Ukraine (Mod Note & Threadbanned Users in OP)

Heard it before but there are a few problems there; first, Russia was not the only Eastern European state to be in dire circumstances following the fall of the Soviet Union. Trying to help in the manner you are speaking of was not necessarily a task that 'the West' as it were, would have been able to accomplish. The best that could have been offered would be perhaps expedited EU expansion but that has not been without its own problems nor has it been a panacea where it has taken place.

Second, Russian actions during the 1990s weren't exactly in line with a typical troubled Democracy fresh from despotism - between Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Serbia, Transdnistria, Dagestan and Chechnya, Russian kept it's hand in a few bloody conflicts and not for altruistic reasons. You would have a very hard time, for example, trying to reconcile NATO membership with the ethnic cleansing of Georgians in Abkhazia.

No he is not and some didn't even stop at 18

Lopez in Paraguay fought with men and children to the point he almost caused the extinction of the native Paraguayan population due to almost all the men dying. And I mean almost all died.

Here's a commentary from Czech independent liberal newspaper Forum24.

The Iron Curtain is a reality, it will separate two different civilizations

At this point, it seems almost certain that the world will be divided, at least in the northern hemisphere, by the Iron Curtain. However, it is not just a matter of separating hostile military-political blocs or regimes, but literally of separating two different civilizations.

What has fascinated Westerners about Russia since the beginning of the 18th century, especially the French or German intellectuals, has been the peculiar similarity in otherness or the otherness in similarity, if you will. In other words, the fact that people look the same there, ride the same carriages and wear the same clothes, listen to and compose (Tchaikovsky) the same music, recite and write (Pushkin) the same verses, and yet Russian society is quite different. It even showed an oriental appeal for Western travelers at the time.

This external similarity, which obscures the true internal differences and differences between Russian and Western society, has been reinforced in an unprecedented way by global developments over the past thirty years. A visitor to Moscow or St. Petersburg will soon find that everything here (except for the inscriptions in Cyrillic) looks the same as in major European cities. People are dressed the same way, they buy the same furniture at home and drive the same cars. Yes, sometimes they have a bit of an eccentric and flashy taste, but from the outside, Russian society, at least in big cities, seems the same as ours, Western.

Hence the subconscious confidence that the traditions and internal principles of Russian society will be the same, or at least very similar. Its rationality, sense of empathy, tolerance, free will and liberalism will be the same, or at least very similar.

Lulled by this westernized face of Russia (or rather the idea of ​​it), we have been able to observe for more than two decades the strengthening of a regime in Russia whose internal nature, on the other hand, is quite different from that of the West. Despite many warnings, many Western politicians have overlooked the clues that have made this clear. For a simple reason, it was convenient, sometimes even popular. And so President Putin gradually eliminated any institutional opposition, decimated the non-profit sector independent of the government on the pretext of fighting "foreign agents," conquered the media, and established a sophisticated brainwashing system. He covered public space with aggressive propaganda about the Great Imperial Russia yet the Russia Hurt by the West at the same time.

He attacked at the same time. In 2008 he occupied part of Georgia, in 2014 Crimea, then the territory of eastern Ukraine. He had his agents killing in Great Britain (Skripal, Litvinenko), had them committing terrorist attacks in the Czech Republic (Vrbětice). In Syria, Russian bomber raids sparked a refugee wave toward Europe, whose population at the same time was disrupted by an army of Russian trolls to an unprecedented rate.

And all this in the western guise of the streets of Moscow and St.Petersburg. With the massive support of citizens dressed in Western brands. Citizens who live in IKEA-furnished rooms, have lunch at McDonald’s, drink Czech beer and drive Skoda, Volkswagen and Mercedes. Citizens who listen to Western music and read books by popular Western authors. Even the same TV programmes are broadcast by the Russian television, so the Russians are looking for their superstar, talents and masterchefs just like the English, the Germans or the Czechs. 

In Russia, a regime has simply evolved, formally dressed in a Western coat, but which has little to do with the West. The departure of iconic brands such as McDonald’s and IKEA from the Russian market is gaining a deeply symbolic significance in this light. At least in part, it removes that Western make-up from the face of Russian society.

It is difficult to judge what the population of Russia is like today. Relevant surveys since the invasion of Ukraine do not exist and it would be far too simple to be giving credibility to polls that appear on social networks, where they are primarily intended to be a proof of unprecedented support for the Putin regime. We do not know how many people refused to answer and preferred to hurry away from the pollsters.

At the same time, we see protesters, usually young people in St. Petersburg and Moscow, being arrested by the police, and we know how much courage and independence of thought is needed to stand up to the regime's security forces and who knows, often perhaps their own parents.

We have no idea how much of the public they represent. Overall, however, Russian society has long represented a different civilization with different thinking and values. This is the only way to present and justify the invasion of Ukraine as a fair fight against the Nazis and drug addicts. Yes, Russia has once again shown that it is a different cultural and civilizational sphere, and if it looks like Europe in a historical epoch (for example, during the reign of Peter the Great or after the collapse of the Soviet Union), it is just a mimicry.

