BlueOak

It's fairly important for Europe's future that Trump loses. So I wish you luck. It's probably my first election where I won't be hitting the liberals as hard as I usually do. Maybe I'll go get shadow banned from a few more conservative outlets, while I drop some things to fry their brains. If you are involved on the ground, all the best. NB If you are on the ground, make sure to make a big deal of how a criminal is running for office, and to play on the republican sense of justice. They'll hate it.

Overall, Russia seemed to range from blue to red, depending on the province. Pre-war Ukraine seemed orange to blue; it was modernizing more toward joining the EU, but it had some distance to go. The EU mostly sits in orange, with some green and blue. The churches were prominent in both, but democracy was starting up in Ukraine, and it was starting to receive investment. It is hard to judge how awareness might drop collectively during the war, but we can say it is likely while survival or killing is the focus, and trauma builds within the collective psyche. People tell me there are sometimes breakthroughs in conflict, but my experience is that this is an exception rather than the norm. It's the same with people (because countries are people), sometimes they change, but mostly they don't.

@Karmadhi Right at the start, Ukraine offered neutrality to Russia, but they refused it. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-offers-neutrality-exchange-nato-style-security-guarantees-russia-talks-2022-03-29/ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/30/ukraine-offer-neutrality-meaning-constitution-russia-what-does-neutral-status-country-mean-how-would-it-work If Russia gave up the land they've stolen, and Ukraine didn't join NATO, then there would be peace in your scenario. Ukraine can't join anyway while Russia occupies Crimea, several countries didn't want them in NATO before the war. Now it's different, they have more support. Russia (and I mean the people) will not give up the land so the point is mute now. It's about the expansion of a greater Russia. Putin has said that's his goal. He's fought 8 wars to do so and formed a breakaway republic in Moldova, ready for the 9th. People arguing that point are arguing against Putin's own words and his constant barrage of state TV material. Estonia has a Russian population and is vulnerable to the same breakaway republic. The top video in the three I've just listed highlights the scenario those in Europe are worried about. People can disagree of course, but dismissing other countries' points of view because they don't agree with their own, is half of how all this mess started.

Yes, well put. An alternate way to look at it: Too good would be, spending time in nature, caring for it, and appreciating it. Ditto your food, home, community, etc. What we have now is unbalanced. Our values are not in alignment with sustainability, so we don't sustain and take care of ourselves. We burn out, we have depression, reoccurring relationship problems, weight problems, dietary problems, musculoskeletal problems, and mental or physical illnesses. I see all this in the macro too, families not having kids, societies breaking apart, social unrest, and unnecessary national or personal debt to name a few.

So you all understand, this is a common theme here in Europe to think about, not a one-off video I happened upon. I do not vouch for the quality of any of these compared to the previous video, which I considered a reasonable quality. These are to demonstrate that the war is being discussed and planned for if it happens.

People won't sit back and play the game of what if against an aggressive dictator. The longer it takes Russia to recover from these wars, the better it is for the rest of Europe. That's precisely why we are trying to get aid to Ukraine. People can put moral things on top of it to make themselves feel better, but everything humanity does is self-serving. Putin isn't that smart, he's got some intelligence, sure, but he hamstrings himself by killing anyone who doesn't say yes to him. I argue with you in this thread but I don't for one second think I am more intelligent without your input. Do you understand? If I were in power, I'd want you and Bobby in my ear checking my bias, to come to a better decision. I will repeat: This is the 8th war to rebuild or control former USSR territories. Moldova is an almost guaranteed 9th. The Baltics would be a calculation, is NATO going to respond with enough force to stop me? Already knowing that the Suwałki Gap gap could not be held, war games showed that even with American assistance, Russia would cut off and siege the Baltics, overrunning them (let alone without America). This is why those countries are creating so many bunkers to slow the Russians down, and Poland is restoring a large armored core. - They believe there is a chance they will be invaded as it has happened so many times before. Germany and the UK are moving troops to the region because they believe the threat is real. Everyone recognizes Trump wants to pull out of NATO, so the Europeans are moving to fill the gap and push back against Russia. There are many reasons for a Russian invasion that I keep talking about, the Russian population crisis, needing a shorter border, reforming what Putin saw as the greatest Russian loss (the USSR territories), the one China, and one Russia principal that is getting all the Russians around the world into one nation. Russia is led by Putin, but he still must satisfy the hatred of the 'other' in Russian people. An ideology that he's cultivated to keep himself in power, and the strong nationalist population core that all dictators require to stay in power. Russia is fascist and it requires perpetual war to sustain that ideology. Distracting people from economic misfortune is often a reason people go to war. - Then there are trade routes, pushing influence outward, connecting to Kaliningrad, getting access to ports, etc. Europe will show its Europe, with 44 different voices wanting 44 different things. It will always show this. Expansionist authoritarian powers are seeking to test what they can take from that.

