FLEA

You misread my take and the situation very severely. I agree Putin overstepped with Ukraine. I'm not backing his decision. Im saying this could have been solved with diplomacy as recently as 3 weeks ago and nobody was interested in doing that. Putin handed us a letter and told us want would prevent his action and we completely dismissed it. Now I'm not saying just cave to all of his dands but certainly some of them were entertainable. Everyone thought Putin was bluffing, and he wasn't. I dont think he was justified but I think this was preventable. Putin didn't miscalculate, the vast majority of Intel shows he expected sanctions and started hardening his economy for it. We miscalculated. When you're talking about the world's largest nuclear power and the lives of 10s of millions of civilians, you do not get to ride on a pass of " 'Merica, fuck yeah." You need to be a responsible player. Our interests is the lives of our citizens, that certainly becomes more important to me than Ukranian lives or freedoms any day. But there are far to many people on here that seem ready to just jump straight to war not believing Putin will go tooth an nail on this. You already miscalculated once. Why are you so sure you won't do it again?

So it was cool when Russia put nukes in Cuba right? They were only there to defend Cuba. You will be cool next month when Putin puts nukes in Belarus as well right? They are there for Belarus' defense after all. But the hilarious thing is, you guys are on here, calling Putin a madman that needs removed from power, but then call him crazy when he says he feels threatened from the west. Like bro, you just threatened him.

Why yes... I am saying we should have stopped NATO expansion in 1990 when we had the chance. There wouldn't be a Vladmir Putin problem if we did. Not only that we had several off ramps including up until February when Vladmir Putin sent President Biden a list of demands that encompassed his security concerns in central Europe. You writing about the neccesity of NATO to hold back Russia is like a self licking ice cream cone. They created the problem they are solving. So forgive me if I'm a little hesitant to thank them for holding Russia at bay. I don't have a disdain for NATO. I am a bit surprised by a complete lack of SA though, to admit we could have handled our foreign policy better the last 30 years. I don't think Putin miscalculated, I think we did. We miscalculated that Putin was bluffing when he said he would take his security into his own hands if NATO didn't back off his doorstep. Now we act like we are surprised and he is irrational that he took his security into his own hands when NATO approached his doorstep. NATO was an organization that was designed, as they said, to keep America in, Russia out and Germany down. By 1991 the world order changed and none of that was needed. However we lacked the strategic agility to realize that and adjust strategy to renegotiate a better world. Now we are facing what is probably the closest we've been to nuclear war since the Cuban missile crises and I'm shocked at the number of people on here who are OK with that over a conflict that was entirely preventable with diplomacy. But I think your solution to all this is to stop waiting and just take the fight to Putin. You just said it. The world has no place for his system. So your solution is to what? Get NATO to just invade Russia and oust him? Man.... Putin certainly doesn't have any security concerns from NATO or the US.....

By the way you are all making a massive leap in assumptions that current protest against the war in Russia are popular opinion or mainstream opinion. These protest are more than likely led by a vocal minority that is getting stage lit by western media in am attempt to promote their contempt. Opinion polling in Russia has show declining acceptance of western policy for some time. https://ecfr.eu/article/commentary_how_russia_has_come_to_loathe_the_west311346/?amp And I could be wrong, perhaps people in Russia are largely against the war. But there is no way of really knowing. We aren't hearing the full story of what's happening on Russia's interior and that makes it hard to understand.

Sure, and they could have lived in free capitalist democracies that weren't apart of NATO. Noone ever said you have to be in NATO to be a free capitalist democracy. Japan isn't in NATO. South Korea isn't. Australia isn't. WE didn't have to accept them. They don't just get to join NATO because they filled out a membership app. We voted with approval to do it, knowing for 30 years it wasn't in our interest. Did we ever think for a minute what the ramifications were of tieing ourselves to an obligation to defend every fledgeling state that signs a treaty to us. Do you have any idea how dangerous that is? How much blood and treasure that incurs? Don't make commitments you don't intend to keep because that is the cross roads we are at. If Lithuania is attacked tomorrow, we face the very real probability of large American metropolises being decimated to the point they'll never be recovered because we decided NATO was important enough it was worth aggravating Russia over. Mean while, if we are attacked, what's Lithuania going to do? Send an infantry battalion and an ambulance team? Ok thanks.....

