(03-03-2022, 07:46 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(03-02-2022, 09:11 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: If you've listened to Putin talk about this situation, his complaint hasn't changed in years. He has been asking the West to stop the expansion of NATO to the Russian border for years. It would be one thing if NATO expanded without expanding their defensive perimeters, but they don't. They put missile silos in NATO countries. This is what Putin is talking about. He's asked the question: How would the US feel if I put missiles in Canada or Mexico? They wouldn't like it. And he's saying Russians don't either. The West has abandoned geopolitical centrism in favor of the bully pulpit, because they don't fear repercussions from anyone. There is an arrogance to our policies.

I have listened to Putin speak for hours, and he comes across as a rational, intelligent man. Would I vouch for his moral character? Nope. But I would say that he's had a legitimate, reasonable complaint for most of our actions that affect his nation. Should he be invading Ukraine? No. Absolutely not. Does he have valid accusations against the West, though.... I think he does. The thing is, I can't say for certain who Putin actually is. Putin may be losing it for all I know, but how would I know. I certainly don't trust the media that has constantly lied about everything for the last 12-15 years.

In the past, the spiral towards war has often had a perfect logic to it, as if everyone acted exactly the way one would expect, and yet the result was an immense catastrophe.  World War 1 is a perfect example.  Countries felt threatened, so they formed alliances, and those alliances made other countries feel threatened, so they formed their own alliances.  Germany knew that in case of war, they would have to fight on two fronts, against the Russians on one side and the French on the other side.  So, knowing how long it would take the French to Mobilize (2 weeks) and how long it would take the Russians to mobilize (6 weeks), they formulated a plan to hit the French first, knock them out, and then turn on the Russians.  But that meant that once the Russians announced a mobilization, the clock was ticking, so the Germans had to throw the first punch, at the French.  

And that's what happened.  A Serb killed an Austrian archduke, the Austrians went after the Serbs, the Russians defended the Serbs, the Germans back the Austrians, the French backed the Russians, someone announced a mobilization, and everything kicked in.  The Germans knew if they didn't throw the first punch, they were dead meat.  

It all had a perfect logic to it in hindsight, but at the time, no one had the slightest idea that the deck was stacked for the worst disaster in the history of the world up to that point.

And yes, it is understandable that a totalitarian regime like Russia might feel threatened by the rise of democracies on its borders, but what they have done by attacking Ukraine is make things even worse for themselves, because now all those former Soviet satellites can say, 

"See?  This is why we joined NATO.  We thought that if we didn't join NATO, Russia could possibly attack us and try to bring us back into their control, and now it's been confirmed.  That's exactly what has happened in Ukraine."

You say Putin has valid accusations against the West.  I disagree.  Putin's paranoia about NATO is based on the premise that NATO could attack Russia, which is ridiculous.

The United States would unequivocally go to war if Russia put missile silos in Canada or Mexico or anywhere in Central America.

We blockaded and almost destroyed their fleets for putting missiles in Cuba.

It's hubris at it finest that we try to hold the moral high ground here. We are encroaching on their territory using our allies.

Let's not forget at the height of the Cold War the United States had 5 times the nukes that big bad Russia had. 5 times. Maybe, just maybe, WE were the bad guy

---