Let's Invade Russia!

[Harry Bosch]

Stop being so willfully dumb. Russia is an old imperial power. Just like the UK and France. The UK and France stopped being imperial powers. They obviously didn't do it because of love for the world. It's just that world peace benefits everybody. While imperialism has a winner, everybody loses. We're all better off not having empires. Russia is still nurturing imperial dreams. They're still behaving like the UK and France did in the 60'ies. Russia is having trouble accepting that they just need to respect other people's stuff. It doesn't matter that the stuff used to belong to them. Now it doesn't.

As soon as Russia stops behaving like an imperial power we'll have peace. And we can go on to be friendly neighbors. To prove that it works. In Europe it used to be easier to predict wars than the weather. They were so regular. When Europeans decided to accept the borders it became mostly peaceful. BTW, this was the aim of the Congress of Vienna. While we like to look at WWI and WWII as failures of the Congress of Vienna... they aren't. The period after the Napoleonic wars was amazingly peaceful, even if we count the two world wars. That's the power of fixing borders and not worrying about on who's side stuff is. We all have a claim to everything anyway.

That's why I think we should invade Russia and give the Crimea back to the Ukraine. For that simple reason. We should all get together and collude to prevent any land grabs. Right now Russia and China are the two biggest threat to world peace, for this single reason. They're both constantly looking for weaknesses in neighbors they can exploit to expand power.

Lol the US and NATO invaded Afghanistan, something that wasn't theirs. Why don't you support invading Afghanistan and restoring it to the Taliban? The US, UK and various NATO members invaded Iraq and occupied Iraq, entirely unprovoked. And you expect people to give a shit about the Crimea? To help out a bunch of Ukrainian Nazis? Get real.

Lol. Yeah, the period after the Napoleonic wars was "peaceful" even including the two world wars! How can you expect to be taken seriously?

Did you get your history degree from Trump University? Nato didn't invade Iraq. Some of the countries that invaded Iraq (US, UK) are also part of Nato. Secondly, Afganistan attacked the US through Al-quada.

- - - Updated - - -

Stop being so willfully dumb. Russia is an old imperial power. Just like the UK and France. The UK and France stopped being imperial powers. They obviously didn't do it because of love for the world. It's just that world peace benefits everybody. While imperialism has a winner, everybody loses. We're all better off not having empires. Russia is still nurturing imperial dreams. They're still behaving like the UK and France did in the 60'ies. Russia is having trouble accepting that they just need to respect other people's stuff. It doesn't matter that the stuff used to belong to them. Now it doesn't.

As soon as Russia stops behaving like an imperial power we'll have peace. And we can go on to be friendly neighbors. To prove that it works. In Europe it used to be easier to predict wars than the weather. They were so regular. When Europeans decided to accept the borders it became mostly peaceful. BTW, this was the aim of the Congress of Vienna. While we like to look at WWI and WWII as failures of the Congress of Vienna... they aren't. The period after the Napoleonic wars was amazingly peaceful, even if we count the two world wars. That's the power of fixing borders and not worrying about on who's side stuff is. We all have a claim to everything anyway.

That's why I think we should invade Russia and give the Crimea back to the Ukraine. For that simple reason. We should all get together and collude to prevent any land grabs. Right now Russia and China are the two biggest threat to world peace, for this single reason. They're both constantly looking for weaknesses in neighbors they can exploit to expand power.

As long as West refuses to listen to Russian concerns Russia will keep behaving the way it's behaving.

What are the Russian concerns? I'd really like to know what it is Russia wants in Eastern Europe.

 

[barbos]

What are the Russian concerns? I'd really like to know what it is Russia wants in Eastern Europe.

NATO expansion
Color revolutions and elections meddling in general (yes, US started it first),
Economic sanctions (US does not even hide that the reason for them is US desire to sell their fracking gas to EU),
Anti-ICBM defense in Europe which is obviously targeted against Russia and not Iran.
John McCain (He need to retire and do so retroactively 10 years ago)

 

[LordKiran]

I am confused.

You say you like fixed borders, and that is your justification for an invasion to move the current borders. That's... interesting.

At what date should we declare the borders 'fixed'?

I think it should be August 21 1770

How about 1444?

