Unz: Ukraine is finished and ended so badly might take NATO down as well

[Donald H]

It was not easy for an old anti-Vietnam War activist like myself — who also later opposed most every major U.S. war & occupation & adventure overseas & our aid to countless dictators & rightwing generals — to decide to support major NATO & U.S. assistance to the Ukrainian nationalist government.

It was especially difficult because I long opposed earlier policy errors I think the U.S. made vis-a-vis NATO & Ukraine / Russia relations … which others have also mentioned.

But Putin’s invasion and attempt to seize Kiev in 2022 changed everything. This was never just a U.S. or NATO proxy “war of choice” against Russia. Not at all. It was a “war of choice” … for Putin. For the Ukrainian people it became a struggle for their very survival as a nation against an imperialist invasion by a much larger nuclear-armed bordering state.

I am not for an “endless war” there and I do not rule out an eventual cease fire or “cold peace” or a compromise over Crimea or parts of Eastern Ukraine. But this is not a war the U.S. or the Biden Administration wanted, started, or ever hoped for. This was a war of aggression by Russia and backward “Great Russian” imperial chauvinism.

Those who say “the war is over and Russia has won” or that the “blame for this war falls primarily on the West” … are just mimicking Putin propaganda.

Of course the Ukrainian state will collapse without NATO’s help. But with our assistance they will hold, and may even cause further Russian defeats, despite their being vastly outnumbered by oil-rich Russia.

The Russian mafia state and Chinese CCP and authoritarians everywhere will be strengthened if we capitulate & abandon Ukraine now.

Yes, this is the fight for America's life as the uncontested supeepower

Those who scream this is “Biden’s War” are especially wrong. Most of them are acting as domestic ultra-partisans and just repeating their own authoritarian leader’s demagogy … which happens to very much resemble Russia’s authoritarian leader’s demagogy.

That doesn’t mean that all questioning of neo-con adventurism or “liberal imperialism” is wrong. But this war is not the same as recent

ones where our troops were sent halfway around the world to seize and occupy other countries.

It was the perfect war for you that was backed with the nearly perfect propaganda ploy.

1. Saving a small country had been used before but this one was sold by the propagandists more cagily.

2. Americans aren't dying in their war and that clinched it for many more like you.

It almost worked but fighting Russia turned out to be different in that Russia will refuse to lose and then it will be too late for you to go back to opposing.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Yes, this is the fight for America's life as the uncontested supeepower.
It was the perfect war for you that was backed with the nearly perfect propaganda ploy.
1. Saving a small country had been used before but this one was sold by the propagandists more cagily.
2. Americans aren't dying in their war and that clinched it for many more like you.
It almost worked but fighting Russia turned out to be different in that Russia will refuse to lose and then it will be too late for you to go back to opposing.

What is all this childishness about?

It almost worked but fighting Russia turned out to be different in that Russia will refuse to lose and then it will be too late for you to go back to opposing.

…???

This is not a subjective matter to me and it is not dependent on who “wins” or “loses” in the short run.

I did not oppose the U.S. war in Vietnam or it’s invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, or our killing of Qaddafi or support of Pinochet and the Argentine military junta because I thought the U.S. or the other side was “inevitably” going “to win” or “lose.”

This is not a game of “Risk” where the winner doesn’t really matter! I opposed the U.S. when I thought its actions were objectively imperialist and would harm the larger interests of humanity and all the countries involved. I oppose Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for exactly the same reason. And don’t ever forget that in all those cases of U.S. invasions & occupations, assassination campaigns & coups encouraged, destabilizing sanctions, and support to dictatorships … there were always “good excuses” provided, from the two hundred year old b.s. “Monroe Doctrine” to the fight against Communism and Muslim terrorism.

The simple fact is that despite, for example, Deadstick ’s absurd claim that

There is no great Russian nationalism”

… the invasion of Ukraine was clearly based on the assumption that there was no legitimate Ukrainian nation and that these 40 million people and this sovereign state whose borders Russia had once accepted were no longer worth respecting.

