Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 7:07 pm
Janoah wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 4:50 pm
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:53 pm
it is not up to Putin to dictate what Ukraine can and cannot do or what they can be members of and what they cannot.
To understand, you can remember the Cuban missile crisis, when the same United States decided to attack sovereign Cuba and introduced a naval blockade of sovereign Cuba. This was in response to Soviet missiles in sovereign Cuba, and the missiles in Cuba were in response to American nuclear missiles in Italy and Turkey.
I have no interest in being Putin's lawyer, but it is in the interests of the United States and Ukraine, and everyone who wants peace, - to really want peace.
And the US strategy developed by Brzezinski was,
"Various plans for expanding US influence at Russia’s expense, including the dismemberment of Russia itself (Zbigniew Brzeziński, William Kristol, Robert Kagan, George Friedman) cannot be treated in Moscow as anything other than warning signals to which the Russians naturally react defensively."
https://wuw.pl/data/include/cms/Turbule ... u4mXnW2P2M
And this is what is happening now.
By the way, Brzezinski’s strategy echoes Polish “Prometheism”.
While Trump was there, Putin behaved calmly, because he saw that Trump was not in the mood for confrontation, but, on the contrary, for interaction on truly important aspects in the world.
Under Biden, the frenzied development of Ukraine by NATO began.
In general, those who speak most for peace usually lead to disastrous wars.
Yes, it's complicated. However, I wonder what will happen if Putin wins in Ukraine? Will his next move be against Finland or the Latvian and Estonian states. He seems to have a habit of invading his neighbors.
Finland had no reason to fear Putin until it joined NATO.
It seems that she joined NATO in the hope of tearing off a piece of Russia that she considers hers.
Apparently, in Finland they believe that the collective West is about to crush Russia, and they need to quickly get the right to a piece of the spoils.
Relations between the Baltic states and Russia depend on how much the Baltic states will escalate confrontation with Russia.
Russia does not need the land of the Baltic states; it has enough land of its own.
But if NATO pumps the Baltics with missiles that threaten Russia, then Russia will have no choice to take measures to neutralize the threats.
But in any case, there is a fundamental difference between the Baltic states and Kiev.
Kyiv is “the mother of Russian cities,” and the attitude towards it is appropriate.
Russia cannot afford NATO in Kyiv; for Russia it is a question of its existence as a state.
By the way, a couple of centuries ago, when there was still folklore, a Russian man sang legends of Kievan Rus and on the shores of the northern sea, and among the Ukrainians, the Slavs, who came to Kiev after its destruction by hordes from the East, their folklore begins from times centuries later than Kievan Rus.
Therefore, Ukrainian nationalists have cognitive dissonance: on the one hand, they subconsciously and consciously understand that Kyiv is the original Russian land, on the other hand, they invent a history for themselves to which they have no relation.
By the way, to some extent this is similar to the Arabs in Israel, the Arabs subconsciously and consciously understand that this is the original Land of Israel, they were informed about this in the Koran, but they use all sorts of demagoguery to erase the historical and religious truth in themselves and others.
But, I only mentioned political squabbles in passing, but
your topic is not about political squabbles, but about more fundamental things.