tsuki

@Preety_India State your point.

You are right that this scenario is not a valid concern, but you are wrong that Ukraine is not a threat to Russia. If Ukraine was a NATO member, NATO could station its troops in Ukraine, Lithuania and Estonia, which would create enormous pressure on Russia along with current economic sanctions that are placed on this country. We are not talking about immediate war threats, but more about long term positional situation. If Ukraine trenched up in NATO, it would be next to impossible to change the geopolitical situation for decades. This is why the change of governance in Ukraine is threatening to Russia and Putin was willing to start a war over it. I agree.

@Preety_India @vizual I would expect that to Putin, Western government is extremist and because it is opposed to Russia, he would call it nazi.

And why does Russia need a buffer state? To protect itself from Poland? Lol It needs the buffer state to protect itself against NATO as a whole.

@Preety_India Have you tried googling your question? Here's a first page match for "why did Putin invade Ukraine"? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589

@Ryan_047 No offense taken. Thank you for a good conversation.

@Ryan_047 I can see that you are trying not to, but you are moralizing and being an idealist. A starving peasant that has been kept under a boot of a Korean regime for three generations has zero capacity for resistance. The choice you are presenting does not exist for him. Not "practically" does not exist, as in "nobody's gonna choose that for their own good", but literally. A thought of raising against the regime does not even occur in his mind. I understand your line of reasoning about working in any way for a regime, but as I already said, this is moralizing.and idealism. This view does not help anybody cope with the existence of violence, but morally justifies democracies and is a privilege of an educated, intelligent man of the West.

I could successfully argue the opposite. Leo attracted people here through his brilliance and marketing, and without him, this place would not exist. Many countries started and kept existing because of a strong leader that attracted people to his cause. The leader understood the needs of his subjects, and worked for the best interests of his allies. He served justice so that the country could flourish and passed heirs to assure smooth succession. On the other hand, the democratic view you are presenting breaks down in dictatorial states, where disobedience can get you imprisoned, or even shot. A farmer in Maoist regime is not responsible for Mao's actions because he does not even have the agency to decide his own fate. It is true that we can leave this forum when we don't like it (assuming we're not addicted to arguing), but this idea won't work in North Korea The view you are presenting is not exactly wrong, it's just very modern and democratic.

@Ryan_047 You are still stating your views without giving objective basis for it. Notice that you ground your argument in capitalist view in relation to workplace environment. Russians may not think in terms of "people giving power to government". They may think that Putin gave power to Russia by saving it from the collapse of the Soviet Union. They may think that he is a hero that sacrifices himself for the country and that this is the proper relation between a citizen and a country. The idea that a country is a being that is derivative from collective existence of many individuals is a Western one. In the East, the collective is more real than the individual.

@Ryan_047 I enjoyed reading your post and I have one question: What do you base your conviction that a nation is supposed to serve it's citizens, instead of the other way around? This is a western, individualistic point of view.

@Fleetinglife Do you think it's fair to judge against this material based on one of the previous ones where the author's livelihood was at stake? Is the current material biased in your opinion? I didnt notice any bias against Russia in this one.

@zazen Thank you for sharing this material. It was very informative. Looks like whatever warfare we face next (conventional, or economical) polarization is imminent. The more the EU sanctions Russia, the more incentives it has to consolidate its alliance with China, thus forming a counterweight for EU and NATO, which is the Putin's goal all along.

@BlueOak You are welcome, never would have guessed that this thread could cause such gratitude. I'm happy for you ?

@BlueOak But maybe this is a distinction between Eastern and Western cultures in general? Western cultures promote individualism and personal expression, while at scale they become collectives that accept plurality of perspectives. Eastern cultures, on the other hand, promote collectivism on the individual level - becoming a "good member of society", while at the collective level they assume one identity. Maybe, what we negatively judge as "propaganda" in the West, is what Eastern cultures use as a regular means of communication, and thus built individual identity at the collective level? Maybe we judge it negatively because we've been raised in a culture that promotes individual freedom as a highest virtue and it offends us because of our conditioning? If you look at it this way, why is it wrong for a person to accept a social narrative, if it resonates with their heart? Some narratives, such as in Russia, don't sit well with the society, while some do. If we distance ourselves from our upbringing and forget that individual freedom is the highest virtue, then how would we tell which side is "correct"?

