|
2024 US Election Thread? 2024 US Election Thread (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| AshtarCommand |
| If you want to have a victory, you have to grab it by its haunches and you gotta hump it into submission! |
|
|
| 72hrpartyanimal |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sykonee
Sometimes you have to ride a storm out, hunkering down while it does its damage, rebuilding after it passes. |
agreed. you have to let it burn and rebuild better. |
|
|
| ziptnf |
Alright, time to talk about Ukraine.
It seems like the new US regime has made it clear whose side they're on. Zelensky was hoping to have an ally here, but he was shown precisely who Donald Trump was working for, and is now looking to strike a deal on minerals contracts. What is your all's take on what's going to happen here? Did Putin win by Donald Trump getting elected? |
|
|
| JEO |
| quote: | Originally posted by ziptnf
Did Putin win by Donald Trump getting elected? |
Yes, especially seeing what's happening now, he absolutely did. What is unclear to me is exactly why is Trump so eager to please Putin. Because Putin called him a genius? I could imagine that working. Maybe a debt from all of his businesses in Russia? Maybe they have kompromat on him? Maybe it's all of those reasons. Gabbard – so Russia-friendly that almost no one in their right mind would appoint her as anything of national intelligence, yet there she is. Hegseth stopping that Russia-focused cyber program? Insane. It's like Russia sent Trump a list of people they'd like to see in each position, and Trump went ahead and did what was asked.
Some news outlets have entertained the idea that Trump is motivated by a possible Nobel Peace Prize for bringing peace to Ukraine. I think this is entirely possible. Putin gets to dictate the terms and when peace is brokered to a degree, but he's promised Trump to agree to peace in the near future. Maybe Pumpkin Chops rebuffed Zelenskyy because Putin asked for more time to push further west in Ukraine? Maybe Trump and Putin disagreed on how to divide Ukraine and decided to get back to it later? Maybe it's just competing bids coming in behind the scenes and Trump is waiting for the best one. Anyway, there was a fair bit of Russian theater in the mix last Friday.
As has been said a few times in the recent days, Europe really needs to kick things into high gear as soon as possible, and the threat of the US completely abandoning NATO must be taken seriously. It would be "an incredibly dumb move from the US's perpective", but I'm not gonna put it past Trump to at least try. Most countries on the continent are incapable of defending themselves. There's simply no excuse for that anymore, and I welcome the idea of some sort of "Fortress Europe". I've long been deeply disappointed in much of the EU when it comes to defence, and in that sense I see something positive in Trump's presidency. If this lunacy can whip Europe into shape, I will rejoice. The problem is that you don't build that fortress overnight. Unfortunately I can also imagine a few EU leaders letting out a "phew" and going back to their old, useless selves in case Trump stops hinting at leaving NATO. |
|
|
| 72hrpartyanimal |
| why can't Ukraine join NATO? From my limited knowledge, it was because they didn't want to upset Russia. |
|
|
| JEO |
Well, right now, basically because Ukraine joining would immediately trigger article 5. They'd only be a risk to NATO, not a contributor to the overall security of all member countries. There are also some other criteria that Ukraine might not meet right now. Countries like Hungary, Slovakia, and now most importantly the US, would probably vehemently oppose Ukraine's accession too. All member states have to accept for a country to be accepted.
Around 2013 the people of Ukraine wanted to form closer ties to the West (to eventually join the EU and NATO), and to essentially escape Russia's sphere of influence. Their fraudulently elected Russia-aligned then-president Viktor Yanukovych single-handledly put an end to those plans. This led to big protests and violence (Euromaidan), Yanukovych's ousting, and to Russia supporting pro-Russian separatists and sending in their "little green men" (professional armed troops clad in dark green camo with no insignia) into Ukraine's easternmost parts, and invading Crimea.
