Is Russia about to invade Ukraine? (2 Viewers)

[superchuck500]

Russia continues to mass assets within range of Ukraine - though the official explanations are that they are for various exercises. United States intelligence has noted that Russian operatives in Ukraine could launch 'false flag' operations as a predicate to invasion. The West has pressed for negotiations and on Friday in Geneva, the US Sec. State Blinken will meet with the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov.

Certainly the Russian movements evidence some plan - but what is it? Some analysts believe that Putin's grand scheme involves securing Western commitments that NATO would never expand beyond its current composition. Whether that means action in Ukraine or merely the movement of pieces on the chess board remains to be seen.

VIENNA — No one expected much progress from this past week’s diplomatic marathon to defuse the security crisis Russia has ignited in Eastern Europe by surrounding Ukraine on three sides with 100,000 troops and then, by the White House’s accounting, sending in saboteurs to create a pretext for invasion.

But as the Biden administration and NATO conduct tabletop simulations about how the next few months could unfold, they are increasingly wary of another set of options for President Vladimir V. Putin, steps that are more far-reaching than simply rolling his troops and armor over Ukraine’s border.

Mr. Putin wants to extend Russia’s sphere of influence to Eastern Europe and secure written commitments that NATO will never again enlarge. If he is frustrated in reaching that goal, some of his aides suggested on the sidelines of the negotiations last week, then he would pursue Russia’s security interests with results that would be felt acutely in Europe and the United States.

There were hints, never quite spelled out, that nuclear weapons could be shifted to places — perhaps not far from the United States coastline — that would reduce warning times after a launch to as little as five minutes, potentially igniting a confrontation with echoes of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Russia Issues Subtle Threats More Far-Reaching Than a Ukraine Invasion

If the West fails to meet its security demands, Moscow could take measures like placing nuclear missiles close to the U.S. coastline, Russian officials have hinted.

www.nytimes.com

Blinken Will Meet With Russia as U.S. Pushes for More Diplomacy

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken will meet with Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia in Geneva on Friday as the United States warns that Russia could soon attack Ukraine.

www.nytimes.com

How to think about war in Ukraine

Start with the Ukrainians

snyder.substack.com

 

[coldseat]

I've said previously that Russia bears the moral and legal responsibility for the invasion, but it's complete BS to claim Russia was unprovoked.

There are multiple statements by NATO officials, US officials, official US documents, etc all saying that NATO continuing to expand to Ukraine is a red line for Russia.

From the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, we’ve been told that the issue of NATO expansion is irrelevant to the war, and that anyone bringing it up is, at best, unwittingly parroting Kremlin propaganda, at worst, apologizing for or justifying the war.

So it was curious to see NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg earlier this month say explicitly that Russian president Vladimir Putin launched his criminal war as a reaction to the possibility of NATO expanding into Ukraine, and the alliance’s refusal to swear it off — not once or twice, but three separate times.

“President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement,” Stoltenberg told a joint committee meeting of the European Parliament on September 7. “That was what he sent us. And [that] was a pre-condition for not invade [sic] Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.”

“He went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders. He has got the exact opposite,” Stoltenberg reiterated, referring to the accession of Sweden and Finland into the alliance in response to Putin’s invasion. Their entry, he later insisted, “demonstrates that when President Putin invaded a European country to prevent more NATO, he's getting the exact opposite.”

It’s not clear if Stoltenberg was referring to the draft treaty Putin put forward in December 2021 and simply mixed up the seasons (the provisions of each are the same), or if he’s referring to an earlier, as-yet-unreported incident. In any case, what Stoltenberg claims here — that Putin viewed Ukraine’s NATO entry as so unacceptable he was willing to invade to stop it, and put forward a negotiating bid that might have prevented it, only for NATO to reject it — has been repeatedly made by those trying to explain the causes of the war and how it could be ended, only to be dismissed as propaganda.

The only logical conclusion, if we’re to listen to the hawks, is that the man in charge of the very alliance helping Ukraine defend itself from Putin is, in fact, working for the Russian leader and spreading his propaganda.

This isn’t the only instance from a member of the NATO establishment. Testifying to the Senate Armed Services Committee in May this year, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines said, alongside Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Scott Berrier, that “we assess that Putin probably has scaled back his immediate ambitions to ... ensuring that Ukraine will never become a NATO ally.” Earlier in her testimony, Haines had said that Putin’s invasion had backfired by “precipitating the very events he hoped to avoid such as Finland's accession to NATO and Sweden's petition to join.”

