I said you have to live and grow up in a country near to soviet union to feel what its like before you even know what your talking about.
You are obviously the one that needs to be spoonfed this..
And nobody complained about having any buffer zones and missiles pointing at them,i repeat for the 3 time now.
Kiev can't join NATO while they dont have control over their territory - if they go into Donetsk and start overtly attacking Russian separatists, Russia will threaten to intervene. It's part of the Russian plan to stop them joining NATO, by keeping them in limbo with disputed territories.
goalpost shifting now - unless the definition of "complained" has changed to encompass annexing territory?
You said that nobody complained about missiles on the border or during the cold war, then you say that Finns and Swedes felt aggrieved about Russian aggression in the past - so which is it? To complain or not complain - that is the question. Buffer zones and annexation of territory is an entirely different point youre touching on now
The government in Kyiv doesn't even control all the territory of "Ukraine". How can they make foreign policy decisions for people and land area not under their jurisdiction?
When did Finland and Norway demand a buffer zone to Russia?
When did Finland and Norway demand Russia to remove missiles pointing at them?
Should Finland invade Karelia and demand a referendum since majority of people living there speaks Finnish and have more in common with Finland then Russia and use it as a buffer zone?
I thought you said nobody complained sure?
Old post, however you cited that FAIR is biased for using native speakers in Crimea, rather than ethnicity in their article.
However it occurs to me that native speakers is the most accurate metric, due to an example below. Ukraine hasn't exactly been balklanized along ethnic lines as yet, though that may be occurring.
The Left Bank, which includes the current regions of Crimea, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk, Kharkov, Kherson, Lugansk, Odessa, Nikolayevsk, and Zaporozhye, forms a relatively compact ethnic and cultural community that is distinguished by the strong influence of Russian culture, even where the majority of the population defines itself as Ukrainian.
In the eastern regions that supported Viktor Yanukovych in the 2004 elections, for example, the percentage of the population that considered itself ‘Russian’ was only 34.5 percent, but the percentage of those who considered themselves to be primarily ‘Russian speakers’ was 82.1 percent.
From: https://www.e-ir.info/2015/03/13/understanding-the-other-ukraine-identity-and-allegiance-in-russophone-ukraine/#google_vignette
They are. The problem is that this is an intentional act of intimidation to a neighbour on it's borders.
How do you think people felt about it,in Finland and Norway where is grew up,after the winter war in 1939?
The cold war?Invasion of Czecoslovkia in 1968,Afghanistan 80s and Now Georgia in 2008,eastern Ukraine in 2013 and Crimea in 2014
Do you think People might see a pattern here?
And do you think anyone from Russia and Ukraine want to kill eacother for 300 dollars a month because some President is losing grip in his spehere of influence with his neigbours?
Yes they are great people,both Russians and Ukrainians,great hardworking people who wants nothing more than you and me,and nobody wants a war,except for Kremlin.
Even their own Generals are complaining now,and demands Putin to step down.
Lavrov was pissed and rightly so. He walked off abruptly at the end of their press conference. Ignorance and ineptitude from Britain's govt continues to infect everything they touch.
Afghanistan was a safe haven for AQ which attacked the US.
Indeed, Russia is a source of cyber attacks, as mentioned, Moscow has taken a more aggressive stance in recent years. It's unsurprising that Ukraine wants to join NATO. In irony you couldn't invent, Putin is threatening invasion in order to prevent that from happening.
Well sure Russia is a safe haven for attacks on NATO members - cyber attacks mostly. It's not like Afghanistan borders many NATO members, so any attacks that would originate from there would be acts of terrorism a long way away. It was really NATO involving themselves in the War on Terror™.
In Libya they proudly boasted about 1000s of strikes designed to keep the people of Libya safe (didnt turn out so well) - again this kind of rhetoric isn't really that of a defensive organisation though. If they want to be defacto peacekeepers of the world, then say it, but to pretend NATO is solely a defensive pact is not really true.
Even their involvement in Former Yugoslavia, while it was a generally good thing, it wasn't exactly in their remit as a defensive organisation.