The video agreed with me, that NATO might not launch nukes to defend one country. I think it's probable. Think of the calculation: do we end the planet, or send in conventional forces? Even more likely with Trump in office, and his desire to pull out of NATO. Slovakia even said they would not send troops to defend another NATO country under attack, and Bulgaria is unlikely to. There will be countries that simply do not, especially without American support. You overestimate a NATO response to defend Poland or the Baltics. Especially more nationalist governments. Thankfully these eastern regions, and some others are preparing themselves for this pattern of events.

I agree Putin has adjusted his calculations, in time and effort, not ambition or the underlying reasons such as: his population crisis, needing a shorter border, or wanting the gas connections/supplies into Europe; hindering Turkey's growth in the Black Sea region, and Putin's imperialistic ego, or zealous fascist support requiring war. Because it hasn't stopped Putin from fighting these wars, doubling down, expanding, or mentioning Moldova, Poland, and the Baltics in his plans. Russia cultivates fear and uses it as a weapon. So don't be surprised when its successful. European states serious about the Russian threat are moving to a 3% budget. With some considering 4%. The Era of peace in Europe came about because of the 2nd World War devastation and death toll, with treaties such as NATO that said we wouldn't fight each other again. Then America became the guarantor of democracy so we didn't need to fight anymore, it was a period of stability and peace for us. Because Russia is not in NATO, we are fighting in Europe again, if they were, we would not be fighting them. If people come back in boxes, it initially leads to anger, hatred, and war. Rarely it leads to a desire for peace, but only when enough suffering is experienced. Yes, Europe, and certainly all NATO allies combined, could match the US military if they dedicated enough of their GDP. Then they'd be more proactive in using it to further their aims. Then you'd say oh, those aggressive Europeans! People don't spend all that effort, money, political, institutional, and cultural capital on something to receive nothing back. Russia is a regional power. All the numbers indicate it. Elevating it above that is why they are overreaching and continue to do so.

I've backed it up with many examples of why these wars were fought. You don't agree with them, but ignoring that others do is your main flaw. I can acknowledge Russia's concerns, even if I don't agree with them, you cannot do the opposite. I will repeat, for the 1000th time now, this region has been engaged in hostilities for centuries. We had a period of peace, thanks entirely to Europe coming together with America and making peace here. It's not naturally like that otherwise. You are advocating for WW3. That is the alternative. We cannot match the US military budget at present, though that is being changed it is a gradual process. The support would be us getting directly involved, and settling things in Europe as we used to, with long, bloody wars. Think what countries like UK, France, Germany, and Poland mobilizing troops and sending them into Ukraine would mean. I doubt we'd stop at Ukraine either if an actual war is declared, we'd have to take out Russia's capacity to fight the war, which is their industry, ports, and infrastructure connections.

America was reluctant to give Ukraine any more aid. It was held up for months. vs Eastern Europe has had centuries of conflict with Russia, is rearming, and talking about sending troops? Do you see how you are ignoring the reality of what is occurring, and why it's occurring? European powers fighting wars in Europe have always met other European powers stopping them. It's a miracle that it hasn't happened so far, and it's only the case because America is giving money to Ukraine to fight it themselves. (Also because you are right, people in Europe got complacent) Do America, Russia, and any other arms producers like selling guns? YES! Do they give nukes to countries? No! America hates nuclear proliferation, as most countries do. We are talking about millions of people, and I am trying to give a collective view here, covering their leadership in the same statement.