 

[J842P]

Lol the US and NATO invaded Afghanistan, something that wasn't theirs. Why don't you support invading Afghanistan and restoring it to the Taliban? The US, UK and various NATO members invaded Iraq and occupied Iraq, entirely unprovoked. And you expect people to give a shit about the Crimea? To help out a bunch of Ukrainian Nazis? Get real.

Lol. Yeah, the period after the Napoleonic wars was "peaceful" even including the two world wars! How can you expect to be taken seriously?

Did you get your history degree from Trump University? Nato didn't invade Iraq. Some of the countries that invaded Iraq (US, UK) are also part of Nato. Secondly, Afganistan attacked the US through Al-quada.

That's what I said: "The US, UK and various NATO members invaded Iraq and occupied Iraq..." I did not say NATO invaded Iraq, like I said for Afghanistan.

Also, I made no claim about what Afghanistan did, but since you bring it up, Afghanistan did not attack the US. I know you have a slavish devotion to believing that the US is absolutely justified in every single thing it does, but in fact, the Taliban did not attack the US. Al Qaeda did. The Taliban declined to hand over Al Qaeda without evidence, and then eventually even offered to hand him over to a third party. The US refused, and instead, invaded and conquered the country. Regardless of the justification, my question was why doesn't DZ support invading the US and returning Afghanistan over to the Taliban, given his theory that borders must be kept constant?

 

[Harry Bosch]

What are the Russian concerns? I'd really like to know what it is Russia wants in Eastern Europe.

NATO expansion
Color revolutions and elections meddling in general (yes, US started it first),
Economic sanctions (US does not even hide that the reason for them is US desire to sell their fracking gas to EU),
Anti-ICBM defense in Europe which is obviously targeted against Russia and not Iran.
John McCain (He need to retire and do so retroactively 10 years ago)

You avoided my question. What is it that Russia wants in Eastern Europe?

I do think that Nato expanded too fast into Eastern Europe. It was a provocation. However, it's hard to made the case that it was unnecessary as witnessed by Russian expansion into Ukraine.

 

[LordKiran]

NATO expansion
Color revolutions and elections meddling in general (yes, US started it first),
Economic sanctions (US does not even hide that the reason for them is US desire to sell their fracking gas to EU),
Anti-ICBM defense in Europe which is obviously targeted against Russia and not Iran.
John McCain (He need to retire and do so retroactively 10 years ago)

You avoided my question. What is it that Russia wants in Eastern Europe?

I do think that Nato expanded too fast into Eastern Europe. It was a provocation. However, it's hard to made the case that it was unnecessary as witnessed by Russian expansion into Ukraine.

For my anecdotal part I've spoken to east europeans from time to time and they all seem to agree that Russia poses a direct threat to their sovereignty, especially when you consider how many of them still have large populations of ethnic russians for putin to 'protect'.

I've heard that Russian troops still sit on the border between Moldova and Romania.

 

[barbos]

NATO expansion
Color revolutions and elections meddling in general (yes, US started it first),
Economic sanctions (US does not even hide that the reason for them is US desire to sell their fracking gas to EU),
Anti-ICBM defense in Europe which is obviously targeted against Russia and not Iran.
John McCain (He need to retire and do so retroactively 10 years ago)

You avoided my question. What is it that Russia wants in Eastern Europe?

Russia wants less NATO/US equipment in Eastern Europe.

I do think that Nato expanded too fast into Eastern Europe. It was a provocation. However, it's hard to made the case that it was unnecessary as witnessed by Russian expansion into Ukraine.

Russia "expanded" into Ukraine AFTER US/NATO expanded into there , and LONG after NATO expanded into Eastern Europe.

 

[barbos]

I've heard that Russian troops still sit on the border between Moldova and Romania.

No doubts, your anecdotal friends told you that.

 

[Harry Bosch]

You avoided my question. What is it that Russia wants in Eastern Europe?

Russia wants less NATO/US equipment in Eastern Europe.

I do think that Nato expanded too fast into Eastern Europe. It was a provocation. However, it's hard to made the case that it was unnecessary as witnessed by Russian expansion into Ukraine.

Russia "expanded" into Ukraine AFTER US/NATO expanded into there , and LONG after NATO expanded into Eastern Europe.

