Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > Main Forums > Chill Out Room > The 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine Discussion Thread
Pages (9): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Share
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
JEO
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Jan 2010
Location: ATH

Our Russia appeasers don't agree with Putin either; it's just that they're as much of a coward as you seem to me. They choose to rather appease in fear than simply do the thing Russia "respects" and "fears": not giving in. No doubt, in their mind, they're preventing some unimaginable tragedy with their actions. Oh, and also making lots of money on the side.

Finland's co-operation with NATO is practically on the level of a NATO member. Russia knows this, and so should you. What we're missing right now is the last little bit. Our public discourse's messages are now aimed at NATO members, not Russia. Russia knows we're going to join at some point, and even in the off-chance that we aren't, Russia already thinks of us as a NATO member - a NATO member that doesn't have the support of NATO: a NATO member that can be thought of as a NATO member in Russia, internally, to justify an invasion, but which does not enjoy the protection of the intimidating effect of NATO.

Their invasion, if Finland won't join NATO PUBLICALLY, is just a matter of time. Staying out of NATO at this point is suicide for Finland. When it comes to non-NATO members, Russia will come up with a reason to invade, you don't need to give them one. You're not their neighbor, and you don't know their mindset. As I've said so many times, WEAKNESS is what Russia is going for; they see weakness as an OPPORTUNITY, and at this point not joining NATO would be weakness on Finland's part. Your assumptions about rationality or motive don't apply to Russia or the majority of Russians the way you think they do. Or maybe you know more than you give out, but the sheer fact you didn't comment on Lenin's bayonet makes me think you don't.

The only last thing is to publically debate Finland's public's acceptance to a level that will give current NATO members the needed guarantees that we are fully in to protect other NATO members; that we're not just in for ourselves. A tough thing to prove at this point, and not least because of opinions like yours that have plagued the discourse for decades. Thankfully they are opinions that are at this point increasingly on the losing side of this debate.

Your argument is that NATO's "expansion" lead to Putin's aggression, which is even more proof of you knowing exactly fuck all about Russia. Eastern European states joined NATO exactly because Russia will expand westward if we don't join NATO.

I'm really fighting myself here to not call you a massive pampered fuckwit who hasn't spent most of their adult life going to military refreshers, fearing and pessimistically anticipating this very moment, where opinions like yours have let things get to this point where we STILL in 2022 are not integrated deeply enough with the west for Russia to not play with the idea of threatening us. The only reason I will not is because I think you might have been a conscript yourself.

When Russia threatens to do something if the threatened party does thing X, it's an empty threat. When Russia says they're not going to do thing X, they are going to do thing X.

-Russia has guaranteed not to attack its weaker neighboring countries = they will attack their weaker neighboring countries.
-Russia has not sent conscripts to fight in Ukraine = almost all the captured "soldiers" in Ukraine are conscripcts of age 18-20.
-Russia does not bomb civilians in Ukraine = they bomb civilians every day in multiple cities in Ukraine.
-Russia has threatened to use nuclear weapons = they will not use nukes; the nuclear threat, and in the end, "benevolently" not using their nuclear capacity, is their last non-humiliating way to de-escalate and retreat without a total loss of face in case of a humiliating (from an outside of Russia viewpoint) defeat in Ukraine.
-All historical Russian casus belli are manufactured by Russia - prove me wrong.

I'd worry about a nuclear war when Russia says they're not going to use nuclear weapons.

As much as you've garnered an image of something of an intellectual even in my eyes here during your two decades, you're way off right now. No link, no list of semi-related points, no fucking The Guardian article, no "actually" argument is going to change the fact that NATO is the only way forward for Finland as a de facto independent country, and that Finland's membership in NATO won't make WW3 one fucking bit more probable. Instead, it will do everything that's needed in the Baltic Sea region to make things more stable in the long run. After that, Sweden can finally enjoy its days of real neutrality without any fear of Finland being overrun by Russia, behind NATO without putting up one fucking finger, without actually being in NATO, and without relying only on the flesh barrier Finland has provided for centuries.

