5 ms·

I see this mostly coming from US and UK based news outlets, and of course the White House. I have this nagging feeling the US really wants a proxy war in Ukrain

by adevx 5y ago

I see this mostly coming from US and UK based news outlets, and of course the White House. I have this nagging feeling the US really wants a proxy war in Ukraine for whatever reason. It only needs a trigger, like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. Whatever gets the ball rolling. I hope cooler heads will prevail.

lkxijlewlf 5y ago
What use is a war machine that is mostly idle? /sarcasm.
runnerup 5y ago
> It only needs a trigger, like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. It’s really not the same at all. Even supposing the rest of what you said was true…all Russia needs to do is just: not invade a sovereign country. They don’t have to prove a negative. They just have to not use their military to invade. This isn’t an unfalsifiable causus belli like Iraqs WMDs.
- sschueller 5y ago
  There are news hast currently talking about implementing sanctions already. Russia has not yet invaded but they are talking about imposing sanctions as of they did. At this point it probably doesn't even mater if Russia invades, according to these news channels Russia will be sanctioned. How do you find diplomatic solutions like that?
  - avgDev 5y ago
    It is a threat to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine. I have not seen anything that Russia will be sanctioned even if they do not invade.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Russia has not yet invaded Um, yeah, it has. (See Crimea, Donbas, etc.) After pretty similar denials of intent to invade to those it has recently made about its intent to further invade. That's part of the credibility problem.
    - robbedpeter 5y ago
      It's weird that Russia even bothers. Any human with an iq over 80 knows what Russia is planning at this point.
  - caskstrength 5y ago
    Can you provide sources for any preemptive sanctions towards Russia? I only know about US Republican party initiative, but it was rejected by ruling party (Democrats).
dahdum 5y ago
I don't see the same thing as you. Everyone knows that NATO will deny Ukraine's application if they make one because it requires all 30 countries to accept it. Biden has slow rolled the process, publicly supporting their potential "application" but helping prevent them from doing so. France, Germany, and others are very hard no's as far as I remember. They're afraid to poke Russia and dislike Ukraine in general. Whatever Putin's ultimate goals, I think NATO has already accepted they are fait accompli, but will still pump out some empty rhetoric to quell their conscience. Any sanctions down the road will be a joke, Europe is too reliant on Russian gas to do more than sabre rattling.
- everybodyknows 5y ago
  > France, Germany, and others are very hard no's ... Is this on the record? Haven't heard them affirm it publicly.
  - dahdum 5y ago
    Germany has blocked 3rd path arms shipments to Ukraine and is bypassing Ukraine with a gas pipeline directly to Russia. Something like half of Germans supported the Crimea annexation and their Head of Navy had to resign after causing international outcry by publicly backing Putin. They’ll pay lip service to the idea, but Ukraine will never be “ready” to join NATO in their eyes. Macron is calling for a new security order in Europe that doesn’t involve NATO, and has been working to that end. He seeks appeasement and has been meeting and speaking with Putin directly. If Russia annexes Ukraine I’m sure he’ll speak out against it, but that’s all it seems he’ll do. That’s only my take at least, based on reading major US/EU news sites.
nix23 5y ago
>like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq The not existing one you mean?
dragonwriter 5y ago
> I have this nagging feeling the US really wants a proxy war in Ukraine for whatever reason For what reason? There's no upside for the US. Russia overtly wants a protected hegemonic sphere of influence in Eastern Europe — heck, it expressly uses the idea of such a fear as it's argument, and it's propaganda proxies invoke the idea of a parallel US sphere in North America as a defense — and overtly wants NATO not merely not to expand to include Ukraine but to withdraw troops (and demonstrate a lack of security commitment) to other Eastern European states to facilitate that hegemonic sphere. Russia is the only side with anything to gain by war (establishing a Ukrainian puppet state) or it's threat (getting NATO to back off and enable Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine.) It’s also the only side doing anything threatening. The US has moved forces too small to be anything but tripwire forces against conflict spilling out of Ukraine to other Eastern European allies, while pulling trainers and civilians out of Ukraine with the overt explanation that it is doing so because military intervention to extract them in the event of an invasion would lead to a world war. It is doing everything possible (including not mobilizing forces that would give it credible capacity to intervene) to indicate that it will not fight Russia, not only not aggressively, but also that it won't allow itself to be drawn into conflict if Russia invades Ukraine. Russia, on the other hand, has stripped the entire country to deploy essentially the entire combat power of it's military exactly where you’d want it for an invasion of Ukraine, and unleashed propaganda about whose fault it will be if it chooses to use it. It is pretty clear who wants war.
- landemva 5y ago
  The upside to USA is to distract from problems at home such as: soaring food prices, energy prices 5 year highs, soaring rent house prices, collapsing COVID lockdown narrative, ridiculous levels of govt debt, Pres polls in toilet with midterm elections approaching. It's a great distraction.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > The upside to USA is to distract from problems at home such as: soaring food prices, War would exacerbate that. > energy prices 5 year highs, War would really exacerbate that and it's the single strongest economic force, historically, against the party of the sitting President. > ridiculous levels of govt debt, While the GOP wants to make that a narrative (as they usually do when out of power, despite running it up when in power), it doesn't really seem to be working, so I don't think anyone cares about distracting from it. (And certainly not the GOP.) > Pres polls in toilet with midterm elections approaching. Yes, I’m sure that’s why leading members of the GOP in Congress and GOP-aligned media are pushing for a firm stand and that “Congress must do more” on Russia, they are desperately worried to get the attention off the President’s sagging approval numbers. If this was the runup to the NATO-Yugoslavia war in the 1990s, the wag-the-dog domestic politics argument would at least make some sense, and be consistent with the domestic alignment of views, but for that to work in this case you have to think that both the major parties want—enough to start a war— to get people's minds off a bunch of things that (1) are very good for one of those parties, (2) about half of which would be intensified by war. And that, in pursuit of getting this US-involved war of distraction started, they are carefully pulling US civilians and troops out of Ukraine so that there is no excuse for the US to get involved even if a war does start there, while deploying US troops in numbers FAR too small to meaningfully intervene in Ukraine, but far too large for the message to be missed by Russia, to neighboring NATO countries to deter any action beyond Ukraine that would oblige US involvement under the terms of the Washington Treaty.
sschueller 5y ago
I see this as well and I can't watch them at the moment. The local Swiss news are more cautious as to what they say and there is also a feeling of that there is still hope of preventing this war. Like all conflicts this is an extremely complex situation and the US painting it black and white is neither right nor a way to find a peaceful solution.

