Twice!The Russians have tangled with the Finns before and regretted it
Twice!The Russians have tangled with the Finns before and regretted it
Not trying to justify Russia at all, but this does seem a little unfair to them. How do you think we would react if Russia wanted to form an alliance with countries that are right on our doorstep and do things like station weapons and missiles in them? Wait, seems like that's happened before...The Ruskies only consider NATO membership a threat because they intended on invading these countries anyway...
I assume you are talking about Cuba. I know for a fact that the Russians had troops on the ground in Cuba throughout the 1960's and 1970's. Cannot vouch for times after that. But they were not in uniform, they were "cultural tourists"Not trying to justify Russia at all, but this does seem a little unfair to them. How do you think we would react if Russia wanted to form an alliance with countries that are right on our doorstep and do things like station weapons and missiles in them? Wait, seems like that's happened before...
This is why I would rather not see Ukraine join NATO.Not trying to justify Russia at all, but this does seem a little unfair to them. How do you think we would react if Russia wanted to form an alliance with countries that are right on our doorstep and do things like station weapons and missiles in them? Wait, seems like that's happened before...
Well golly, we wouldn't want to hurt their feelz...This is why I would rather not see Ukraine join NATO.
Russia has a long, long history feeling persecuted and looked down on by the West. Right or wrong, it affects their politics and view of the world.
Dude, that's pretty much what world politics is, feelz.Well golly, we wouldn't want to hurt their feelz...
That is incredibly naive. But you live in NPR world, so I've come to expect that.Maybe if we thought about Germany's feelz after WWI, we wouldn't have had WWII.
NO,NO,NO....they may oniy be 6 minutes from Moscow...but you can only say RUSSIA,RUSSIA,RUSSIA!Not trying to justify Russia at all, but this does seem a little unfair to them. How do you think we would react if Russia wanted to form an alliance with countries that are right on our doorstep and do things like station weapons and missiles in them? Wait, seems like that's happened before...
I think this is the first time I've heard someone imply that they do NOT believe that the excessively harsh terms imposed on Germany (along with the random chopping up of the Austro-Hungarian empire without any regard for the "feelz" of the people living there) after WWI were a significant factor in the politics that lead up to WWII. I should greatly like to hear this elaborated on, if you don't mind.That is incredibly naive. But you live in NPR world, so I've come to expect that.
When your country throws the entire world into chaos, don't be surprised when the consequences are harsh.I think this is the first time I've heard someone imply that they do NOT believe that the excessively harsh terms imposed on Germany (along with the random chopping up of the Austro-Hungarian empire without any regard for the "feelz" of the people living there) after WWI were a significant factor in the politics that lead up to WWII. I should greatly like to hear this elaborated on, if you don't mind.
So if I am understanding correctly, you don't have any problem with agreeing that the harsh consequences imposed after WWI were a significant factor in causing WWII; you're simply arguing that those consequences were well deserved?When your country throws the entire world into chaos, don't be surprised when the consequences are harsh.
I'm pretty sure DoggyDaddy was riled up about something I said in another thread and it bled over here. Hence the ad hominem NPR comment.So if I am understanding correctly, you don't have any problem with agreeing that the harsh consequences imposed after WWI were a significant factor in causing WWII; you're simply arguing that those consequences were well deserved?
Warring nation states should be punished, but if that punishment is too harsh (deserved for not), you end up hurting your own nation in the long run.I don't really have any argument against the fact that they were very much deserved, and to tie back into the subject at hand, I don't doubt that Russia deserves harsh consequences for their unprovoked invasion. However, I would say it's more naive to focus simply on getting back out our enemies to make sure they "get what they deserve" than it is to look for a longer-term solution, even if it involves some degree of mercy where it is not deserved.
To be clear, I am not advocating that we somehow need to be more soft on Russia right now; the time for that is past, and as long as they continue waging this war, I believe we should deal with them as harshly and decisively as we can without risking an all-out nuclear war.
But if (hopefully when) the times come when a decisive defeat is dealt to Russia, I hope we (or NATO, or Ukraine, or whoever is setting the terms of the surrender) can remember that harsh punishments doled out to an entire people, which effect not only the people living there today but also their future generations, have never served as a good recipe for long-term peace. I would much rather see an effort to help the people of Russia rebuild, and make them into a long-term ally, like what we did with Germany and Japan after WWII.
When your country throws the entire world into chaos, don't be surprised when the consequences are harsh.
That sounds justifiable. But it's a reasonable question to ask. If better terms were sought, would the conditions exist that allowed Hitler to rise to power?