• Amoxtli@thelemmy.clubOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Because the elites don’t want to be conquered by NATO via color revolutions and geostrategic advantage. Survival is rational. Ukrainians dying to the last man is not rational because they want to join NATO and the EU so bad. A next door country that is being militarized by a political alliance is more than enough justification to invade a neighboring country. NATO is a political alliance, it not a defensive alliance that it use to be when there was security competition between the USSR and the US. USSR collapsed because military control of an empire is expensive. Needing the military to have a presence to quell rebellion and maintain control is expensive. Ruling over people who don’t like you, doesn’t work in the long run. This is why the Russians gave up the business of imperialism over other countries/nations. Ukraine is a very big exception because of the history of Russia and Ukraine. Russian and Ukrainian history is intertwined. Crimea was won over by Catherine II the Great from the Ottomans. The Donbas has a lot of Russian history. The industry of the Donbas was developed from the years of Russian investment under the Soviet Union. New Russia would become part of Ukrainian Soviet Republic, which was incorporated by Russia in 1917. Then, the name New Russia was disused after incorporation. If you want to be a pendant of who has a great claim to the land, neither Russia nor Ukrainians have the greatest claim because it is conquered land by the Russians. That is like saying Texas, California, etc. does not belong to the United States, they belong to Mexico. What about Hawaii? What about Diego Garcia? The Russians don’t care about the Baltic States. Russians have no interest in Estonia or the rest of Europe. They gave that up in 1991. Ukraine, however, has a special place in the history and culture of Russia, not just geopolitical balance of power politics.

    • droopy4096@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      you’re either misguided or malicious. Have you been to Ukraine? Have you seen what Russia has done to Ukraine over decades? What “special link”? It is as special as link between Jack The Ripper and his victims. russia is very much interested in restoring empire that includes Baltic states and middle asia etc.

      russia had a chance at retaining Ukraine in it’s orbit prior to 2014. If they’d spent same amount of money they did on destabilisation of the country, on development instead, promoting Ukrainian culture etc. they could’ve had Ukraine forever. Honest. Before 2014 there was plenty of pro-russian sentiment in the country to pull it off as old crimes got forgotten and pain dulled. But from 2014 onward it became impossible.

      At present if russia wins, either retaining stolen territories or grabbing some more - it will create destabilized zone that nobody in Europe wants in their backyard. russia is not there on humanitarian mission, and itls been made clear - they are on extermination mission. Like they have been multiple times before.

      • Amoxtli@thelemmy.clubOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        You have no evidence to back up your claims, and let me debunk the claim that the US and NATO obey any semblance of rules. The 1991 agreement for the sovereign statehood of Ukraine was based on the condition that they remain a neutral country. When the EU and NATO came to town, they ignored that crucial portion of the conditions of Ukrainian statehood. You accuse me of soundbites and using propaganda, no sir, you are the one that was fed misinformation. NATO and Ukraine can break the rules, but Russia can’t alter their recognition of the rules that have been violated. You have been propagandized to believe Western countries are the good guys and the Russians, the Chinese, etc., are the bad guys. Your assumption is the West is infallible. You are wrong, sir. Let us examine how much you don’t know. Crimea does not belong to Ukraine. Crimea became independent before Ukrainian independence. It was in fact called the >Republic of Crimea. Let us review evidence, straight from Wikipedia: >With the dissolution of the Soviet Union and Ukrainian independence in 1991 most of the peninsula was reorganized as the Republic of Crimea,[25][26] Pro-Russian and pro-autonomy forces dominated the republic’s government until it was forcibly abolished by Ukraine in 1995 with the Autonomous Republic of Crimea established firmly under Ukrainian authority.[27][28] A 1997 treaty partitioned the Soviet Black Sea Fleet, allowing Russia to continue basing its fleet in Sevastopol, with the lease extended in 2010. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea

      • Amoxtli@thelemmy.clubOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ukraine isn’t eligible for EU and NATO membership. They don’t meet the criteria. What the US is doing is manipulating Ukrainian nationalism to fight a suicidal war against Russia, who does not want US influence and power next to its border. There is no way that Ukraine could be part of NATO. Ukraine couldn’t meet the harsh terms to be eligible. You can cry, whine, and yell all you want, but the fact is, Ukraine is destroyed, and whatever you think is an injustice, does not matter. You don’t get to decide what you want to do when a stronger country wants a certain amount of influence. Just like the US thinks it can command “sovereign” countries that they should not do business with Russia. The US thinks it can pressure China, or more like bully China to bend to its will, but establishment actors like Anthony Blinken don’t realize how insignificant he really is against Beijing. International relations are also about diplomacy. Something the US forgot a long time ago.