There's a great series of videos by Vice News called Russian Roulette covering the events from back then, up close, if you're interested. I've seen the whole series at least twice, and I really recommend it. It sometimes also shows one of Russia's most effective long-term means for expansion: their dumb-as-, violence-loving population and moving as many of them to contested areas to play the role of a discriminated Russian-speaking minority in order for Russian troops to step in to protect this "minority" at some point. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by ziptnf
Did Putin win by Donald Trump getting elected? |
We did have a Ukraine thread, so I'll quote what I wrote last February, since it still holds up:
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I still care, but the war has stagnated into a largely attritional stalemate and Putin is playing the long game of hoping Trump regains power in the US so Ukraine's military aid dries up. The Ukrainian counter-offensive last summer was never realistically going to throw Russia out of the country: conventional military doctrine is that you need a 4:1 ratio of offensive power to overcome a defending force and Ukraine simply didn't have anything close. They had a rag-tag handful of different battle tanks sent from different NATO countries and no airpower.
So where do we go from here? Russia seems prepared to lose an endless amount of young men and suffer endless economic sanctions to grind away ceaselessly until the West gets tired of sinking money into a fruitless forever war.
I think the best possible outcome is a ceasefire that permanently cedes occupied Ukrainian territory to Russia and then a fast-track of Ukraine into NATO so we can station armed forces there and get them underneath our nuclear umbrella before Russia invades all over again. The problem is that Zelensky has been too bolshy on this and seems to believe he can throw Russia out completely, including Crimea. That may prove to have been a grave strategic error in the long run.
And if Trump wins next year, it's really all over. |
| quote: | Originally posted by 72hrpartyanimal
why can't Ukraine join NATO? From my limited knowledge, it was because they didn't want to upset Russia. |
If they joined right now they would immediately bring Russia into conflict with NATO, which would be a fast track queue jump to nuclear war.
The bigger question, which is worth asking, is why Putin has always been so trenchantly opposed to Ukraine (and other former Eastern Bloc nations) joining NATO. After all, that's what this war is about. Putin decided to invade before Ukraine got chance to join. But why does he care so much?
The reason Russia always gives is that they view a build-up of NATO forces close to their border as a provocation, but everyone knows NATO aren't going to invade Russia. As long as nuclear weapons are on the table, no NATO member will ever go to war with Russia and vice versa. The real reason seems to be more that Russia fears the alignment of former Soviet satellites with the West, diminishing Russia's political and economic influence. The really cynical reading, which I've heard a few experts venture, is that Putin is an aspiring empire builder who wants to restore the reach of the former USSR by military force. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
If they joined right now, they would immediately bring Russia into conflict with NATO, which would be a fast-track queue jump to nuclear war. |
Oh, hi! Nice to see us on the same page :p
Now, I guess the following is the only substantial disagreement on Ukraine we still have:
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
The bigger question, which is worth asking, is why Putin has always been so trenchantly opposed to Ukraine (and other former Eastern Bloc nations) joining NATO. After all, that's what this war is about. Putin decided to invade before Ukraine got a chance to join. But why does he care so much?
The reason Russia always gives is that they view a build-up of NATO forces close to their border as a provocation, but everyone knows NATO aren't going to invade Russia. |
I've explained this in the Ukraine thread: that's not how Russian nationalists (claim to) think... especially those calling the shots. This is why I’m trying to say Putin cares so irrationally much.
To them, NATO isn’t a defensive alliance. It isn’t a collection of states bound by mutual promises and diplomatic red tape. It isn’t what Europeans, North Americans, or I — distant from both Kyiv and Kentucky — think it is.
To the Russian elites that matter, NATO is a spectre. This great, hulking force, pressing against Russia’s borders, swallowing its neighbours, waiting. It is the thing that generations before them feared, the thing that whispered in the ears of tsars and commissars alike. It is the West, but not just the West. It is something older, deeper, woven into the very fabric of Russian historical consciousness (hence Alexander Dugin’s appeal among certain nationalist circles).
And so the fear spreads, not like wildfire, but like damp creeping through the cracks. Unshakable. Unstoppable. Present even when you try to ignore it. Here’s why:- The Weight of History: To Russian nationalists, NATO is simply the latest face of an ancient enemy. They see history as an unbroken line of Western attempts to crush Russia, to carve it into pieces and take its soul. Napoleon came from the West. The Germans came from the West (twice!). The Cold War, the dissolution of the USSR, the economic chaos of the ’90s — Western hands in everything. NATO, then, is not just a military alliance. It is a continuation of a war that never truly ended.
