[Tainari88]

@late who are the nations near the US borders? How much of México did the US take in wars? How many millions of Mexicans, Central Americans, etc does the US labor market use from 1840-2024? Threatening in order to dominate? Putin wants to be el más chingón. Lol. That ugly greedy mentality You see in the Russian dictator is what fueled westward expansión in North América long ago.

Have You observed Chimp societies? Gorilla societies? Lol. They teach each other a lot of things. Fight for territorios.

Who has been the biggest baddest gun toting nation in the last 125 or so years? The United States of América. They had their Manifest Destiny. They helped turn the tide in Europe in WWII. They defeated Imperial Japan.

You think the primates never noticed the tactics? The PlayBook is there? China paid attention. So did Russia. Nukes, controlling little places. Paying nothing for labor. Expanding territorios. Scaring into compliance.

The thing is the US government never learned from the mistakes of it's compañeros in the rest of the world. Because it failed to realize that overweening ambitions lead to internal rot.

It Will find out what that means soon enough.

[Puffer Fish]

It would be the perfect opportunity for NATO to invade. In reality, NATO doesn't even allow Ukraine to bomb targets in Russia with NATO weapons. Putin did not start the SMO because he fears NATO, but because he doesn't fear it.

NATO doesn't want to attack targets in Russia because it would escalate the conflict. What's happening now is more like a "Cold War", or war by proxy, similar to the Korean and Vietnam wars.

There is a real danger to the type of mentality people like you have. You think the solution is to step up the conflict rather than try to temper it down and keep it from escalating.

That could result in a huge war with much more widespread destruction and huge loss of human life, and probably create long-term bitterness on both sides.

[noemon]

And it could totally be the case per Mearsheimer and even Putin that Russia was pushed towards a military confrontation based on NATO's expansion into Ukraine or whatnot. Still doesn't give Russia the right to use these things as an excuse to annex territory.

Russian rights in 90% ethnic Russian Donbass & Crimea:

1) Donbass recognised internationally in Minsk as ethnic-Russian areas granted the right to self-determination and to special status. Provided that, they will not be demilitarised by separatist forces until they are granted special status as ethnic-Russian areas by the constitution of Ukraine. Legally, the Donbass can leave Ukraine and join Russia as per international treaty since Ukraine failed to provide the constitutional guarantees that Minsk required it.
2) Crimea already recognised as Russian internationally in Minsk that recognised the Russian State after it had already annexed Crimea without any asterisks, ifs or buts.

Somehow you believe that the US has the right to declare new countries by removing provinces from sovereign countries like it did against Serbia in Kossovo, but Russians have neither the right to self-determination in their native lands, nor to join the State that represents their national interests.

[Unthinking Majority]

Somehow you believe that the US has the right to declare new countries by removing provinces from sovereign countries like it did against Serbia in Kossovo, but Russians have neither the right to self-determination in their native lands, nor to join the State that represents their national interests.

When did I say this?

What it comes down to for me is that in this day in age I don't trust anyone's opinion but my own. And I don't care about Russia or Ukraine enough to spend the many, many hours it would take to properly educate myself on the history and agreements of the region because i have better things to do and so I don't to have much of an opinion. What I do know is these countries are run by mafia bosses and western or Russian puppets and the regular people are caught in the middle.

I'm more concerned that my neck of the woods and its ally countries are slowly becoming more and more corrupt and violent and inching more towards resembling those thug-haven societies.

[Tainari88]

Russian rights in 90% ethnic Russian Donbass & Crimea:

1) Donbass recognised internationally in Minsk as ethnic-Russian areas granted the right to self-determination and to special status. Provided that, they will not be demilitarised by separatist forces until they are granted special status as ethnic-Russian areas by the constitution of Ukraine. Legally, the Donbass can leave Ukraine and join Russia as per international treaty since Ukraine failed to provide the constitutional guarantees that Minsk required it.
2) Crimea already recognised as Russian internationally in Minsk that recognised the Russian State after it had already annexed Crimea without any asterisks, ifs or buts.

Somehow you believe that the US has the right to declare new countries by removing provinces from sovereign countries like it did against Serbia in Kossovo, but Russians have neither the right to self-determination in their native lands, nor to join the State that represents their national interests.

Humans observe each other and they also observe the behavior of all of the governments in all of the nation states.

It is in human nature to see what the neighbors can do or obtain and why they can't do the same or can do the same.

If the example is might is right. That is the only thing that will be respected in the end.

If you resolve conflict by throwing a Nuke on the opposition and cowing them into submission and you think you can control Nuclear Arms races and turns out the genie is out of the bottle? The fault lies in not understanding human nature.

We follow and interact with each other for centuries and millennia. Learn that trying to force others to give up their homes, livelihoods, and lands so only one can be the all-knowing one in government and in power is for fools. It always has been.

Everyone relies on peace to get to basic needs met. War threatens everyone over time. I find it weird that so many people keep advocating for something so counterproductive because they think their own nation should be the one dictating systems to everyone else. It does not make sense.

[noemon]

When did I say this?

It logically follows from your statement "Russia has no right to annex".

Noone challenges the right of Kossovo to be chopped off a Serbian province.