And I dont give a fuck about "calls against NATO expansion" since the fucking 90s. To me this is literally about my life, my family's life, and about the life of EVERYONE I've EVER KNOWN, and after that, if my life is spared, my way of living. To you this is seemingly some half-assed antagonist thought experiment on a long-dead trance forum. Revisiting this discussion is not upsetting. To me the only upsetting thing here is your way of seeing things.

quote:
Originally posted by Lira
...and they have, for the most part, been quite prescient


You still don't seem to understand that Russia making the threat and the threatened hesitating is what wins Russia the opportunity to act on the threat.

It all would have been so easy if it was not for this brown-tongued idea of not pissing off the aggressive retard living next to us.

Last edited by JEO on Mar-13-2022 at 02:03

Old Post Mar-13-2022 01:42  Finland
Click Here to See the Profile for JEO Click here to Send JEO a Private Message Add JEO to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lira
Ancient BassAddict



Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Brasília, Brazil

This is not some thought experiment for me either, reason I won't keep debating you. Like I mentioned before, I have people very dear to me being shelled in Ukraine and my heart aches for them. I wouldn't be so callous to speak out of ignorance about something I know nothing about, I'm saying things ambassadors to the U.S. in Moscow have warned about. You just happen to disagree with me and that's okay, I get it.

We've seen it happen to Georgia. We're now watching it in Ukraine. I don't want any other country to be next, full stop.


___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

Last edited by Lira on Mar-13-2022 at 04:02

Old Post Mar-13-2022 03:19  Brazil
Click Here to See the Profile for Lira Click here to Send Lira a Private Message Visit Lira's homepage! Add Lira to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
SYSTEM-J
IDKFA.



Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester

quote:
Originally posted by Lira
Thanks, Swampstah!

All right, this is actually two entirely different claims, and I partially agree with the latter half for one simple reason: Russia wouldn't have to invade a NATO member state to invade Finland if they ever decide to join.

Since 2005, Russia has been known to destabilise and carve out buffer states in neighbouring countries with intensified NATO talks, prior to their entrance (that's how we ended up with Abkhazia, Donetsk, Luhansk, and South Ossetia after all), so the negotiations themselves would hang a bullseye on Finland's for a while. In a way, the Kremlin is already watching because it always has.


As we've discussed, Russia simply does not have the military capacity to mount a full scale invasion of a second country while it remains embroiled in Ukraine, which is why now is the perfect time for Finland to get with the programme.

quote:
Now, regarding the nuclear strikes. I used a colourful hyperbole to drive my point home, as is my wont, but don't you reckon a blanket statement is a tad bit too strong? At this very moment, the use of any nuclear weapon is very unlikely, but remember "Russia won't invade Ukraine"? It wasn't an unreasonable position just a little over a fortnight ago (I myself thought it wasn't feasible until Putin's "Ukraine doesn't exist" speech), US Intel sounded nothing short of paranoid, and yet, here we are. The risk is definitely higher than zero, no need to push the envelope with a cavalier approach towards Russia.


Russia invading Ukraine is of an entirely different magnitude of probability to a full scale nuclear war breaking out and annihilating Russia, NATO and everyone else. The outcome of every single exercise in game theory run by both sides is to avoid complete self-destruction.

quote:
Anyway, that's not a very good comparison because it's a very different context: the Cold War slowly evolved after a number of years, with a gradual escalation between two former allies that eventually fell out, which gave both sides the possibility to develop checks to avoid an accidental clashes. This is not the case just yet.


That is exactly what has happened between NATO and Russia over the last 20 years.


___________________
Mixes:
> Back To Deep [Deep Trippy House]
> Terra Nova [Modern Progressive Trance]
> Rough & Ready [Modern Trance]
>A Different Energy [Good Modern Trance]
> The Edale Mix [Panoramic Beats]

Old Post Mar-13-2022 20:42  England
Click Here to See the Profile for SYSTEM-J Click here to Send SYSTEM-J a Private Message Visit SYSTEM-J's homepage! Add SYSTEM-J to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lira
Ancient BassAddict



Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Brasília, Brazil

Jack, out of respect for JEO, I'd gladly continue this discussion in a separate thread about the war in Ukraine, as you suggested earlier, if you're willing to debate this further. I don't think it's fair to keep this here as this is completely unrelated, and he can't put me on ignore. Maybe it would be better if we kept this space for more trivial discussion so people can relax a bit?


