American Politics Discussion Thread

[Mjmd]

What most of you fail to realize is how this is a matter of life and death for Russia, as it usually is, specially contemporarily, when things get bad enough that armed conflict has to be considered.

Russia has done a good job of propaganda. You see similar in even reputable news. A few pages ago we pretty well went through this myth. NATO is a defensive alliance of WILLING participants. The entity being the aggressor is Russia. While I understand that Russia WANTS Ukraine in its sphere of influence, just because it used to be and Russia wants it to be, doesn't mean it gets to invade to make it so. I mean it "can". I don't think Europe or USA will actively intervene, but it just has to debate costs vs benefits.

A good gauge is always "who has the power". Clearly in this case Russia is either directly (money, supplies, & probably actual troops) supporting eastern Ukraine separatists. They clearly have the power to you know NOT invade. Neither Ukraine nor NATO even if Ukraine joined has the power to threaten Russia.

The Ukraine president saying that his countries only future is through NATO is true. STUPID AS HELL TO SAY, but true. Russia WANTS its old influence and territory back. The only way Ukraine isn't a  Russian puppet is through joining NATO. Again, its not an accident so many countries in the former eastern block have joined. Its a choice between minor western meddling or direct (or at least fairly direct) Russian control.

[Pindrich]

What myth? That letting Ukraine slowly integrate itself into the EU and NATO could very well be worse for Russia's economy than supposed sanctions whose exact extent we don't even know? That if Russia allows it, more and more ex-USSR republics will leave its zone of influence and join foreign economic unions and military pacts? You live in a strange reality if you think those things are myths. As I have said, it is a matter of life and death for Russia. I don't mean the Russian people, though they are, of course, involved, I mean more precisely what you could call the Russian establishment. If you won't see how all of this is a matter of life and death for them, then you may very well give up on any attempt at understanding what's going on, because you'll understand nothing.

[Mjmd]

What world do you live in that the only way to economic prosperity is direct conquest over territory? I would say this policy has mixed results at best in world history.

Russia could have / still could choose economic influence over military. As we've discussed a bit, they already have a pretty good hook into European economy through energy. Bashing anyone not in NATO with a stick to get what they want though is a pretty good way to make sure that countries choose to stay in NATO / want to join.

[superdeath]

Russia could always... stop trying to separate itself from NATO and the EU and literally be a huge active member rivaling Germany in what it contributes/ect.


If you control a population thru fear/intimidation it will ALWAYS come to bite you in the ass. Can i understand WHY Russia wants essentially buffer states? Yep. Does Russia understand that this is not the way to do it, and that setting up another cold war is not in its (or anyone else's) best interest? Remains to be seen.

Being the bad guy of the world doesn't help you. It helps the "other" guys. Take USA being the bad guy for a ton of Muslims in the middle east (along with France/UK for breaking treaties wayyyy back when) Russia trying to annex more territory/China trying to annex more territory just fuels political fires in places like the US. Here each side blames the other for supporting Putin, or being cozy with the Chinese. Im not a nationalist at all as i think its among the dumbest things you can be/support, yet every day i hear neighbors/people on the news/social media blame and shame others for not being patriotic enough and just supporting Russia or China.


Democratic ways of thinking should be the only way forward. Annexing via force/insurrections need to be dealt with accordingly. That is my stance. Lets all be peaceful and have open borders/no borders.

[Pindrich]

If you had actually cared to understand what I was saying, you'd have noted that nowhere have I even mentioned territorial conquest as a way of furthering Russian economic interests, much less stated that such is the only course of action available for them. Pay attention, or else you'll experience difficulties understanding even the most basic things. What you're talking about concerns calculations the Russian political leadership at the Kremlin have been making for quite some time, and possibly are in this very moment. Naturally, you can trust them to make the best assessments possible and to act accordingly. No one is making any diplomatic decisions out of impulse or any similar thing.

[Pindrich]

Russia could always... stop trying to separate itself from NATO and the EU and literally be a huge active member rivaling Germany in what it contributes/ect.


