Is this any different than any other military intervention America watched idly over the past century? Not really. In the &quot;infallible&quot; 1970s-1990s you might be remembering, we were casually ignoring plenty of similar actions around the world that make this present intervention seem pretty benign and slow moving. American soft power was over when the failure of the Korean war made it clear that all that could be done against a major nuclear power is a stalemate.

Russia advanced under Obama, Trump, and now Biden. This war is entirely on Putin&#x27;s shoulders.

I don&#x27;t know if it helpful during times like these but it sounds like the quote by G. Michael Hopf:Hard times create strong men, 
strong men create good times, 
good times create weak men, 
and weak men create hard times

Recent times were largely the result of an unusually unipolar (read: US) world after the USSR collapsed.In more normal bi- or multi- polar periods (50s - 90s), international order often submitted to great power politics. What was right or legal was less important than who wanted what.

Good times breed bad times.PS: I agree about the feeling of infaillible institution and international order..

I wonder how you can believe that knowing all the coups organized by CIA, wars waged by US military everywhere in the world, countries US split in two or more ...etc. it was only safe for USA and its allies. Only difference is war is getting close to western Europe so it&#x27;s felt more

&gt; the general decline of American soft power we’ll see more and more global turmoilI have argued, tons, that America is making the world more peaceful. It was hard to sell especially to Arab&#x2F;Muslim countries but without a unipolar power, it&#x27;s lots of small powers fighting each other for territory.&gt; institutions and America seemed infallibleCouple that with recklessness. Fatca, CRS, Trade deals, etc... lots of countries got screwed bad and treatment from the masters was as bad and discriminatory as it can get. If people sympathies with Putin, you are doing something wrong.

It’s sad but my father always told me that the good times we’ve had are unprecedented and they can end faster than we think.I never believed him growing up, institutions and America seemed infallible. It’s sad to say but I think with global warming, covid, and the general decline of American soft power we’ll see more and more global turmoilMy heart goes out to Ukraine and its people

Right, it’s the denazification of a country with the Jewish president.Fuck Russia :(

That&#x27;s been the narrative since the beginning, except for the big long stretch of Putin’s recent speech where he blamed the problem on the USSR, and Lenin and Stalin specifically, for existence of Ukraine as a modern polity occupying land that, in Putin’s view, is rightfully Russian.

The narrative is already pivoting to &quot;NATO made them do this&quot;.

I didn’t follow this civil war for 7 years for someone to tell me I’m not entitled to an opinion on who is the real aggressor here.

The propaganda is a rescue operation not no invasion at all: I&#x27;ve already seen &quot;Russian operation to protect people from Kiev regime&quot; headline on an Indian news site.

The first post I saw that mentioned it disappeared off the first 4 pages at least a few min after I saw it: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=30449794" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=30449794</a>

To be fair, it is slightly off topic. I hope we get more articles on the war which go in depth about the tactics, operations, etc.

This post already got marked as flagged&#x2F;dead ten minutes ago. I&#x27;m glad HN has the option to &quot;vouch&quot; for posts.

Putin has been growing and funding his online and offline armies well, while the West has been sleeping at the wheel for years.

My response to that is the same as it has historically been. We don&#x27;t need a wall to keep our people in. If you wish to go to North Korea, you are free to do so.Fair warning though, it doesn&#x27;t work the same way in reverse.

Do not forget the &quot;useful idiots&#x27; who will whitewash anything the enemies of the west do just because they align with their ideology better than the free world does.

I think HN&#x27;s moderation policy of not accusing accounts of being paid trolls and sock puppets is maybe failing today, here.

They&#x27;re already here in this thread.

Yep, just a week ago they were in &quot;ridicule west for saying that the attack is cominh&quot;. Biden was right all the time.

Please don&#x27;t take HN threads further into hellish flamewar. This is the last thing we need here, and with comments like this one, what chance is there to avoid it?If you wouldn&#x27;t mind reviewing <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;newsguidelines.html</a> and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we&#x27;d be grateful.

I await the Russian trolls to tell us that this is all Western propaganda.

Kapersky? If it&#x27;s running Kapersky it&#x27;s not running anything that critical. The cyberwarfare capabilities of the US, EU and allies are not to be underestimated, even if they have used more precisely and conservatively than Russia&#x27;s sphere.

It should be illegal to continue to use Kaspersky in the West after today.

How many machines can Kaspersky brick? I don’t think you want to start this.

Both Apple and Google offer remote wiping of devices as features, and they both have root access on all of their devices. They can do whatever they want to on anyone&#x27;s phone.

As history shows again and again, attacks against the civilian population only serve to strenghten the support for the local tyrant.  This would be just as counter-effective as the sanctions.

Brilliant idea, would definitely not have any knock-on effects or cause any retributive cyber-attacks

OTOH, why does china even allow Apple or Google devices today? Because Chinese people want to purchase these products and at this point there would be pushback if they were suddenly banned.

I doubt they would do that. It would cause Apple&#x27;s biggest market, China, to rethink allowing Apple and Google devices in their country.

Solve? No. But what is stopping them from getting a few kicks in?

&gt; Russian tanks and artillery don&#x27;t use the Google Play Store.But the wives and children of those who move them do. People in the West don&#x27;t seem to notice a crucial aspect of modern Russia: extended families of those in charge live in the West. They study in Stanford and Harvard, mingle in Aspen, have holiday homes in the Hamptons. Russia is merely a piggy bank to finance that lifestyle. They are at the mercy of Western governments, because they&#x27;ve turned Russia into a stagnating shithole that even at its best is far below the upper-middle class standard in the West. Without access to Western resources, from mansions in Knightsbridge to accounts on Instagram, all that looted money becomes worthless.All you need to do is let them sleep in the bed they&#x27;ve made. Freeze bank accounts, confiscate property, deny visas. Make them live that global jet-set lifestyle in Rostov oblast.

