Washington and Kiev are negotiating a bilateral security agreement that mirrors the 10-year commitments Ukraine has entered into with several European powers.
Putin wanted the civil war resolved, and he thought he could trust NATO to resolve it. Instead, as Angela Merkel pointed out, the Minsk II Accords were merely to buy time to arm Ukraine.
In her interviews with Alexander Osang, which took place over a period of a year and in various locations, Merkel insisted that her stance on the Minsk agreement – which brought a ceasefire after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula – had been right. Key points of the Minsk peace talks, including disarmament and supervision by an international body, were never followed through. But Merkel said the agreement had nevertheless helped buy Kyiv time to arm itself better against the Russian military.
I deal with facts and logic. Putin does not want to fight NATO, but NATO clearly wants to fight Putin without initiating a nuclear war. Using Ukrainians to fight their war for them, which is the reason for arming them in the first place, and to use Ukraine as a NATO bulwark against Russia. Ukraine is in trouble today because of the refusal to handle the situation diplomatically. The motive is obvious, the US wants Ukrainians to fight Russia, and plotted to agitate Russia to invade Ukraine. NATO has absolutely no interest in any peace. They’re not fighting it, and they promote Ukrainians as fighting their war. A war which they can’t win. The US does not care about NATO. Caring would involve saving the lives of Ukrainians and to ensure peace and prosperity through diplomacy. If Lindsey Graham had his way, he would lower the draft age to 14 years old. It is an unhinged foreign policy; it is a war that did not need to be fought if there was a compromise. It is foolish to reject compromise because of valiant defiance. Bravado alone is not enough. The case in Ukraine shows there is irrational leadership in Ukraine. Zelenskyy was naive not acknowledge interests of other countries, especially a neighbor. Ukraine was ill-equipped, by all metrics, weaker than Russia. Russia was weak in the first year of the war, because the military was not prepared to go to war, but now Russia has a much better military, and they have the resolve to win. This shows a lack of reason on the part of the Ukrainians who seem romantically obsessed of joining NATO, which is a political alliance, and the EU, which has a military component.
You keep twisting to talking about NATO, and the EU, when an elected government in Ukraine is choosing to keep fighting. Remember that the majority of western support came after Ukrainians showed in the first weeks/months of the war that they were willing to fight- even without support.
Then you talk of how it is “irrational” for Ukraine to try to defend itself. In what world is it rational for Russia to spend so many lives and so much equipment on a war of choice?
Ukrainians wanted, and want, to live peacefully and in harmony with their neighbours. They never had any intention of hurting Russia. The Russian attack showed the whole world why any country that wants to be left alone needs to arm itself.
Hell, Russia was on its way into the good company of Western Europe, relations had never been better, with more cooperation and international trade than ever, when they decided that they had to attack and subdue Ukraine, because Ukraine was becoming a bit “too good” friends with the west.
You know you have a problem when NATO and the EU can just have a half open door, and countries actively seek to join, while Russia has to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths in order to force others to be “friendly nations” towards them.
Listen… Ukraine is irrational when they violated the conditions for which they gained independence. When Ukraine became independent, it was agreed that it would remain neutral. Since it is not neutral and actively aligning with a political alliance that is the enemy of Russia, it voided that agreement. Another thing, Crimea gained independence before Ukraine, and was an independent republic. In 1997, after bringing the Crimean Republic by force under its control, Russia, and Ukraine agreed to partition the land as to continue to have Russian military presence in Crimea. Sorry, but you are wrong, and have no basis for your argument. Russia has no interest in conquering anything and does not want to fight NATO. The US is the principle instigator that wanted Russia to invade. This is why the US has no interest in any peace process or rejected any diplomacy. Ukrainians are not supposed to win, they are supposed to weaken Russia. Russia is reacting to NATO expansion. Had Ukraine maintained neutrality like it agreed when it gain independence, it would not be in predicament. Western rhetoric and propaganda is contradictory and inconsistent; it is full of lies. NATO is neither morally on a superior level nor even obeys treaties and rules. You are repeating Western propaganda, which is proven by a study of Steve Walt and John Mearsheimer that democratic government lies to their citizens far more than autocracies. The mainstream news media that are dubbed “reliable” are narrative control. Your government wants you to believe their lies. These are the facts. Now you can believe in the myth of a Russian imperialism when it is in fact the expansion of NATO that is the problem for balance of power and ignoring international agreements, that Putin in all his years as public figure suddenly decides in Feb. 22, for no apparent reason, decided to Ukraine to start a new Russian Empire or bring back the USSR, it is a propaganda that falls flat when facts are involved. You like to pick sides, and you like to think you are with the good guys, but I can assure you, NATO are not the good guys. The US has no interests in Ukraine, Russia does, and the US, or NATO do not care about Ukraine. Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia into invasion, as to weaken them. The West did not keep their end of the bargain yet because you believe what your government and national media tells you, you have no ability to objectively judge a conclusion.