If you control a population thru fear/intimidation it will ALWAYS come to bite you in the ass. Can i understand WHY Russia wants essentially buffer states? Yep. Does Russia understand that this is not the way to do it, and that setting up another cold war is not in its (or anyone else's) best interest? Remains to be seen.

Being the bad guy of the world doesn't help you. It helps the "other" guys. Take USA being the bad guy for a ton of Muslims in the middle east (along with France/UK for breaking treaties wayyyy back when) Russia trying to annex more territory/China trying to annex more territory just fuels political fires in places like the US. Here each side blames the other for supporting Putin, or being cozy with the Chinese. Im not a nationalist at all as i think its among the dumbest things you can be/support, yet every day i hear neighbors/people on the news/social media blame and shame others for not being patriotic enough and just supporting Russia or China.


Democratic ways of thinking should be the only way forward. Annexing via force/insurrections need to be dealt with accordingly. That is my stance. Lets all be peaceful and have open borders/no borders.

Russia did try to establish closer ties with the West at a point. Needless to say, if that had worked we wouldn't be where we are right now.

[Pindrich]

Essentially, the problem is that Russia's economy is still much similar to how it used to be in the Cold War era. Russia could, of course, integrate into the West, but that would mean restructuring its economy and, as you probably know, going contrary to many interests within the Russian elite. It's fundamentally a fight between two systems, two implicit economic models. That's why Russia is alligning with China. Russia wants buffer states just as the US wants hegemony over the rest of America. What's wrong with Cuba being socialist? Do the US really needs to embargo Cuba? It's simply how the game is played.

I think it should be pretty evident that what constitutes evil for some may just as well constitute good for others, and, as I have said before, whether inaugurating a new Cold War is the preferred alternative or not is something that remains to be seen.

[BING_XI_LAO]

If Ukraine doesn't want to get invaded it should stop shelling Russians.

[Mjmd]

If Ukraine doesn't want to get invaded it should stop shelling Russians.

Lets focus on the easiest point first.

Clearly in this case Russia is either directly (money, supplies, & probably actual troops) supporting eastern Ukraine separatists.

Everything happening is Eastern Ukraine is being orchestrated by the Russians. My understanding is Ukrainians have pretty strict orders to not fire except in extreme circumstances. Do I think some nervous troops might fire at other points. Yes. But again the power to stop the fighting in the contested regions lies with Russia.

[Mjmd]

Essentially, the problem is that Russia's economy is still much similar to how it used to be in the Cold War era. Russia could, of course, integrate into the West, but that would mean restructuring its economy and, as you probably know, going contrary to many interests within the Russian elite. It's fundamentally a fight between two systems, two implicit economic models. That's why Russia is alligning with China. Russia wants buffer states just as the US wants hegemony over the rest of America. What's wrong with Cuba being socialist? Do the US really needs to embargo Cuba? It's simply how the game is played.

I think it should be pretty evident that what constitutes evil for some may just as well constitute good for others, and, as I have said before, whether inaugurating a new Cold War is the preferred alternative or not is something that remains to be seen.

First off I'm glad instead of the ad homonym attacks you made in your other post you actually addressed that a large part of Russia's economic issues lies in its own history and how its structured. China very much proves you don't have to bow to the west to become a strong economy. You just have to use them to build yourself up and then start using the economic power to get what you want / get the west to ignore things. Part of the west's opening of China was to form a wedge between China and Russia. Russia could try the reverse. Both China and Russia know that they are currently in a short term "appear friendly towards each other" mode. Long term if the west weakens this is unlikely to last.

I would also point out there is a large difference between embargo and direct invasion. I also, will freely admit US has done a piss poor job of relationships in its sphere, but I don't advocate invading Cuba!

Also, I don't think we've brought up that this could all just be to gain international recognition as a major power / create an internal Russian rallying point / serve multiple functions.

I do agree that being a direct aggressor (even if they don't actually invade) is not the best optics to keep countries from joining NATO. I'm sure Russia / Putin have multiple reasons far beyond the scope we've covered.