> Ukraine is fighting now for less militarized and endangered Europe.
I hope somebody else can appreciate the irony of this sentence like I do, given that the cause of the conflict is military NATO expansion towards east.
I hope somebody else can appreciate the irony of this sentence like I do, given that the cause of the conflict is military NATO expansion towards east.
To large parts of Eastern/Northern Europe, it is either be part of a pretty good (but admittedly imperfect) NATO defence alliance - or have your sovereignty threatened by Russia.
You seriously think the Baltic states would be independent today, if they had not gained NATO membership?
You can look up articles from 2008 and see that even Germany (Angela Merkel) was adamantly opposed to Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO, because there was no credible threat from Russia and she knew this would create instability in Europe. The fact that there was no credible Russian threat is easily confirmed if you do a Google search for "ukraine russia" before 2008: you hardly find anything noteworthy. The whole narrative only changed around 2014.
Now we're at the situation where the Ukrainian people, and also Russians and the entire Europe (at least economically), are paying huge costs because we couldn't avoid seconding foolish US foreign policy choices.
All this bullshit about "NATO expansion eastward" that "Putin warned against" - LOL, this is no "NATO expansion", this is "free sovereign states joining NATO by their own volition to get protection from aggressors", and Putin's opinion doesn't matter at all and his "warnings" only reveal him as the bully aggressor he is.
His place is to sit home and accept what Ukraine's elections decide. He should've thought out his actions and shouldn't have done things that made Ukrainians want to join NATO and EU if he is afraid (more like paranoid) of NATO being too close.
> You can look up articles from 2008 and see that even Germany (Angela Merkel) was adamantly opposed to Ukraine and Georgia joining NATO, because there was no credible threat from Russia
This shortsightness is exactly what got us into this mess. It was crystal clear in 2008 that this is what Russia will do if the pro-Russian government withers away, but business was more important to Germany.
> The whole narrative only changed around 2014.
No, you're very out of touch. Ukrainians wanted freedom, democracy and end of corruption since forever - but they were silenced by the old government.
It seems that many in Europe hoped to turn a blind eye in return for economic success. I hope much can be recovered and ties restored, but probably not while Putin is at the helm.
Stop swallowing Putin propaganda wholesale.
You can watch this to familiarize yourself with historical context of Russia-Ukraine relationships: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK-yJD_fAtk
That's just not true.
> NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agreed today that these countries will become members of NATO.
This is from the 2008 Bucharest NATO meeting official declaration. [1]
[1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm
Whay I fail to still see is how it in any shape or form justifies what Putin is doing.
It explains way better why he decided wage war that will be devastating to Rusian economy that wasn't doing so well already.
This and access to Ukraine resources because resources is what Russia earns their money from.
That's why he believes sanctions won't be such a big deal in the long run. He thinks Ukraine resources will balance out costs of war.
Talking about NATO agression on Russia is pure and simple propaganda. NATO is a defensive alliance and there's no way USA or anyone could convince other members to invade Russia in peace time.