Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[Falco Underhill]

I tried to share a link to a YouTube video but Google said there was a problem with sharing it and keeps signing me out of Google if I try.

For anyone interested, do a Google Search on -

"John Mearsheim the causes and consequences of the Ukraine conflict" and that should get you to the link.

[Falco Underhill]

Go ahead and propose an ironclad guarantee that Ukraine will not join NATO. Do you think Russia will then withdraw from the four provinces of Ukraine that it has claimed to have annexed along with Crimea? Of course not. There is zero chance of that.

Which underscores the lie that this was anything to do with NATO. It was about Russian imperialism and an effort by Russia to expand its territory at the expense of the nation and people of Ukraine. They have said exactly that. Both Putin in his speeches and the other organs of the state.

I suggest you watch the John Mearsheim video. He covers the facts. Russia would have found your reasoning laughable. All they want is an assurance and in writing.

There's still one simple way to prove me wrong. We just need to hear those magic words.

For those who prefer to read, this paper lays out Mearsheim's argument:

https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/ ... sis-Is.pdf

But Ukraine did not join NATO before the invasion, and NATO didn't sound like they were likely to allow them to join. Perhaps Russia could wait for the offense to happen before invading?

And the REASON that Ukraine wanted help defending itself against Russia is quite simple: Russia consistently threatened the existence of Ukraine. That's where the Canada and Mexico analogies fall down: the United States is not threatening the existence of either country. Suppose the United States did threaten Canada and Canada appealed to a military alliance for help - that would look different.

Beyond that ... surely Russia is primarily responsible for what Russia does. Neither NATO nor the United States are invading Russia or threatening to do so. Russia is doing that to Ukraine. That's where I really start shaking my head, when it sounds like the military aggressor bears no real blame for massive destruction of civilian lives.

John Mearsheim lays out the facts.

Yes, Russia must bear responsibility for its part.

But if you want this war to end, the U.S. NATO and Ukraine need to "say the magic words."

[Bootstrap]

Isn’t part of the problem (Josh referenced above) that NATO didn’t stay out of Ukraine, as they’d agreed?

As I understand it:

1. NATO wasn't in Ukraine. Ukraine asked to join, NATO had not responded. Ukraine felt Russia was a danger.
2. There was no legal agreement to prevent NATO from allowing Ukraine to join (see https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ent-again/)

Did I miss something?

[Falco Underhill]

Isn’t part of the problem (Josh referenced above) that NATO didn’t stay out of Ukraine, as they’d agreed?

As I understand it:

1. NATO wasn't in Ukraine. Ukraine asked to join, NATO had not responded. Ukraine felt Russia was a danger.
2. There was no legal agreement to prevent NATO from allowing Ukraine to join (see https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ent-again/)

Did I miss something?

Yes. Watch the John Mearsheim video. I won't do the work for you.

[Bootstrap]

Isn’t part of the problem (Josh referenced above) that NATO didn’t stay out of Ukraine, as they’d agreed?

As I understand it:

1. NATO wasn't in Ukraine. Ukraine asked to join, NATO had not responded. Ukraine felt Russia was a danger.
2. There was no legal agreement to prevent NATO from allowing Ukraine to join (see https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ent-again/)

Did I miss something?

Yes. Watch the John Mearsheim video. I won't do the work for you.

I read his article, and provided a link to it. Here it is again:

https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/ ... sis-Is.pdf

I think you are confusing NATO and the European Union. They aren't the same thing. The European Union is not a military organization, it is an economic market. And I think that's the REAL threat to Russia, they worry that a prosperous Ukraine, as part of the European Union, might show people another way.

I think I've done my share of the work. If you can provide a link to something that clearly says I was wrong - not a video that is over an hour, something simple to check - that would be more helpful than claiming it's in a video somewhere.

[Falco Underhill]

As I understand it:

1. NATO wasn't in Ukraine. Ukraine asked to join, NATO had not responded. Ukraine felt Russia was a danger.
2. There was no legal agreement to prevent NATO from allowing Ukraine to join (see https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... ent-again/)

Did I miss something?

Yes. Watch the John Mearsheim video. I won't do the work for you.

I read his article, and provided a link to it. Here it is again:

https://www.mearsheimer.com/wp-content/ ... sis-Is.pdf

I think you are confusing NATO and the European Union. They aren't the same thing. The European Union is not a military organization, it is an economic market. And I think that's the REAL threat to Russia, they worry that a prosperous Ukraine, as part of the European Union, might show people another way.

I think I've done my share of the work. If you can provide a link to something that clearly says I was wrong - not a video that is over an hour, something simple to check - that would be more helpful than claiming it's in a video somewhere.

No, I am not confusing NATO and the EU. Watch the video.

[Josh]

What is shocking is to see supposedly "pacifist" Mennonites supporting shipping billions of dollars in weapons, ammunition, bombs, and missiles to the region. Many of these people are the same people who ended up picking up arms in the Ukraine to fight with the Nazis in the 1930s. They have the same kind of thinking: it's OK to shoot and kill people as long as you're shooting and killing Russians.

I don't see that here, Josh. I have not advocated that. I have said this is in Caesar's domain, I don't know what the right course of action is for Caesar, my concern is for the victims of war, etc.

But I am saying military invasions and killing civilians are bad things. That's what Putin is doing. Repeatedly, you seem to be saying that Putin has every right to do this, that it's somehow a good thing, that Ukraine has no right to exist, that it should belong to Russia.

And the U.S. is doing the same thing. What happens when billions of dollars worth of arms are sent to a country? They get used to attack civilians, which is indeed who died in the Crimean bridge attack.

To me, that's a "pacifist" Mennonite playing cheerleader to a military invasion.

No, that's how you keep trying to typecast me. I am simply here speaking against U.S. (and Ukrainian) involvement in violent armed conflict, particularly armed conflict that I see dragging on forever with no chance of winning or a peaceful resolution.

And I believe a viewpoint of history is to be called for here too. In the 1930s, many Mennonites also sided with fighting back against Russia. Mennonite academics now solemnly condemn that. Could it be the over-eagerness here to pick sides will result in the same realisations 100 years from now?

[Josh]

Because Zelensky is not bombing Moscow, he has not invaded Russia. He is not a military invader who is killing Russian civilians.

Ukraine took responsibility for blowing up the Crimea bridge, which is both infrastructure, and the people who died are civilians.

[Ken]

Because Zelensky is not bombing Moscow, he has not invaded Russia. He is not a military invader who is killing Russian civilians.

Ukraine took responsibility for blowing up the Crimea bridge, which is both infrastructure, and the people who died are civilians.

Are you talking about the bridge that is carrying all the troops, weapons, artillery, and missiles that Russia is using to attack and terrorize all of Southern Ukraine?

[Josh]

Are you talking about the bridge that is carrying all the troops, weapons, artillery, and missiles that Russia is using to attack and terrorize all of Southern Ukraine?

So are you saying attacks on Russian bridges, which kill civilians, are fully justified at this point?

Should the U.S. and other Western powers help provide materiel and other support to help Ukrainian armed forces and militias blow up Russian infrastructure?