Russia(gate/bot) At what rate is NATO planning to invite in Ukraine? If NATO doesn't know, why is negotiating away a neutrality agreement a non-starter?

Terthna

Professional Lurker
People can be wrong about one thing and right about another you know, and this includes governments.
Perhaps, but obviously I don't agree that they are right in this case, or appreciate being compared to a Holocaust denier; though I do find the irony in that (from someone who, like all of us, is denounced as a Nazi for having the wrong opinions) a bit darkly humorous. Also, keep that in mind when backing them on this that the establishment is going to eventually declare that all criticism of them is Russian propaganda, the promulgation of which is an act of treason.
 

Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
Perhaps, but obviously I don't agree that they are right in this case, or appreciate being compared to a Holocaust denier;
:rolleyes: Once again, you insist on not actually reading what people have actually said, even though you quoted them:

I get this weird thing with (not saying there's equivalence, just pattern recognition) Holocaust deniers as well. They scream about "current narrative" being western propaganda, then proceed to quote the other side's propaganda as evidence of this. Political tribalism well and truly rots the brain in my view. It's gotten the better of quite a few on here and they have utterly embarrassed themselves as a result.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
:rolleyes: Once again, you insist on to actually reading what people have actually said, even though you quoted them:
The comparison poisons the well.

Also, have you just up and forgotten what the US gov did with regards to Wu Flu info, and is still doing with it?

Doubt the official narratrive of all sides, yet recognizing what is actually happening on the ground and what gov heads are claiming vs what actually happens, is the only way to avoid being led into WW3, and/or another Chernobyl), by propaganda, greed, and stupidity.

I doubted the invasion would happen, till the bridge went up in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, and that is because of how bad the gov's cred is anymore.

However, Zelenski is turning out to actually be more of a Bahgdad Bob with his claims, while Western press has people like Hannity calling for Putin to be coup'd, and people like Lindsey Graham echoing it.

Why do you act like the US gov suddenly got all it's cred back, just because Putin decided to roll the dice on his, and his nation's, future, and maybe the world's future if things escalate.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Moscow would never accept NATO troops possibly being within minutes flight time from Moscow; we saw what happened with the missiles we placed in Turkey that precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis.

And that's not already the case with the Baltic countries already being in NATO?

Have you considered that maybe Ukraine is a sovereign nation of 44 million people, and not a toy in a tug of war game? In the end it's their prerogative to seek NATO membership. Hell, the events of these past weeks absolutely prove that they were justified in it!

Agreed!
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
No. Did we all hallucinate the 2019 elections?

There were also the 2014 Ukrainian elections before that.

It's ~350 miles from Latvia (a NATO member) to Moscow. Ukraine to Moscow is ~270. The difference there in travel time for missiles is seconds. Do some bloody research before you repeat nonsensical claims like this.



I have yet to see you present a single shred of evidence that this is true. From what I've seen, it's more likely that the government before the 2014 coup was a Russian puppet government, but I know my familiarity with Ukraine is sparse enough that I might be misreading the situation. If you'd actually present some evidence, I might be persuaded you're right here.

We know that either way the Ukrainian government was very corrupt both before and after the coup, though whether it was worse before or after I don't know.

FWIW, what likely radicalized the Ukrainian protesters in 2013-2014 was the fact that Yanukovych used brutal and bloody violence against them. When they got beaten up for peacefully protesting, well, that made them really angry. And of course it didn't help that Yanukovych acted like an authoritarian thug during his entire presidency in general.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
I have yet to see you present a single shred of evidence that this is true. From what I've seen, it's more likely that the government before the 2014 coup was a Russian puppet government, but I know my familiarity with Ukraine is sparse enough that I might be misreading the situation. If you'd actually present some evidence, I might be persuaded you're right here.

We know that either way the Ukrainian government was very corrupt both before and after the coup, though whether it was worse before or after I don't know.
Sorry I missed this, but I'm not really sure what you're asking me to prove here.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
And that's not already the case with the Baltic countries already being in NATO?
NATO is not Ukraine, and as far as I know, there are no ABM/possible TCLM launchers in the Baltics, only Poland and Romania.

US forces in the Baltics are tripwire forces mostly made of cav and armor, so they can at least fight through the first strikes of a nuclear war.

As well, the Ohio SSGN can go into the Med, but not the Black Sea, due to the agreements with Turkey and Russia about limiting the US to 1 warship at a time in the Black Sea, and I think that excludes subs. It what we gave up to get Turkey to bottle up a lot of the Black Sea Fleet and keep it from transiting to the Aegen freely.

As well, Russia has Kaliningrad, which is really wants to have a land bridge to, only NATO membership for the Baltics kept Russia from pursuing that. I am all for letting in Finland and Sweden though; I always felt they were natural members that just didn't want to completely screw their neutrality with Moscow up to this point. Now I think they are no longer willing to tolerate Putin's paranoia or desire for empire.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
So, why exactly can't the Baltic arrangement also work for Ukraine?
Because Ukraine and the Baltics are different situations, in terms of what the risk vs rewards are for trying to have them in NATO and were also far less corrupt than Ukraine.
 

prinCZess

Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
were also far less corrupt than Ukraine
*whistles*
That really wasn't the case--Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania were all pretty notoriously and straightforwardly corrupt post-Soviet states. Corruption (and general economic/social reorganization less negatively) that delayed their entries into NATO or the EU by more than a decade.

I mean...The picture is complicated by the greater international access globalization and the internet (and economic integration like the EU itself) have caused, along with Ukraine's greater size/resources compared to the baltic states. But...'relatively', if you can use such a word, there's very great similarities between the corruption present in the post-Soviet baltics as there is in current Ukraine (or, for that matter, overlap with the corruption in post-Soviet Russia as well...the baltics just made their way out of it to some degree whilst Russia and Ukraine have only continued and streamlined the corruption with the march of technology and time).

