its nuclear dissuasion.
The issue with being Switzerland is that it requires a very helpful geography to pull out. Belgium and the Netherlands tried, but it didn’t work out.

[Grifman]

I understand Russia’s historical fear of invasion. But this ignores several facts:

1. What European country doesn’t have an history of being invaded? They’ve been fighting among each other for centuries. The whole point of the post WW2 economic and security structure in the West was to put an end there that. And it worked. I don’t think anyone believes that France has anything to fear from Germany for example.
2. The USSR/Russia has refused to join the West in these arrangements. The West can’t be blamed if the Russians refuse to take part in the very structures that would guarantee that they would not suffer invasion.
3. Russia may have been invaded in the past, but they have their own record of invasions of neighbors in this century: Finland, the Baltic States, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and others. Indeed it is that fact that has led to these countries seeking to join NATO. So for Russia to say they are worried about being invaded yet to not acknowledge their neighbors concerns is ignoring their own history.

[Dejin]

Tweeter is a verified journalist with the Kyiv Independent

Anastasiia Lapatina

[SeaGreen]

Which again is all entirely fair. But how about a bit of Shakespeare to make the point: “heavy lies the head that wears the crown”. You have to add on to the geopolitics what it must mean to be a dictator, and I guess, a Russian dictator (so not only fearful of losing the crown but also torn by pride, anger, the desire/need to dominate). It’s not that he’s openly insane, it’s more that by virtue of his position in society and coupled with his culture he looks downright bonkers to us. To that person a NATO tank on his borders is a straightup provocation and a threat to his power.

I think. Could be just a fruitcake.

[scottagibson]

I think a lot of it is simply this:

Vladimir Putin likes power and wants more. More power and more of everything. And he knows that he can’t get more by attacking / absorbing NATO states because of the nuclear deterrent, so instead he targets non-NATO states. I think his neighbors know this about him, so they’re inclined to become NATO states, or at least align with NATO in looser arrangements, and since this would put them beyond his reach, he foments fake grass-roots rebellions to install his own puppets to prevent it, and when that doesn’t work, he invades them. Which brings things full circle and encourages more states to court NATO.

[abrandt]

I agree. But I guess then to turn this back to blaming NATO, uh, NATO is forcing Putin to invade these countries now because if they join NATO later he won’t be able to invade them then.

[scottagibson]

Fucking NATO ruins things again!

[antlers]

I think in the case of Ukraine, more than just a lust for power Putin is afraid of a Russian-speaking (at least substantial Russian minority) country with a media he cannot control. His power depends on his control of the media; an open, Western oriented Ukraine is going to continually undermine his legitimacy. Supposed concerns about NATO and national security are just rationalizations for his need to suppress the democratic yearnings of his people.

[inactive_user]

Sounds like we need a Radio Free Russia.

[scottagibson]

Or a Putin free Russia.

[SeaGreen]

I’m smoking that one, for sure.