How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Copernicus]

I have lived through 90s Russia. At one time I was literally starving and technically homeless, while having a full time job after getting degree from a top university in Russia, all because greatest "democracy" had some ideas about further collapse of Russia.
What do you think I should feel about US actions back then? When Russian government asked for help and you said "Fuck you!"?
And now, you started a proxy war with Russia? You honestly believe anyone in Russia buys your shit?
Nobody buys your shit, not even your puppet regimes in Europe. The rest of the world is openly rooting for Russia.
And why would not they? Why would not Latin America root for Russia?

We didn't hurt you. Your own leaders looted the country.

Actually, the West helped to stabilize the Russian economy. I traveled there on a business trip in 1997 and visited the newly-opened headquarters of my company above the MacDonalds in a building that hosted them not far away from the Kremlin. We provided Russian citizens with high-paying jobs, although the ones I met seemed a little unhappy that they were forbidden from smoking in the toilet. (We had a no-smoking company policy.) At the beginning of the new century, we expanded business there and engaged in a lot of work with Russian colleagues. Then Putin started ruining relations between our countries, and it all came undone. Now foreign investment inside of Russia has largely collapsed, and it won't be coming back soon after hostilities with Ukraine end. Putin and his thuggish cronies have done real damage to his country.

 

[Jayjay]

I have lived through 90s Russia. At one time I was literally starving and technically homeless, while having a full time job after getting degree from a top university in Russia, all because greatest "democracy" had some ideas about further collapse of Russia.

No, that's all on you. It was Russian oligarchs who turned the country into a mafia state, not the US. In retrospect one could always argue that the US and Europe should have done more to ensure a transition to a normal democracy, but Russia's problems in the 90s are 100% the fault of Russia and the communists who had fucked the country over for the past 70 years.

Besides, aren't you against US meddling in other countries affairs? But now you say they should've helped Russia in the 90s and poured money over there to help the people? Aren't you glad that the US has learned its lesson and is promising huge amounts of aid to rebuild Ukraine after the war?

What do you think I should feel about US actions back then? When Russian government asked for help and you said "Fuck you!"?

Didn't the US give a loan to Russia or something to help Yeltsin get elected? And how did that turn out? Throwing money into a country to make it less corrupt usually has the opposite effect.

 

[Jayjay]

Tell you what barbos, I'll do a recap of your top 10 stupidest referrals when you give me some good evidence that the US "invaded" Ukraine. Afterall, I asked you first.

Fuck the EU phone call.
next!

Nowhere in that call is there anything that refers to US invading Ukraine, either by sending troops, or weapons, or anything else. Or that they had anything to do with Maidan even.

The call does show one thing: the fact that the plans that Nuland and whatshisname ambassador discussed didn't come to pass shows that the US didn't have that much sway over Ukrainian government. It was just normal diplomacy. I guess the surprise was that Russia was listening on the call, and decided to publish part of it because they thought that "fuck the EU" would cause some sort of diplomatic uproar.

 

[Jayjay]

Reading barbis’s responses I don’t know whether to
1) laugh at their inanity,
2) wonder at the insane echo chamber of Russian media, or
3) fight the realization that it will take an almost complete annihilation of Russia’s gov’t and armed forces along with a couple hundred years of mass therapy to deal with pervasive paranoia and self-delusions of the Russian people to bring about long lasting peace and stability to that region if barbos’s portrayal of the Russian public’s views are correct.

I completely agree.

While I like a good debate as much as anyone, how do you respond to a person who keeps completely contrafactual claims without any evidence or reasoning like "NATO invaded Ukraine" or "Victoria Nuland blew up Nordstream"? It's like arguing with someone who thinks the moon is made of cheese.

And Russia has millions of people who believe exactly the same delusional conspiracy theories he does, reinforced constantly by endless stream of vile hate from Russian state media and other extremist propaganda outlets.

 

[Jayjay]

To summarize the video for those who didn't watch it: Bunch of talking heads talking about a clip where American general says that his son doesn't think Russia or Ukraine didn't sabotage Nord Stream, and the US has most to gain.