___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

Old Post Mar-13-2022 23:10  Brazil
Click Here to See the Profile for Lira Click here to Send Lira a Private Message Visit Lira's homepage! Add Lira to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
SYSTEM-J
IDKFA.



Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester

Bung all these posts in a different thread if you want and we can carry on there. Will make them easier to find for future COR archaeologists. I don't think you need to get touchy feely on JEO's behalf though.


___________________
Mixes:
> Back To Deep [Deep Trippy House]
> Terra Nova [Modern Progressive Trance]
> Rough & Ready [Modern Trance]
>A Different Energy [Good Modern Trance]
> The Edale Mix [Panoramic Beats]

Old Post Mar-13-2022 23:45  England
Click Here to See the Profile for SYSTEM-J Click here to Send SYSTEM-J a Private Message Visit SYSTEM-J's homepage! Add SYSTEM-J to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lira
Ancient BassAddict



Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Brasília, Brazil

quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Bung all these posts in a different thread if you want and we can carry on there. Will make them easier to find for future COR archaeologists.

Sure thing, will do soon


___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

Old Post Mar-13-2022 23:49  Brazil
Click Here to See the Profile for Lira Click here to Send Lira a Private Message Visit Lira's homepage! Add Lira to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lews
Platipus And Prog Addict



Registered: Feb 2007
Location: Hugging Whales And Saving Trees

I think the whole question about the expansion of NATO rests on the counterfactual of what would have happened if NATO had not expanded. Would Russia be a peaceful, international law-abiding, prosperous democracy? Can anyone answer 'yes' with a straight face?

Putin wants to create the old Tsarist Russia, not the USSR. Look more at the statements of the Russian Orthodox Church than NATO, if you want to understand his actions.

At this point, blaming the expansion of NATO on this situation is just regurgitating Russian propaganda.

I look forward to Finland, and hopefully Sweden, joining as soon as possible.


___________________
Quarantine Classics Brunello di Montalcino (In Transit) Edition [Progressive Classics] (August 2020)
Quarantine Classics - Puligny-Montrachet Edition [Progressive Classics] (April 2020)
What Is Progressive Anyways? [Progressive House Classics] (November 2019)

Old Post Mar-14-2022 19:58 
Click Here to See the Profile for Lews Click here to Send Lews a Private Message Add Lews to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lira
Ancient BassAddict



Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Brasília, Brazil

All right, this discussion now has its own thread. Some of the content is still in the Friday thread, but I'm sure it's possible to follow the debate just fine here.


___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

Old Post Mar-15-2022 18:08  Brazil
Click Here to See the Profile for Lira Click here to Send Lira a Private Message Visit Lira's homepage! Add Lira to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Lira
Ancient BassAddict



Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Brasília, Brazil

quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
As we've discussed, Russia simply does not have the military capacity to mount a full scale invasion of a second country while it remains embroiled in Ukraine, which is why now is the perfect time for Finland to get with the programme.

Russia has proven, time and again, that they can play a weak hand extremely well.

From the meddling in US elections with troll farms to the "little green men" in Crimea, brute military force has been just one of the ways the Kremlin has sought to achieve its goals. We just can't ever know what is next.
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Russia invading Ukraine is of an entirely different magnitude of probability to a full scale nuclear war breaking out and annihilating Russia, NATO and everyone else. The outcome of every single exercise in game theory run by both sides is to avoid complete self-destruction.

I'm in full agreement. However, as James M. Acton, the co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, explains at length in a rather accessible podcast by FiveThirtyEight, and he explains the use of nuclear weapons is very unlikely - unless one of the belligerent parties is having a really bad loss (e.g. Russia feeling overwhelmed and outgunned would be an example) and judges that the deployment of a nuclear weapon might be preferable to an unfavourable outcome that could be perceived as more certain and qualitatively worse. Reason caution is advised, in his opinion.

Of course, it's not a consensus not even among experts, so I'm not saying the world will definitely end as in a Matt Maltese song. But, as there are still discussions by people who know about it way better than either of us, I'd be a tad bit more cautious about escalating the tension in the region. The pessimist may turn out to be right.
quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
That is exactly what has happened between NATO and Russia over the last 20 years.

