Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Absolute nonsense. Russia weren't frozen out of plans for post cold war Europe. Russia and NATO signed the NATO-Russia Founding Act.

We have seen how difficult it was for Europe to wean itself off Russia products at the start of this illegal war of aggression and plunder by Russia. How could that be the case if Russia was frozen out?

So it is just a dump of Russian propaganda and lies.

Russia froze themselves out by their continued hostility to what they see as their territory but rightly its inhabitants seen as their sovereign countries, as they continue to try to bully Poland, the Baltics, Georgia, Moldova etc etc

It is Russia who has perpetuated rivalry and division in Europe, not the West, not the US, not the EU.

The reason why Russia is seen as a threat to them is because it is, proven by its historic treatment of them and it current actions in Ukraine which gives a foretaste of what would be in store for such countries under Russia domination.

Russia has never seen those countries as a partner of any kind, don't pretend otherwise, it would be a transparent Russian lie. Those countries, when given the free choice to do so, either have or want to take their place in Western alliances such as NATO or the EU. Proof positive your claims here are false, without merit and without foundation.

They've plenty of prior art:

Add Ukraine 2022 to that. There are plenty of countries where RuZZia is actively involved in their wars, like Syria, Central African Republic, Mali…

I don't get this logic?

A) they're not in a war - completely different to Iraq/ Afghanistan where you had US soldiers on the ground and US lives being lost. Here, its the Ukrainians handing Putin's ass to him for the US and all they're asking for is the military support from - not just the US - the West.

B) this war is likely to be massively beneficial to the US economy - military and weapons manufacture - JERBS! - and sales, guaranteed finger in the pie when the country is being rebuilt.

C) this is the chance to kick Russia in the balls that generations of red blooded Yanks dreamed of… yet the good ol boys in the Republican party are siding with the Reds?

Stoopid is as stoopid does I guess…

Why would you publicise this (seems to be happening a lot in this war)… essentially giving forewarning of new developments, technologies and strategies? Unless of course it's a complete white elephant that the Ukrainians know will never see action and they just want to put the wind up Putin?

Russia also would not still be in this fight if it wasn't for Chinese, Iranian and North Korean 'help'. And you are incorrect about Ukraine needing to win - Putin started the war so the pressure is on him to win. For Ukraine, even if this war ends up in some form of occupation by Russia, they will switch to guerilla and cyber attacks. Russia won't hold Ukraine for long.

The usual story goes something like Ukraine was a red line for Russia. Nobody else better look at Ukraine because Ukraine is Russia's bítch. But, goddammit, didn't the U.S. roll by anyway in its lowrider, giving Ukraine the bedroom eyes. Russia saw this, and when Ukraine went out to meet the US in the street, Russia was forced to drag her back by the hair and give her the pimp hand in order to remind her who daddy really was.

Something interesting you might notice in any, if not pro-Russia, then certainly anti-USA/west case which is made is that they all suggest no agency on the part of Ukraine. They all assume it is impossible that the Ukrainian people would in a majority sense prefer to pivot their political, social and economic values toward the West. Instead the assumption is that this drift toward the West arises from pernicious espionage. Something Robert Mearscheimer refers to quite vaguely as 'western social engineering' in his paper on why the Ukraine crisis is the West's fault.

Let's extrapolate on this and assume for the sake of argument that the above is true. Let's pick up this line of reasoning and start to follow it. Well, firstly, we know that Ukraine hasn't exactly been well treated during its time within the Russian sphere of influence and the shadow of Holodomor still looms over the country. We should know from our own history how devastating a famine can be and how it can sour relations with the authority blamed for causing it. We can also see that Ukraine's neighbours, such as Poland, joined the EU and gained considerable economic growth from it and aren't in any great hurry to leave it. So, this is just two broad demonstrations of why a country can become distant from one old ally and also be drawn to a new one. See the line begin to fray a little bit?

Let's walk along that line.