It is as if the U.S. were to “invade Mexico” or Nicaragua or Cuba claiming these countries were not really nations or sovereign states but just some kind of “Americans” with a bastard culture and an inferior language, run by a no good bunch of “Communists” … and Nazi-like drug dealers to boot!

Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Canada have their own sovereign right to trade with authoritarian China or Russia, and even Venezuela and Cuba have sovereignty. Invading them in the hope they might become “happy Americans” under U.S. tutelage would be an even more stupendous act of imperialist arrogance than any we have taken in the past!

 

[Deadstick]

What is all this childishness about?

…???

This is not a subjective matter to me and it is not dependent on who “wins” or “loses” in the short run.

I did not oppose the U.S. war in Vietnam or it’s invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, or our killing of Qaddafi or support of Pinochet and the Argentine military junta because I thought the U.S. or the other side was “inevitably” going “to win” or “lose.”

This is not a game of “Risk” where the winner doesn’t really matter! I opposed the U.S. when I thought its actions were objectively imperialist and would harm the larger interests of humanity and all the countries involved. I oppose Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for exactly the same reason. And don’t ever forget that in all those cases of U.S. invasions & occupations, assassination campaigns & coups encouraged, destabilizing sanctions, and support to dictatorships … there were always “good excuses” provided, from the two hundred year old b.s. “Monroe Doctrine” to the fight against Communism and Muslim terrorism.

The simple fact is that despite, for example, Deadstick ’s absurd claim that


… the invasion of Ukraine was clearly based on the assumption that there was no legitimate Ukrainian nation and that these 40 million people and this sovereign state whose borders Russia had once accepted were no longer worth respecting.

It is as if the U.S. were to “invade Mexico” or Nicaragua or Cuba claiming these countries were not really nations or sovereign states but just some kind of “Americans” with a bastard culture and an inferior language, run by a no good bunch of “Communists” … and Nazi-like drug dealers to boot!

Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Canada have their own sovereign right to trade with authoritarian China or Russia, and even Venezuela and Cuba have sovereignty. Invading them in the hope they might become “happy Americans” under U.S. tutelage would be an even more stupendous act of imperialist arrogance than any we have taken in the past!

What you don't mention is in all those cases from Vietnam to supporting fascists like Pinochet, there was no threat to the US or it's security, unlike Ukraine where there IS a threat to Russia's security from the Coup Regime in Kiev and it's US pimps.

 

[Deadstick]

Again, there is no rational scenario in which Ukraine becoming a NATO member would lead to an attack on Russia, so the only rational conclusion to be drawn from Russia's objection to NATO in eastern Europe is that it protects eastern European countries from Russian imperialism.

To put it another way, NATO is not anti Russian but anti Russian imperialism.

There is no Russian imperialism, who told you that? and Nato in Ukraine would be a threat to Russia end of story.

 

[Litwin]

Make Peace, you fools!

suck my dick , you muslim slave ivan

Estonia takes first steps to rename Kaliningrad to its traditional name - Königsberg!

This is a significant and symbolic step. Historical place names can carry deep cultural and historical meaning. When Moscow ulus does collapse, the west should give Königsberg an opportunity to formally re-join the Free World (west) one way or another . Estonia takes first steps to rename...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Litwin]

There is no Russian imperialism,

A full of crap ivan is lying again

the leading expert speaks :

Timothy Snyder: Putin's and Trump's lies, "rashism", Dostoyevsky is an imperial writer​

 

[Litwin]

True ^





View attachment 835052

Timothy Snyder: Putin's and Trump's lies, "rashism", Dostoyevsky is an imperial writer​

 

[Deadstick]

A full of crap ivan is lying again

the leading expert speaks :

Timothy Snyder: Putin's and Trump's lies, "rashism", Dostoyevsky is an imperial writer​

So where is all this Russian imperialism Obergruppenfuhrer?