But they do challenge the right of the ethnic-Russians in Ukraine to self-determination even though these rights have been recognised to them by the international community and Ukraine under the Minsk agreements.

Kossovars had no such international rights recognised to them, but they did chop off sovereign Serbian provinces with US military & diplomatic support. Ethnic-Russians have such rights recognised to them officially internationally while Ukraine and the US are trying to deny them their recognised rights by military force.

It's all a bit too much in terms of hypocrisy. Apparently Russians have less rights than Albanians even though the Russian have international treaties backing those rights while the Albanians, nothing.

[wat0n]

Does Ukraine have the right to apply to NATO and the EU, and join if admitted, @noemon?

[noemon]

As much right as Palestine has to join NATO.

[wat0n]

Would Putin accept to see Ukraine joining NATO and the ensuing loss of Russian influence in Ukraine?

[noemon]

Russia would accept Ukraine in NATO as much as Israel would accept Palestine as a member of NATO.

[wat0n]

And I am sure it would. A Palestine wanting to join NATO would be aligned with the West and, by extension, Israel itself.

Why can't Russia do the same? That is, be on good terms with the West, rendering Ukraine's desire to join it moot?

[noemon]

Your opinion that Israel would ever allow Palestine to be recognised as a State when it does not even allow it to join the UN let alone NATO is both ridiculously cominal and inconsequential. Do you believe that your opinion creates parallel dimensions where the things you imagine may be real?

Russia has already recognised Ukraine as a State.

Why can't Israel recognise the State of Palestine?

Moreover, why doesn't Israel hand over full control and sovereignty of Jerusalem to the UN as it signed as a condition for its recognition as a State and as a condition for its own UN membership?

If the troll argument is that the UN is a terrorist organisation, then why is Israel still a member of it?

[wat0n]

You did not answer the question, but let's try again with an easier one.

Why can't Russia let Ukraine join the EU?

[noemon]

For the same reason Israel can't let Palestine even be a State.

This was answered 2 posts ago.

Why did you not answer my questions?

1) Why doesn't Israel recognise the State of Palestine?

2) Why doesn't Israel hand over full control and sovereignty of Jerusalem to the UN as it has already signed as a condition for its recognition as a State and as a condition for its own UN membership?

2b) If the troll argument is that the UN is a terrorist organisation, then why is Israel still a member of it?

[wat0n]

Because you will say my answer is "trolling".

I didn't see your response. The EU isn't even a military alliance, so security shouldn't be a Russian concern.

Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk in exchange for EU membership seems like a good deal to me.

[noemon]

Because you will say my answer is "trolling".

What's your reply for Question 1?

If your reply for question 2 is argument 2b, then the following question still requires a reply.

1) Why doesn't Israel recognise the State of Palestine?

2) Why doesn't Israel hand over full control and sovereignty of Jerusalem to the UN as it has already signed as a condition for its recognition as a State and as a condition for its own UN membership?

2b) If the troll argument is that the UN is a terrorist organisation, then why is Israel still a member of it?

The EU isn't even a military alliance, so security shouldn't be a Russian concern.

Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk in exchange for EU membership seems like a good deal to me.

The EU has already accepted Ukraine's application for membership and has granted it candidate status, now it's totally outside Russia's control or opinion. It is entirely up to Ukraine to meet the conditions of accession.

So Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk should have been recognised as Russian as of June 2022 according to your plan.

[wat0n]

What's your reply for Question 1?

If your reply for question 2 is argument 2b, then the following question still requires a reply.

Fine, I'll bite:

1) Because there are Palestinian armed groups outside the control of the Palestinian state that are still fighting Israel.

2) Because nobody in Jerusalem wants that. Even the Palestinians don't want to be under UN administration, they want to rule the city (part or all of it, depending on whom you ask). I think the Old City should be divided and placed under UN civil control but that's just me and not what most Israelis and Palestinians want.

The EU has already accepted Ukraine's application for membership and has granted it candidate status, now it's totally outside Russia's control or opinion. It is entirely up to Ukraine to meet the conditions of accession.

It is up to Russia to decide if it would try to stop this accession by force, however.

So Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk should have been handed over to Russia as of June 2022 based on your plan?

Yes, Ukraine has zero chance to recover them by force and I think that, at this point, most people there don't want to be ruled by Ukraine. Those who are supporting Ukraine in this war have likely already left those areas for Ukraine proper or elsewhere. Most probably did so in 2014.

This is no different from how I think Israel shouldn't rule over the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, and for the same reason: Most people who live there don't want to be ruled by Israel. It's a completely legitimate desire. So don't you say I have double standards here, because I don't.

Of course, going back to Ukraine, if it cannot accept those regions are lost then I don't see why would Russia accept it joining the EU (let alone NATO). No, this has to be a quid pro quo arrangement, in writing, in the form of a peace treaty: Ukraine accepts it has lost those regions, in exchange, Russia accepts Ukraine can choose what sphere of influence it wants to be part of. For all we know, Ukraine eventually doesn't get admitted into the EU and changes its mind regarding Russia - nobody can predict the future in this regard.

