Comments on: The Russians assessed Nato as weak because it was weak

By: Pseudo-Chrysostom

Pseudo-Chrysostom — Sun, 01 May 2022 01:33:13 +0000

Any pretense of NATO being ‘merely a defensive alliance’ was definitively put to bed for anyone paying attention in the late 90s and early aughts, when ideas of Russia joining NATO were floated, and met with a resounding arcade of awkward shuffling and averted glances.

The purpose of NATO’s existence is menacing Russia; it does not exist without this purpose; and as long as it continues to exist it will continue to pursue this purpose, regardless of what the situation, scenario, or circumstances are.

By: Gavin Longmuir

Gavin Longmuir — Sat, 30 Apr 2022 23:02:36 +0000

Soban: “Russia invaded Ukraine, not the other way around.”

That is a rather over-simplified view, although it is the view being pushed into empty heads by the BBC, CNN, NYT and their ilk.

NATO aggression started long ago, when “Our Guys” broke their promise not to expand NATO towards Russia’s borders. The war in the Ukraine started in 2014, when the US engineered a coup and installed a rather unsavory clique who began oppressing & murdering Russian-speaking Ukrainians. When the West intervened to try to stop that slaughter, the Ukrainian clique signed the Minsk accords to protect Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the east – but then refused to implement those agreements.

Zelensky’s clique were gearing up for a military invasion of those Russian-speaking areas. NATO and the US were ignoring the pleas from Russia. So Russia pre-empted the Ukrainian clique by attacking.

All Putin’s fault, of course. The man is worse than Trump!

By: Soban Robespierre

Soban Robespierre — Sat, 30 Apr 2022 17:22:28 +0000

If the US had invaded Mexico without just cause, you can be sure that both Russia and China would be sending weapons to Mexico and training Mexican soldiers and guerillas.

Would the US then be justified in threatening China and Russia with nuclear oblivion in return? The entire situation becomes tangled beyond rational argument very quickly, when wars start out of the fever dreams of autocrats, with no justification.

Russia invaded Ukraine, not the other way around. Russians are turning Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure to rubble and practicing genocidal rape, murder, torture, and population cleansing against Ukraine.

None of this would have happened without Putin’s nightmares playing out in reality.

By: VXXC

VXXC — Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:20:28 +0000

“I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve.”

Pardon, that’s a myth. What he actually may have sad is the Japanese got a much sharper reaction than expected.

By: Altitude Zero

Altitude Zero — Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:04:57 +0000

Whether it makes sense to us or not, the Russians announced repeatedly that they regarded Ukraine in NATO as a threat to their vital interests, and we continued to ignore them, and push NATO east. In a similar vein, the US regarded Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba as being utterly unacceptable, even though its unclear to this day whether this really gave the Soviets any actual additional capabilities, or at least any that warranted WWIII. Nations, (including us) are not always entirely rational, we should have learned that by now. Russia is obviously ultimately responsible for their own actions, but the US and NATO had many chances it help defuse the situation, and instead they escalated it, and this has made the world much more unsafe for everyone. Incidentally, you would have thought that, after 1941, the Russians would have learned not to trust the Germans by now…

By: David Foster

David Foster — Wed, 13 Apr 2022 12:06:33 +0000

“concern that NATO was working up to expanding into the Ukraine — which could have put nuclear missiles only 4 minutes flight time from Moscow.”

Many, perhaps most, US cities are within about 15 minutes flight time from Russian SLBMs. With depressed trajectories, coastal and near-coast cities are within perhaps 7 minutes…with hypersonic missiles, less…and missiles can be launched from any commercial-appearing vessels as well as submarines.

By: Lu An Li

Lu An Li — Wed, 13 Apr 2022 11:58:36 +0000

“As for Nato, Germany reiterated its refusal to spend 2% or even 1% of its GDP for defence.”

The agreed amount that had been agreed upon. One conference agreed. A second affirmed. But still no 2 % from other than a few members of NATO.

By: Capt Obvious

Capt Obvious — Wed, 13 Apr 2022 09:09:09 +0000

More news, the sky is blue (at least in the East, can’t say what the West will call it tomorrow), F=mA and the only things certain are death and taxes. NATO only works on soft targets and the Russians knew the moment President Potato was inaugurated that Operation Annex Whatever parts of Ukraine was on.

And, no, NATO still sucks and always will against a Peer level military. Pretty good at bombing civilians though.

By: Gregory Cochran

Gregory Cochran — Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:47:49 +0000

“which could have put nuclear missiles only 4 minutes flight time from Moscow”

Like it makes any difference.

By: Gavin Longmuir

Gavin Longmuir — Tue, 12 Apr 2022 23:27:21 +0000

“The Russians assessed Nato as weak because it was weak, and therefore attacked Ukraine.”

Hmmm! Part of the trigger for Russia intervening in the Ukraine’s 8-year long civil war was the concern that NATO was working up to expanding into the Ukraine — which could have put nuclear missiles only 4 minutes flight time from Moscow. That was unacceptable — at least that is what the Russians themselves have said.

If Russia had really believed that NATO was weak, then why would Russia have been concerned about a weak NATO advancing towards its border?

Maybe Russia was concerned because they had seen the “defensive” NATO alliance invade the sovereign nation of Iraq, attack Libya, bomb Belgrade, and invade the sovereign nation of Afghanistan. Reasonable people might have sheltered severe doubts about NATO’s objectives for the Ukraine, and decided to pre-empt NATO before it could attack.

Luttwak’s assessment is unconvincing. Russia’s move into the Ukraine was more likely driven by the (misapplied) strength of NATO rather than by any (perceived) weakness.