Sure. But it just boils down to the fallacious "who benefits" argument. And appeal to authority; the retired general doesn't speak from any direct evidence, he's just saying his own personal opinion, not spilling the beans based on some inside information. Yes, US had motive, but so did Russia. And circumstantial evidence points to Russian ships loitering around the pipes long enough to plant the explosives.

 

[Jayjay]

Do you really think Ukraine wants to be a part of Russia? Cause they sure aren’t acting like it.

They (Ukrainian Regime) want what US tells them to want. And US wants Russia out of Black Sea.
Yes, Ukraine are telling story how black sea belongs to Ukraine, because ......... a lot of ethnic ukrainians live there.
Does not matter that these so-called "ukrainians" (with ukrainian last names) don't really consider themselves as such.

No, it's the Russian people that do what Putin wants.

You were allowed to keep your port--you went to war anyway. It's not about the port.

I think eventually Russia would have lost the port. The writing was on the wall. Not that it justifies the invasion of Crimea, but I think it highlights that Putin is a thug who doesn't believe in diplomacy or negotiation, he thinks the only way to deal with other countries is by force and intimidation.

Russia could have maintained positive relations with Ukraine, and convinced them that way that letting Russia continue to stay in Crimea for historical reasons and for the benefit of cultural exchange would have been acceptable. But that would have meant letting Ukraine make their own decisions about who they want to trade or ally with, not extort them with energy, and not try to install their own puppet leaders. It would have been completely antithetical to Putin's Russia, so they just took what they wanted. And a bit more. And because they only got slapped at the wrist, Putin decided to try his luck once more and take over the whole country.

 

[Jayjay]

We did not help ISIS. We helped some anti-Assad forces that turned out to not be as friendly as we thought but they weren't ISIS.

I don't know how much we helped Isis, but I know that we did.
Senator McCain put a lot of effort into helping a Syrian rebel group get surface-to-air missiles from the US. Because Assad's air superiority was crushing them.
It turned out that particular group of rebels were part of ISIS. Had McCain been successful, the rebel group might just as easily have used those weapons against Israeli jets. Or U.S. jets.
The USA has a terrible track record of discerning friends from foes, especially when partisan politics gets involved.
Tom

That sounds more like naivete than intentional help to ISIS. Not all the rebels in Syria were ISIS, but some groups had closer ties to it than others.

 

[Jayjay]

I have lived through 90s Russia. At one time I was literally starving and technically homeless, while having a full time job after getting degree from a top university in Russia, all because greatest "democracy" had some ideas about further collapse of Russia.
What do you think I should feel about US actions back then? When Russian government asked for help and you said "Fuck you!"?
And now, you started a proxy war with Russia? You honestly believe anyone in Russia buys your shit?
Nobody buys your shit, not even your puppet regimes in Europe. The rest of the world is openly rooting for Russia.
And why would not they? Why would not Latin America root for Russia?

We didn't hurt you. Your own leaders looted the country.

Actually, the West helped to stabilize the Russian economy. I traveled there on a business trip in 1997 and visited the newly-opened headquarters of my company above the MacDonalds in a building that hosted them not far away from the Kremlin. We provided Russian citizens with high-paying jobs, although the ones I met seemed a little unhappy that they were forbidden from smoking in the toilet. (We had a no-smoking company policy.) At the beginning of the new century, we expanded business there and engaged in a lot of work with Russian colleagues. Then Putin started ruining relations between our countries, and it all came undone. Now foreign investment inside of Russia has largely collapsed, and it won't be coming back soon after hostilities with Ukraine end. Putin and his thuggish cronies have done real damage to his country.

This is exactly right. Putin whines that the west betrayed Russia, but it's the other way around. The west put aside 70 years of animosity and did everything it could to foster peaceful ties with Russia, to the point of making themselves vulnerable to energy blackmail. Every country wanted to do business with and in Russia, and we welcomed Russian people to the west to study, work, and whatever else. I've had several Russian colleagues and acquaintances in the past, all great people. And not in a putinist "Peter the Great" way. We all welcomed Russia to join the civilized world for the past 30 years, but Putin declined the offer.

