What an epic blunder by Putin which we can only hope leads to some kind of change in Russia.
And in some areas like Eastern Europe that's exactly what did happen of course.
It also didn't leave a power vacuum in the country afterwards that allowed a worse enemy to grow (Like Isis in Iraq, the Taliban's return in Afghanistan). Civilian casualties were also an order of magnitude lower. The local population was better off with the intervention than if it hadn't taken place.
PS I don't despise Americans at all! Although I was opposed to the wars in Iraq (2003) and Afghanistan and my own country's involvement in them. However I don't blame the American people for it, same way I don't blame the Russian people for Ukraine.
These wars are orchestrated by interests so far above the heads of common people that they really have no control over it.
And after a certain period of suffering and unrest, people just want "stability" and that's when any well-intention-ed politician in a country with 5min of democracy experience don't stand a change against the quintessential competent strongman savior of the once-great empire.
The problems and solutions for Russia are inside, but I don't see how that society after 70 years + 20 under alternate realities can change to actually modern and democratic ( which is very different from being Americanized ).
Being geographically closer to the West probably also made a difference; after the fall of socialism, more people could take a trip across the iron curtain and observe how things worked on the other side.
Maybe these days, people living in Russia should be invited to visit Europe and see how people live there. Like, maybe as a part of "propaganda budget", EU should offer one month of fully paid vacation here to every citizen of Russia. To see that we are actually not a hellhole full of Nazis; to see how even the life standards in Eastern Europe are these days closer to the West than to Russia; to understand that they could do even better (because they could do whatever Eastern Europe did, plus they would still have the oil).
Generally, people should travel more, see the world more. So that they can later return to their country and ask: "How is it possible that other countries have X, but here at home we say that it is impossible?" (And this applies to everyone. Like, Americans would probably also benefit from seeing that universal healthcare is possible and actually considered normal in some places.)
I'd argue the blunder is on the yes men surrounding him who now will lose their perks because they didn't think of dealing with the problem first
All in all, thousands of Russian service members have died, but Russian representatives refuse to collect bodies from Ukrainian authorities for proper burial. Relatives are kept in the dark. Many will receive a letter months from now saying that their father/husband/son died in undefined military exercise. Those relatives who speak up get a visit from security service intimidating them into shutting up.
It's a total nightmare. There'd be a violent revolution the next day if Russian TV showed truth for one evening: orthodox churches burning, entire towns razed to ground, kids getting limbs blown off from cluster munitions dropped onto residential areas, all kinds of unimaginable suffering.
The scale of this is such that there's no way to conceal truth for an extended period of time. It will lead to implosion of Russian society just like the Afghan war did in the 1980s.
Determined people may seek out independent online sources if they can digest that everything they've been told is a lie, but that's an insignificant fraction of the whole population and their activism is mercilessly crushed by security services. The critical majority remains unaware of what the whole world has seen on front pages for the past several weeks and instead lives in a parallel reality where the widely reported bombing of Mariupol's hospital didn't happen, or if it did, they were all Nazis and crisis actors. It's Alex Jones and InfoWars adopted as state religion. Insane.
People often believe what they want to believe. Repression of the press is not helpful. But it isn't hard to find the truth in Russia. You can find whatever truth you want to find.
I hope either that the Russians withdraw without a very bruised ego so they leave poor Ukrainians alone to rebuild their country or that they simply collapse altogether and start afresh without Putin. Would like to live to see Putin condemned and perhaps imprisoned or executed by his own people, that would completely vindicate the Russian people in my eyes but I very much doubt that.
“Take over Ukraine!”
“Yes!” But nothing (?) about 1. very hard, 2. unprepared military, 3. external risks.
There's no rational benefit, it's just the bizarre thinking that a physical buffer between Moscow and NATO is somehow helpful in a world with thousands of ICBMs.
On the flip side, it's ridiculous that the US and NATO leaders are willing to risk nuclear war over something symbolic with miniscule strategic value. If WW3 is started over something as foolish as this when all we had to say was 'Ukraine will never join NATO'.
In a way it is hypercritical to say Russia is overreacting when the US was extremely close to escalating to all-out war over the missiles in Cuba.
It was never about NATO, that was just a fig leaf to people with terminal “both sides” mentality. This has always been sold to Russia has returning to its rightful place as a glorious empire. That’s Putin’s personal motivations as well and he was damn clear about it in his invasion-eve speech.
This is about liberal democracy versus ruthless authoritarianism, and if you repeat Kremlin talking points, you’ve chosen the side of ruthless authoritarianism. Russia faked evidence and used it as pretext for their invasion. This is a war of aggression based on misinformation.
Even if NATO is just a fig leaf, why give it to him? Why give him the chess piece that makes it easier to justify this war?
One of the great things about a liberal democracy is that we can openly criticize the strategic choices our government has made. I sure hope that we can continue to do that without labeling those dissenters as supporting ruthless authoritarianism.
It’s great to be skeptical of our government. It’s not so great to repeat kremlin talking points nearly verbatim.
Are invasions and overthrow of governments somehow okay when they install a pro-democratic and/or US-friendly leader? What if it fails and that leader turns out to be worse than the previous one?
Keep in mind that the US/NATO has been closely involved in many of these overthrows: Libya, Yemeni, Syria, Iraq, Uganda, Somalia, Pakistan, Yugoslavia, Panama, Grenada. Pretty much all of these involved lots of civilian death and collateral damage.
These aren't kremlin talking points, this is history. It's important to try to break out of the filter bubble and consider alternative viewpoints. At least consider the possibility that NATO is abusing its power and taking actions that are far beyond its original charter/purpose.
The US almost started WW3 over exactly that same thing in the not so distance past during the cuban missile crisis.
We get mad when Russia interferes with US-elections with a few online bots but the US directly funded and participated in the overthrow of the pro-Russia Ukrainian government in 2014. There was violence involved, why is it okay when the US murders Ukrainians to install a sympathetic government but not when Russia does it? It's hypocritical.
If it were up to me, I'd disband NATO entirely (too much polarizing history) and replace it with a new organization with a very similar charter, but open membership to Russia and China. The purpose of this organization should be to prevent world wars, not to decide local elections, especially when those elections/conflicts involve non-member countries.
However note how aggressive a stance that is. NATO is supposed to be a defensive organization but with the charter/purpose you suggest, it is rational for Putin and Xi to fear US/NATO aggression and do whatever it takes to fight its expansion. It is very much a threat to their survival, and the existence of their countries as they know it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine%E2%80%93NATO_relations...
His current plan likely: 1. destroy Ukrainian military and establish control over all major cities, roads and borders (russian losses to achieve this goal is no-brainier for him) 2. starve population (repeat Holodomor [1]) 3. sent millions to prison camps.