That said, still plenty of complications in Ukraine joining NATO not present in the baltics...Somewhat more similarly to Georgia in Ukraine's case, it would give NATO a land-border with Russia much broader and more threatening than the current borders Latvia and Estonia have.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
NATO is not Ukraine, and as far as I know, there are no ABM/possible TCLM launchers in the Baltics, only Poland and Romania.

US forces in the Baltics are tripwire forces mostly made of cav and armor, so they can at least fight through the first strikes of a nuclear war.

As well, the Ohio SSGN can go into the Med, but not the Black Sea, due to the agreements with Turkey and Russia about limiting the US to 1 warship at a time in the Black Sea, and I think that excludes subs. It what we gave up to get Turkey to bottle up a lot of the Black Sea Fleet and keep it from transiting to the Aegen freely.
But a SSGN or any other warship can go to Baltics' coast.
And a B-2 can fly over them.
Or last but not least, if we are playing nuclear skullduggery, and USA has secretly ressurected Tomahawk GLCM, could put them on a truck, just like in the Cold War, put the trucks in the hold of a ro-ro freighter, unload them at night in Riga, and fire off within minutes of unloading.
 

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
It's ~350 miles from Latvia (a NATO member) to Moscow. Ukraine to Moscow is ~270. The difference there in travel time for missiles is seconds. Do some bloody research before you repeat nonsensical claims like this.



I have yet to see you present a single shred of evidence that this is true. From what I've seen, it's more likely that the government before the 2014 coup was a Russian puppet government, but I know my familiarity with Ukraine is sparse enough that I might be misreading the situation. If you'd actually present some evidence, I might be persuaded you're right here.

We know that either way the Ukrainian government was very corrupt both before and after the coup, though whether it was worse before or after I don't know.
They were a Russian puppet before 2014
NATO is not Ukraine, and as far as I know, there are no ABM/possible TCLM launchers in the Baltics, only Poland and Romania.

US forces in the Baltics are tripwire forces mostly made of cav and armor, so they can at least fight through the first strikes of a nuclear war.

As well, the Ohio SSGN can go into the Med, but not the Black Sea, due to the agreements with Turkey and Russia about limiting the US to 1 warship at a time in the Black Sea, and I think that excludes subs. It what we gave up to get Turkey to bottle up a lot of the Black Sea Fleet and keep it from transiting to the Aegen freely.

As well, Russia has Kaliningrad, which is really wants to have a land bridge to, only NATO membership for the Baltics kept Russia from pursuing that. I am all for letting in Finland and Sweden though; I always felt they were natural members that just didn't want to completely screw their neutrality with Moscow up to this point. Now I think they are no longer willing to tolerate Putin's paranoia or desire for empire.
You do know there are NATO forces in every Baltic state that is a member of NATO right?
Three of which are on the border of russia. With Turkey having prime control over the Baltic sea. A NATO country...
Almost like all the NATO countri3s are literally in it because if Expansionist Russia.
But obviously Georgia, and Chechnia and Crimea and Donbass mean nothing...
 

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
The ship/sub numbers came down because we felt the Cold War was over, not as a peace overture to Russia.
What exactly is the difference to you between "doing it because we consider the war to be over" and "doing it as a gesture of peaceful intent"?
Why do you act like the US gov suddenly got all it's cred back, just because Putin decided to roll the dice on his, and his nation's, future, and maybe the world's future if things escalate.
I think there is no reason to look at recent events and conclude the US intelligence community isn't going to lie to us, but I do think it restores some confidence that, at least on some topics, it's not going to be dead fucking wrong.
 

Emperor Tippy

Merchant of Death
Super Moderator
Staff Member
Founder
Whether or not Ukraine has a right to self determination is immaterial, what matters in international relations is what interests are at play and who is willing to do what to advance those interests.

Russia perceives Ukraine being part of NATO, or even being western aligned with a credible military force trained/supplied/equipped by the west to be an existential threat. Russian policy on this point has been unambiguously clear literally since the end of the USSR, and has been repeatedly and emphatically expressed consistently for years.

Russia is, as they have proven rather empathetically this past week, willing to use full scale military force to enforce its opinion.

Ukraine is dealing with the realistic, expected, consequences of pissing off the great power it shares a border with.

If you want the proximate cause of the Ukraine mess, it goes back to the US couping the pro-Russian Ukrainian President and not even being subtle about it. I mean when you have a ranking member of the state department being leaked on YouTube planning said coup a few weeks before it happens, only being the US lets you get away with denying reality that hard when you claim it wasn't your fault.

---
Nations don't have a "right" to be in NATO. It is an alliance that was designed for mutual defense against Russia (the USSR). If making someone a member doesn't serve that interest, then they shouldn't be made a member.

In the case of Ukraine, trying to become a member makes them LESS safe from Russia because Russia was very clear it would go to war with Ukraine to prevent it.

In the case of NATO, trying to get Ukraine to be a member makes them LESS safe from Russia because of exactly what is happening right now and the expected consequences.
 

The Original Sixth

Well-known member
Founder
Bit of a spoiler at this point, but Ukraine was never going to be allowed to join NATO in any short amount of time, because Russia made it plain that it would invade should it try. And so the West has slowly tried to arm and empower Ukraine. Troop training, Javelins, Stingers, and lots of other cool toys. With Russia decaying strength, it would only be a matter of time before Russia would not be able to take or hold Ukraine. Right now, holding Ukraine is somewhat questionable for the Russians.

Bringing NATO into the fold makes no sense, not unless you want to start a war with Russia. Either by provoking Russia into a war or by using it as a springboard to assault Moscow and cut Russia off from the Black Sea.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top