You see, Ukraine has not been Russia's only no-go area. In 2007, I think it was, at the Munich security conference, Putin painted the front row of dignitaries with flecks of spittle as he ranted about the injustice of NATO expansion. As Putin saw it, this was never supposed to happen. This was the breaking of a verbal promise made in 1990 that NATO would not place military infrastructure in East Germany and NATO did not place military infrastructure in the former East Germany. However, NATO did eventually come to Poland and several other Eastern Bloc countries. More accurately, they applied to join and this was accepted.

Why is this pertinent?

It's pertinent because the mentality that Ukraine is a red line is the same mentality which would have said that those former Eastern Bloc countries was a red line. It was just a red line which Russia was too weak to do anything about at the time, but Putin would still rant about it years later and become determined never to let it happen again. However, nobody really talks about the 'Western social engineering' that went on in Poland or Romania or Bulgaria. Largely, we accept that it is those countries democratic wish to be west-facing. Why do some people not afford that same assumption to Ukraine? Why is it that when somebody like Zelensky gets elected, that's supposed to be Western interference, but when Yanukovych backed out of a trade deal with the EU, leading to the Euromaidan protests, that's apparently above board? Don't hear the usual heads mention that bit in the same breath…

It's clear from Putin's own writings that he regards Russia as something of a victim of history, especially when he talks about how Ukraine was formed in the first place. It's also clear from how he runs his country with his circle of oligarchs and tight grip on power that he has no particular interest in creating an egalitarian country that develops itself and makes it an attractive and prosperous place to live, such that Ukraine would naturally want to stay in its orbit. He wants control and brutal suppression of discontent.

But please, trolls, tell us more about why Ukraine wouldn't want to leave such a shambolic setup.

At least we've progressed to accepting that the US is not in a war. Baby steps.

Next lesson ' "Why China is not currently a more healthy/ stable nation than the US".

Re expanding NATO’s membership in an eastern direction . NATO was set up to protect countries that felt that they might be invaded anytime in the future - so a purely defensive stance- and that they would come to each others aid. So Putin gave Sweden and Finland a 1000% reason to join NATO. When they saw Putin Attacking Ukr for no logical/meaningful reason - apart from his on logic- Sweden and Finland saw the writing on the wall and both would have been VERY. Isolated if outside Of NATO .
So MR PUTIN that train has left the station - thanks 1000% to you.
what’s of interest is that ‘ all the talk’ was about NATO not expanding beyond West Germany but there has NEVER any talk about Russia/ USSR expanding up to the borders of NATO countries

Nope, not going to happen like that. Europe will not tolerate Russia on its borders and will support Ukraine to make sure that it will not happen. First, Ukraine will join the EU, (already in progress) and later on they will join NATO. Russia tried their best for 10 years to control Afghanistan and failed. They are not going to win a guerrilla war in Ukraine either, even if it comes to that. Putin's Russian Federation is slowly but surely disintegrating mainly due to the fact that the war is absorbing too much money from the economy. Its currently struggling, all these dams breaking etc. is only the tip of the iceberg.

I kind of agree with your points about resistance & guerilla warfare in Ukraine's lost territories, but it is interesting to see a pro-Russia poster boast that the Russian govt.'s sheer brutality and their willingness to utilise terror tactics (on full display during this war) is a big asset for a "successful" occupation! A mask off moment.

Russia mercilessly and genocidally wiping out local resistance in places like Kiev , kharkiv , Lviv etc will not be accepted and will utterly discredit any remaining legitimacy they have as a country. Look what happened the Serbs when they tried that tactic.

I'm not pro or anti Russia. I just don't swallow the nonsense we've been fed for 2 years about this war, or it's origins either.

All of these large power players are brutal in their own ways. The Russians are no more barbaric than the yanks in how they try to eliminate a threat, but they just do it in a different way. The Americans try to pretend they're very civilized, but it's just a façade. Russia will ruthlessly squash any terrorism or guerrilla style war, they won't tolerate it or make any attempt to appease anybody.

Anyone who thinks the Russians are more ruthless in nature, you clearly haven't been looking at the evidence of what certain nations have been doing around the world for the last half a century or more. There is a top dog in the league of brutality, and it ain't the Russians or the Chinese leading that table right now!