They may not use the Play Store, but they do use Android apps: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.crowdstrike.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;danger-close-fancy-bear-tracking-ukrainian-field-artillery-units&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.crowdstrike.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;danger-close-fancy-bear-tra...</a>

Russian tanks and artillery don&#x27;t use the Google Play Store. You&#x27;re witnessing a mechanized land war in Ukraine, Silicon Valley won&#x27;t solve this one.

I don&#x27;t fault OP for brainstorming ideas, especially since I assume its done with the intent of finding ways to protect civilians, but you point out what is critical here: the west cannot give up on the Russian people. By-and-large they do not support this act of war and the best way to further our interests is to continue to foster a desire for change in them.

Russia is not a democracy. What its people want is irrelevant. They have no meaningful agency.

If the war is seen as something distant that has no impact at all on the average Russian&#x27;s life will they actually care about it or will they just ignore it?To be clear I don&#x27;t wish anything bad for the general Russian population, among which I have many friends, let alone Putin&#x27;s opposition. And this may not be the best strategic idea, but it&#x27;s a possible one that fits the theme of this community - so I think the snarkiness is uncalled for.

Congratulations! You bring an idea to brick all Russian phones including phones of opposition, people who against the war, political prisoners, and other people who just live in the country.

why does everyone go for these slippery slope type arguments all the time. you dont need to worry about hypotheticals.

Apple still has to follow US laws and sanctions. Especially considering how the people that run it and work in corporate are in America

Maybe a gray fail ? No bricking but random lag and failures

Even if it&#x27;s possible, for Apple, it would be an utterly disastrous thing to do. Imagine the damage to its reputation. If they were to do it in this situation, the argument would go, what about other situations? What about all the phones they sell in China, for example. Are there circumstances where they should brick all US Democrat or Republican phones? It would be the end of Apple, and that&#x27;s why it would (hopefully, thankfully) never happen.

if only the tank&#x27;s control system ran on ios&#x2F;android ..jokes aside, doing such a thing would actually galvanize the russian civilian population to support the government.

Even if they could I think this is a pretty stupid idea if you think about for a half hour or so.

They can, but they will not. If they have any direct dealings with the Russian government then they should probably stop (which they probably already have to due to sanctions), but otherwise it&#x27;s best for large corporations to stay out of geopolitics.

Brick... is a bit much. But we should definitely shame any company that works with Russia in the next decade or so.

What you are suggesting will backfire. IDK why people have such cynical thoughts to make people&#x27;s life more difficult. Many Russian don&#x27;t support Putin, so why even try to punish them?

That would be pretty dumb move. 
Then they can no longer spy on Russians.

Two US-owned companies remotely accessing peoples&#x27; mobile Internet devicces&#x2F;cameras&#x2F;personal document storage and disabling them throughout a country that just went to war?How does that possibly sound in any way like a good idea?

Targeting the population at large only even has the potential to have an effect in a democracy (and even then it seems plausible it would only create a stronger national sense of an external enemy). I don&#x27;t understand what you want to accomplish by hurting innocent russians. The strategy so far seems to be to target the economy and ogliarchs, which actually has an effect on decision makers.

Basically all companies should seize any economic activity in Russia and with Russia. And all of the properties of Russian companies should be nationalized by respective countries and all Russian citizens involved in ownership of those should have their visas revoked and be deported.Any reclamation or reversals should be only made possible after last Russian soldier leave Ukraine.

I just woke up to this news and I&#x27;m wondering if it&#x27;s possible for Apple and Google to brick all Russian phones? This would probably be more effective on their population at large than any form of sanctions.

It&#x27;s hard to say, right now it looks like it&#x27;s just letting countries armed to the teeth with them dominate whoever they want

They gave up those nukes with the promise we would protect them.That trick of ours won’t work again.

It does a lot for global peace right up until our extinction. We don&#x27;t need thousands of nukes to maintain deterrence. We should reduce our nuclear stockpile to the smallest number that still maintains deterrence.

Ukraine never had the codes to use those nukes. They didn&#x27;t give up a functioning deterrent.

Libya was invaded after giving up nuclear in 2003. Clinton pushed for the invasion as Secretary of State, then she joked about the death on TV.
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usatoday.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;2017&#x2F;11&#x2F;27&#x2F;clinton-ponders-2020-run-lets-not-forget-her-real-libya-scandal-glenn-reynolds-column&#x2F;895853001&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.usatoday.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;opinion&#x2F;2017&#x2F;11&#x2F;27&#x2F;clinton-po...</a>It should not be a surprise that North Korea refuses to disarm.

This is happening because the sanctions put in place on Russia during the Trump admin were undone haphazardly by Biden. Russia is moving strictly because it knows it has the EU by the short hairs on energy and after the afghanistan exit the US is in a very strategically weak position.We should be grateful Ukraine does not have nukes. 12 hours ago the world might&#x27;ve gotten 4000C hotter if they did.

Ukraine did not have the ability to launch a single nuke. They didn&#x27;t give up anything.

I&#x27;m not convinced. Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan again, Syria, Peru, Mali, ...When you say &quot;world peace&quot;, do you mean European peace? California peace? Where is your world?

The nukes never belonged to Ukraine, unfortunately. It was always controlled by Soviet Union.

Nuclear proliferation, like it or not, has done more for global peace than US military&#x2F;trade hegemony. Ukraine gave up all its nukes in the 90s which is why this is happening now.

A similar sentiment was expressed in the 1930s.

It was a bad idea in the 1930&#x27;s and it&#x27;s an even worse idea now, with the globe being more interconnected than ever.

I would argue the US needs to batten down the hatches and become more isolationist. Let Europe deal with European problems. It&#x27;s clear from the last 70 years, since WW2, that the US meddling in others&#x27; affairs only leads to death, destruction and more negative sentiment against the US.If LBJ stuck to his promise, we could have avoid a ton of mess in Vietnam: &quot;We are not about to send American boys nine or ten thousand miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.&quot;We don&#x27;t have a dog in this fight.Edit: Apparently arguing for the US to not get involved in yet another foreign war warrants my comment being flagged.