So, your point hinges on the distinction between "true Russian POV" vs "false Russian POV". How do you make this distinction? Is the "true POV" the one that causes the decisions to be made? In that case, Putin's (or Lukashenko's) POV is the true Russian POV. Or maybe the "true POV" is the one that most of the Russians share (which may be in a disagreement with Putin's)? Are we trying to understand why Russia (as in: Putin) made the call to invade Ukraine, or are we trying to assess the "Russian spirit" that is the people's will? What value does the people's will bring to this discussion if it was clearly ignored? Or maybe you are referring to Putin's ulterior motives, to which we have no access? Is there a point to guessing them if we assume that the information that is publicly available is propaganda and is aimed to throw us off?

Yes, I'm going to spend a lot of time explaining my subject knowledge to you, because you demonstrated your ability to listen in a non-judgmental way. </sarcasm> I have not studied the subject in any depth whatsoever. I'm only here because my wife is freaking out that we will have WW3 and she calms down when she sees that I'm interested in the subject. I would rather endure your petty squabbles than her wild imagination, so humor me some more with your projections please. Like I told you before, I am not being serious and you refuse to acknowledge my words. Your rhetoric suggests that you are concerned with my views on various subjects and that you want the best for me, but that is not the case. What you are concerned with is that I am saying things that are unpopular/hurtful or otherwise offensive. I don't think that what Putin is doing is right, nor do I think that he has any right to do it. What I am saying is that he did it, and I want to know why. If you want to feel better (which is a very valid pursuit in this situation), then maybe start a thread where you can express your emotions on the subject and find like-minded people to join you?

Tone your rhetoric down, you know nothing about me. In dictatorial states, "the people" don't make decisions. In dictatorial states, the government is the country, hence "willingly".

Maybe I am. Thank you for not forcing me into changing my views, but talking with me instead.

And just to be clear, I think that the idea of forcing other nations to join an alliance is astronomically stupid. I know that because I personally was the receiving end of such an idea, as well as my country in the past. As far as I know, Russia never had the opportunity to see how the other end works, so it is not too surprising to me that they think that this is a good idea. But frankly, I'm not sure whether or not they learned from the fall of the Soviet Union. Maybe they have to try construct it for the second time just to learn this lesson?

No, I haven't. What you are proposing is to stop listening to what he has to say. You are painting him basically as a devious animal that has the destruction of the world in mind. I think that his ambitions are much more modest. He wants a second alliance to counter NATO's and EU dominance, but he's not going to give economical incentives to join, but will use force to coerce other nations that he deems ideologically/ethnically similar. He will spin a narrative along the lines of "We Russians should stick together" and expect other countries to follow. Either willingly (Belarus), or not (Ukraine). Obviously, red thinking is shining through, but what I'm seeing here so far is that the proposed solution is simply "he's a madman, we should sanction him", or "he wants war so he shall have one". This solution is only going to bring more destruction and suffering. You cannot fight red out of being red, nor can you effectively punish it. What I am proposing is that we should somehow accept Russia's existence and stage of development and learn to cope with it. I myself still struggle with seeing them as mentally disabled to some degree, but there has to be a way to make peace with their way of thinking and a way to effectively communicate. What I am definitely not going to do is to join the narrative of "Russians are stupid/Putin is having a seizure", because it completely blocks any opportunity to learn from this difficult time. And I am not saying this lightly like some of you may, I live in Poland, which has first row view of the things that happen in Ukraine.

We would know that if we were genuinely interested what constitutes "national interest" in Putin's eyes, which by the way is the definition of a good relationship/alliance.

@Danioover9000 If you start your own thread, I will rally to your aid whenever it gets too serious ?

@ItsNick Thank you for sharing. That was a valuable find.

@Gesundheit2 Care to spill your point?