5 ms·

I watched some analysis a while ago that stared that the war broke out to prevent Ukraine from tapping into some natural gas reserves that were uncovered at tha

I watched some analysis a while ago that stared that the war broke out to prevent Ukraine from tapping into some natural gas reserves that were uncovered at that time. Those reserves are located near Crimea. Sounds more plausible than pure ego.

pydry 3y ago
That gas field isnt going to pay for even a small fraction of the cost of the war. It doesnt make any sense as a cause. The most plausible reason for the war is still the publicly stated reason: preventing NATO expansion to Ukraine.
- verdverm 3y ago
  NATO is not a threat, just an excuse Both sides know that to be the truth. NATO would never start a war, the rules prevent article 5 from being usable should a member decide to start one on their own edit, I see parent edited their "NATO threat" comment to be "prevent NATO expansion", the JM thesis is utterly wrong, these countries are choosing to be part of a defense alliance, it is not forced on them The threat Ukraine poses to Russian leaders is a demonstration that a better life is possible without an authoritarian at the helm > publicly stated reason Putin wrote an essay in July 2021. That is the foundation, and most plausible publicly stated reason, to understand why they decided to invade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Russians_and_Ukrainians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Rus...
  - pydry 3y ago
    [flagged]
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  It would have, though, if Putin's "conquered in three weeks" had panned out.
verdverm 3y ago
Russia has plenty of oil & gas in their existing territory. If anything, Putin wants to prevent Ukraine from becoming the supplier to Europe Most experts see the reasoning as Putin wants a sphere of influence, and since no one is volunteering besides Belarus, he decided to do it by force. It's more Make Russia Great Again (like the times of czars, not soviet union)
- quantified 3y ago
  Preventing Ukraine from becoming a supplier still fits the parent comment.
  - verdverm 3y ago
    Except for the last sentence
    - quantified 3y ago
      This one: "Sounds more plausible than pure ego"? We seem to believe ego well enough (we certainly succumb to it), so if that's what you refer to, I do take your point.
vGPU 3y ago
Russia would never risk losing access to the Black Sea, as it’s the only year-round military port they have. For that extremely obvious reason Russia would never allow NATO to control that region of Ukraine.
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  This is the answer -- they want the port. The grain and industry in UKR is also a plus, but a lot of wars have been fought over Crimea, and for good reason.

pydry 3y ago

That gas field isnt going to pay for even a small fraction of the cost of the war. It doesnt make any sense as a cause. The most plausible reason for the war is still the publicly stated reason: preventing NATO expansion to Ukraine.

verdverm 3y ago
NATO is not a threat, just an excuse Both sides know that to be the truth. NATO would never start a war, the rules prevent article 5 from being usable should a member decide to start one on their own edit, I see parent edited their "NATO threat" comment to be "prevent NATO expansion", the JM thesis is utterly wrong, these countries are choosing to be part of a defense alliance, it is not forced on them The threat Ukraine poses to Russian leaders is a demonstration that a better life is possible without an authoritarian at the helm > publicly stated reason Putin wrote an essay in July 2021. That is the foundation, and most plausible publicly stated reason, to understand why they decided to invade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Russians_and_Ukrainians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Historical_Unity_of_Rus...
- pydry 3y ago
  [flagged]
AnimalMuppet 3y ago
It would have, though, if Putin's "conquered in three weeks" had panned out.

verdverm 3y ago

Russia has plenty of oil & gas in their existing territory. If anything, Putin wants to prevent Ukraine from becoming the supplier to Europe Most experts see the reasoning as Putin wants a sphere of influence, and since no one is volunteering besides Belarus, he decided to do it by force. It's more Make Russia Great Again (like the times of czars, not soviet union)

quantified 3y ago
Preventing Ukraine from becoming a supplier still fits the parent comment.
- verdverm 3y ago
  Except for the last sentence
  - quantified 3y ago
    This one: "Sounds more plausible than pure ego"? We seem to believe ego well enough (we certainly succumb to it), so if that's what you refer to, I do take your point.

vGPU 3y ago

Russia would never risk losing access to the Black Sea, as it’s the only year-round military port they have. For that extremely obvious reason Russia would never allow NATO to control that region of Ukraine.

red-iron-pine 3y ago
This is the answer -- they want the port. The grain and industry in UKR is also a plus, but a lot of wars have been fought over Crimea, and for good reason.