Likewise, in a March 2023 interview with the German newspaper Die Zeit, Russia expert Fiona Hill — who served as an intelligence analyst under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, as well as on the National Security Council under President Donald Trump — told the paper that “it was always obvious that NATO’s enlargement to Ukraine and to Georgia was a provocation for Putin.” Yet the opposite claim, that the invasion was entirely “unprovoked,” has become such an article of faith in Western discourse that this word is ubiquitous in news reports and official statements on the war.

On a similar note, an August 2022 Washington Post report based on “in-depth interviews with more than three dozen senior U.S., Ukrainian, European and NATO officials” reported four separate instances of high-ranking Russian officials telling their U.S.counterparts in the lead-up to the war that NATO expansion was a core part of the grievances motivating Moscow’s threatening troop build-up. That included Putin himself, who told President Joe Biden in a December 2021 video call “that the eastward expansion of the Western alliance was a major factor in his decision to send troops to Ukraine’s border,” according to the report.

To some extent, this isn’t surprising. As the analysts, journalists, politicians, and others pointing to NATO expansion as a leading cause of the war have copiously documented, the decades before the invasion saw countless members of the Washington national security establishment, from famed Cold War strategist George Kennan and current CIA Director William Burns to a parade of diplomats, military officials, NATO leaders and even Biden himself, warn that the alliance’s eastward creep was a fundamental source of Russian unhappiness and that it would provoke Russian hostility and aggression — or even spark war.

...As with officials’ words, you can find similar points in documents before the war. A 2020 U.S. Army War College paper states that “future admissions to NATO for states in Russia’s near abroad will likely be met with aggression.” A 2019 paper from the Pentagon-funded RAND Corporation — and sponsored by the Army Quadrennial Defense Review Office — states explicitly that the Kremlin’s fear of a direct military attack by the United States is “very real,” plus that “providing more U.S. military equipment and advice [to Ukraine in the war on the Donbas] could lead Russia to increase its direct involvement in the conflict and the price it pays for it,” including by “mounting a new offensive and seizing more Ukrainian territory.” The 2017 National Security Strategy states outright that “Russia views the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and European Union (EU) as threats.”

When officials say the quiet part about Russia and NATO out loud

Was the invasion about the alliance's expansion to Moscow's doorstep? Depends on who's telling the story.

responsiblestatecraft.org

There is also a 2008 leaked cable from current CIA director William Burns warned that Ukraine membership in NATO was the “brightest of all redlines for the Russian elite (not just Putin).”
Link to the leaked cable:

Cable: 08MOSCOW265_a

wikileaks.org

Here are some of the hyperlinks from the article

Ukraine war follows decades of warnings that NATO expansion into Eastern Europe could provoke Russia

Lost in the outrage over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is the fact that many in the West have long warned that widespread NATO expansion into Eastern Europe could spark just such a conflict.

theconversation.com

NATO and the Road Not Taken - Boston Review

Condemning Putin's war must go hand in hand with imagining a more just security order.

www.bostonreview.net

Diplomatic Cables Prove Top U.S. Officials Knew They Were Crossing Russia’s Red Lines on NATO Expansion

Nearly a year in, the war in Ukraine has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and brought the world to the brink of, in President Joe Biden’s own words,

www.counterpunch.org

Video of Joe Biden Warning of Russian Hostility if NATO Expands Resurfaces

Ahead of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, President Vladimir Putin repeatedly warned the West about NATO's expansion, viewing it as a threat to Russia's security.

www.newsweek.com

I'm able to do that as well if someone is telling the truth, but based off what I posted above he's full of shirt and government officials have long warned that NATO expansion would cause Russia to increase fighting and seizing of territory.

It doesn't matter what NATO and Ukraine would have done, it did not give Putin/Russia justification to attack Ukraine.

Also, by attacking Ukraine, Putin provoked the exact opposite response from NATO of what he wanted. NATO expanded because he attacked and proved how much of a danger he/Russia are to the rest of Europe and the west.

 

[DaveXA]

It doesn't matter what NATO and Ukraine would have done, it did not give Putin/Russia justification to attack Ukraine.

Also, by attacking Ukraine, Putin provoked the exact opposite response from NATO of what he wanted. NATO expanded because he attacked and proved how much of a danger he/Russia are to the rest of Europe and the west.

Indeed. There was no justification and it absolutely was unprovoked. His whole argument is based on a false and contrived premise.

He's little more than a Herr Poots mouthpiece.

 

[J-DONK]

Indeed. There was no justification and it absolutely was unprovoked. His whole argument is based on a false and contrived premise.

He's little more than a Herr Poots mouthpiece.

