this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2025
67 points (100.0% liked)
World News
32870 readers
533 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Did you just stop reading my comment at a certain point?
International protocols governing military readiness preparations that literally no one else in the world is capable of doing because the US outspends the next 10 countries combined AND has over 700 forward operating bases globally. Russia doesn't conduct military exercises at the Mexico/US border for a reason.
This is accurate.
Again, this demonstrates my point.
This is a ridiculous way of framing Ukraine and US arming and training literal neo-nazis to go kill ethnic Russians within Ukraine's own borders.
OH!? They engaged in military preparedness WITHIN THEIR OWN BORDERS and lied about not invading? Funny. I wonder why they would do that? Could it be what they literally said it was - the continued escalation of lethal preparedness by NATO within Ukraine specifically at the Russian border?
Again, NATO and Ukraine did almost NOTHING together until the Euromaidan coup that saw Victoria Nuland and John McCain on the ground supporting Right Sector the evening before they stormed the Ukrainian capitol and forced the sitting government to flee at gun point. 20 years of neutrality ended then, and the build up began.
The very first NATO exercise in Ukraine was actually Rapid Trident in 2017 (not Rapid Trident 21 as I previously stated). In political terms, 4 years of exercises is new. Rapid Trident 2017 only involved 2500 personnel.
In 2020, B-52 bombers made their first flight ever in Ukraine. A massive escalation.
That same year a NATO exercise was staged that was literally a mock invasion of Kaliningrad.
Rapid Trident 21 was the first exercise of its kind in September of 2021 and it's not even listed on the Wikipedia article of NATO exercises, despite being well documented by NATO itself.
Also, critical to note, the Trident moniker is literally the nuclear program.
Oh noes! Russia said one thing and did another! Oh noes! What incredible subterfuge and criminality! I'm so glad you and I live in countries that never lie!
It's pretty clear that it was a defensive action to the vast majority of analysts, including US and Euro diplomats and even Stoltenberg. It has been well understood since Clinton participated in the negotiations around the dismantling of the USSR that Ukraine becoming a staging ground for Western military readiness was a clear and present national security threat to Russia. It was discussed openly on the floors of the US Congress. It was discussed openly at the UN. Most international security strategists have stated that security is mutual and that means Russia must be included in a security framework. Security for the West at the expense of Russian security is security for no one because it will ultimately force Russia to defend itself.
And that's literally exactly what happened. We've been talking about it for over 20 years. It happened as we discussed it would happen. You will note that Russia says the reason for the Crimean annexation involved the Euromaidan coup. People like you claim that this is nonsense, because the change in 2014 was not material to Russian security in the least. And yet, the very first NATO/Ukraine collaboration was in late 2013, followed by US politicians and state dept actors on the ground for the coup, followed almost immediately by NATO involvement in Ukraine. So clearly the change in Ukrainian government goes hand in hand with an increased security threat for Russia - exactly as Russia said was happening, exactly as the international community of analysts and diplomats have been discussing since the USSR was dissolved.
The only thing that's surprising is just how effective Western propaganda has been at convincing people like you to ignore all of history and only focus on exactly what makes it seem like the West is in the right. You look at every Russian action as without any historical context, just the ravings of a mad man. You look at every Russian statement as an outright lie. And you look at each lie as though it justifies continued military escalation by the US (independently and through NATO).
None of what I'm saying is controversial in the least to anyone with a grasp on the history.