- A Slow but Unstoppable Encroachment: Every time NATO expands, it is seen as another noose tightening around Russia’s neck. Poland. The Baltic states. Former Soviet republics. One by one, slipping out of Russia’s orbit and into NATO’s embrace. To a European (or an American), this is sovereignty, self-determination, a choice. To a Russian nationalist, this is theft. A betrayal. A slow-motion invasion that doesn’t need tanks or missiles, because the mere fact of NATO’s presence is already a provocation.
- The Colour Revolutions - A New Kind of War: When Ukraine revolted in 2014, Russian nationalists didn’t see young people fighting for democracy. They saw NATO’s invisible hand. Another domino falls. A carefully orchestrated plot designed to install a Western puppet on Russia’s doorstep. Kyrgyzstan, Georgia (another country with a frozen conflict), Belarus — the story repeats. The West doesn’t need boots on the ground when it can simply turn Russia’s neighbours against her.
- The Ukraine War - The Phantom Enemy Becomes Real: This is where the nightmare manifests. The tanks roll, the shells fall, the blood soaks the earth. And there, behind the Ukrainian forces, they see NATO. Not just as an idea now, but as a force arming, training, advising. They are not fighting Ukraine — not really. They are fighting something much larger, something vast and faceless and relentless. To the Russian nationalist, this is not an invasion — it is a counterattack. A desperate attempt to push NATO back before it is too late. Hence Zelenskyy’s eagerness to join all things Europe as soon as possible and frustrate Putin’s endgame.
- A War of Civilisations: This is about more than borders, more than soldiers. To people like Putin, it seems to be about survival. Many Russian nationalists do not just see NATO as an enemy, but as the agent of something deeper: the Western “disease.” Liberalism, decadence, weakness (and I’m a liberal myself, so I say this despite the fact that I couldn’t disagree with them more). They do not see Europe as Europe sees itself — a collection of free nations— but as a civilization in decline, dragging everything with it. They’re the red-pillers in Red Square (and people with red baseball caps), if that helps. Russia, to them, is the last bastion, the final redoubt against a corrupting tide.
The fear is there, deep in their bones. It is not paranoia to them, not propaganda, not a convenient excuse for war. It is real. It is pressing. And it’s diametrically opposed to how everyone else but them — and, apparently, some in the White House now — seem to see it.
(I'll get back to the bit I was talking about American democracy later, I know I left that hanging) |
|
|
| JEO |
The wide Russian support for expansion is rooted in nostalgia for the USSR, revanchism, and "protecting Russian speakers", not a fear of a "naively benevolent West", as a Russian might put it.
The "fear of NATO" only resurfaces when Russia itself invades its neighbors, and that's the Russian mind for you.
Putin cares because he's got nothing else than an ever larger Russia to achieve, a greater Russkiy mir, with him going down in history as the man who returned Russia to its height, as "cynical" as that idea might sound to some. Unfortunately, a vocal part of Russians want Russkiy mir too, and after that there aren't many questions left to ask regarding why something like the war in Ukraine is happening. Especially when the West, in its weakness, lets these things happen. |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Now, I guess the following is the only substantial disagreement on Ukraine we still have:
I've explained this in the Ukraine thread: that's not how Russian nationalists (claim to) think... especially those calling the shots. This is why I’m trying to say Putin cares so irrationally much. |
Are you actually disagreeing with me? Do you believe that Putin genuinely thinks NATO will start a war with Russia? |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Are you actually disagreeing with me? Do you believe that Putin genuinely thinks NATO will start a war with Russia? |
I mean, sure, there could be other explanations. But, do I believe it’s plausible that the amateur historian running the Kremlin — the boy who grew up hearing war stories about the Siege of Leningrad from a wounded father who buried a son before his second birthday, the man who once loosed a hound on a defenceless Angela Merkel, like a ghost slipping through a cracked window — might genuinely think NATO would start a war with Russia under the right circumstances?
I find it as baffling as you do. And yet, all signs seem to point to da. It’s not as if this would be the first time reality proved him wrong... |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| So you think it makes no sense at all but you choose to believe it anyway? It's completely obvious Putin knows NATO won't invade Russia, and we've already agreed on the reason why: Russia's nuclear arsenal. That's why he was sabre rattling with that arsenal a year or two back to deter NATO from becoming more involved in Ukraine. He knew perfectly well that nobody was willing to risk open conflict between two nuclear powers. |
|
|
|
|