[noemon]

Fine, I'll bite:

1) Because there are Palestinian armed groups outside the control of the Palestinian state that are still fighting Israel.

National Security is the exact same reason as Russia's.

2) Because nobody in Jerusalem wants that. Even the Palestinians don't want to be under UN administration, they want to rule the city (part or all of it, depending on whom you ask). I think the Old City should be divided and placed under UN civil control but that's just me and not what most Israelis and Palestinians want.

First of all, using your enemy as an excuse does not answer the question for yourself.
Second, handing over Jerusalem to UN administration can only happen by the one controlling it which is Israel and not Palestine.
Third, handing over Jerusalem to the UN solves a problem right there as the Palestinians in Jerusalem are no longer Israel's problem.
Fourth, Israel has already signed that Jerusalem must be administered by the UN to validate its recognition as a State as well as its UN membership. It controls Jerusalem, so it is entirely up to Israel to abide by the terms of the agreement it has already signed up to.

It is up to Russia to decide if it would try to stop this accession by force, however.

Russia did not use military force to prevent it and Ukraine is already a candidate country.

Yes, Ukraine has zero chance to recover them by force and I think that, at this point, most people there don't want to be ruled by Ukraine. Those who are supporting Ukraine in this war have likely already left those areas for Ukraine proper or elsewhere. Most probably did so in 2014.

This is no different from how I think Israel shouldn't rule over the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem, and for the same reason: Most people who live there don't want to be ruled by Israel. It's a completely legitimate desire. So don't you say I have double standards here, because I don't.

Of course, going back to Ukraine, if it cannot accept those regions are lost then I don't see why would Russia accept it joining the EU (let alone NATO). No, this has to be a quid pro quo arrangement, in writing, in the form of a peace treaty: Ukraine accepts it has lost those regions, in exchange, Russia accepts Ukraine can choose what sphere of influence it wants to be part of. For all we know, Ukraine eventually doesn't get admitted into the EU and changes its mind regarding Russia - nobody can predict the future in this regard.

Agreed.

[wat0n]

National Security is the exact same reason as Russia's.

Indeed, although the situations are not the same.

If Russia needs to talk to Ukraine, it deals with its government. Russia knows that the government of Ukraine exercises control over its population and any violence against Russia will be authorized by it.

In Palestine's case, this is just not how things work. The Palestinian government has no way to stop Hamas and other armed groups. It it had, I think there would have been a peace treaty in the 1990s.

First of all, using your enemy as an excuse does not answer the question for yourself.
Second, handing over Jerusalem to UN administration can only happen by the one controlling it which is Israel and not Palestine.
Third, handing over Jerusalem to the UN solves a problem right there as the Palestinians in Jerusalem are no longer Israel's problem.
Fourth, Israel has already signed that Jerusalem must be administered by the UN to validate its recognition as a State as well as its UN membership. It controls Jerusalem, so it is entirely up to Israel to abide by the terms of the agreement it has already signed up to.

As I said, nobody wants to hand Jerusalem to the UN. This includes Jerusalemites. The Palestinians in Jerusalem don't want to be under UN rule, they want to be under Palestinian rule. Same applies to the Jews with regards to Israel. And, of course, this also applies to Israelis and Palestinians in general.

If they wanted to, I would consider it a viable option but they don't and so it's not. At best, one can hope the Old City to be split between both parties and for its policing (but not sovereignty) to be under the UN as an open city. And this is kind of pushing things at this stage.

Also, since this is a digression from Ukraine/Russia, I'll leave this tangent here.

Russia did not use military force to prevent it and Ukraine is already a candidate country.

I disagree. Russia definitely doesn't want Ukraine to join the EU, let alone NATO, and considers it dangerous for its national security (not without reason, by the way).

Fortunately, some of its most important security concerns can be addressed by this arrangement where Ukraine accepts it lost Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk - but, of course, keeping Ukraine within its sphere of influence is obviously better for Russia. And I think that, from their perspective, it is worth fighting for.

Agreed.

Too bad realism isn't in vogue right now, though

And I still wonder - why can't Russia just get along with the West? I would think it's in its long term interest to do so, given the impending rise of China.

[Puffer Fish]

The whole situation in Ukraine is really a mess, in my opinion.

Most countries today originate from the modern nation-state concept, which started to take form in the late 1700s.

The world has come to accept (in theory) that it's not okay for nations start wars invading other nations. But that assumes that nations have clearly defined and historically established borders.

That is not so much the case in Ukraine, arguably.

The state of Ukraine did not really become truly independent until 1991. And even then it was kind of only a historical accident. Not all of the territory of Ukraine is really "Ukrainian".
Setting aside politics, Ukraine is somewhere in the twilight zone between being its own nation and a Russian territory.

This is not the only reason Russia invaded, but it serves as a backdrop.

To make matters more complex, Russia, although having the structure of a democracy, functions a little bit like a dictatorship, with Putin having a large amount of power, and other political rivals suppressed. But Ukraine had even more government corruption than Russia, despite being more politically open.

Russia would have been content to keep Ukraine as a satellite state, with their own political independence, so long as they followed Russia's orders on certain issues. We can see this in the country of Belarus.