- Joined
- Aug 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,495
- Reaction score
- 457
- Location
- Canada
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Over the course of time in this forum, multiple people have apparently been upset with me for not following the standard western mainstream media's approach of calling Russia's role in Ukraine an invasion. I've given my reasons, but some people keep on bringing it up anyway. To avoid having to repeat myself, I thought it'd make more sense to make a thread of it, and then simply refer people to this thread if it comes up again, and any commentaries on my views on this can be brought up here as well.
I don't call Russia's role in Ukraine an invasion because of the way an invasion is generally defined. Wordnik, referencing the American Heritage Dictionary, has this as its first definition of the term:
I don't believe that Russia started its military op in Ukraine to conquer it. Furthermore, Russia, long before its military op in Ukraine, had been warning any country that would listen that allowing Ukraine to join NATO was a red line it wouldn't take lying down. Political scientist and international relations scholar John Mearsheimer has been placing a lot of the blame for the situation in Ukraine on the U.S. and Europe since Russia annexed Crimea back in 2014. The New Yorker published an interview with him back in March. I'll quote its introduction:
**
The political scientist John Mearsheimer has been one of the most famous critics of American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Perhaps best known for the book he wrote with Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” Mearsheimer is a proponent of great-power politics—a school of realist international relations that assumes that, in a self-interested attempt to preserve national security, states will preëmptively act in anticipation of adversaries. For years, Mearsheimer has argued that the U.S., in pushing to expand nato eastward and establishing friendly relations with Ukraine, has increased the likelihood of war between nuclear-armed powers and laid the groundwork for Vladimir Putin’s aggressive position toward Ukraine. Indeed, in 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea, Mearsheimer wrote that “the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for this crisis.”
**
Source:
The bottom line here is that Russia only got involved militarily in Ukraine as a result of the U.S. and Europe's political moves there. It has a lot in common with the Cuban Missile Crisis back in the 60s. The U.S. got Russia to back down there, but what many don't know is that Kennedy secretly agreed to take missiles out of Turkey in exchange. Even back then, the U.S. was placing missiles close enough to Russia to anger it considerably. It's moves to get Ukraine into the NATO fold and possibly arm it with missiles as well has certainly not helped. By these lights, Russia's actions in Ukraine can be seen as defensive in nature, just as the U.S.'s actions to block Cuba from gaining missiles can be seen in the same way.
There is also the fact that for the past 8 years, Ukraine had already been waging a war against citizens of the Donbass region in Ukraine, killing around 10,000 Donbass citizens in the process. Jacques Baud, a former NATO military analyst, points out that had it not been for Ukraine's renewed assault on this region that started on February 16th, Russia may well have not started its military operation in Ukraine at all. For more on that, I welcome those reading this to take a look at his article on the subject, which can be seen here:
I don't call Russia's role in Ukraine an invasion because of the way an invasion is generally defined. Wordnik, referencing the American Heritage Dictionary, has this as its first definition of the term:
- The act of invading, especially the entrance of an armed force into a territory to conquer.
I don't believe that Russia started its military op in Ukraine to conquer it. Furthermore, Russia, long before its military op in Ukraine, had been warning any country that would listen that allowing Ukraine to join NATO was a red line it wouldn't take lying down. Political scientist and international relations scholar John Mearsheimer has been placing a lot of the blame for the situation in Ukraine on the U.S. and Europe since Russia annexed Crimea back in 2014. The New Yorker published an interview with him back in March. I'll quote its introduction:
**
The political scientist John Mearsheimer has been one of the most famous critics of American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War. Perhaps best known for the book he wrote with Stephen Walt, “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy,” Mearsheimer is a proponent of great-power politics—a school of realist international relations that assumes that, in a self-interested attempt to preserve national security, states will preëmptively act in anticipation of adversaries. For years, Mearsheimer has argued that the U.S., in pushing to expand nato eastward and establishing friendly relations with Ukraine, has increased the likelihood of war between nuclear-armed powers and laid the groundwork for Vladimir Putin’s aggressive position toward Ukraine. Indeed, in 2014, after Russia annexed Crimea, Mearsheimer wrote that “the United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for this crisis.”
**
Source:
Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine
For years, the political scientist has claimed that Putin’s aggression toward Ukraine is caused by Western intervention. Have recent events changed his mind?
www.newyorker.com
The bottom line here is that Russia only got involved militarily in Ukraine as a result of the U.S. and Europe's political moves there. It has a lot in common with the Cuban Missile Crisis back in the 60s. The U.S. got Russia to back down there, but what many don't know is that Kennedy secretly agreed to take missiles out of Turkey in exchange. Even back then, the U.S. was placing missiles close enough to Russia to anger it considerably. It's moves to get Ukraine into the NATO fold and possibly arm it with missiles as well has certainly not helped. By these lights, Russia's actions in Ukraine can be seen as defensive in nature, just as the U.S.'s actions to block Cuba from gaining missiles can be seen in the same way.
There is also the fact that for the past 8 years, Ukraine had already been waging a war against citizens of the Donbass region in Ukraine, killing around 10,000 Donbass citizens in the process. Jacques Baud, a former NATO military analyst, points out that had it not been for Ukraine's renewed assault on this region that started on February 16th, Russia may well have not started its military operation in Ukraine at all. For more on that, I welcome those reading this to take a look at his article on the subject, which can be seen here:
Former NATO Military Analyst Blows the Whistle on West’s Ukraine Invasion Narrative
Jacques Baud, a NATO expert, denounces western coverage of the Ukraine invasion.
scheerpost.com