He starts at a place of "Ukraine shouldn't have autonomy to make it's own choices, and is just a pawn". That's Russian propaganda itself. He will never be able to answer WHY Ukraine shouldn't be able to join the EU, or NATO. Russian doesn't get to dictate international relations to it's neighbors.

Also, I laugh when he starts talking about sphere of influence. Russia has the GDP of Italy. Does Italy have a sphere of influence? Russia is the little brother to China now.

 

[SaintForLife]

Superchuck posted this:

He's talking about those who are taking a position that Russia's conduct is defensive in nature or otherwise justified based on US and western conduct. That specific rhetoric, he says, is pretty much the same as what you see on Russian TV.

What I posted showed multiple US/NATO officials, government documents, a leaked US cable that said Ukraine/NATO was a red line for Russia.

Even Joe Biden who warned of hostilities if NATO continued expansion toward Russia.

So what Turner said was complete BS just like his fake new Russian space nuke threat.

 

[samiam5211]

Putin doesn't get to decide which countries not named Russia get to choose to join NATO.

Ukraine was a red line for him because he always planned to take back parts of Ukraine, and didn't want to deal with Article V.

 

[J-DONK]

Putin doesn't get to decide which countries not named Russia get to choose to join NATO.

Ukraine was a red line for him, because he always planned to take back parts of Ukraine, and didn't want to deal with Article V.

Nevermind, Ukraine wasn't close to joining in 2014. That the war started over Yanukovych backing out of a EU trade deal, and getting coup d'état for it.

OF course to SFL, this was all part of America's secret plan to forge the one NATO ring of power in secret. Why? For the nefarious motivation of defense against aggression.

Putin is trying to keep the free lands of the former USSR from being covered in a new and terrible darkness of mutual defense.

 

[MT15]

 

[LA - L.A.]

What I posted showed multiple US/NATO officials, government documents, a leaked US cable that said Ukraine/NATO was a red line for Russia.

Nothing posted by SaintForLife actually shows what SaintForLIfe claims it shows, except for when the source he posts is flat out lying.

Even Joe Biden who warned of hostilities if NATO continued expansion toward Russia.

Biden said that in 1997. Putin was just another cog in the machine in 1997. This is the NATO expansion since 1997 up to when Russia launched a full invasion of Ukraine:

The Addition of NATO Members Over Time (1949-2024)

To secure peace and stability in Europe, in 1949, twelve countries on both sides of the Atlantic formed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as...

ndisc.nd.edu

• 1999
  • The Czech Republic (formerly Czechoslovakia)
  • Hungary
  • Poland (put NATO between Russia and Kalingrad)
• 2004
  • Bulgaria (formerly of the Warsaw Pact)
  • Estonia
  • Latvia
  • Lithuania
  • Romania (formerly of the Warsaw Pact)
  • Slovakia
  • Slovenia (successor to Yugoslavia)
• 2008
  • Ukraine's request for NATO membership rejected
• 2009
  • Albania (formerly of the Warsaw Pact)
  • Croatia (successor to Yugoslavia)
• 2014
  • Russian troops covertly invade Crimea
• 2017 and 2020
  • Montenegro (in 2017)
  • North Macedonia (27 March 2020)

Putin is full of BS when he says he invaded Ukraine because of NATO expansion. In fact, he started positioning Russia's invasion forces along the Ukrainian border before he demanded that NATO agree never to allow Ukraine into NATO.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine. He created the false NATO expansion excuse as one of his BS justifications for invading Ukraine, which he was going to do even if NATO promised never to accept Ukraine.

That's why Putin was also putting out the false excuse of "fighting NAZI's" in Ukraine. That excuse was in case NATO agreed to never let Ukraine in.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine, it had nothing to do with NATO expansion.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine, it had nothing to do with fighting NAZI's.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine, because Ukraine was about to pass Russia up economically and politically.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine in a desperate attempt to keep he and the Russian oligarchs rich and powerful.

 

[DaveXA]

Nothing posted by SaintForLife actually shows what SaintForLIfe claims it shows, except for when the source he posts is flat out lying.


