Couple_Overall t1_jadqnlf wrote

>Fwiw - Russia
>engaged in violent expansion during Putin's regime, and most analysts agree that reclaiming the glory of the Soviet Union/Russian Empire is a part of his agenda

Evidence does not support it though. Always ask yourself "why now?". What's different in February 2022 than one, two, three or 12 months before?

If that was the Russian goal, then Russia had an infinite amount of opportunities before February 2022. Entirety of Ukraine was free to grab for Russia in 2014 or in the following years, he didn't move.

If he had it planned before he would've ordered the army to get prepared to such an occurrence. But that didn't happen and Russian army itself was not prepared and informed about these plans.

The reason why it happened then was prompted by Kazakhstan protests, Putin merely waited the olympics to end as a favor to China.

Putin's goal (which he never hid by the way), was first and foremost beheading the Ukrainian leadership and placing a puppet regime there which is why the attack spearheaded and concentrated on Kiev, land grabbing was of second importance.


Couple_Overall t1_jacfsl3 wrote

No, this is bullshit.

Go check on Wikipedia how much gas Ukraine has. Even at best estimates if they exported it to Europe it would last for merely 12 months. If they only used it at home it would still deplete in less than 30 years. Their oil would last globally for a single day of use. It's really not much. Even if your theory had any basis (it doesn't) those discoveries happened 5 years ago, not in January/February 2022.

This has nothing to do with economy or security, it's all about fighting the spread of democracy in neighbouring countries, tightening his control over Russians and banning oppositions. Hell, Russia did much more damage to their economy which will last for decades than the tiny drop of Ukrainian gas or oil could do (even admitting Ukraine invested enough to extract it and prices where worth the investment).

By the way that's not my opinion but of former US Ambassador to Russia (and now Stanford professor McFaul) who knows Putin from more than 30 years.


Couple_Overall t1_jacabi3 wrote

At the start of the war I need to admit I had some part of me that kind of understood Russian agenda in Ukraine. I didn't support the war but I was buying in the "Russians needing to protect their west flank from American/Nato tampering", at least partially.

I kind of thought that Zelensky's hard stance against Russia rather than playing fool to catch wise could've added to the tension.

But with time I came to the conclusion that I was wrong. Plain and simple. I was naive.

This whole military action and Russian agenda has absolutely nothing to do with Russian's security (which is forever secured by a minimal investment in nuclear weapons to be honest, nothing can save anyone from them), Nato, and not even imperialistic ambitions by Putin. Even those are honestly idiotic. If Putin really has had such imperialistic ambitions he would've acted on them earlier.

Reality is that this is all about Putin's autocracy. Putin knows that Russians consider themselves and Ukrainians the same people, so even if he could and can sleep just fine with Finland or Sweden joining NATO, as this poses no threat to his regime nor Russia, he cannot sleep well knowing that his citizens can look at Ukraine and see that a really democratic government, one that fights corruption and works for its citizens is possible. Because the instant message for Russians is that an alternative to Putin's autocracy is possible and he's scared shitless of that.

He was burning classified documents in Berlin in the very same moment that people were bringing down the Berlin wall, he was a KGB officer there. He knows that change to autocratic regimes can come at any time and that this leaves people like him ousted, at the very least. He's scared shitless of "real" democracy.

It's incredible world is heading into global recessions, thousands are dying, tensions are rising, I'm paying more than 4 times the energy bills I paid just 18 months ago, all because this shithead wants to transform Russia in a tsardom again.

It's terrible, awful.

We all need to do our best and push our legislators to help Ukraine as much as possible.

Arm them, train them, send all the money we can, sanction any country doing business with them, whatever we can so we can make Russian population suffer as much as possible, at the end of the day, Russians aren't stupid, they overthrew not one but two regimes that looked impossible to overthrow (the Tsar first and the Soviet Union second), they can understand the world around them and they're aware that most of what they hear in their tv is straight propaganda.

I am honestly sorry for not emphasizing enough with Ukraine. I did donate 200 euros to Ukraine in recent days and I plan to donate 2% of my monthly income for the foreseeable future at each check I receive.

If Putin wins, it's not just Russia winning and Ukraine losing, Europe isn't threatened by Putin's army, they can barely fight against Ukraine, but if Putin wins this is a very huge setback for democracy globally, for our own life styles and dignity.


Couple_Overall t1_j0ycklb wrote

Turkey isn't geographically considered in Europe, only a tiny part of their country is in geographical Europe.

Your post is correct nonetheless, but I think that the first phrase being an emphasis on Turkey's sharing a border with Russia is wrong because NATO is a defensive, not an offensive alliance. Turkey was if anything seen as a liability and source for problems for NATO till Turkey helped in Korean war.