 

[toomuchtime_]

What you don't mention is in all those cases from Vietnam to supporting fascists like Pinochet, there was no threat to the US or it's security, unlike Ukraine where there IS a threat to Russia's security from the Coup Regime in Kiev and it's US pimps.

Total bullshit. There is no rational scenario in which NATO membership would lead to an attack on Russia.

 

[toomuchtime_]

There is no Russian imperialism, who told you that? and Nato in Ukraine would be a threat to Russia end of story.

There is no rational scenario in which NATO membership for Ukraine would lead to an attack on Russia, so the only rational explanation for Russia's objection to Ukraine or other eastern European countries joining NATO is that Russia would not be able to control them.: that's Russian imperialism.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Whenever anybody writes “end of story” it means that they don’t want to — or can’t — discuss matters further.

I agree that this issue is complicated by the fact that to a certain extent we were and still are dealing in the Ukraine with interpenetrated peoples, a small part of the post WWII multinational Soviet collectivist Warsaw bloc “Russian Empire.” That military bloc and alliance was critically untenable … Putin’s dreams and nostalgia notwithstanding.

Some modern anti-imperialists long shared the hope that Russia could reform or be a reliable ally against capitalist imperialism. After all, the USSR after Stalin’s death did reform and it helped Vietnam resist French colonialists & U.S. neo-colonial occupation.

Also the pressure of its Cold War competition with the U.S. helped in other struggles, like the fight to free Mandela and end apartheid in Southern Africa. It also objectively helped convince U.S. rulers it was necessary to finally end U.S. Jim Crow oppression and pass Civil Rights Laws in the 1960s (there was a Cold War going on and Russia even looked like it was winning in those days). But Russia stultified and then after 1991 could not overcome its old backwardness, blaming the West for the horrible, almost preternatural collapse of society and economy and the rise of mafia capitalism … until Russia completed its 360 degree turn and again welcomed a new strongman “Czar” … in Putin.

 

[Deadstick]

Total bullshit. There is no rational scenario in which NATO membership would lead to an attack on Russia.

Why are they on Russia's border? it just won't wash and you know it, Russia isn't on your border if they were you would go apeshit.

 

[Deadstick]

Again you demonstrate that there is no rational basis for thinking NATO membership for Ukraine would lead to an attack on Russia.

Will you stop parroting that nothing to see here move on nonsense ?

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Russia (really the Kremlin) controls a huge mostly empty landmass in EurAsia with borders touching innumerable countries, some now more advanced than it is. It suffers also from the famous “curse of oil” — which kills small enterprise and entrepreneurship while it corrupts and strengthens authoritarian governments everywhere.

Before it’s invasion of Ukraine “NATO already had land borders with Russia that spanned 754 miles across northern Norway, eastern Latvia and Estonia, and the borders with Poland and Lithuania around Russia's Kaliningrad region.”

As a direct result of Putin’s invasion that land border with NATO more than doubled, as Finland (830 mile land border) felt it wise to join the Western military alliance. Let us remember that the now democratic Republic of Finland had to fight its own wars to win and protect its independence from Russia. It even allied with Nazi Germany in WWII! Today it has over four times the per capita GNP of Russia — and its success was achieved without coal, oil or natural gas resources. So will Russia invade “Nazi” Finland next? Finland is not only a bordering state with a strong army in NATO. It is a stone’s throw from Leningrad / St. Petersburg, while poor Kiev is far from Moscow. Will Finland be Russia’s next target?

I think not. So why then is Ukraine, with pre-2022 per capita GDP of only about half of Russia’s very low level — now reduced to less than a quarter of Russia’s per capita GDP by Putin’s bloody invasion — why was it such a perceived threat though not even in NATO?