Afghanistan - so it wouldn't become a safe haven for attacks on NATO members.
Libya was more complex, it was essentially requested by the UN, which China/Russia didn't veto, to enforce arms embargo, no-fly zone, and so on. Their involvement was more debateable.
In terms of Russia, NATO is no overt threat to Russia obviously. It is however a threat to Russian aggression. More than a few Russians ultimately believe that Ukraine is a part of their "ex-empire" and as such would like to incorporate the country, by force if necessary.
What NATO member were NATO defending in their involvement in Afghanistan? Or Libya?
I'm not siding with anyone here. I would like to point out though, if the people on the other side of that iron curtain were happy enough but the people on "your" side were not. Then the problem lies with the people on "your" side.
Of course there were complaints about it - both by people on the street and at the international level.
And I was there for a time - I travelled and met people living in the Federal Republic, lovely people, but they did complain about sharing a border with a communist satellite state. They complained about militarized borders, and the fact that were the cold war to go "hot", they would be first in the firing line.
I work in Russia with both Russians and Ukrainians today and i know first hand what they mean about the situation in Ukraine and Russia.
What do they tell you then, first hand about the situation in Ukraine and Russia?
Where did they say they were not entitled to conduct such exercises?
A "Dangerous moment" is true. That has no bearing on 'legality', and vice versa.
NATO is not a credible threat to Russia, it's a defensive organisation.
Ukraine is a sovereign country, if they want to join NATO, it should be up to them. The problem with that is that it hinders Moscow's ambitions for the country and the greater region. It's much harder for Putin to "dick" with Ukraine if they are a member of NATO. The Russians know this so they are making every effort possible to stop that from happening. The equivalent of the bully not wanting the bullied kid to get boxing lessons.
The Chinese really only support the NK dynasty because they don't want millions of refugees piling across if that regime collapses.
There was no complaints from any western country,we accepted it and moved on.
I lived and grew up in a country next to soviet union,and felt the constant pressure from the iron curtain.
And just because you talked with a few doesnt give you any clues,you have to be there to feel it.
You need to ask yourself, what price are you willing to pay, to keep Ukraine from falling back into Russia's sphere?
Because I believe that Russia is willing to pay a pretty high price.
I'd wager the Kremlin might use nukes before the Russian bear is "euthanized" as you so say.
Russia being realistic about it is a pretty lame bear or even a paper bear at this stage, the us and the rest of the world could care less about Russia, let alone invade it.
The bear would be euthanasized militarily fairly quick if NATO wanted it so. People are niave if they think Russia can stand up to NATO militarily And economically.
Old enough to have met people living on "our" side of the then iron curtain - needless to say they were not enamoured at having a militarised border with the communists, and while people got on with life, there was definitely complaints. People were not happy go lucky having the USSR and its vassals on the other side - if they were, why was there such relief then at the collapse of the USSR and the demilitarization of the east-west european borders?
I am old enough to remember living in a country next to the soviet union and serving in the army at the time.
And nobody complained about buffer zones and invaded neighbours because of it.
How old are you?
Apparently Russia and it's ally Belarus are not entitled to conduct joint military exercises inside their borders.
Here's more of it "dangerous moment", are you scared yet?
https://www.rawstory.com/west-warns-of-dangerous-moment-as-russia-holds-drills-in-belarus/
@correct horse battery staple I'm not a moderator here but what's with the name calling and emotive language?
"You are some sort of a perverted puppet" really?
"wife beater"
"gain threatening to rape"
You guys got issues.
Meanwhile, the UK doing a great job keeping the Russian menace in check:
I've seen him on other threads on here. He likes to take an "alternative" stance on other topics cause he thinks it makes him look edgy and seem more intelligent. In reality he's wearing a full on tinfoil helmet and lapping up what Putins misinformation campaign spews up every day.
But yet they have militaries with defensive capability and offensive capability nobody in America is complaining,
Unlike Russia
This is just more nonsense. We know that Russian troops allegedly on the border of Ukraine has frustrated Washington's plans by their reaction to it.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