Has it? Between 2009 and 2011, there were a couple of joint military exercises between NATO and Russia, and that's about it. The Cold War started soon after the US and the USSR fought Nazi Germany as allies. The trust baseline started in very different levels, and I'm afraid Trump may even have had a negative impact, having left treaties like the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and nearly bungled the "New Start" renewals, raising distrust between the parties. I don't remember another American president being so reckless in the Cold War.

I could be mistaken though, so if there are more parallels, I can't remember them right now.
quote:
Originally posted by Lews
I think the whole question about the expansion of NATO rests on the counterfactual of what would have happened if NATO had not expanded. Would Russia be a peaceful, international law-abiding, prosperous democracy? Can anyone answer 'yes' with a straight face?

I don't think anyone here said anything resembling that. The argument so far has been about military build-up and perceived threats.
quote:
Originally posted by Lews
Putin wants to create the old Tsarist Russia, not the USSR. Look more at the statements of the Russian Orthodox Church than NATO, if you want to understand his actions.

No disagreements here either. Jack and I have both mentioned the Cold War at some point, but I believe we're in agreement when we both say this is not a USSR redux either.
quote:
Originally posted by Lews
At this point, blaming the expansion of NATO on this situation is just regurgitating Russian propaganda.

Come on now, mate, really? I'd understand your being dismissive if I just typed a few ramblings away, and I'd be humble enough if this were the case. However, and I don't want to to appeal to authority or anything, would you really be willing to say John Mearsheimer is being something of a Kremlin mouthpiece, for example? He's been even more critical of NATO expansionism than I have in this thread, saying "[t]he West, and especially America, is principally responsible for the crisis"... and that's from The Economist, not the RT, so it's hardly a publication with a pro-Russia bias. I said what I said precisely because I've tried to get as broad a view as possible about this conflict since the annexation of Crimea, as I've explained I had my reasons to.

I have also, up to this moment, been citing and quoting experts whose opinion I believe we can all find unbiased and reliable, from Russian scholars critical of Putin to Western officials (I linked to a diplomatic cable by the current CIA director, then U.S. Ambassador to Moscow, a few posts back). If I'm not mistaken, I am the only one citing sources around here, aren't I?

I understand perfectly well JEO's "Fuck Leftist Westplaining" knee-jerk reaction as he's closer to St. Petersburg than I am to Rio. But, you have a PhD in political science. If you're going to say these these people and I are "just regurgitating Russian propaganda", I'm genuinely interested to know when Brookings (whose former senior fellow, Michael Mccgwire, I also quoted) became an agitprop institution... because that's the sort of person I'm referring to


___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]

Old Post Mar-15-2022 22:44  Brazil
Click Here to See the Profile for Lira Click here to Send Lira a Private Message Visit Lira's homepage! Add Lira to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
SYSTEM-J
IDKFA.



Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester

quote:
Originally posted by Lira
Russia has proven, time and again, that they can play a weak hand extremely well.

From the meddling in US elections with troll farms to the "little green men" in Crimea, brute military force has been just one of the ways the Kremlin has sought to achieve its goals. We just can't ever know what is next.


Right, sure, okay. I think this whole point is just drifting now. If Finland join NATO, Russia will not invade and occupy them. I don't know exactly what you're suggesting they might do to Finland instead of invading them while Finland goes through the process of joining NATO, and I'm not sure you know either, but I think JEO and his countrymen will take a bit of cyber-terrorism over a full scale invasion.

quote:
Of course, it's not a consensus not even among experts, so I'm not saying the world will definitely end as in a Matt Maltese song. But, as there are still discussions by people who know about it way better than either of us, I'd be a tad bit more cautious about escalating the tension in the region. The pessimist may turn out to be right.


Cutting through the back-and-forth in the article, the consensus they come to is this:

quote:
So, essentially, Russia is backstopping its conventional aggression with nuclear threats. Step 1: Invade your neighbors. Step 2: Threaten nuclear war to prevent outside interference that could reverse your conquest.

EA: That’s a better characterization. As the Georgetown University professor Caitlin Talmadge pointed out last week, the Russians are largely using their nuclear weapons as an umbrella, presuming that the stability-instability paradox—which suggests that states with nuclear weapons are even more likely to start a war, assuming that nuclear weapons will prevent the worst outcomes—will hold that and they’ll be able to get away with conventional military activity as a result.

