Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,202 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 789,012
Pageviews Today: 1,393,286Threads Today: 589Posts Today: 10,213
04:10 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO

 
BackOnceAgain
Offer Upgrade

User ID: 71880691
United States
06/30/2022 05:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
This is good research done by Stephen Jones. Give it a read.

[link to godskingdom.org (secure)]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 83695543
United States
06/30/2022 06:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Nice summary.
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 71880691
United States
06/30/2022 06:17 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Nice summary.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 83695543


Did you read it?
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 71880691
United States
06/30/2022 06:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
"In 1991, when the Soviet Union disintegrated, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia were given their independence, but Kaliningrad remained as part of the new Russia. As part of the agreement, NATO declared that it would not move one inch toward Russia. This agreement, of course, was quickly ignored. Poland joined NATO in 1999, and Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia joined NATO in 2004, along with many others.

The 1991 agreement also stipulated that in return for Lithuania and Latvia’s independence they would grant an unrestricted railway connecting Kaliningrad with the rest of Russia."
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 83197112
United States
06/30/2022 07:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
I didn’t agree to any of that shit so …
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 82419335
Australia
06/30/2022 07:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Russia transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954. So it is Russia that screwed this up. They desperately want Crimea but Ukraine owns it. So Russia decided to violently take it from Ukraine
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 71880691
United States
06/30/2022 07:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
"The US-led coup in Ukraine in February 2014 immediately began a Ukrainian offensive against its Russian-speaking population in the east. The Russian provinces then mobilized and declared their independence from Ukraine. This led to the first Donbass war in July, which ended (temporarily) in September 2014 with a ceasefire known as the Minsk Protocol.

[link to euromaidanpress.com (secure)]

Ukraine failed to honor this agreement, even though it was brokered by Germany and other Europeans. So the war continued, which one might call the second Donbass war, until the Minsk 2 agreement in February 2015. The provisions of Minsk 2 were ignored once again, and so the third Donbass war continued for the next seven years.

Russia was patient during this time. But when Ukraine stated its intention to join NATO, it became an existential issue for Russia. Russia could not allow Ukraine to allow NATO’s nuclear bases on the Russian border.

Finally, in 2022 Ukraine mobilized a large army and sent it to the Donbass region, not only to take back the territory but also to kill the Russian-speaking people there. Russia then intervened on February 24, 2022 in what has been termed the “Russian invasion.” The mainstream media, which is subservient to the Wicked Witch of the West, framed this as if the invasion was totally unprovoked and unjustified."
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 71880691
United States
06/30/2022 07:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
I didn’t agree to any of that shit so …
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 83197112


Oh well go fight for the Ukrainians then.
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 80642476
United States
07/03/2022 01:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Now we see NATO trying to save face...denying there involvement.

"A couple of weeks ago Lithuania blocked train shipments of goods from one part of Russia to another (Kaliningrad). They justified their actions by citing the EU sanctions against Russia. The EU then distanced itself from Lithuania's actions, telling them that this was not done under their authority. Lithuania--an EU member--then hardened its position, essentially defying the EU in a clear case of the tail wagging the dog.

Now the EU has come out with a more forceful position, ending the blockade. The whole confrontation has embarrassed the EU and has made the EU look weak in the eyes of the world. I suspect that there is infighting among different factions in the EU."

[link to theconservativetreehouse.com (secure)]
ShiningLightIntoDarkP​laces

User ID: 71681857
United States
07/03/2022 05:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
"The US-led coup in Ukraine in February 2014 immediately began a Ukrainian offensive against its Russian-speaking population in the east. The Russian provinces then mobilized and declared their independence from Ukraine. This led to the first Donbass war in July, which ended (temporarily) in September 2014 with a ceasefire known as the Minsk Protocol.

[link to euromaidanpress.com (secure)]

Ukraine failed to honor this agreement, even though it was brokered by Germany and other Europeans. So the war continued, which one might call the second Donbass war, until the Minsk 2 agreement in February 2015. The provisions of Minsk 2 were ignored once again, and so the third Donbass war continued for the next seven years.

Russia was patient during this time. But when Ukraine stated its intention to join NATO, it became an existential issue for Russia. Russia could not allow Ukraine to allow NATO’s nuclear bases on the Russian border.

Finally, in 2022 Ukraine mobilized a large army and sent it to the Donbass region, not only to take back the territory but also to kill the Russian-speaking people there. Russia then intervened on February 24, 2022 in what has been termed the “Russian invasion.” The mainstream media, which is subservient to the Wicked Witch of the West, framed this as if the invasion was totally unprovoked and unjustified."
 Quoting: BackOnceAgain


bingosign
"Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing." -Clive James

Miss Trump yet?

LET IT RAIN.
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 73806200
United States
07/04/2022 04:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Some more info on the US meddling in countries not there own.

[link to www.tikkun.org (secure)]

"Ukraine Is The Latest Neocon Disaster

The war in Ukraine is the culmination of a 30-year project of the American neoconservative movement. The Biden Administration is packed with the same neocons who championed the US wars of choice in Serbia (1999), Afghanistan (2001), Iraq (2003), Syria (2011), Libya (2011), and who did so much to provoke Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The neocon track record is one of unmitigated disaster, yet Biden has staffed his team with neocons. As a result, Biden is steering Ukraine, the US, and the European Union towards yet another geopolitical debacle. If Europe has any insight, it will separate itself from these US foreign policy debacles.

The neocon movement emerged in the 1970s around a group of public intellectuals, several of whom were influenced by University of Chicago political scientist Leo Strauss and Yale University classicist Donald Kagan. Neocon leaders included Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Kagan (son of Donald), Frederick Kagan (son of Donald), Victoria Nuland (wife of Robert), Elliott Abrams, and Kimberley Allen Kagan (wife of Frederick).