Russia is a openly currupt oligarchy dictator state and China runs slave camps and genocides. It seems to pretty much just be helping the US or the EU at this point. Honestly I would say EU over us in a ideal world, probably.

&gt; helping the US is the only wayWhen people are convinced that there is only one way, then the propaganda worked.

Give it 72 hours. The news cycle is leading the announcements tomorrow and the announcements that will inevitably come next week. If the news is already talking WW3 (and yes, they are) then it won&#x27;t be long before the UN deploys it&#x27;s own &quot;peacekeeping forces&quot; and the world goes hot.

We aren&#x27;t sending troops to Ukraine so that&#x27;s irrelevant.

&#x27; the democratic countries are getting stronger and more united. &#x27;I see no evidence for this statement in western Europe countries. EU negative interest rates are an indicator of failure not success.

What you&#x27;re witnessing right now are the deathroes of the dictatorships like Russia and China with its aging leaderships. These dictatorships know that their time is limited; the democratic countries are getting stronger and more united. China, the one dictatorship that is supporting all the other dictatorships like Russia or Iran, is going into the final stages of debt&#x2F;demographic&#x2F;economic collapse. This is a pivotal time for the citizens of the free world to fight against these dictatorships.And you can help by asking your government to sanction China. And stop buying goods from China

&quot;abject suffering&quot; And what about some of the most peaceful decades in human history? That means nothing, eh?&quot;only thing&quot; Not the only thing by any stretch... but definitely a major reason and a hugely stabilizing force.

Also because what Russia is doing right now is the same thing that US tried to do in the Bay of Pigs, settling a puppet government in a portion of a country then make it ask for help? That&#x27;s CIA 101

It&#x27;s not a &#x27;myth&#x27; that the US maintains world peace, it&#x27;s a most obvious reality and it&#x27;s disturbing that anyone wouldn&#x27;t be able to see it plainly.The world is not a &#x27;peaceful place&#x27; with a bunch of wars now and again.It&#x27;s held together by force.Peace is a balance of, and righteous management of power.The US+NATO+Allies form the basis of that power. Unfortunately, without the US, that &#x27;Team&#x27; would basically be dysfunctional and wouldn&#x27;t really work.The Panama Canal, Suez Canal, the Gulf, S. China Sea - all of it would be controlled by various regimes if it were not for US power basically keeping it all open for everyone.Israel and Egypt the &#x27;lynchpin&#x27; of peace in the ME is kept that way because of US power. All of he Middle East would be like Syria were it not for US&#x2F;West.Obviously Taiwan would be in China and Korea would be vanquished by N. Korea.It&#x27;s hard to know exactly how the cards would fall, but they would definitely fall one way or another.Unfortunately, we don&#x27;t have a solution for Ukraine, but thankfully, this will be mostly contained in Ukraine thanks to NATO.

Any abject suffering that occurs over the next hours, days, and weeks doesn&#x27;t excuse the historical record of abject suffering imposed by the US military.It&#x27;s perfectly consistent to be opposed to Russia&#x27;s invasion of Ukraine and also reject the myth that the US&#x27;s military is the only thing that maintains world peace.

This requires a very specific version of peace, where it&#x27;s still peaceful for those in power to use violence against those who don&#x27;t.

It&#x27;s certainly different from Afghanistan.  The invasion of Afghanistan by the United States was preceded by an attack by Al Qaeda on New York City. The attack by Russia on Ukraine is completely unprovoked.

Actually reminds me a lot of the run up to Iraq ca 2003, which was a disaster for all involved. Who in the world looks at the US invasion of Iraq and thinks it was a good idea that should be emulated?

I wonder if this is bot or paid Russian troll..

Is what Russia is doing in Ukraine right now too different from the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan?

The period of US hegemony from WW2 until today has by far been the most peaceful time in the history of civilization.  Unlike previous super powers, the US did not take over any other countries or colonize by force.  We have done many horrible things, like support dictators, invade Iraq based on lies (to depose a dictator), etc., but we have also supported people all over after natural disasters, helped with foreign aid to relieve famines, policed global trade to enable fair markets, and many other good deeds.  It&#x27;s definitely not the only way, and we could do much, much better, but show me another major country that you would prefer hold the reigns of global power?

US the only way for a peaceful world? You should read a bit on the USA history and its military conflicts and you may change your mind. Wikipedia is a good starting point.

Yesterday we&#x27;d have laughed at this. Today we get it.

The US moto is the same as that of the fictional character Peacemaker: &quot;I cherish peace with all my heart. I don&#x27;t care how many men, women, and children I need to kill to get it.&quot;

I resent the implication that the US military is the only reason the world is at peace, and I bet plenty of NGOs feel the same - if anything, the US military is the one that has been pushing for new conflicts. And while it&#x27;s true that all superpowers have done terrible things, the difference with the US is that plenty of them have stopped doing terrible things since.I was not born yet when Germany started WWII, but I was alive to see the US declare torture as a valid means of interrogation and bomb civilians with no repercusions. And my living relatives who suffered under a US-backed military coup may not be as quick to forgive either. Maybe your children will live in a peaceful world, but for many of us that&#x27;s cold comfort.

While I agree, I’m afraid all your comment did was pull the anti-US Russian trolls out into the open.

I&#x27;ve worked at tech companies that despise helping the US military. Please understand that the world is complex and although all superpowers have done terrible things, helping the US is the only way our children will live in a peaceful world. This isn&#x27;t about democrats or republicans, the future of humanity will be decided in the next decade.

The similarity is that the both the Russians and the Taliban do not allow for self-determination by the citizenry.

Al-Queda attacked New York city unprovoked. Not an invasion and not defending US, just that it was not American expansionism that led to invasion of Afghanistan. US has no interest in imperialism.

