Ukraine Thread

[Montmorency]

To recognise that Russia has geostrategic interest

If in seeking to maintain their interests, Russia violates perhaps one of the most important international dictums for the US - no unmanaged territorial changes - then all bets come off. You keep mentioning Kosovo, but whatever you think of the respective parties involved the US interest here and throughout the Balkans was primarily to pacify the region (at least in the short-term). Russia's actions in Crimea are partially a tit-for-tat in response to the Kosovo incident (less so than Georgian intervention), but the irredentist nature of Crimean "re-absorption" is so serious that it overshadows even efforts to dislodge the US from its financial hegemony. I believe that a US administration would even be willing to go so far as to "abandon" a swathe of the Intermarium as a buffer for Russia were Putin to reverse or at least renegotiate the Crimea transfer.

No Country was expelled from NATO for being dictatorships. In fact, a lot of NATO members became member when they were a dictatorship.

By the loose standard you seem to be using, all those countries would still be dictatorships.

[Brenus]

"By the loose standard you seem to be using, all those countries would still be dictatorships." ? Why would they? The regime changes in Greece, Portugal and Spain had nothing to do with NATO. NATO is indifferent to regime if it suits.

"but whatever you think of the respective parties involved the US interest here and throughout the Balkans was primarily to pacify the region (at least in the short-term)" That is your opinion and it might be true. But, put yourself in Russia's post Yeltsin leader, how will you see it? The only reel result is a US base.

As Georgia is concern, it was the same pattern than Croatian Storm Operation, attack on refugees camp and ethnic cleansing... What the Georgian President failed to see was NATO wouldn't back him up as it did for the Croats, and Russia was really at the door and had the power to intervene...

[Montmorency]

Why would they? The regime changes in Greece, Portugal and Spain had nothing to do with NATO. NATO is indifferent to regime if it suits.

I thought you were referring to recent enlargements. Spain was post-Franco when admitted, and harping on founding members seems a little petty.

As Georgia is concern, it was the same pattern than Croatian Storm Operation, attack on refugees camp and ethnic cleansing... What the Georgian President failed to see was NATO wouldn't back him up as it did for the Croats, and Russia was really at the door and had the power to intervene...

I don't think that's correct. The Georgians were responding to escalation; where they failed was in calling Putin's bluff that he would respond to any direct intervention. With the two provinces already being under partial Russian administration/occupation, there should never have been any notion that Georgia could simply roll in like Gaza.

While there's no reason to believe that had the Georgian army been allowed free reign they would have demonstrated a pristine humanitarian record, in the end the Russian counterattack and political entrenchment ensured that it was largely ethnic Georgians who got 'stormed'.

[Gilrandir]

"Perform the Marxist reality check you are so proud of being able to do." Easy: The entire thread about Ukraine, plus link with aircraft carrier smoking and planes crushing. Pick your choice.

As you have taught me (as a linguist), words are important. You were persistent in demanding direct quotation of your words containing "worthless". I think I'm right in believing I can demand the same attitude from you too.

But I can save you the trouble: you will not find any. What I tried to show by the posts you mentioned is that Russian armed might is to a great degree exaggerated. I NEVER said that "Russian army is crap, ill trained, incompetent and ill equipped." But if you are still sure that you can give the relevant words of mine, be my guest.

End of my answers to you until you accept civilised debates and stop practicing personal attacks.

So, Sarmatian calling me obnoxious is not a personal attack, and me reiterating what you yourself claim is? Again: perform the reality check.

But: A nice dodge - playing hurt dignity instead of admitting your bad call.

And NATO/US get away first with Yugoslavia then with Kosovo, so spread the model until Ukraine where it failed.

It says a lot when you think that events of 2013/2014 in Ukraine was NATO's/US operation.

Putin's operation on Ukraine is a copycat of Kosovo. Same pretext, same modus operandi, and almost same results.
Anexion of internationally recognised part of a sovereign Country, with the same disdain for international law and treaties.

You contradict yourself in two successive sentences. In Kosovo case, there was no annexation.

Moreover, your other claims are wrong as well:
1. The pretext of Kosovo intervention was the REAL use of military force by Serbia against Kosovars. The pretext of Crimea annexation was the IMAGINED (you would call it LIKELY) attack of Ukrainian nazis against the locals.
2. As for modus operandi: in Crimea Putin sent his green men pretending those were local militias. Only a year (or about that) later he admitted those were Russian regular army. NATO intervened openly. Putin has resorted (and keeps doing it) to the hybrid warfare in which "local pitmen and tractor drivers" wage "civil war" against "Kiev nazi junta" while Russian regular army is at the root of all the set-to and Russia supplies the occupied Donbas with ammo, fuel, money and weapons.

[Sarmatian]

So, Sarmatian calling me obnoxious is not a personal attack, and me reiterating what you yourself claim is? Again: perform the reality check.

I was calling your behavior obnoxious, not you, a subtle but important difference.

Although, to be frank, I would have no problem calling you obnoxious and that wouldn't be an incorrect abridgment of my opinion of you. Unlike Brenus, I'm not a very civilized and polite human being.

[Gilrandir]

I was calling your behavior obnoxious, not you, a subtle but important difference.

Although, to be frank, I would have no problem calling you obnoxious and that wouldn't be an incorrect abridgment of my opinion of you. Unlike Brenus, I'm not a very civilized and polite human being.

What about your exhortation to attack arguments, not a person? Or is it valid only if this person is not obnoxious?

By the way, being subtler is expressing his attitude doesn't make one more polite or civilized.

[Brenus]

"Aside from that, maybe Montenegro is afraid of Russia?" You never had put a foot in Montenegro!!!!

[Sarmatian]

What about your exhortation to attack arguments, not a person? Or is it valid only if this person is not obnoxious?

By the way, being subtler is expressing his attitude doesn't make one more polite or civilized.

It's valid always. It's just that I'm an ass and don't care in majority of cases.