Lol, you’re literally claiming that Russia is too weak and pathetic to not attack someone when it is in their best interest to not attack them, because “big bad west” somehow forced them to attack, against their own wishes. Also, you’re talking about NATO expansion as if it’s something that’s been forced upon other countries, rather than a tough process to get through, that a bunch of countries have worked hard to complete, because they wanted to join. Just look at the recent ascension of Finland and Sweden, and you’ll quickly recognise that the main driver for NATO expansion is Russias neighbours wanting security from Russia. If Russia didn’t want others joining NATO they could just leave people alone.
Not only that, you’re saying “The US has no interest in Ukraine, Russia does…” as if “having interests in Ukraine” justifies invading the country and killing thousands of civilians. I don’t care what interests Russia has in Ukraine, they have no right to invade, because Ukraine is a sovereign country. Western countries don’t need to have interests in Ukraine to have a vested interest in maintaining a rule-based world order, where we can focus on making the world a better place rather than fighting off invading Russians. If Russia is allowed to force their will upon a free country, we are all forced to spend more resources on our militaries, which we would really prefer not to.
Again, this whole “Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia” argument just makes Russia look even more pathetic. They can just stop the invasion and leave if it isn’t in their best interest to fight. That’s literally what we’re asking for: Just stop. We don’t want this war, and the way we’re going to stop it is by helping Ukraine kill Russian soldiers on their soil until Russia gets the picture.
Finally, the thing about democratic governments lying to their citizens doesn’t really carry the weight you think it does, because we have actual free press and free speech, which leads to lying politicians being held accountable. Just take a look at any Western European democracy, and you’ll see a host of politicians that have been outed for all kinds of things, and subsequently been punished either legally (if applicable) or in the polls.
You must have been living under a rock. The US prevented expansion of communist countries. Same thing. The US is not going to let a superpower rise peacefully. Look how American government antagonizes China. You think America will accept the rise of a superpower in South America? You are naive. NATO does not follow international laws. Ukraine is by law suppose to be neutral as a condition as a sovereign country, and no Crimea does not belong to Ukraine. Ukraine stolen it. You are very one-sided. It is not the choice of Ukraine, just abandon treaties, except Westerners think it is okay. Well, two can play that game. Doesn’t matter what you “think is moral”, the fact is, Ukraine is getting wrecked, and they have no manpower to continue on fighting. Ukraine does not know how to run a military. They should not have been armed and aligning with NATO and the EU when it wasn’t supposed to. Their economy cannot sustain a war, which is why NATO countries are supplying it. I have facts on my side.
Lol, you’re literally claiming that Russia is too weak and pathetic to not attack someone when it is in their best interest to not attack them, because “big bad west” somehow forced them to attack, against their own wishes. Also, you’re talking about NATO expansion as if it’s something that’s been forced upon other countries, rather than a tough process to get through, that a bunch of countries have worked hard to complete, because they wanted to join. Just look at the recent ascension of Finland and Sweden, and you’ll quickly recognise that the main driver for NATO expansion is Russias neighbours wanting security from Russia. If Russia didn’t want others joining NATO they could just leave people alone.
Not only that, you’re saying “The US has no interest in Ukraine, Russia does…” as if “having interests in Ukraine” justifies invading the country and killing thousands of civilians. I don’t care what interests Russia has in Ukraine, they have no right to invade, because Ukraine is a sovereign country. Western countries don’t need to have interests in Ukraine to have a vested interest in maintaining a rule-based world order, where we can focus on making the world a better place rather than fighting off invading Russians. If Russia is allowed to force their will upon a free country, we are all forced to spend more resources on our militaries, which we would really prefer not to.
Again, this whole “Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia” argument just makes Russia look even more pathetic. They can just stop the invasion and leave if it isn’t in their best interest to fight. That’s literally what we’re asking for: Just stop. We don’t want this war, and the way we’re going to stop it is by helping Ukraine kill Russian soldiers on their soil until Russia gets the picture.
Finally, the thing about democratic governments lying to their citizens doesn’t really carry the weight you think it does, because we have actual free press and free speech, which leads to lying politicians being held accountable. Just take a look at any Western European democracy, and you’ll see a host of politicians that have been outed for all kinds of things, and subsequently been punished either legally (if applicable) or in the polls.
Putin wanted the civil war resolved, and he thought he could trust NATO to resolve it. Instead, as Angela Merkel pointed out, the Minsk II Accords were merely to buy time to arm Ukraine.