And were the Taliban, a democratically elected regime? Granted, they were (are?) less corrupt that the government that the US had installed, but they don&#x27;t represent the interests of the people of Afghanistan, either.

The US was an occupier of Afganistan. The US agreed to a withdrawal in exchange for a truce with the Taliban under the previous administration, which was honored by the next administration.This is an invasion of a peaceful country by its neighbor. They are complete opposites.

Between this and the takeover of Afghanistan it certainly has been an extremely sad year.The End of History? Not so fast. Free people not having a good run here.

For one thing, NATO does not propose membership, something Russians seem to think though [0]. Countries apply to join.[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2021&#x2F;nov&#x2F;04&#x2F;ex-nato-head-says-putin-wanted-to-join-alliance-early-on-in-his-rule" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2021&#x2F;nov&#x2F;04&#x2F;ex-nato-head-s...</a>

Maybe because the U.S. military isn&#x27;t bombing the Ukrainian cities right now?And it wasn&#x27;t the U.S.A. who sent troops to the Crimea and annexed in 2014?

I can only vouch so much, I agree with you. The post may be insightful or irrelevant, but I see no reason it should be flagged. I suppose some view message boards as an information battleground and find it&#x27;s their duty to maintain a single narrative.

Nobody likes seeing Realpolitik in action. When you have been drip fed ideology about the LIO your whole life, it is very difficult to accept anything else. Unfortunately, today Thucydides wakes. It is unfortunate that international relations is not a part of the engineering curriculum of your typical HN user. Through the lens of realism, Ukraine is but another Cuban missile event. Pretending that joining NATO is a strictly defensive alliance and therefore more morally &quot;right&quot; will not change geopolitical realities. This is a failure of leadership on every side. Media soundbites and cool reprimands were chosen over recognising the harsh truth of Great Power politics. When it becomes more important to be an ardent defender of ideology on tiktok and television than to negotiate and compromise, this is what happens.

Buffer, yes. But the Maidan protests started because Russia made the first power grab. The very openly pro-Russian government of the time had just passed legislation that put Ukraine on a direct path towards becoming what is now Belarus. TBH, if that hadn&#x27;t happen, we&#x27;d just have Ukraine more or less locked by Putin now. So no, we&#x27;re not talking about a buffer zone, sorry. Not even in the strict military sense - the invasion today came from Belarus as well, and some reports even claim Belarusian troops, not that it matters much. So without that regime change, we&#x27;d most likely see Ukraine as part of the Russian Federation in a military capacity as well.We _had_ a buffer zone until yesterday. NATO was supporting Ukraine without much real intention of having it join, while Russia had Crimea and half of Donbass. This could have gone for decades - see Transnistria, which does exactly the same for Moldova for 30 years.

Now the original comment is flagged and gone. I will still leave this reply here because it expands on the original comments claim with more sources than just Wikipedia;&gt; We then openly backed the 2014 putsch in Kiev, an open act of aggression just as irresponsible as a military incursion. CIA John Brennan, Senator John McCain, and Diplomat Victoria Nuland were there in Ukraine when Yanukovych was being overthrown. There is also evidence to show that we were involved through NGOs in overthrowing and promoting an atmosphere desiring the overthrow of Yanukovych.This is an aspect to this that way too many people just ignore as &quot;Russian misinformation&quot;.The Orange revolution was a prior US attempt [0] at facilitating a regime-change in Ukraine from pro-Russian politics to pro-Western politics, which failed.In 2014 there was the next attempt McCain not only riling up protesters [1], but meeting with the future PM Arseniy Yatsenyuk and leader of right-wing militias Oleh Tyahnybok [2] that were the muscle behind the 2014 revolution [3].Arseniy Yatsenyuk was already declared the US&#x27;s &quot;man&quot; during the leaked &quot;Fuck the EU Nuland&quot; calls [4], same Victoria Nuland that was literally handing out cookies to Ukrainian protesters [5].Yatsenyuk wasn&#x27;t even too shy about these connections; His OpenUkraine foundation&#x27;s list of partners reads like the who is who of US regime change actors, down to the CIA&#x27;s a National Endowment for Democracy and literal NATO itself [6].Tho it was a bit too blatant, so they ended up putting his wife in charge of the foundation and removing the partners list.[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2004&#x2F;nov&#x2F;26&#x2F;ukraine.usa" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2004&#x2F;nov&#x2F;26&#x2F;ukraine.usa</a>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2013&#x2F;dec&#x2F;15&#x2F;john-mccain-ukraine-protests-support-just-cause" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;2013&#x2F;dec&#x2F;15&#x2F;john-mccain-uk...</a>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahnybok-in-ukraine-2013-12" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;john-mccain-meets-oleh-tyahn...</a>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;KfD_CaSIxmQ" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;youtu.be&#x2F;KfD_CaSIxmQ</a>[4] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;world-europe-26079957" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;world-europe-26079957</a>[5] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;euobserver.com&#x2F;tickers&#x2F;122437" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;euobserver.com&#x2F;tickers&#x2F;122437</a>[6] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20140407065419&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;openukraine.org&#x2F;en&#x2F;about&#x2F;partners" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.archive.org&#x2F;web&#x2F;20140407065419&#x2F;http:&#x2F;&#x2F;openukrain...</a>

The narrative of NATO expansion is a PR meme. It was created by Russians for the 2007 Munich security conference, where Putin made a speech.NATO is a defensive pact and existing members have always been very hesitant about accepting new members, because it is intended as a cooperation platform between equals and not a substitute for building up own defense force. The initiative to join NATO has always been driven by Eastern European countries seeking to maintain independence and reduce the risk of Russian invasion. Together with EU membership, it&#x27;s the holy grail of foreign policy.The referenced Mearsheimer et al are irrelevant. They depict everything as a grand Russia vs USA standoff as if it were a board game, and ignore the delicate histories and current relationships between countries in Europe.If you are a fan of history, I recommend rejecting grand narratives and reading a general history of every country in Europe. How has Sweden fared in the past 500 years? Why Russians have an inferiority complex with Finns? Why isn&#x27;t Austria in NATO? The more you read, the more you&#x27;ll see the complex network of relationships and understand what every country seeks to achieve. To treat all of them as pawns of the US or Russia is unbelivably ignorant. Even countries as small as Iceland have their own foreign policy, and sometimes have a great impact on international relations.