But for the United States, the result is the same whether or not Russia says it out loud. The United States doesn’t have an interest in getting in a shooting war with Russia, particularly given the risks of nuclear escalation that come with it. There’s a reason why, during the Cold War, the superpowers typically kept conflict contained to proxies.


This is pretty much exactly what I said in one of my very first posts, which you didn't move into this thread:

quote:
Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
There will be no direct conflict between NATO and Russia, that much is clear. The risk of escalation is far too high.


Russia may use a limited nuclear strike in Ukraine if things go really badly for them, but frankly I would be fucking amazed if that ever happens. But Ukraine is not part of NATO and that won't result in a nuclear exchange. What I'm talking about is a full nuclear war between NATO and Russia, which essentially means mutual annihilation. That's not going to happen. Putin is ratcheting up the nuclear threat to ensure NATO don't actually deploy troops in Ukraine or institute a no fly zone or anything to that effect, and it will work because neither side wants to end the world. And I don't find your earlier, possibly hyperbolic, assertion than Finland has stayed out of NATO because they're scared of global thermonuclear war if they do join very credible. To me that line of reasoning is so self-evidently daft I just settled for a slightly weary "There's not going to be a nuclear war."


___________________
Mixes:
> Back To Deep [Deep Trippy House]
> Terra Nova [Modern Progressive Trance]
> Rough & Ready [Modern Trance]
>A Different Energy [Good Modern Trance]
> The Edale Mix [Panoramic Beats]

Old Post Mar-15-2022 23:15  England
Click Here to See the Profile for SYSTEM-J Click here to Send SYSTEM-J a Private Message Visit SYSTEM-J's homepage! Add SYSTEM-J to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
planetaryplayer
Surpeme traineanddict



Registered: Dec 2011
Location: Pine Tree Valley

My gut is another dimension where thermonuclear war is happening right now. This dimension doesn’t have Armin von Bergen so there will be no peaceful resolution

Old Post Mar-16-2022 00:46  Norfolk Island
Click Here to See the Profile for planetaryplayer Click here to Send planetaryplayer a Private Message Add planetaryplayer to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
JEO
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Jan 2010
Location: ATH

quote:
Originally posted by Lira
If I'm not mistaken, I am the only one citing sources around here, aren't I?


How about you put your sources away for a moment then. Lower yourself to my level and give me answers in a way I can understand.

-Given the world today, if you got to decide, would you have kept NATO from "expanding" to the former Warsaw Pact countries and/or the Baltic states?
-What do you feel would have been Russia's reaction if, after the USSR's collapse, these said countries expressed strong interest in integrating with the West and the West outright denied them?
-Why are the countries that didn't join NATO or didn't make it to the EU early enough the ones in Russia's sights now?

These questions might be slightly leading, but please, just tell me what you think.

If you won't arrive to the conclusion that we are all indeed better off with NATO having "expanded" than not, you might just be dismissing the whole of non-Russian Europe, where I think there are quite a few more experts who agree on NATO's "expansion" being a good thing than not.

I feel like you're complicating an issue that's now 100% clear to at least all of Russia's neighbors, if not the whole of Europe; it was absolutely necessary for all the current Eastern European NATO countries to join NATO for things to be as good as they are now, as opposed to how things probably would have been if they hadn't chosen to join. Even if it was NATO's expansion that lead to the conflict we see now, do you not think it was and is worth it?

My questions ultimately boil down to one question: would you rather have the current situation in Europe or have half of Europe as Russia's buffer states?

You are either in a strong alliance against Russia or forcibly kept from not being a part of it in some way.

And sorry for my vitriol towards you. I'm in a sort of proxy war against Russia myself, through people with opinions like yours.

Last edited by JEO on Mar-16-2022 at 01:50

Old Post Mar-16-2022 01:35  Finland
Click Here to See the Profile for JEO Click here to Send JEO a Private Message Add JEO to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > Main Forums > Chill Out Room > The 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine Discussion Thread
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (9): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackAmazing electro-tech house sample to id [2005] [1]

Click here to listen to the sample!Pause playbackAfterburn - "North Pole" [2004]

Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread
Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:13.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
Support TA!