In her interviews with Alexander Osang, which took place over a period of a year and in various locations, Merkel insisted that her stance on the Minsk agreement – which brought a ceasefire after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula – had been right. Key points of the Minsk peace talks, including disarmament and supervision by an international body, were never followed through. But Merkel said the agreement had nevertheless helped buy Kyiv time to arm itself better against the Russian military.
Angela Merkel says she lost influence over Putin as a lame duck leader https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/25/angela-merkel-says-she-lost-influence-over-putin-as-a-lame-duck-leader Minsk agreements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements Real intention behind Minsk agreements further destroys credibility of the West https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202212/1281708.shtml No apologies: Germany’s Merkel defends approach to Ukraine https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-putin-politics-berlin-germany-20b29c43618d4d711d62c07b589de4b1
I deal with facts and logic. Putin does not want to fight NATO, but NATO clearly wants to fight Putin without initiating a nuclear war. Using Ukrainians to fight their war for them, which is the reason for arming them in the first place, and to use Ukraine as a NATO bulwark against Russia. Ukraine is in trouble today because of the refusal to handle the situation diplomatically. The motive is obvious, the US wants Ukrainians to fight Russia, and plotted to agitate Russia to invade Ukraine. NATO has absolutely no interest in any peace. They’re not fighting it, and they promote Ukrainians as fighting their war. A war which they can’t win. The US does not care about NATO. Caring would involve saving the lives of Ukrainians and to ensure peace and prosperity through diplomacy. If Lindsey Graham had his way, he would lower the draft age to 14 years old. It is an unhinged foreign policy; it is a war that did not need to be fought if there was a compromise. It is foolish to reject compromise because of valiant defiance. Bravado alone is not enough. The case in Ukraine shows there is irrational leadership in Ukraine. Zelenskyy was naive not acknowledge interests of other countries, especially a neighbor. Ukraine was ill-equipped, by all metrics, weaker than Russia. Russia was weak in the first year of the war, because the military was not prepared to go to war, but now Russia has a much better military, and they have the resolve to win. This shows a lack of reason on the part of the Ukrainians who seem romantically obsessed of joining NATO, which is a political alliance, and the EU, which has a military component.
You keep twisting to talking about NATO, and the EU, when an elected government in Ukraine is choosing to keep fighting. Remember that the majority of western support came after Ukrainians showed in the first weeks/months of the war that they were willing to fight- even without support.
Then you talk of how it is “irrational” for Ukraine to try to defend itself. In what world is it rational for Russia to spend so many lives and so much equipment on a war of choice?
Ukrainians wanted, and want, to live peacefully and in harmony with their neighbours. They never had any intention of hurting Russia. The Russian attack showed the whole world why any country that wants to be left alone needs to arm itself.
Hell, Russia was on its way into the good company of Western Europe, relations had never been better, with more cooperation and international trade than ever, when they decided that they had to attack and subdue Ukraine, because Ukraine was becoming a bit “too good” friends with the west.
You know you have a problem when NATO and the EU can just have a half open door, and countries actively seek to join, while Russia has to cause hundreds of thousands of deaths in order to force others to be “friendly nations” towards them.
Listen… Ukraine is irrational when they violated the conditions for which they gained independence. When Ukraine became independent, it was agreed that it would remain neutral. Since it is not neutral and actively aligning with a political alliance that is the enemy of Russia, it voided that agreement. Another thing, Crimea gained independence before Ukraine, and was an independent republic. In 1997, after bringing the Crimean Republic by force under its control, Russia, and Ukraine agreed to partition the land as to continue to have Russian military presence in Crimea. Sorry, but you are wrong, and have no basis for your argument. Russia has no interest in conquering anything and does not want to fight NATO. The US is the principle instigator that wanted Russia to invade. This is why the US has no interest in any peace process or rejected any diplomacy. Ukrainians are not supposed to win, they are supposed to weaken Russia. Russia is reacting to NATO expansion. Had Ukraine maintained neutrality like it agreed when it gain independence, it would not be in predicament. Western rhetoric and propaganda is contradictory and inconsistent; it is full of lies. NATO is neither morally on a superior level nor even obeys treaties and rules. You are repeating Western propaganda, which is proven by a study of Steve Walt and John Mearsheimer that democratic government lies to their citizens far more than autocracies. The mainstream news media that are dubbed “reliable” are narrative control. Your government wants you to believe their lies. These are the facts. Now you can believe in the myth of a Russian imperialism when it is in fact the expansion of NATO that is the problem for balance of power and ignoring international agreements, that Putin in all his years as public figure suddenly decides in Feb. 22, for no apparent reason, decided to Ukraine to start a new Russian Empire or bring back the USSR, it is a propaganda that falls flat when facts are involved. You like to pick sides, and you like to think you are with the good guys, but I can assure you, NATO are not the good guys. The US has no interests in Ukraine, Russia does, and the US, or NATO do not care about Ukraine. Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia into invasion, as to weaken them. The West did not keep their end of the bargain yet because you believe what your government and national media tells you, you have no ability to objectively judge a conclusion.