Biden said that in 1997. Putin was just another cog in the machine in 1997. This is the NATO expansion since 1997 up to when Russia launched a full invasion of Ukraine:

The Addition of NATO Members Over Time (1949-2024)

To secure peace and stability in Europe, in 1949, twelve countries on both sides of the Atlantic formed the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as...

ndisc.nd.edu

• 1999
  • The Czech Republic (formerly Czechoslovakia)
  • Hungary
  • Poland (put NATO between Russia and Kalingrad)
• 2004
  • Bulgaria (formerly of the Warsaw Pact)
  • Estonia
  • Latvia
  • Lithuania
  • Romania (formerly of the Warsaw Pact)
  • Slovakia
  • Slovenia (successor to Yugoslavia)
• 2008
  • Ukraine's request for NATO membership rejected
• 2009
  • Albania (formerly of the Warsaw Pact)
  • Croatia (successor to Yugoslavia)
• 2014
  • Russian troops covertly invade Crimea
• 2017 and 2020
  • Montenegro (in 2017)
  • North Macedonia (27 March 2020)

Putin is full of BS when he says he invaded Ukraine because of NATO expansion. In fact, he started positioning Russia's invasion forces along the Ukrainian border before he demanded that NATO agree never to allow Ukraine into NATO.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine. He created the false NATO expansion excuse as one of his BS justifications for invading Ukraine, which he was going to do even if NATO promised to accept Ukraine.

That's why Putin was also putting out the false excuse of "fighting NAZI's" in Ukraine. That excuse was in case NATO agreed to never let Ukraine in.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine, it had nothing to do with NATO expansion.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine, it had nothing to do with fighting NAZI's.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine, because Ukraine was about to pass Russia up economically and politically.

Putin was always going to invade Ukraine in a desperate attempt to keep he and the Russian oligarchs rich and powerful.

Facts. Nice.

 

[Lapaz]

I mean you guys still believe the Trump Russia collusion story. The same one created by Hillary which included one of the main sources of the Steele Dossier being log time Clinton operative Charles Dolan.

How can a genius like yourself fall for and still believe such an idiotic and discredited narrative?

Here are just 3 screenshots from the Mueller report about Russian conspiracy to aid Trump. Whether Mueller was able to prove that Trump conspired with Russia, it is indisputable that Russia did conspire to get him elected. Trump probably covered his tracks like a good mob boss.

 

[UriUT]

EU moves towards using €27bn in profit from frozen Russian assets for Ukraine

Officials could put forward proposal before meeting of prime ministers in Brussels next week

www.theguardian.com

 

[RebSaint]

Did you watch it????? Says the guy who thinks npr tries to make us how to think....but freaking relies on some off based criticism by someone on the web. Woopty...dubudgu...it's nazi...more buzz words..... Watch the damn documentary. Learn the events. Stop freaking projecting.

Netflix is a member of the corporate media, duh.

 

[RebSaint]

It's almost like pre-1994 Soviet Union didn't happen.

It also almost like Ukraine wasn't promised sovereignty by Russia and protection from the US if they gave up their nukes.

It's almost like Putin hasn't already invaded four countries.

Because you have to suspend those facts to blame anybody but the dictator in Moscow for his attempted conquest of the former USSR.

I'm watching this documentary on the Cold War on the Netflix Corporate media, and one of the themes it explores the fact that Putin is trying to basically re-write Russian history to revive Stalinism mixed with an even older form of authoritarianism going back to the Tsars.

Part of that re-writing of history is to erase any and all evidence that Ukraine should and was never a sovereign entity.

The gist of contemporary Putinism, re: Ukraine is that they do not deserve sovereignty and that the only "legitimate" Russian history only sees Ukraine as ruled by Russia.

 

[bird]

I'm watching this documentary on the Cold War on the Netflix Corporate media, and one of the themes it explores the fact that Putin is trying to basically re-write Russian history to revive Stalinism mixed with an even older form of authoritarianism going back to the Tsars.

Part of that re-writing of history is to erase any and all evidence that Ukraine should and was never a sovereign entity.

The gist of contemporary Putinism, re: Ukraine is that they do not deserve sovereignty and that the only "legitimate" Russian history only sees Ukraine as ruled by Russia.

It is interesting because, iirc, the Kyivan Rus was around while Moscow was a backwater. If anything Russia should belong to Ukraine.

 

[efil4]

I'm watching this documentary on the Cold War on the Netflix Corporate media, and one of the themes it explores the fact that Putin is trying to basically re-write Russian history to revive Stalinism mixed with an even older form of authoritarianism going back to the Tsars.

Part of that re-writing of history is to erase any and all evidence that Ukraine should and was never a sovereign entity.

The gist of contemporary Putinism, re: Ukraine is that they do not deserve sovereignty and that the only "legitimate" Russian history only sees Ukraine as ruled by Russia.

I think I'm on same one...Turning Point?

Basically the full history of the fall of Soviet Union.

 

[efil4]

 

[MT15]

Oh, this cannot possibly be true, can it? Russia isn’t the victim here? Say it isn’t so!

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Wait a sec. Are you saying that Russia was never operating in good faith?