The answer in large part is simply because Russia’s ruling elites long thought of Ukraine as being thoroughly a part of “Greater Russia” historically and they just couldn’t accept that a new generation of Ukrainians, with their rich exposure to Russian culture and intermeshed history & economy, language and religion, would nevertheless despise Russia’s heavy-handed backwardness and prefer to be a part of the “decadent” Western European economic & political order. How could they reject “Mother Russia”? — unless they like their fathers and grandfathers were all Nazis!!!

Map shows how Russia's border with NATO more than doubles with Finland as a member

Let us not forget that little Latvia & Lithuania, both NATO countries, and Poland too, which borders Russia’s Kaliningrad enclave, now have almost twice Russia’s per capita GDP — again without gas or oil of their own! How is it that Poland’s economy is expanding rapidly now, and may soon surpass Spain and perhaps even Italy?

Belarus is another sad ally of Russia, tied to it by corrupt rulers and oligarchs and oil and gas dependence, with a GNP per capita of $6,330, among the poorest countries in Europe. Because it borders Russia it too can never be “let go” by Putin — indeed he has nuclear weapons there or so he claims. He used it to invade Ukraine and Ukraine hasn’t ever struck back. The dictatorship there also shares a long border with NATO’s Poland.

Ukraine’s border with Southern European Russia is 1226 miles long. Putin and Greater Russia cannot imagine “giving up” Ukraine to either Western democracy, the EU economic community or — eventually — NATO. “The Black Sea Russian Navy would be threatened” they announce. Well, it is certainly threatened now…

Ultimately, it is Russia’s and many Russians’ inability to imagine sharing a long border with a distinct Ukrainian “nationalist” government that caused it to invade and occupy Ukraine many times in the past, and has in the end made the much hyped “fraternal relations” between these two nations impossible.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Why are they on Russia's border? it just won't wash and you know it, Russia isn't on your border if they were you would go apeshit.

More bullshit. Ukraine is on Russia's border, not NATO. NATO would be an organization Ukraine belongs to, not an entity, itself. The fact is, there is no rational scenario in which NATO membership would lead to an attack on Russia, but it is clear the lack of NATO membership has led to a Russian attack on Ukraine.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Will you stop parroting that nothing to see here move on nonsense ?

It is not nonsense, it is a fact that there is no rational scenario in which NATO membership for Ukraine would lead to an attack on Russia, so the only reason Russia objects to NATO membership for Ukraine and other eastern European countries is that Russia can't gain control of them if they are in NATO. It is clearly a lie to claim that NATO membership for Ukraine is a threat to Russian security.

 

[Litwin]

Russian imperialism

tell me, what do you think about Moscow imperialistic, genocidal mentality ?
we have to slaughter them, commit genocide or something like that.

 

[Deadstick]

It is not nonsense, it is a fact that there is no rational scenario in which NATO membership for Ukraine would lead to an attack on Russia, so the only reason Russia objects to NATO membership for Ukraine and other eastern European countries is that Russia can't gain control of them if they are in NATO. It is clearly a lie to claim that NATO membership for Ukraine is a threat to Russian security.

What makes you think we are dealing with rational people in Washington, everthing i have seen shows the

tell me, what do you think about Moscow imperialistic, genocidal mentality ?
we have to slaughter them, commit genocide or something like that.

I don't think anything about it because they don't have one Obergruppenfuhrer

 

[SavannahMann]

Always interested in hearing your POV!

Preventing Russia from conquering its neighbours has become a popular talking point! Some are suggesting that Russia will need to take all of the Ukraine in order to stop US attacks.

I don't really think that Russia wants 'all' of the Ukraine and the repair bills that come with it.

Russia tried to get all of Ukraine a year and a half ago. They didn’t need to do any of that. With a bridge they had land access to their port.

 

[Litwin]

I don't think anything about it because they don't have one

dirty ivan you are full of crap
the reality :

Moscow Propagandist explains Moscow is restoring its empire​