Now do you understand the neo-McCarthyism raging through our country?If you even say something other than &quot;Putin is Satan&quot; or &quot;Russia bad&quot;, you get downvoted to oblivion. Enjoy. Don&#x27;t bother mentioning the complexities of this situation or once again, you&#x27;ll be downvoted.

&gt; Will the people downvoting this comment mind telling me what is wrong with it?Do the people in Ukraine want to be &#x27;used&#x27; as a buffer? What do they want?Because without addressing that your comment has a ‘I’m in favour of sacrificing people’ vibe.

Ukrainian people can decide themselves what they can do.The comment above is pushing Russian propaganda.

Will the people downvoting this comment mind telling me what is wrong with it? I&#x27;m not a Russian apologist, just a fan of history, and am trying to understand why so many people reject this narrative.edit: Now I am downvoted too just for asking..? This just makes me think that there is not a solid answer?

I am for keeping Ukraine as a neutral buffer separating Russia and the US.NATO proposed Ukrainian and Georgian membership of NATO in 2005-2008, in the clear knowledge that this would destabilize the situation.France, Germany, and others were against this. The proposal began the issue. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=SJBQikfYyKs" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=SJBQikfYyKs</a>We then openly backed the 2014 putsch in Kiev, an open act of aggression just as irresponsible as a military incursion. CIA John Brennan, Senator John McCain, and Diplomat Victoria Nuland were there in Ukraine when Yanukovych was being overthrown. There is also evidence to show that we were involved through NGOs in overthrowing and promoting an atmosphere desiring the overthrow of Yanukovych.This war is about more than just Putin.Research: George Friedman, Peter Zeihan, John Mearsheimer, Peter Hitchens, Noam Chomsky (more of an ideologue), etc. on this issue. You can start on YouTube OR read their books, I guess.These are all PhDs or experts in some fashion that I just cited. You could just read their books too.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;John_Mearsheimer" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;John_Mearsheimer</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;George_Friedman" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;George_Friedman</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Peter_Zeihan" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Peter_Zeihan</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Peter_Hitchens" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Peter_Hitchens</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Noam_Chomsky" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Noam_Chomsky</a>&quot;F* the EU&quot; said Diplomat Victoria Nuland -- knowing full well that the Germans and French would be against a coup in then-neutral Ukraine.Meanwhile, once again, soon after the Iraq debacle: here we are getting dragged into another &quot;war for democracy&quot;.Russia and America turned Ukraine into a &quot;if we can&#x27;t have, burn it to the ground&quot; situation. Further American intervention in Ukraine will just turn it into another Syria.

It&#x27;s possible for nuclear powered thugs to be beaten off. Just look at the Taliban. Destroying things is easy, but maintaining control is hard

The US has a major security advantage in terms of mutually assured destruction in that its home to many people from around the world. There are like tens of thousands of Americans living in all of Russia or China. Meanwhile, there are millions of both Russian and Chinese Americans in the U.S.. This provides safety. Good luck finding morale in your military after you&#x27;ve just told them to nuke millions of their own people.

I&#x27;d say in this case everyone has nuclear weapons i.e. thug and bystanders with abundant second strike capabilities and also a healthy desire to live. With that level of mutually assured destruction, conflict if any would almost certainly stay conventional.In fact if NATO had moved in about 50 to 100K troops at the invitation of Ukraine sometime over the past 3 months, its really unlikely that Putin would have upped the ante.If anything the multiyear patience and planning on his part suggests he absolutely wants to win and wont take a chance if he thinks he might lose or draw

The thug also thinks his knife won&#x27;t be needed.Often I wonder which of our leaders has ever played poker. It seems like Putin has figured out that we won&#x27;t push all-in, ever, so he steals another pot.If the west really cared about this, the only way now is to retaliate way out of proportion to what&#x27;s happened.Before this happened, the west also didn&#x27;t act like it wanted to contain the Russians, so the Russians got brave. If there had been some sort of response the Russians would have backed off. It&#x27;s somewhat stable for both sides to bluster about this or that minor victory. Can&#x27;t do that now.

When the thug has nuclear weapons, responses get a lot trickier.

Well said. Additionally and even more sadly, in this case the thug has a strapped on bomb belt powerful enough to kill everybody.

I have a strong feeling that the US has missiles stationed in both Japan and Korea, which is about the same as putting them in Taiwan for this comparison

This is too simple. Ukraine and Russia, Orthodox and Catholics, Polish, Ukrainians and Russians have had a varied history in the proximate territories.Despite the bluster of &quot;I&#x27;m the only one who&#x27;s gone toe to toe with Putin&quot; there is only so much anyone can do in this situation. If KSA decided to invade one of its neighbors, there is only so much anyone could do because doing anything would severely disrupt energy. But in the Caucasus and Dnieper areas there, I mean you have nukes involved. Like India and Pakistan.Then there is the promise we made not to station missiles in territories bordering Russia and the whole Orange Revolution Obama thing. That&#x27;s a big deal to them just as it would be a big deal if Russia stationed missiles in Mexico or Cuba. We&#x27;d throw a fit too. Just as China would throw a fit if we stationed missiles in Taiwan.The US could do the same thing. People like to complain about how much a bully the US has been (Chile, Guatemala, Vietnam, etc)... Now they are seeing how real bullies act in Russia and a lesser degree China (but they are on the sidelines biding their time) They can do what they want because they have little constraint --with big players it&#x27;s self-imposed.