I gotcha! So, Russia invaded Ukraine before Nato could? It was an effort to preserve Ukraine before the western savages invaders could take over? If you were a neutral country, do you think you would prefer to be "invaded" by Nato or Russia? When NATO invades, we allow the country to operate itself as it sees fit. We don't change anything. We put a few troops in the country. But the country has sovereignty. They can withdraw from NATO when they so desire. There is a formal process. There is no withdraw process from mother Russia. When you guys come to town, sovereignty is lost. Putin calls the shots. There is no local control. Do you see the difference? Do you understand why some countries would prefer to part of NATO and retain local control? Rather than be taken over by Russia?

 

[LordKiran]

I've heard that Russian troops still sit on the border between Moldova and Romania.

No doubts, your anecdotal friends told you that.

So does wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Army_involvement_in_Transnistria

Wrong border, but no less provocative. No less obviously a veiled threat to the nation's sovereignty.

 

[barbos]

No doubts, your anecdotal friends told you that.

So does wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Army_involvement_in_Transnistria

Wrong border, but no less provocative. No less obviously a veiled threat to the nation's sovereignty.

Yes, very wrong border and in fact it's not a border at all, also no understanding why are they there and since when.

 

[barbos]

Russia wants less NATO/US equipment in Eastern Europe.

I do think that Nato expanded too fast into Eastern Europe. It was a provocation. However, it's hard to made the case that it was unnecessary as witnessed by Russian expansion into Ukraine.

Russia "expanded" into Ukraine AFTER US/NATO expanded into there , and LONG after NATO expanded into Eastern Europe.

I gotcha! So, Russia invaded Ukraine before Nato could? It was an effort to preserve Ukraine before the western savages invaders could take over?

No, it was an effort to preserve Russia.

If you were a neutral country, do you think you would prefer to be "invaded" by Nato or Russia?

Neutral country would prefer to be invaded by neither.

When NATO invades, we allow the country to operate itself as it sees fit. We don't change anything. We put a few troops in the country. But the country has sovereignty.

Your point being....?

They can withdraw from NATO when they so desire. There is a formal process.

Well, Eastern block countries withdrew from Warsaw pact, did not they? In case of NATO, France did it once but not completely.

There is no withdraw process from mother Russia.

Eastern block countries withdrew from Warsaw pact, did not they? In case of NATO, France did it once but not completely.
Also Georgia left millitary alliance with Russia in modern time.
As for Crimea there was no process from mother Ukraine.

When you guys come to town, sovereignty is lost.

Again, it was not true even during USSR time.

Putin calls the shots. There is no local control.

This is patently false.
Putin does not call shots in Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia/etc. He was not calling shots in Ukraine before the coup. He had to bribe Ukraine into staying with Russia.

Do you see the difference?

Not really.

Do you understand why some countries would prefer to part of NATO and retain local control?

Well, some of them prefer being paid by US for harassing Russia.

Rather than be taken over by Russia?

If you mean Crimea, then crimeans voted to be taken over by Russia. That's better than to be taken by Ukraine without any voting.

 

[LordKiran]

So does wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Army_involvement_in_Transnistria

Wrong border, but no less provocative. No less obviously a veiled threat to the nation's sovereignty.

Yes, very wrong border and in fact it's not a border at all, also no understanding why are they there and since when.

Clearly to protect themselves from the mighty and massive Moldovan army I'm sure.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Stop being so willfully dumb. Russia is an old imperial power. Just like the UK and France. The UK and France stopped being imperial powers. They obviously didn't do it because of love for the world. It's just that world peace benefits everybody. While imperialism has a winner, everybody loses. We're all better off not having empires. Russia is still nurturing imperial dreams. They're still behaving like the UK and France did in the 60'ies. Russia is having trouble accepting that they just need to respect other people's stuff. It doesn't matter that the stuff used to belong to them. Now it doesn't.

As soon as Russia stops behaving like an imperial power we'll have peace. And we can go on to be friendly neighbors. To prove that it works. In Europe it used to be easier to predict wars than the weather. They were so regular. When Europeans decided to accept the borders it became mostly peaceful. BTW, this was the aim of the Congress of Vienna. While we like to look at WWI and WWII as failures of the Congress of Vienna... they aren't. The period after the Napoleonic wars was amazingly peaceful, even if we count the two world wars. That's the power of fixing borders and not worrying about on who's side stuff is. We all have a claim to everything anyway.