This right here.... This isn't FLEA in 2022 playing devil's advocate.... This is like 30 years of top academics and policy experts ignored because politicians love the easy "feel good" win of cozying up to NATO. For 40 years America simply saw NATO as "the good guys" and developed this strong idealogy that if NATO is good, more NATO must be better. We knew this in 88-91. What happened? https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

A military alliance, yes. You see it as a defensive thing, but many of the nations we are postured against wonder why we, or all of these countries, need so many allies? The very act of expanding the alliance is see as posturing for western dominance.

None of what you said matters. I don't care what Ukraine's interests are and I don't care what NATOs interests are. Was it in our interest to bring the Ukraine into NATO? That's really all that matters. If growing NATO is so awesome, why don't we bring Russia in?

https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/0002828054201305#:~:text=The rise of Western Europe,and Asia via the Atlantic.

Agree with your first part. Democracy is the best but highly flawed. Eh on the middle. You can bring Ukraine in to the free world without committing them to a military alliance. A military alliance implies violence. Disagree with most of your last bit. Interesting belief. So what power and money has Putin got from this so far? He's been pariah'd by the west and they have sanctioned the shit out of him. Seems if this was about money he would have backed off and returned to status quo. So that COA is probably off the table. How about power? Well power is tricky because the capability to defend ones borders requires power. So I do think he is after power to a certain extent yes. Furthermore, you state, generally, that Putin is an egomaniac and is doing this entirely out of self motivations. What is your evidence for that? What drives you to that reasoning? Do you simply not believe a dictator can act in their state's interests?

Ok, Ill go a level deeper. It wasn't just the slaves or the colonies, it was the Atlantic trade hemisphere combined with the slave trade that set the conditions. It was uncontested, vast, and had access to raw resources as opposed to the South Indian hemisphere that was largely refined commodities. The industrial revolution (part 1) largely came from all of this. Where do you think all the cotton for those cotton looms came from? Historically wealth conglomerated in the east for far more of history than the west. I believe the rise of China (and probably India soon as well) is simply a return to the status norm.

Holy shit people we've come full circle..... https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/economy/2022/03/03/biden-lower-inflation-plan/9341221002/

Something like this: Is Ukraine entry in the Green zone? Or the Yellow Zone?

Prozac, I understand what you mean, I'm just saying not everything is capitulation. I made this diagram in MS Paint in 30 seconds to illustrate what I mean. On the line there is the US position, and the RUS position, and they look enormously apart. Almost irreconcilable. On the surface, we look at this and say "RUS says they need 'this' but we say we need 'that' and we are right and they are wrong!" We need to get below those positions though and actually figure out what are the interests that are driving those position, because often those interests overlap. For example, in global security, a huge Russian interests is terrorism. We share that interest. We don't like terror either and for the last 20 years, we disliked it more than Russia. Those purple overlaps are our room to negotiate and offer olive branches to ease tensions. No the US is NEVER going to support the invasion of a sovereign nation for state gain. BUT..... was it really in OUR interest (The US only, because in actuality we dont care about NATO, our relationship with NATO ends once our interests with them end) that the Ukraine join NATO? Was the Ukraine going to provide meaningful Art 5 support to the US? Was the Ukraine going to ensure the US stays out of unnecessary conflicts? At the time, our thought experiment led us to believe that admitting states into NATO would make them pro western democracy and they would eventually turn to mirror our values in world views. Was that goal not achievable via non military means? I want to say Ukraine admittance to the EU would have similar results but I can almost be certain that some US policy maker at the time didn't like that idea because it removed US control and leadership from the outcomes. I dunno, hindsight 2020. We are at where we are at now. What I am trying to explain though, is going forward, it helps to understand how we got here, and why Russia felt it needed to do the things it did.

This! When I mentor young officers I really want them to see this! If you can see how power conglomerates and tugs at things with a soft hand, the whole world makes way more sense.

Also, realize, we have a difficult time comprehending many of these anxieties because they really predate our rise into geopolitical leadership. Russia was a power far before we were, and they tend to derive a lot of lessons in statesmanship from the great powers eras of the 18th and 19th centuries. This was the era when European states commonly through around terms like "balance of power" and Putin sees all of this as analogous. He believes he is uniquely in the position to balance western power and if he doesnt western tyrants will consume Eurasia. Also, remember, Russia and the Ottomans were set apart from the other great powers in that they were largely left behind in the European rise of the 17th-19th centuries. They didn't have easy access to the Atlantic, colonization or slave trade which shaped their culture and economies. They see western success as something that was built off the victim hood of Asia, Africa and the Americas.