&gt; at the same time they could have done a lot more to prevent it.I&#x27;m skeptical. Russia has been harrying and undermining Ukraine for many years. Remember Viktor Yanukovych and all the turmoil of that era? It&#x27;s not like Ukraine has been through a period of decadence where they slacked off — they&#x27;ve never caught a break.And now the full force of Russian imperialism is crashing down on them.

Does it need to be &quot;go to war&quot;? How many NATO aircraft would it take to give the Ukrainians on the ground the upper hand? For all his bluster, do you think Putin really wants to escalate beyond Ukraine? He&#x27;s playing a game of chicken with the west and winning.Hitler did the same thing right up until 1939. From what I&#x27;ve read he was actually surprised that the allies finally called his bluff after Poland, considering they just rolled over after the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia.

Germany could have stopped the situation from deteriorating further weeks ago, but the new government are idiots.

They trusted the American guaranty of their safety in exchange for them becoming a nuclear non-proliferation country and giving up their inherited nukes. American&#x27;s failure to stay ahead of the situation and deliver on the guaranty we promised them caused this, and I think is going to lead to nuclear proliferation going up now.

Are you suggesting that neighboring countries should go to war to defend Ukraine? If I see a street mugging then I&#x27;ll call the police but I&#x27;m not going to risk getting shot in order to intervene in a random street crime.This is obviously a terrible situation for the Ukrainian people but at the same time they could have done a lot more to prevent it. They essentially let their military deterrent collapse years ago through a mix of corruption and apathy. If they had had a real combat effective military back in 2014 then Russia probably wouldn&#x27;t have invaded in the first place.

Why is this downvoted?It&#x27;s not just Putin; Russian leaders through most of the 20thC have feared encroachment on their western borders, and have launched invasions and installed puppet regimes to create a buffer. The fact that Ukraine has clearly expressed its desire to join NATO, and NATO&#x27;s refusal to reject that possibility, means that Russia perceives a threat that their greatest enemy will suddenly appear right on their border.Georgia also wanted to join NATO; so they got invaded.The West has played this hand very badly. Instead of declaring that under no circumstances would they send troops to Ukraine, they should have kept silent, or possibly sent a division of ground troops, to be dispersed around the country. They should also have leaned hard on Ukraine to make Donetsk and Luhansk officially autonomous regions. The Donbas would then become Russia&#x27;s buffer zone, making them feel a bit less paranoid about NATO encroachment.FWIW, I think NATO should have dismantled itself following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The modern NATO is a global organisation, not restricted to the North Atlantic. It&#x27;s no longer a mutual defence pact for countries at risk of Russian attack; its main purpose now is simply to intimidate Russia.

Couldn&#x27;t it simply be true that Putin doesn&#x27;t want Ukraine to join Nato and Ukraine is trying to join anyway?

To some extent this situation feels analogous to a street mugging happening in very slow motionThe thug accosts the victim, threatens and then proceeds to assault the victim in full view of a large number of bystanders who are numerous enough to defend the victim and alter the outcome but not convicted enough to take on the inconvenience of doing so.Nevertheless all the bystanders voice words of encouragement and sympathy and even offer to sue the aggressor in court after the fact if the victim is harmed or killed.

&gt; Russians associate the current Ukrainian regime with Nazism&#x2F;fascism.I guess you are speaking for majority of Russians. Is there an independent survey to back it up?

Why are you saying that? Not all Russians are brainwashed by state propaganda. I think very few Russians who read Hackernews actually support what is going on right now, if any.
To be honest, me and all of the people around me thought that this is too crazy to happen, but here we are.

&quot;Yes&#x2F;No&quot; support is a bit of an over-simplifaction of the situation.There&#x27;s two major axes, here.The government is pushing the &#x27;Ukranian neo-nazis&#x27; propaganda, because it&#x27;s a convenient bullshit excuse (as is all the spilled ink in Putin&#x27;s essay about long-dead history). Some soft-headed people obviously believe that wholesale. What isn&#x27;t an excuse, though, is that Ukraine did take steps to restrict its Russian minority. Many Russians who don&#x27;t swallow the neo-nazi nonsense are sympathetic to that view on the situation (for, uh, obvious nationalistic reasons).Now, whether or not sympathy for that is sufficient grounds to do nothing and respect Ukrainian sovereignty, to prosecute a proxy war, a limited war, or a full war all depends on how much of a warhawk you personally are.My highly unscientific feeling is that public support rests somewhere north of &#x27;most Russians believe that Ukraine has been repressing Russians, and would support a proxy war&#x27;, and somewhere short of &#x27;drive the fascist swine out - prosecute a full war and occupation of Kiev&#x27;.

Russians (some of them, to clarify) associate the current Ukrainian regime with Nazism&#x2F;fascism. After all, far right groups were a major part of the 2014 revolution&#x2F;putsch.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;crimethinc.com&#x2F;2022&#x2F;02&#x2F;15&#x2F;war-and-anarchists-anti-authoritarian-perspectives-in-ukraine" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;crimethinc.com&#x2F;2022&#x2F;02&#x2F;15&#x2F;war-and-anarchists-anti-au...</a> (note: the disinformation section is especially relevant)

It&#x27;s complicated, because the government position on it is a few &#x27;valid&#x27; concerns backed up with a lot of irrelevant bullshit about long-dead history. Practically, nobody is going to be stopping this. By deciding on sanctions, everyone in the west made it clear that it doesn&#x27;t want to fight a war, and the regime is currently too secure to be threatened by internal dissent.The best realistic outcome at the moment is something similar to what happened to Georgia - occupation of the two territories, a referendum, annexation, and an end to the proxy war.Whether we are going to get that outcome, or something worse, is, of course, unclear.