Then maybe Russia is a pawn too? Did you see how that assumption went? Then how many European countries are rearming? I'll link a video at the bottom with the latest development to match Belarus. The foreign policy of Europe is 44 different countries' foreign policy, including Russia and Russian-aligned states. Again, your point of view sees one block. It sees the West, or NATO, or Europe. From our point of view, we are 44 voices, with 44 different foreign policies. Here is one of them: Poland asks again for nukes: https://apnews.com/article/poland-nuclear-weapons-nato-russia-ukraine-d92c508d6ff53683a25f1bc62d256f86 If you can for a second, try to put aside your (can I say block or collective) bias and understand Polish concerns, especially with Belarus getting nukes, then you can see the war in more focus and the potential fallout from it. Or the video version, the start is the relevant bit.

For people who have no idea about how Europe operates. When one power starts to conquer territory, alliances arise to fight them. It has always been that way, the different powers have kept each other in check for hundreds of years. *That is what a non-globalist reality looks like, the thing so many right-wingers have been rushing toward for a couple of decades with open arms.

1) THEY DID. Ukraine beat them out of Sumy, Kyiv, and Kherson, then held a line. Putin is interested in a greater Russia, this is his 8th war to create it. As the video shows, if Trump pulls out of NATO, a war with Europe is likely. Again, you belittle Europe, it's insane. Why do people do this? They did it to Russia, and now they do it to the rest of Europe. Do they want to create the same result again? It boggles the mind. Keep pushing, keep calling people weak, and the result is a war. When Europe does it back to Russia, you'll be saying oh how could this happen, those bad Europeans? Surprised face. Do I think far-right governments will tolerate an aggressive Russian expansion on their borders, and meddling in their elections, a pattern that has for centuries meant war and instability? No, I don't. I think without America holding NATO together there would already be a larger regional war, with Polish, English, and Baltic troops in Ukraine (at a minimum probably France and Finland too). Your entire focus on the Americans as the bad guys misses the regional history and reality of the region. As I've tried to tell you 100 times, America was reluctant to give this last round of aid, but Europe was asking for help or getting ready to use their own troops. Russia wants the baltics back inside Russia, as the video tells you. There are large Russian populations there. Putin has already said so. I can only keep repeating what he's said. You can ignore it. You can put your head in the clouds and just say America is the bad guy, thus never seeing both sides, or the ground reality at all in that case.

The front line barely moves and the only reason it's moved meters at all is because Ukraine had to ration its artillery and ammunition. Now it can match or surpass the Russians for a couple of years again. Your entire analysis is wrong. You can't see Russia suffering, you can't see Ukraine holding. You quote to me things like the average age of a Ukranian soldier earlier without even realizing its because those under 27 were not allowed to be conscripted, now its 25. I get my information from the map itself. You have Russian propaganda. Ukraine is not on the verge of death at all. I just told you they are conscripting another 500,000 soldiers for the summer. Don't listen to so much Russian propaganda, and try to do an objective analysis. The line barely moves either way. There will be some Ukrainian offensives in areas that are less well dug in, and some Russian offensives. Everything is not as well defended as anyone here is making out. Certain territories are very well fortified, but not things that have been occupied for a month, That's how wars are fought It is not one battle that decides everything, it's small operational gains and losses. People have forgotten I suppose, because like you say they are used to one weaker country fighting a stronger one, not countries that are more evenly matched. The reality you haven't adjusted to still is that Russia isn't much stronger than Ukraine. With enough western weapons, Russia is closer to an underdog, but it gets BRICS support to even it out. Democracies don't give up land to Tyrants. Expect violence and instability for decades in any occupied area. With the aid, it'll be up to 1k+ a day if they keep up their human wave, they probably won't and go back to defend instead.

Maybe contemplate why others arguing bothers you? There could be something there to teach us about communication, or it could be an issue you have with life. Myself, that's how I communicate a lot of the time. Debate, questioning, and then arriving at an understanding by going through that process. Some bosses, for example, love it when I pull apart systems and then find ways to do them better, they can handle questions on the fly with no problem. Another boss thought I was trying to usurp their authority. To give this a parallel, a good meditation technique is on the train or somewhere noisy near distractions, it's a great practice for being able to be anywhere.