That's why I think we should invade Russia and give the Crimea back to the Ukraine. For that simple reason. We should all get together and collude to prevent any land grabs. Right now Russia and China are the two biggest threat to world peace, for this single reason. They're both constantly looking for weaknesses in neighbors they can exploit to expand power.

As long as West refuses to listen to Russian concerns Russia will keep behaving the way it's behaving.

So what concerns are those? LordKiran makes a good point though. They took Crimea while not giving back Karelia to Finland. So they don't seem to care about who's stuff they're holding onto.

 

[barbos]

So what concerns are those? LordKiran makes a good point though. They took Crimea while not giving back Karelia to Finland. So they don't seem to care about who's stuff they're holding onto.

Finland lost in WW2. But if you insist on Karelia going back to Finland then there will be nothing left of Ukraine. Because they would have to give back western Ukraine to Poland, Romania, Hungary and South Ukraine to Russia.

 

[LordKiran]

So what concerns are those? LordKiran makes a good point though. They took Crimea while not giving back Karelia to Finland. So they don't seem to care about who's stuff they're holding onto.

Finland lost in WW2. But if you insist on Karelia going back to Finland then there will be nothing left of Ukraine. Because they would have to give back western Ukraine to Poland, Romania, Hungary and South Ukraine to Russia.

Finland didnt lose Karellia in WW2, they lost it when the USSR invaded because Finland wouldn't cede their land voluntarily. Oh and also north Manchuria should go back to the PRC, along with pretty much all of Tartaria to Mongolia with all of the Ethnic Russians being relocated to Kievian Rus, with new nations carved out for those such as the Bolghars, Permese, Turkish Crimeans, and Mordvinians.

Indeed, Moscovy Rus was a busy little bee during the early modern period.

Also technically the lands you mentioned wouldn't go to Poland. If anything, they'd go to Lithuania who owned them first before the political union that resulted in The Commonwealth.

 

[barbos]

Finland lost in WW2. But if you insist on Karelia going back to Finland then there will be nothing left of Ukraine. Because they would have to give back western Ukraine to Poland, Romania, Hungary and South Ukraine to Russia.

Finland didnt lose Karellia in WW2, they lost it when the USSR invaded because Finland wouldn't cede their land voluntarily.

It did not get back Karelia or rather did not get territories which Stalin offered in exchange for it because they lost in WW2. To the victors goes spoils.

Oh and also north Manchuria should go back to the PRC, along with pretty much all of Tartaria to Mongolia

Tatars are not mongols,

with all of the Ethnic Russians being relocated to Kievian Rus,

Ethnic Russians are not related to Kievian Rus that much, if we are talking about gene pool that is.

with new nations carved out for those such as the Bolghars, Permese, Turkish Crimeans, and Mordvinians.

Indeed, Moscovy Rus was a busy little bee during the early modern period.

Also technically the lands you mentioned wouldn't go to Poland. If anything, they'd go to Lithuania who owned them first before the political union that resulted in The Commonwealth.

No, it would go to Poland, and then Litvinians can demand it back from Poland.

So you see where are we going with this? Hence this demand of frozen borders is stupid.

 

[LordKiran]

Finland didnt lose Karellia in WW2, they lost it when the USSR invaded because Finland wouldn't cede their land voluntarily.

It did not get back Karelia or rather did not get territories which Stalin offered in exchange for it because they lost in WW2. To the victors goes spoils.

Oh and also north Manchuria should go back to the PRC, along with pretty much all of Tartaria to Mongolia

Tatars are not mongols,

with all of the Ethnic Russians being relocated to Kievian Rus,

Ethnic Russians are not related to Kievian Rus that much, if we are talking about gene pool that is.

with new nations carved out for those such as the Bolghars, Permese, Turkish Crimeans, and Mordvinians.

Indeed, Moscovy Rus was a busy little bee during the early modern period.

Also technically the lands you mentioned wouldn't go to Poland. If anything, they'd go to Lithuania who owned them first before the political union that resulted in The Commonwealth.

No, it would go to Poland, and then Litvinians can demand it back from Poland.

So you see where are we going with this? Hence this demand of frozen borders is stupid.

1. So you deny then that The USSR declared a war of aggression against Finland to annex their territory?

2. "Tartaria" Is the western name for the territory owned by the turko-mongol empire and includes almost everything north-east of the caspian sea stretching to the Pacific.