Putin has been busy cracking down hard on any descent for the past two years of his bunker dwelling. This round included not only the usual opposition organizations but independent news orgs and even the elites. I believe whatever his plans are it’s been at least a few years in the making

Now, I forgot to mention that all this &quot;they&#x27;re bad&quot; sentiment is part of so-called post-imperial syndrome. Many are really dissentful.Also, I&#x27;m old enough to remember the popular dissent with the USSR in the late &#x27;80s. We as kids would repeat the adults&#x27; discussions about how bad the country was, and our parents weren&#x27;t political dissidents at all, just common dwellers, absolutely non-ideologized. Many wanted friendship with the West. Only very ideologized communtists wanted to keep the status quo when the USSR collapsed, and obviously even secret services where Putin served wanted to open the country and the economy and did not resist the collapse, nor support the GKChP coup.The economic crisis of the &#x27;90s and the war in Yugoslavia where what changed people&#x27;s minds. I remember seeing a woman carry a white plastic bag with large US flag on it, probably in 1991 or 1992, but that became unthinkable in 1999-2000. Even a liberal pro-Western TV presenter Parfyonov showed some sort of dissent in his historic program when he described the events of 1991.Those years many changed their minds about the past, and went all way from complete discontent with the communist regime to believing that it was good and that it was destroyed intentionally.

A Russian here under a throwaway account. I&#x27;ve seen very few open supporters of the military invasion on social media. But most Russians, reached by TV or social media propaganda, carry on 3-5 factoids regarding Ukraine that somehow invalidates Ukrainian position completely.For example, just from today&#x27;s talk (face-to-face):* that Ukrainian forces supposedly committed crimes in Donbass region -- when I ask who in particular and how, these people fail to answer. When I say that they had full right to suppress armed riot of Girkin &amp; co, they switch the topic.* that the government were illegally overthrown in 2014. I challenged that with the fact that Yanukovich&#x27;s own party voted to introduce an president interim and start new elections.Both times I pushed the interlocutor and asked if I lied, and they have nothing to say, nor have more facts, but jump between topics all the time, switching from facts to questions -- like &quot;did they start living better?&quot; or &quot;what about those who died in Odessa protest?&quot; I guess this demagogy is enough for those who want to justify their stance, and to claim own moral superiority.I asked if they support the invasion, and they say they don&#x27;t. I&#x27;m sure they&#x27;ll have to make up their mind, but I&#x27;m afraid people can choose whatever more convenient to feel ok.A recent sociological surveys made in January showed about half of population being on Putin&#x27;s side, even 40% of those in political opposition to him. Sociologists confronted people with evidence of Russian military buildup, and respondents usually answered that this was &quot;Western propaganda&quot; and tried to avoid further discussion.I can&#x27;t read minds of the elites and secret service generals who constitute the Security Council, but it seems this is partially what they think -- secret services are very suspicious of everyone and treat everything as a threat. This leads to believing in conspiracies, and justifies agression.As for me and many others who value the open world borders and don&#x27;t want back to USSR, I&#x27;m most worried that we&#x27;re going to be under severe sectoral sanctions, with many industries in serious crisis, like in the 1990s.

I am curious, what do Russians think of this. Does anyone support him? Is it completely just one maniac with his friends running this.Is his propaganda that effective that Russians agree with any of it. I think if anyone can stop him, it has to be ordinary Russians. I don’t see sanctions or warnings from Biden or EU doing anything. And they will never directly step in and protect the Ukranian people.

&gt; Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because &quot;Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics&quot;. Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.Finland gets the next worst treatment, simply saying it should be “absorbed”.Interesting that it says military action is to be avoided and that Russia should use it’s natural resource dominance to extract concessions from other countries.

France and Germany having a firm anti-Atlanticist tradition, and China being a danger for Russia are ridiculous.I don&#x27;t believe for a second that this represent Putin&#x27;s strategy in any meaningful way.

Hang on to your butts, they&#x27;re gonna come for all of Europe: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Foundations_of_Geopolitics" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Foundations_of_Geopolitics</a>

&gt; who wants the right to express dissent with government policies without being bullied, harrassed, harmed or killed for it.This is the whole reason we have separate countries and government. Setting your own policy as a country is not supposed to result in war.Ukraine is standing firm on its sovereignty. A belligerent adversary has started a war because it feels the sovereign country isn&#x27;t sovereign and can&#x27;t be friends with certain countries. That upends the whole concept of countries, which further erodes Putin&#x27;s credibility, if he had any left. He first upended self-determination in his own country, then internationally, and now seeks takeover of an entire foreign country.

How horrible for those that will die now, and over time for anyone in Ukraine who wants the right to express dissent with government policies without being bullied, harrassed, harmed or killed for it. This is a right worth fighting for, for ourselves and others, and always will be.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newyorker.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;daily-comment&#x2F;russia-and-china-unveil-a-pact-against-america-and-the-west" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.newyorker.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;daily-comment&#x2F;russia-and-chin...</a>For and article showing their cooperation. I would imagine China is. Wry curious about the actions and resolve of the West in this situation.

Wait up, they didn&#x27;t explicitly show support for russia in the UNSC meetings on ukraine, so that at least that means something.

China already stated they support Russia 100% because they need Russia to defend against the west. There was a document posted by Chinese media yesterday stating how to censor Russia content. Anything pro Russia to be promoted and anything against to be scrubbed.Edit: This was screen grabbed from Weibo which was posted by Horizon News. (sorry got the wrong news agency)<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;lingli_vienna&#x2F;status&#x2F;1496097706493816833" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;lingli_vienna&#x2F;status&#x2F;1496097706493816833</a><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;china-news-outlet-ukraine-coverage-instructions-weibo-horizon-russia-2022-2" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;china-news-outlet-ukraine-co...</a>

Russia and China have a deal to back each other’s despotic regimes on the UN security council.  No matter what Xi says, he will back Putin.

China is greatly in favour of Countries losing their sovereignty and isn&#x27;t a fan of historical claims to territory.

China has said Russia should respect Ukrainian territory publicly.Personally I guess they will support Russia via trade and not partake in sanctions.Form this I feel the west has to put tariffs or reduce trade on nations that trade with Russia for maximum effect. It could also be a useful way to rebalance the trade with China which is the aim of some western governments.China is also in a bind as if they recognise the break away regions this gives political credit to Taiwan&#x27;s independence. From this I suspect they will continue to publicly offer Ukrainian support, and appear as the peace makers, but do little in actual effect.

