| You started well, but then the train got derailed... Russia has no need for Eastern Europe (they have enough land and resources, why saddle yourself with hostile population?), as long as the said Easter Europe is not threatening them with NATO bases/missiles (US has repeatedly shown that they do not hesitate to use their muscle if they think they can get away with it, so Russia's paranoia is not entirely unfounded). Even if Russia somehow took over Eastern Europe (most likely way: they learn from US how to do soft 'regime change'), they have no chance against China (China is just so much bigger and better organized; the population's mentality also matters a lot). China and Russia are rather complementary, there is not reason for confrontation between them. But you are correct, what US is doing is really totally stupid ... although it seems designed by Netanyahu, not Putin. |
| |
| ▲ | andy_ppp 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | If China cannot get oil from the middle east what happens to China and China-Russia relations? I didn't say there would be hostilities just Russia would become potentially the more dominant partner. If NATO expansion is the reason for the war in Ukraine (not imperialism) then why has the war not stopped now we know Ukraine will never join NATO? | | |
| ▲ | don_esteban 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | 1) Russia will happily supply China with oil and other resources, and China will pay by industrial good and all other stuff they produce. China is working really hard on getting rid of dependence on foreign energy sources, any leverage Russia might get if it became the sole supplier of oil/gas to China is very temporary and Russia knows it. Furthermore, unlike USA, it has no delusion of ever dominating China - China already has them by the balls. 2) mostly face saving, but also: Ukraine will remain openly hostile, NATO or not, planning to have hostile (EU) forces on its territory as 'security guarantor'. Russians still believe Ukraine will collapse (those men will eventually run out/economy will collapse/EU will not send its children to die on the eastern front) and they will be able to have a friendly (or at least truly neutral) government there. Russia's paranoia about the west is really strong, well founded and well documented. | | |
| ▲ | andy_ppp an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | You seem to be extremely fond of Russian propaganda. | | |
| ▲ | don_esteban an hour ago | parent [-] | | That's the easy way out, isn't it? Why argue on merit of anything you don't like, just name it Russian propaganda. Or, perchance, you want to provide a concrete argument why are my statements incorrect? (No, 'it fits Russian narrative' is not argument about correctness, it is an argument about the narrative.) | | |
| ▲ | andy_ppp 15 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I think this is the wrong place to debate politics tbh, better luck next time. |
|
| |
| ▲ | mopsi 40 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Russia's paranoia about the west is really strong, well founded and well documented.
It's an act, and everyone in Russia knows that it's an act. Acting this way gets the dumber kind of Western politicians to carefully tiptoe around Russia; that is the value this act provides. | | |
| ▲ | don_esteban 13 minutes ago | parent [-] | | There are many western authoritative sources documenting that. Have a look at William Burn's 'Nyet means nyet' depeshe.
Or Merkel's memoirs.
Or George Kennan's statement's in the 90's on the wisdom of expanding NATO. But, ultimately, one believes what he/she wants to believe.... Do you think it is better to not carefully tiptoe around Russia? Do you consider full-on sanctions, total refusal (except Trump) to diplomatically engage them, open intelligence, military and financial support of Ukraine 'carefully tiptoing'?What do you propose instead? Open WW3? I am really curious. |
|
|
|
|