And in fact, I think that even now, if Putin decided to end the war by withdrawing, most countries in the west would reward him for it, end the sanctions, and start to rebuild economic relationships (of course, when you lose trust, it's hard to get back, so it wouldn't happen overnight).

 

[Jayjay]

About cluster bombs, I was skeptical before how useful they are. And it doesn't seem like they're being used very effectively so far. Here's a video of them using it apparently to target something in a treeline in Zaporizhzhia (as usual, mute the sound):



Most of the bomblets just hit the empty field. If Ukraine had sufficient other artillery shells to hit the treeline, they wouldn't need to try to use a sub-optimal tool like cluster munitions.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Thank you for being honest on this. There will never be a long-term peace for Ukraine until it is allowed into Nato.

Oh there will be peace, once it's part of Russia.

If that were to come true there would not be peace as Russia would go after something else.

And note you said the US invaded, but now you admit the goal is to annex Ukraine.

 

[JabuKhan]

Well done, Barbos. Russia isn't the one always going after something else nor or they threat of a nuclear war. Russia is the deterrent. The only reason their goal would be to annex Ukraine now, is the ethnic cleansing barbarians that we consider their military now. Funding them was illegal when they were terrorist groups like most of the others we backed in the war on terror. This should have ended at Dyebolsovo, even by our own laws.

 

[barbos]

This is exactly right. Putin whines that the west betrayed Russia, but it's the other way around. The west put aside 70 years of animosity and did everything it could to foster peaceful ties with Russia,

According to what we know now that's a complete lie.

 

[barbos]

Thank you for being honest on this. There will never be a long-term peace for Ukraine until it is allowed into Nato.

Oh there will be peace, once it's part of Russia.

If that were to come true there would not be peace as Russia would go after something else.

And note you said the US invaded, but now you admit the goal is to annex Ukraine.

Yes, that's how it works. If you invade and lose you pay ... usually with territory.

 

[JabuKhan]

If Ukraine really wants to be anything other than a tool of NATO they should start with fair elections.

 

[barbos]

That sounds more like naivete than intentional help to ISIS. Not all the rebels in Syria were ISIS, but some groups had closer ties to it than others.

Yeah, right, US did not know these people. I believe that.

 

[barbos]

No, that's all on you. It was Russian oligarchs who turned the country into a mafia state

Acutally it is on US advisers who came up with that idea, literally.
What Sachs is talking about is different, he compares his experience with Poland and Russia.
US helped Poland when they were in similar situation. When He tried to do the same with Russia, he was praktically told "No, we want russians dead" As for oligarchs they were result of US meddling in the Russian elections with probably eventual goal to plunder Russia with this oligarchs scheme. Putin eventually solved this Oligarch problem US created. Lots of professional haters of Putin are western "businessmen" who were kicked out of Russia for essentially stealing.

So I blame US for my eating sugar for a month and sleeping on a work on a chair.

The only shit US did is to make sure that russian rocket scientists don't go to Iran, so they made a deal with russian space agency.
They did it for themselves of course, very practical.

 

[JabuKhan]

Even though the Clinton administration created Putin with their so-called aid.

 

[Copernicus]

This is exactly right. Putin whines that the west betrayed Russia, but it's the other way around. The west put aside 70 years of animosity and did everything it could to foster peaceful ties with Russia,

According to what we know now that's a complete lie.

Which proves that you really don't know anything.

 

[barbos]

Sure. But it just boils down to the fallacious "who benefits" argument

So Russia/Ukraine did not do it and US has direct monetary interest to do it and is the only one left who CAN do it.
So who did it?

 

[barbos]

And Russia has millions of people who believe exactly the same delusional conspiracy theories he does,

First, it's not a conspiracy, that's a fact. Second yes, Russia has 140 millions of people who believe that Hersh is correct.
What are you gonna do?