Ok, look at it from the 300 year goggles of evil empires. Poland, Napolean, Hittler..... I get that you see the war in Ukraine as horrific, a travesty to humanity. Putin is looking at it as a few hundred thousand casualties are nothing compared to the 30 million Russians that died in WW2 because a Western tyrant couldn't keep his own.

Take the course I recommended. I know for a fact they cover all of this. They aren't asking for help, they are posturing to ensure their security. Russia doesn't see itself as defensible without some of these holdings. To understand that you need to know the ground and naval component to the terrain in East Ukraine and the historic tenacity of European empires to press Russia there to the point of near state collapse. You are looking at this with 30 year goggles and Russia is looking at it with 300 year goggles.

Because your actual truth is not the actual truth either Prozac, its your perceived truth as well. And its not about giving a dictator what he wants, its about understanding and addressing his security concerns without escalating conflict. Just because a foreign government has an autocrat, does not mean there can't be trust or cooperation. We've done it with other autocrats, why are we so resistant to do it with Russia? I'm not saying make Russia the next South Korea (autocratic government until the late 80s) but I am saying when their head of state says he is concerned about infringement on his country's sovereignty, why do we dismiss that as a non issue?

Guys I really encourage everyone to take the DSCU course on European geopolitics. Its a 2-week course, you take it over zoom, its free to you, and you can probably get your commander to support it by saying you will become the squadron SME on the Ukraine crises and spread that knowledge to help the squadron understand the conflict they are going to go in. One of the professors from the Naval Post Graduate school is a former KC-135 pilot, you will all like him. He has studied Russia, and lived in Russia, for..... probably a decade. He will open your mind to how much we struggle to comprehend Eastern thought in the post cold war era. Again, its not about being a bunch of commie supporters. Its about knowing thy enemy. Understanding their motivations, their concerns, what makes them lose sleep at night. https://www.dscu.mil/

That's fine but you merely falling into the ploy that you only support western values when its convenient for you in your violent determination to subdue Eurasia.

Between 2011-2013 Russia experience massive revolts as apart of the "Colored Revolutions" a wave of pro-liberal ideology that swept FSU states, but also North Africa and the Muslim World. In the US we paid mostly attention the latter report and most of you remember the Arab Spring. Particularly, you remember several Arab dictators being overthrown and ousted from office, a move that Western politicians, particularly sitting US President Barrack Obama was openly in favor of. When the Snow Revolution broke out in Moscow, initial violence led over 1000 to be arrested. When asked what he thought about Russia having its own colored revolution, President Barrack Obama stated the protest were a "positive sign." Now, set aside what your thoughts on the protest are for a moment. Think from Russias perspective, and particularly the perspective of a former KGB officer who was well aware of CIA posturing in Iran, Bolivia, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam, Indonesia, Cuba, I mean holy crap there are like dozens of them. Also couple that with the fact that the term "revolution" holds special context to Russia, and has innate violent implications from the start. Lastly, recognize that in at least two of these revolutions, the US involved itself militarily to ensure the successful overthrow of an anti western dictator, and in one of those conflicts it led the US into direct opposition with Russia. (Libya and Syria). That's how Russia molds that narrative. Thats why they see it as an enormous threat. Putin's opinion was that the US should have respected the concepts of Western sovereignty and not involved itself.

Nope. Been very very very highly trained by the USG on this. Hold a graduate degree in global security and have worked academically in partnerships with strategic DoD centers. Look I dont support Putin. I'm trying to get you guys to think like officers and not naive teenagers that think they can just march in a parade or pick up a gun and make a difference. If you go to war with Russia tomorrow, you are going to lose, because you don't even know what victory conditions are for Russia. How do you stop Russia from winning when you don't even know what it is he is trying to win.

Oh also, the defensive NATO alliance openly supported and encourage the violent overthrow of the Russian government less than a decade ago, an attempt that Putin believes he has evidence the CIA initiated.

Sure, collective defense. That's the excuse all of NATO is going to use to invade Belarus when they see a Russian exercise there as an excessive force build up. Here's a fact for you, the US doctrinely plays the offense in war. We don't wait to be attacked we teach to open with shock and awe. Putin knows that. He knows "defense" can be shammed for an offensive operation because he essentially just did that. Its not being duped. You lack the creativity to see the world without your American rose tinted lenses and therefore can't come to terms with your adversaries motivations.