by adevx 5y ago

lkxijlewlf 5y ago

What use is a war machine that is mostly idle? /sarcasm.

runnerup 5y ago

> It only needs a trigger, like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. It’s really not the same at all. Even supposing the rest of what you said was true…all Russia needs to do is just: not invade a sovereign country. They don’t have to prove a negative. They just have to not use their military to invade. This isn’t an unfalsifiable causus belli like Iraqs WMDs.

sschueller 5y ago
There are news hast currently talking about implementing sanctions already. Russia has not yet invaded but they are talking about imposing sanctions as of they did. At this point it probably doesn't even mater if Russia invades, according to these news channels Russia will be sanctioned. How do you find diplomatic solutions like that?
- avgDev 5y ago
  It is a threat to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine. I have not seen anything that Russia will be sanctioned even if they do not invade.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Russia has not yet invaded Um, yeah, it has. (See Crimea, Donbas, etc.) After pretty similar denials of intent to invade to those it has recently made about its intent to further invade. That's part of the credibility problem.
  - robbedpeter 5y ago
    It's weird that Russia even bothers. Any human with an iq over 80 knows what Russia is planning at this point.
- caskstrength 5y ago
  Can you provide sources for any preemptive sanctions towards Russia? I only know about US Republican party initiative, but it was rejected by ruling party (Democrats).

dahdum 5y ago

I don't see the same thing as you. Everyone knows that NATO will deny Ukraine's application if they make one because it requires all 30 countries to accept it. Biden has slow rolled the process, publicly supporting their potential "application" but helping prevent them from doing so. France, Germany, and others are very hard no's as far as I remember. They're afraid to poke Russia and dislike Ukraine in general. Whatever Putin's ultimate goals, I think NATO has already accepted they are fait accompli, but will still pump out some empty rhetoric to quell their conscience. Any sanctions down the road will be a joke, Europe is too reliant on Russian gas to do more than sabre rattling.