Lol, you’re literally claiming that Russia is too weak and pathetic to not attack someone when it is in their best interest to not attack them, because “big bad west” somehow forced them to attack, against their own wishes. Also, you’re talking about NATO expansion as if it’s something that’s been forced upon other countries, rather than a tough process to get through, that a bunch of countries have worked hard to complete, because they wanted to join. Just look at the recent ascension of Finland and Sweden, and you’ll quickly recognise that the main driver for NATO expansion is Russias neighbours wanting security from Russia. If Russia didn’t want others joining NATO they could just leave people alone.
Not only that, you’re saying “The US has no interest in Ukraine, Russia does…” as if “having interests in Ukraine” justifies invading the country and killing thousands of civilians. I don’t care what interests Russia has in Ukraine, they have no right to invade, because Ukraine is a sovereign country. Western countries don’t need to have interests in Ukraine to have a vested interest in maintaining a rule-based world order, where we can focus on making the world a better place rather than fighting off invading Russians. If Russia is allowed to force their will upon a free country, we are all forced to spend more resources on our militaries, which we would really prefer not to.
Again, this whole “Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia” argument just makes Russia look even more pathetic. They can just stop the invasion and leave if it isn’t in their best interest to fight. That’s literally what we’re asking for: Just stop. We don’t want this war, and the way we’re going to stop it is by helping Ukraine kill Russian soldiers on their soil until Russia gets the picture.
Finally, the thing about democratic governments lying to their citizens doesn’t really carry the weight you think it does, because we have actual free press and free speech, which leads to lying politicians being held accountable. Just take a look at any Western European democracy, and you’ll see a host of politicians that have been outed for all kinds of things, and subsequently been punished either legally (if applicable) or in the polls.
You must have been living under a rock. The US prevented expansion of communist countries. Same thing. The US is not going to let a superpower rise peacefully. Look how American government antagonizes China. You think America will accept the rise of a superpower in South America? You are naive. NATO does not follow international laws. Ukraine is by law suppose to be neutral as a condition as a sovereign country, and no Crimea does not belong to Ukraine. Ukraine stolen it. You are very one-sided. It is not the choice of Ukraine, just abandon treaties, except Westerners think it is okay. Well, two can play that game. Doesn’t matter what you “think is moral”, the fact is, Ukraine is getting wrecked, and they have no manpower to continue on fighting. Ukraine does not know how to run a military. They should not have been armed and aligning with NATO and the EU when it wasn’t supposed to. Their economy cannot sustain a war, which is why NATO countries are supplying it. I have facts on my side.
Lol, you’re literally claiming that Russia is too weak and pathetic to not attack someone when it is in their best interest to not attack them, because “big bad west” somehow forced them to attack, against their own wishes. Also, you’re talking about NATO expansion as if it’s something that’s been forced upon other countries, rather than a tough process to get through, that a bunch of countries have worked hard to complete, because they wanted to join. Just look at the recent ascension of Finland and Sweden, and you’ll quickly recognise that the main driver for NATO expansion is Russias neighbours wanting security from Russia. If Russia didn’t want others joining NATO they could just leave people alone.
Not only that, you’re saying “The US has no interest in Ukraine, Russia does…” as if “having interests in Ukraine” justifies invading the country and killing thousands of civilians. I don’t care what interests Russia has in Ukraine, they have no right to invade, because Ukraine is a sovereign country. Western countries don’t need to have interests in Ukraine to have a vested interest in maintaining a rule-based world order, where we can focus on making the world a better place rather than fighting off invading Russians. If Russia is allowed to force their will upon a free country, we are all forced to spend more resources on our militaries, which we would really prefer not to.
Again, this whole “Ukraine is a device to provoke Russia” argument just makes Russia look even more pathetic. They can just stop the invasion and leave if it isn’t in their best interest to fight. That’s literally what we’re asking for: Just stop. We don’t want this war, and the way we’re going to stop it is by helping Ukraine kill Russian soldiers on their soil until Russia gets the picture.
Finally, the thing about democratic governments lying to their citizens doesn’t really carry the weight you think it does, because we have actual free press and free speech, which leads to lying politicians being held accountable. Just take a look at any Western European democracy, and you’ll see a host of politicians that have been outed for all kinds of things, and subsequently been punished either legally (if applicable) or in the polls.