You disagree that Russia is responsible? Russia invading a neighbor country and the global upheaval that created, but it's not Russia's fault?

What sort of Putin apologistic crap is that?

 

Don't ever let a crisis go to waste? I guess Covid has been cured because you darn sure are not hear anything about it, even though more people are dying from it than ever before. Zelensky is the new Fauci. Oil prices were already on their way up before Russia invaded, this is just excuse to raise them even more.

 

Cool beans. I doubt that Russians view it that way, since they went in as NATO forces, not UN forces.

 

Yes, that's what they are told. Anyone in west who has more than two brain cells wired in series knows that the idea of an unprovoked NATO invasion of RU is beyond ludicrous.

NATO is no way restricted to engage in combat only if article V is triggered.


The US invaded Iraq. NATO elements later did some training of the new Iraqi military and security forces to assist in stabilizing the country. They didn't invade or intentionally engage in combat.

Humanitarian and stability efforts are not proscribed by the NATO charter, and sometimes they're actually a good idea.

So what? That's their prerogative. As a NATO entity, or as individual nations coordinating via their common NATO C2 and doctrine.

What they have not done is invaded anyone for the purpose of imperial expansion.

Even Uncle Vlad doesn't want to appear to do that... he tells his people that he's intervening to save Ukrainians from a Neo-Nazi induced humanitarian crisis

 

I posted it previously, but would you care to list the times that Russia invaded Europe vs how many times European countries invaded Russia?
Just because those invasions of Russia were beyond our lifetimes does not mean that the history hasn't been taught to Russians. The last time a European country invaded Russia was 80ish years ago. European countries have invaded Russia at least once a century going back to at least the 1300s.

While you say that an unprovoked NATO invasion of Russia is beyond ludicrous, I can come up with several scenarios where NATO could invade unprovoked, all involving resources.
Just because you can't personally imagine such a scenario does not mean it doesn't exist.

I would have never envisioned a scientific lab doing gain of function research, much less have a lab leak. Yet here we are. That's the stuff of Michael Crichton books.4


Again, you've completely ignored Russia's concerns about NATO. They are NOT a purely defensive force.

 

The Germans haven't committed a genocide in 70 years. That doesn't mean I think they are going to at any moment.

NATO is purely a defensive alliance no matter what the propaganda you read says. There has never been or even been a threat or a NATO country invading Russia. False flag justifications by the Russians don't mean thst the reciprocal was inevitable.

 

When you’re right, you’re right.

HSBC routinely fined billions for money laundering drug money, ponzi schemes, illegal weapons sales, and the more garden variety banking fraud that BOA/Chase/etc get whacked for (but no one ever goes to jail….).

HSBC advertising prominently featured with one story tall ads in the JFK terminal where a certain airline parks. Always gives me a chuckle to see it when schlepping by bag past them with my iPad and the rules of the road file in it.

Russian normies will suffer. Russian power brokers, not so much.

(“The strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must.” It was always thus)

 

That's why it's easy to sell that bill of goods to russians.

Modern Europe is repelled in abject horror at the concept of an "all in" war, and tries to forget it ever happened. Modern Russia revels in the memory and glory.

I have professional experience and expertise in military affairs including NATO operations and planning. Such a scenario is beyond ludicrous today, or probably any time this century (baring asteroid impact or zombie apocalypse). Try google, anybody with the slightest credibility would laugh at the concept. But we can agree that even though the idea is not legitimate, the Russians can still be sold on it.

Bears further investigation but we do not appear to quite be there yet. But even if it happened, it's still logical, there's a reason researchers would want to do that even if they gooned up the risk vs. benefit analysis.

They can certainly apply the "best defense is a strong offense" doctrine. In theory.

In political reality the idea of NATO executing an unprovoked war of aggression is beyond ludicrous. Your examples were all humanitarian crises, usually involving genocide.

Russia's concerns are invalid, but they don't know that. The top Russians know, Putin sneers in disdain at the weakness of western leadership and society.

 

So what. They got their Javelin missiles. Remember the previous guy said the 1980’s called and wants their foreign policy back when others were concerned about Russia.

 

A committed Japanese nationalist might argue that sanctions caused pearl harbor.

But RU invaded UK before the sanctions, at least before the serious sanctions.