everybodyknows 5y ago
> France, Germany, and others are very hard no's ... Is this on the record? Haven't heard them affirm it publicly.
- dahdum 5y ago
  Germany has blocked 3rd path arms shipments to Ukraine and is bypassing Ukraine with a gas pipeline directly to Russia. Something like half of Germans supported the Crimea annexation and their Head of Navy had to resign after causing international outcry by publicly backing Putin. They’ll pay lip service to the idea, but Ukraine will never be “ready” to join NATO in their eyes. Macron is calling for a new security order in Europe that doesn’t involve NATO, and has been working to that end. He seeks appeasement and has been meeting and speaking with Putin directly. If Russia annexes Ukraine I’m sure he’ll speak out against it, but that’s all it seems he’ll do. That’s only my take at least, based on reading major US/EU news sites.

nix23 5y ago

>like the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq The not existing one you mean?

dragonwriter 5y ago

> I have this nagging feeling the US really wants a proxy war in Ukraine for whatever reason For what reason? There's no upside for the US. Russia overtly wants a protected hegemonic sphere of influence in Eastern Europe — heck, it expressly uses the idea of such a fear as it's argument, and it's propaganda proxies invoke the idea of a parallel US sphere in North America as a defense — and overtly wants NATO not merely not to expand to include Ukraine but to withdraw troops (and demonstrate a lack of security commitment) to other Eastern European states to facilitate that hegemonic sphere. Russia is the only side with anything to gain by war (establishing a Ukrainian puppet state) or it's threat (getting NATO to back off and enable Russian hegemony in Eastern Europe beyond Ukraine.) It’s also the only side doing anything threatening. The US has moved forces too small to be anything but tripwire forces against conflict spilling out of Ukraine to other Eastern European allies, while pulling trainers and civilians out of Ukraine with the overt explanation that it is doing so because military intervention to extract them in the event of an invasion would lead to a world war. It is doing everything possible (including not mobilizing forces that would give it credible capacity to intervene) to indicate that it will not fight Russia, not only not aggressively, but also that it won't allow itself to be drawn into conflict if Russia invades Ukraine. Russia, on the other hand, has stripped the entire country to deploy essentially the entire combat power of it's military exactly where you’d want it for an invasion of Ukraine, and unleashed propaganda about whose fault it will be if it chooses to use it. It is pretty clear who wants war.

landemva 5y ago
The upside to USA is to distract from problems at home such as: soaring food prices, energy prices 5 year highs, soaring rent house prices, collapsing COVID lockdown narrative, ridiculous levels of govt debt, Pres polls in toilet with midterm elections approaching. It's a great distraction.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The upside to USA is to distract from problems at home such as: soaring food prices, War would exacerbate that. > energy prices 5 year highs, War would really exacerbate that and it's the single strongest economic force, historically, against the party of the sitting President. > ridiculous levels of govt debt, While the GOP wants to make that a narrative (as they usually do when out of power, despite running it up when in power), it doesn't really seem to be working, so I don't think anyone cares about distracting from it. (And certainly not the GOP.) > Pres polls in toilet with midterm elections approaching. Yes, I’m sure that’s why leading members of the GOP in Congress and GOP-aligned media are pushing for a firm stand and that “Congress must do more” on Russia, they are desperately worried to get the attention off the President’s sagging approval numbers. If this was the runup to the NATO-Yugoslavia war in the 1990s, the wag-the-dog domestic politics argument would at least make some sense, and be consistent with the domestic alignment of views, but for that to work in this case you have to think that both the major parties want—enough to start a war— to get people's minds off a bunch of things that (1) are very good for one of those parties, (2) about half of which would be intensified by war. And that, in pursuit of getting this US-involved war of distraction started, they are carefully pulling US civilians and troops out of Ukraine so that there is no excuse for the US to get involved even if a war does start there, while deploying US troops in numbers FAR too small to meaningfully intervene in Ukraine, but far too large for the message to be missed by Russia, to neighboring NATO countries to deter any action beyond Ukraine that would oblige US involvement under the terms of the Washington Treaty.

sschueller 5y ago

I see this as well and I can't watch them at the moment. The local Swiss news are more cautious as to what they say and there is also a feeling of that there is still hope of preventing this war. Like all conflicts this is an extremely complex situation and the US painting it black and white is neither right nor a way to find a peaceful solution.