Estonia, Norway, and Latvia already border Russia and are closer to certain major Russian cities than Ukraine. Now Finland is also part of NATO, too. Ukraine is not a useful site for launching missiles into Russia and if NATO were to invade Russia additional land borders would not be relevant.
Not sure what the Cuban missile crisis has to do with this. Cuba was a useful launch site to hit the US mainland. That is simply not the case with Ukraine.
You tell me. My entire point was that Putin is not worried about an invasion of Russia and that he shouldnât be. Youâre the one claiming that Putin is responding to a credible threat that he should be worried about.
It isnât though. We already have bases in Estonia and Norway. Having bases in Ukraine would change nothing about our ability to attack Russia. It would only change Russiaâs ability to attack Ukraine.
In regards to âwould the US stand for this?â, why do you think all of Russiaâs neighbors want protection against it. Why arenât Mexico and Canada looking for protection against the US? Maybe if Putin wasnât a malevolent autocrat, his neighbors wouldnât be hedging against him.
Actually. itâs much worse. They realized that (until two years ago) a Russian speaking people were living better lives than they did and now theyâre trying to âbring the lost sheep to the foldâ - i.e. their level of dreary submission with extermination, torture and well⊠throwback stuff like this:
Sometimes the Russians also try to âcureâ protestants. Viktor Cherniiavskyi, was held for 25 days, beaten with a baseball bat and given electro-shocks. A Russian Orthodox priest was present in this process, and tried to cast demons out of him for being an evangelical Christian. The torturers used a taser to help the exorcism along.
First off, I didnât say Moscow. I said major Russian cities. Saint Petersburg is far closer to Estonia and Norway.
But if you want to use Moscow as the only point that matters, Ukraine is still not much closer to Moscow than Estonia. If you look at points in northeastern Ukraine Sumy and Kharkov, the distance to Moscow is a bit under 400 miles. Narva is 429 miles from Moscow. Lugansk, Donetsk, and Crimea where the fighting is mostly happening are farther still from Moscow (although they do contain critical economic objectives that can be looted and controlled for profit).
If NATO wanted to attack Russia proper (either through missiles and aircraft or with a land invasion) control of Ukraine would not significantly facilitate that attack beyond the points that NATO already controls in Estonia, Norway, Poland, and Turkey, etc. We are well within attack range of Russia already.
I havenât seen any competent military experts give a rational explanation as to why control of Ukraine would significantly increase the ability of NATO to attack Russia. Putin himself has never made the assertion that control of Ukrainian territory facilitates Russian defense as far as I have heard. His statements on the subject are always more amorphous claims dealing with the ideology of people in Ukraine, the protection of Russian speakers living within Ukraine, and the general desire to restore Russia to some perceived historical borders.
If moving our ground bases 50-100 miles closer to Russia would be such an improvement, why are NATO bases in Norway and Estonia so far from their borders with Russia?
Dude, if youâre being a Putin shill, at least have the discipline to listen to the Tsarâs speeches. The Tsar himself repeatedly stated that the invasion had nothing to do with nuclear weapons and is all about the empire.
Curious to see the quote from Putin or a high level crony.
In any case, that still doesnât pass the smell test. If 50 miles makes such a big difference, why do we have an airbase in Amari and not 150 miles to the east (150 miles closer to Moscow) in Narva?
Edit: I had been looking at Estonia since Iâve been there and know itâs close. But by distance to Moscow, the Latvian border is only 350 miles. That is actually closer than Kharkov and effectively the same as Sumy Ukraine.
Oh okay, being on a countryâs border IS NOT a useful launch site. Alright just tell yourself what you need to believe whatever you want.
OMG, are you serious?
Ukraine shelled the Donbas after a U.S. led coup in 2014. Ukraine has already shown that it will already attack the Russian lineage in their own country. With the U.S. led government why wouldnât he show some worry if Ukraine was given NATO status? Or maybe you should just give him a call and explain why he shouldnât be cautious for his own country.
Maybe because they get all kinds of freebies from the U.S. Have the Russians invaded more countries than the U.S.? Who has a bigger body count than the good ole U.S.A.?
Here you are describing the very country you live in, you idiot. And you arenât even aware. The price of being conditioned by propaganda.
What ethnic lineage? The vast majority of Ukrainian soldiers are Russian speakers. The current C-in-C of the Ukrainian army is an ethnic Russian from Vladimir, a city 100 miles east from Moscow. All Azov commanders grew up speaking Russian.
Yes.
Russia for one. Please note theâŠahemâŠdiscrepancy in the number of civilian deaths when evil America invades and when Soviet liberators help the oppressed people of Afghanistan.
Youâre rooting for a bloodthirsty dictatorship because for whatever reason, youâre unable to fit into the Western world you live in. Your motto is âburn everything downâ because thereâs nothing to look forward to in your marginalized life.
Iâm not prone to hysteria and neither are the Ukrainians Iâm working with - theyâre facing the war with - frankly impressive - grim determination.
Just a reminder - this whole hysteria about southern border/homelessness/inner city crime was designed to prevent the aid package and avoid the outcome shown below from today - a obsolete US missile produced 35 years ago, taken from storage and about to visit a group of 120 Russian soldiers 100 miles behind the frontlines.
Iâve already explained this above. NATO already has many sites (in the baltics, Scandinavia, and Turkey) close to Russia that could be used as missile bases against Russia (that we arenât fully using). Ukraine offers nothing further of use in that regard. Of course it would be useful if we didnât already have equally good alternatives. But we do, so it isnât.
I agree that the legitimacy of the Maidan government in the immediate aftermath was very suspect and raises questions about the democratic nature of that government. Yanukovych was legally elected and his deposal was a violent coup. However, that was 10 years ago and the current Ukrainian government is duly elected.
Ukrainian attempts to control the Donbass cannot reasonably be construed as a threat against Russia proper when everyone agrees that they were originally part of Ukraine. That said, in 2022, the powers that be in Ukraine and the West had basically tacitly acquiesced to the idea that if Putin wanted to put troops in the Donbass and annex it into Russia no one was really going to stop him. But he attacked Kharkov, Kherson, Zaporizhia, Odessa, and Kyiv. This wasnât a simple attempt to control the areas that were already de facto under Russian protection.
Bigger body count would be Russia. Have you heard of the Holodomor? But more recently, more people have died in the Russo Ukrainian war already than died in 20 years in Afghanistan.
As far as freebies, we donât really give many freebies to Canada, weâre just good neighbors. With Mexico, most of the freebies actually involve just being a good trading partner. Yes we give them money, but that pales in comparison to the net positive effect that trade with the US has on the Mexican economy. But even if we were maintaining the border by just sending them bags of cash, I fail to see how that makes us the bad guys compared to Russia invading to rape and kill Ukrainians.
First off, the fact that you think the level of kleptocratic corruption in the US is in any way comparable to Russia simply betrays your ignorance on the subject. Yes, we have some problems. But I have lived in both and it isnât in any way comparable.
Second, even if the US was just as bad, that wouldnât excuse the corruption in Russia.