3. But it is where the Rus Slavs originate from, not from Moskva or Novgorod.

4. I don't actually subscribe to any of this lunacy, just pointing out how if we applied it extreme enough, The Russian state would simply cease to be since almost all of its territories are the result of conquest and subjugation.

 

[barbos]

It did not get back Karelia or rather did not get territories which Stalin offered in exchange for it because they lost in WW2. To the victors goes spoils.

Oh and also north Manchuria should go back to the PRC, along with pretty much all of Tartaria to Mongolia

Tatars are not mongols,

with all of the Ethnic Russians being relocated to Kievian Rus,

Ethnic Russians are not related to Kievian Rus that much, if we are talking about gene pool that is.

with new nations carved out for those such as the Bolghars, Permese, Turkish Crimeans, and Mordvinians.

Indeed, Moscovy Rus was a busy little bee during the early modern period.

Also technically the lands you mentioned wouldn't go to Poland. If anything, they'd go to Lithuania who owned them first before the political union that resulted in The Commonwealth.

No, it would go to Poland, and then Litvinians can demand it back from Poland.

So you see where are we going with this? Hence this demand of frozen borders is stupid.

1. So you deny then that The USSR declared a war of aggression against Finland to annex their territory?

Technically yes, but Stalin offered territory exchange before that.

2. "Tartaria" Is the western name for the territory owned by the turko-mongol empire and includes almost everything north-east of the caspian sea stretching to the Pacific.

So?

3. But it is where the Rus Slavs originate from, not from Moskva or Novgorod.

We don't know that for sure, could be Klingons too.

4. I don't actually subscribe to any of this lunacy, just pointing out how if we applied it extreme enough, The Russian state would simply cease to be since almost all of its territories are the result of conquest and subjugation.

It's 100% true for any state.

 

[LordKiran]

It did not get back Karelia or rather did not get territories which Stalin offered in exchange for it because they lost in WW2. To the victors goes spoils.

Oh and also north Manchuria should go back to the PRC, along with pretty much all of Tartaria to Mongolia

Tatars are not mongols,

with all of the Ethnic Russians being relocated to Kievian Rus,

Ethnic Russians are not related to Kievian Rus that much, if we are talking about gene pool that is.

with new nations carved out for those such as the Bolghars, Permese, Turkish Crimeans, and Mordvinians.

Indeed, Moscovy Rus was a busy little bee during the early modern period.

Also technically the lands you mentioned wouldn't go to Poland. If anything, they'd go to Lithuania who owned them first before the political union that resulted in The Commonwealth.

No, it would go to Poland, and then Litvinians can demand it back from Poland.

So you see where are we going with this? Hence this demand of frozen borders is stupid.

1. So you deny then that The USSR declared a war of aggression against Finland to annex their territory?

Technically yes, but Stalin offered territory exchange before that.

2. "Tartaria" Is the western name for the territory owned by the turko-mongol empire and includes almost everything north-east of the caspian sea stretching to the Pacific.

So?

3. But it is where the Rus Slavs originate from, not from Moskva or Novgorod.

We don't know that for sure, could be Klingons too.

4. I don't actually subscribe to any of this lunacy, just pointing out how if we applied it extreme enough, The Russian state would simply cease to be since almost all of its territories are the result of conquest and subjugation.

It's 100% true for any state.

1. If you're just going to wage war against someone who declines your offer and take it anyway then it was never a choice, only an ultimatum. Stalin's offer of territory that the Fins were under ZERO obligation to accept does nothing to make this any better.

2. So your previous point doesn't mean anything. The fact that "Mongols are not Tatars" Doesn't matter. ESPECIALLY when you consider the historical context behind the word "Tartar" such as:

The Tatars (Russian: татары); (Tatar: татарлар) are Turkic-speaking people[1] living in Asia and Europe. The name "Tatar" first appears in written form on the Kul Tigin monument as ������������������ (TaTaR). Historically, the term "Tatars" was applied to a variety of Turco-Mongol semi-nomadic empires who controlled the vast region known as Tartary. More recently, however, the term refers more narrowly to people who speak one of the Turkic[1] languages.

Bolding is mine

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatars

3. We have a pretty good idea of it actually. Its commonly accepted that the Rus people originate from further west than Moskva, a region which was historically populated by Mordvids and baltic peoples.

4. Not -Every state- But certainly the ones who's current borders are the result of past conquests.