The main message of the neocons is that the US must predominate in military power in every region of the world, and must confront rising regional powers that could someday challenge US global or regional dominance, most importantly Russia and China. For this purpose, US military force should be pre-positioned in hundreds of military bases around the world and the US should be prepared to lead wars of choice as necessary. The United Nations is to be used by the US only when useful for US purposes. This approach was spelled out first by Paul Wolfowitz in his draft Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) written for the Department of Defense in 2002. The draft called for extending the US-led security network to the Central and Eastern Europe despite the explicit promise by German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher in 1990 that German unification would not be followed by NATO’s eastward enlargement. Wolfowitz also made the case for American wars of choice, defending America’s right to act independently, even alone, in response to crises of concern to the US. According to General Wesley Clark, Wolfowitz already made clear to Clark in May 1991 that the US would lead regime-change operations in Iraq, Syria, and other former Soviet allies.

The neocons championed NATO enlargement to Ukraine even before that became official US policy under George W. Bush, Jr. in 2008. They viewed Ukraine’s NATO membership as key to US regional and global dominance. Robert Kagan spelled out the neocon case for NATO enlargement in April 2006:

"[T]he Russians and Chinese see nothing natural in [the “color revolutions” of the former Soviet Union], only Western-backed coups designed to advance Western influence in strategically vital parts of the world. Are they so wrong? Might not the successful liberalization of Ukraine, urged and supported by the Western democracies, be but the prelude to the incorporation of that nation into NATO and the European Union -- in short, the expansion of Western liberal hegemony?"

Kagan acknowledged the dire implication of NATO enlargement. He quotes one expert as saying, “the Kremlin is getting ready for the 'battle for Ukraine' in all seriousness." After the fall of the Soviet Union, both the US and Russia should have sought a neutral Ukraine, as a prudent buffer and safety valve. Instead, the neocons wanted US “hegemony” while the Russians took up the battle partly in defense and partly out of their own imperial pretentions as well. Shades of the Crimean War (1853-6), when Britain and France sought to weaken Russia in the Black Sea following Russian pressures on the Ottoman empire.

Kagan penned the article as a private citizen while his wife Victoria Nuland was the US Ambassador to NATO under George W. Bush, Jr. Nuland has been the neocon operative par excellence. In addition to serving as Bush’s Ambassador to NATO, Nuland was Barack Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs during 2013-17, where she participated in the overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych, and now serves as Biden’s Undersecretary of State guiding US policy vis-à-vis the war in Ukraine.

The neocon outlook is based on an overriding false premise: that the US military, financial, technological, and economic superiority enables it to dictate terms in all regions of the world. It is a position of both remarkable hubris and remarkable disdain of evidence. Since the 1950s, the US has been stymied or defeated in nearly every regional conflict in which it has participated. Yet in the “battle for Ukraine,” the neocons were ready to provoke a military confrontation with Russia by expanding NATO over Russia’s vehement objections because they fervently believe that Russia will be defeated by US financial sanctions and NATO weaponry.

The Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a neocon think-tank led by Kimberley Allen Kagan (and backed by a who’s who of defense contractors such as General Dynamics and Raytheon), continues to promise a Ukrainian victory. Regarding Russia’s advances, the ISW offered a typical comment: “[R]egardless of which side holds the city [of Sievierodonetsk], the Russian offensive at the operational and strategic levels will probably have culminated, giving Ukraine the chance to restart its operational-level counteroffensives to push Russian forces back.”

The facts on the ground, however, suggest otherwise. The West’s economic sanctions have had little adverse impact on Russia, while their “boomerang” effect on the rest of the world has been large. Moreover, the US capacity to resupply Ukraine with ammunition and weaponry is seriously hamstrung by America’s limited production capacity and broken supply chains. Russia’s industrial capacity of course dwarfs that of Ukraine’s. Russia’s GDP was roughly 10X that of Ukraine before war, and Ukraine has now lost much of its industrial capacity in the war.

The most likely outcome of the current fighting is that Russia will conquer a large swath of Ukraine, perhaps leaving Ukraine landlocked or nearly so. Frustration will rise in Europe and the US with the military losses and the stagflationary consequences of war and sanctions. The knock-on effects could be devastating, if a right-wing demagogue in the US rises to power (or in the case of Trump, returns to power) promising to restore America’s faded military glory through dangerous escalation.

Instead of risking this disaster, the real solution is to end the neocon fantasies of the past 30 years and for Ukraine and Russia to return to the negotiating table, with NATO committing to end its commitment to the eastward enlargement to Ukraine and Georgia in return for a viable peace that respects and protects Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity."
BackOnceAgain  (OP)

User ID: 73806200
United States
07/04/2022 04:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Another good article by Stephen Jones

[link to godskingdom.org (secure)]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 78603331
Lithuania
07/17/2022 12:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
the neocon threat to national security

[link to odysee.com (secure)]

odysee.com/@Harry-Vox:d/neocon_threat_to_national_security-ha​rry_vox:f
ShiningLightIntoDarkP​laces

User ID: 71203427
United States
07/17/2022 01:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
bump
"Common sense and a sense of humor are the same thing, moving at different speeds. A sense of humor is just common sense, dancing." -Clive James

Miss Trump yet?

LET IT RAIN.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 17875709
Canada
07/17/2022 01:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Little history of Russia, Ukraine and NATO
Russia transferred Crimea to Ukraine in 1954. So it is Russia that screwed this up. They desperately want Crimea but Ukraine owns it. So Russia decided to violently take it from Ukraine
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 82419335


Bullshit.





GLP