UKRAINE the latest.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/putins-new-ukraine-es...
What Putin wrote about Ukraines right to exist.
Only an opinion SF, those countries were not invited by the US to join NATO.To join you have to apply and be scrutinised by all members, its not an open door.
Finland who has a long border with Russia has joined along with Sweden since POOmans invasion..They were shit scared that the Ruskis might have a go at them.
How accurate do you think Sachs opinion is ?
Supafreak wrote:https://www.instagram.com/reel/DCaTvgICFlu/?igsh=MWZmMTdxNGcxMTN1OQ==
Putin sounds like a saint in that video. Give me a break. If anything, bombing of Serbia should've happened even earlier than 1999. And like quadzilla said, many countries eagrley joined NATO. And for the right reasons, you think Russia just sits idle and doesn't interfere into other countries? They are a constant threat, NATO is one line of security that some smaller, weak countries need.
So how accurate do you think Sachs opinion is ?
Supafreak wrote:So how accurate do you think Sachs opinion is ?
Have been following Sachs on a couple of podcasts for the last year or so.
Pretty much most things he says tend to come to fruition, as he definitely knows what he is talking about.
Look, to be transparent I'm a dual citizen with family in one of these recently joined countries. So I might be biased.
He can say whatever he wants from the US perspective. He can rightfully request for the US to be less involved or even have no involvement. But his angle is wrong and biased. He is pushing this narrative as it gains him popularity and probably, income. His whole premise is based on US being the one and only driver of this whole picture. This is wrong, Russia always interfered into other countries. I would like him to talk more about Russia and which moves/interferences they did so we can compare apples to apples. His presentation is one sided and shouldn't be taken seriously.
flollo wrote:Supafreak wrote:https://www.instagram.com/reel/DCaTvgICFlu/?igsh=MWZmMTdxNGcxMTN1OQ==
Putin sounds like a saint in that video. Give me a break. If anything, bombing of Serbia should've happened even earlier than 1999. And like quadzilla said, many countries eagrley joined NATO. And for the right reasons, you think Russia just sits idle and doesn't interfere into other countries? They are a constant threat, NATO is one line of security that some smaller, weak countries need.
Do you think the USA would be ok with say BRICS bases with missile capabilities being set up in Cuba, Mexico or Venezuela? Monroe Doctrine is ok for USA why not a similar scenario for Russia?
Russia's actions may not be 'right' or 'ethical' but totally understandable given the history and realpolitik situation. and it is total hypocrisy of the West not to take this into account.
USA/ NATO do not have an ethical leg to stand on with the latest being the open support for genocide in Gaza, never mind Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria amongst others.
Sorry, being critical of Putin and Russia somehow makes me an approvalist of all US actions?
It’s Sacks isn’t it?
You guys are looking at this from a wrong angle. The real threat to Russia is not NATO. It is European Union. EU is one of the greatest (if not the greatest) achievements in recent memory. 27 member countries, joined into one shared market. One of the highest standards of living in the world. Most share one of the strongest currencies in the world and have no border restrictions for people movement or trade of goods and services. EU lifted standards of living in all its members, especially the recently joined ones. There are not many countries outside the EU left in Europe. Ukraine is the biggest one.
I can totally see the future where most countries in Europe are members of the EU. Exception being the stupid UK, Switzerland and Norway. Russia will then be sandwiched between 2 great superpowers - EU and China. And standard of living between Russia and the EU shouldn't even be discussed. Sooner or later I can see the Russian citizens wanting the same rights and benefits that EU citizens take for granted. That is a massive problem for the existing oligarchy. Russia spent decades undermining the EU. They constantly get involved into elections in hopes of eurosceptics taking a stronger foothold. This is nothing new and it's still ongoing.
A lot of these videos are blatantly ignoring these facts. So sorry, I can't take them seriously.
flollo wrote:Sorry, being critical of Putin and Russia somehow makes me an approvalist of all US actions?
Sorry flollo did not mean to infer that.
I'm no fan of Putin etc, but believe the whole thing could have been handled better from the early 90's.
Sach's may sound anti US, but with his views on China he is a lot more hawkish and USA first. Think he looks at the situation rationally.
Agree with your EU sentiments, but still reckon NATO fooked it, Russia may have been able to be a partner with the prosperity if it had been handled differently.
andy-mac wrote:flollo wrote:Supafreak wrote:https://www.instagram.com/reel/DCaTvgICFlu/?igsh=MWZmMTdxNGcxMTN1OQ==
Putin sounds like a saint in that video. Give me a break. If anything, bombing of Serbia should've happened even earlier than 1999. And like quadzilla said, many countries eagrley joined NATO. And for the right reasons, you think Russia just sits idle and doesn't interfere into other countries? They are a constant threat, NATO is one line of security that some smaller, weak countries need.
Do you think the USA would be ok with say BRICS bases with missile capabilities being set up in Cuba, Mexico or Venezuela? Monroe Doctrine is ok for USA why not a similar scenario for Russia?
Russia's actions may not be 'right' or 'ethical' but totally understandable given the history and realpolitik situation. and it is total hypocrisy of the West not to take this into account.USA/ NATO do not have an ethical leg to stand on with the latest being the open support for genocide in Gaza, never mind Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria amongst others.
These terrorists you mention ARE very ethical aren't they?
Supafreak wrote:How accurate do you think Sachs opinion is ?
It all depends how a humans mind interprets what he says.
The BIG picture is that the boundaries in Europe have been changing throughout history for any number of reasons
He wants to isolate a reason and thats his point, its only his opinion which some will take as gospel.I watched what he had to say when you posted it.I'll watch it again and may make a specific comment.
If someone presents a series of events and the outcomes of each event and evidence to support the material when does it transcend opinion to a historical account. It would appear he just outlined the context of the conflict. I don’t think it was an opinion to be honest.
Quad. Have you hitched your wagon to the Putin bogey man team? Do you absolve the responsibility of Western hegemony continually pushing the brinkmanship.
always has good scripting for thought-provokes
from jay/lynn from a 40-years-ago perspective
This conflict is over 1000 days and will continue for a good while yet.
Theres lots of BS floating around online( some paid for by the Ruski propagandists) so here's an opportunity to comment on whats going on if ya know?
Juzzie is a good source of info and he speaks "our" language.