Oh Realism - how i have missed you -its like you never left

The Great Thing about John Mearsheimer is - he is a Realist.

The bad thing about John Mearsheimer is - He is a Realist.

Realism Argues on many things. State Survival, self help, sovereignty, military power, and balancing etc.

Yes Russia can have concerns about the Ukraine. It has stated these concerns for many years, and has waxed lyrical about the need for an 'end to Nato Expansion'. etc etc. And it would logically seek to deter Ukraine from joining NATO. Russian intentions are absolutely clear on this, unambiguous. Russia wishes to remain the hegemon in the region. Realist doctrine would certainly pivot towards Russia establishing a favorable 'balance of power' in its neighborhood.

THE TROUBLE IS: Russian intentions ONLY EMPHASIZE the Ukrainian position. They observe and note a large nuclear armed power on its door step. They remember history, they understand the threat that Russia poses. They hear its declarations of wishing to remain 'in control' of the region. Not wishing to live in a Russian Dominated eastern Europe, (with Belarus as a neighbor also) - they need to balance against this. They balance by joining a defense bloc - enter NATO. Ukraine, in seeking to join NATO is absolutely following the logical pathway to ensure its survival. Neo Realism (of which John is arguably the grandfather), would demonstrate that if you dont have the ability to deter aggression from a nearby hostile state - you seek allies who can. 'Strength in Numbers'

So Russia, AND THE UKRAINE, are both behaving along Realist lines with regards to their situation (the door swings both ways). In fact, in Russia's pursuit of remaining 'in charge' (realism) - THEY FORCE UKRAINE to balance against this (realism). The more Russia threatens against Ukraine joining NATO, the more UKRAINE absolutely feels the need, to join NATO.

Now, there is a way out of the above:

What Russia COULD have done

Russia could have said to Ukraine. Listen, we dont like NATO, for obvious reasons. And you joining them would be a real annoyance to us. So, we want to make a deal. We will utterly guarantee your statehood (militarily) as long as you dont join NATO - We will sign this treaty in FULL SIGHT of the world. And listen, if you wanna be democratic, autocratic, theocratic, or 'rule by Lizards' - Thats YOUR choice. We have NO INTEREST in undermining your independence, honestly!!! That doesnt matter to us and its not our business. If you wanna join the EU thats grand! Just .. not NATO? We wont interfere in anything else, thereby your SOVEREIGNTY INTERNALLY is your business. And international trade! Listen go ahead! I mean to hell with it, we will HELP!!!! Just, .... dont join NATO? Deal? We good??

What Russia ACTUALLY DID

• Attempted to undermine the Ukraine Internally by placing effective agents in its political parties
• Funded pro Russian Parties to discourage any thought of being more European
• Demanded for NO LEGITIMATE REASON that the Ukraine not join the EU (NOT A MILITARY ALLIANCE, at least until this disgrace)
• Armed separatists in the Ukraine
• Encouraged said separatists
• Annexed the Crimea
• Invaded the Ukraine

All of the above, up to the actual invasion - tells the Ukraine a few things

• Russia cannot be trusted
• Russia is undermining us
• Russia has territorial ambitions in Ukraine
• Russia has no intention of respecting us one bit
• We, need, to join..... NATO - ASAP

I love John Mearsheimer - the man is a legend. But he primarily concerns himself with who ever the BIG PLAYER is - by default - and some consider it a weakness - Dont get me wrong he makes a lot of sense, and can seem prescient, at times. But realism is not just about the big players. ALL countries seek to survive. John wants to attack NATO expansion, and he, and Russia, make it sound like NATO 'INVADED' Eastern Europe. They were INVITED IN - by countries that had been ACTUALLY INVADED - BY RUSSIA! Seriously if we were in the Black Sea, and had been behind the Iron Curtain - we would have BEGGED AND PLEADED to join NATO -

Anyway - Realism only gets you so far - only one of many theories that bounce around -

Look i replied above - but you need to look at the term - NATO AMBITION - Its Russian for - Hey, that used to be ours - honestly, im not being hostile with you - i studied realism - have a read of my response -

And, NATO did not have ambition - it did not need ambition - When the curtain fell down, those previously trapped behind it - WANTED NATO - They joined - and believe me they are kissing their lucky stars for doing so -

Russia signed an agreement with ukraine re nuclear weapons. They agreed to respect ukraines boundaries including crimea. No mention that Ukraine couldnt join nato. It shows they cannot be trusted.

Nowhere did nato sign an agreement with Russia saying ex ussr countries would not be admitted.

Russia has signed agreements with nato accepting that ex ussr territories could join. And if they hadnt... they do not have that right after 50 years of occupation.

Did the sites you are getting this guff from mention that?

Does he want all ukranian men to die?

Does any country fighting invasion where the existence of the country is at stake want their men to die? What a bizarre phrasing.

Conditions for peace? Dont use weael words. They are conditions for surrender. That is why Ukraine fights on.

You havent engaged or processed any of the points made about baltics belarus kalingrad if you just keep reposting the same questions prompted by propaganda cues over and over.