China&#x27;s ambassador to UN Security Council today, 45 minutes after the invasion, basically said &quot;we call on all parties to stop escalations and proceed diplomatically.&quot; (no shit) Honestly, I&#x27;m baffled that this type of trite platitude makes it into the highest important discourse in the world, but here we are, for insane political shirking reasons.EDIT: China now calling West to blame for situation and there isn&#x27;t an invasion.If anyone had any doubts as to the morality of Chinese leadership these days...

China wants Russia&#x27;s support when China does the same to Taiwan...

I believe order and chaos are the two most predominate forces in nature. Russia is a very chaotic nation (granted they made the RD-180 rocket engines, but they murdered Korolev) Life favors the ordered.

The reason Putin is invading is because he knows the U.S. is weak, its leadership is politically weak, and there&#x27;s very little it will do, and even if it does, it doesn&#x27;t have popular support. It&#x27;s the effect of clear incentives.If the U.S. intervenes, a retaliatory cyber op from Russia against critical infrastructure would make america amish again. Then, wait until midterms when the president loses the house and senate and doesn&#x27;t have the power to muster a draft when China takes Taiwan. This is one of those happening slowly and then all at once events in history I suspect.

And it&#x27;s the only reply that could stop him. He is basically Hitler 2.0.

How long do you think Russia can hold out if the entire world sanctions them? Do you think they&#x27;d trade Ukraine for trade with every world partner? Bottom line: Russia can only win a physical war - they cannot win an economic war.This is bait and bad bait at that. The longer Russia continues to provide us with video evidence of their bullying only makes it easier for us to convince undecided countries to sanction Russia to submission.

Take a big dose of Realpolitik and leave the &quot;ought to&quot;s behind. There&#x27;s no nanny to tattle to. Nuclear war is a losing move for us all. Don&#x27;t encourage it&#x27;s happening out of some sense of moral justice that will kill billions.

That is a fairly simplistic view and this certainly wouldn&#x27;t have helped anyone.

Haven’t you seen “war games”? Listen to Joshua.

Wow, not really. Putin lies all of the time and he is a bully, but he&#x27;s not kidding when he says there will be retaliations.Anything the West does directly they have to expect a response.That said, I think the west should be using &#x27;distance power&#x27;.There are US Global Hawk drones over Ukraine right now doing surveillance, I think it would be reasonable for the US to launch cruise missiles at Russian targets in Ukraine.The Russians could make things very difficult for ships in the Black Sea however as one opportunity for retaliation.We just have to hope that Ukrainians can leverage the Javelins and Stingers to great effect and make it painful enough for Putin that he has no choice to step back, but it&#x27;s impossible to tell, it&#x27;s just as likely Russia may be able to just smash through Ukranian defences and leave them to some insurgency skirmishes.

or just assassinate him.If you&#x27;re really clever, get all Sun Tzu on him and feed his fears until he chokes on them.Most bullies are cowards. Threats and ultimatums like that come from a place of weakness. Did you hear America saying anything like that when they invaded Iraq? No, because they weren&#x27;t scared.

That is big talk. You can always hop on a plane and go join the Ukrainian Army

The speech of a bully, of an aggressor. The only correct reply is a direct retaliatory attack on his offensive positions.

His pre invasion speech has striking similarity to Hitler&#x27;s speeches

So he aims to be scarier than Hitler? Quite an ambition. Tragic for everyone involved.

Nukes are probably not Russia&#x27;s strongest offensive resource, and certainly will not be the first resource to be drawn upon.

He is hinting that he can nuke everyone who will stand against. This is a typical tactic of bullies – to hint death threats, without directly stating them. Also they want to assure you that they can definitely do it, even though they know about the consequences.I wrote about such tactics in a blog post <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dandanua.github.io&#x2F;posts&#x2F;counterfactual-communication-and-intimidation&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;dandanua.github.io&#x2F;posts&#x2F;counterfactual-communicatio...</a>

&quot;Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.&quot;

Basically, he threatens anyone interfering with nukes. It&#x27;s a new world, or actually it&#x27;s the old world reappering.

Putin (and his kgb clique) is loosing grip on the power, the war started to be the only way to rally local support and remain in the power. Small scale, local conflicts are growing in size to appease common people to give them taste of USSR former glory, taste of world power, not decay of corruption riddled aristocracy ruled former empire.Putin is at the top of the pyramid but he is not the sole ruler of the Russia. Its not like if he dies Russia will magically become exemplary democracy.There were and still are people lining up and aiming to take his seat, but as long as Putin appears to be strong and gives his underlings enough he will remain on the throne.

Why would Putin think his life is over?  He&#x27;s 10 years younger than Biden. And, have you ever heard the expressions, &quot;better dead than Red&quot; and &quot;give me liberty or give me death&quot;?  People often believe that deeply held principles are more important than mere survival. Similarly Putin might believe that establishing Russia&#x27;s strength and border security is more important than any short term pain Russia endures. In other words, there&#x27;s other ways to look at this than as just a pure boss move for his own ego and pleasure.

Putin is a 69 year old dictator who is realizing his life is over. He&#x27;s decided to go out with a bang. He obviously does not care about his country since this war will only hurt Russia, it&#x27;s already had multiple consequences that are directly opposed to his stated goals. He wants to play with his army and tanks.&quot;Take all your overgrown infants away somewhere
And build them a home, a little place of their own.
The Fletcher Memorial
Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.
...
Boom boom, bang bang, lie down you&#x27;re dead.&quot;--- The Fletcher Memorial Home - Pink Floyd

I agree, though what&#x27;s the alternative to appeasing a nuclear power? Sanctions I guess?

It’s tantamount to appeasement to let threats like this influence any decisions

&gt; &quot;To anyone who would consider interfering from the outside: if you do, you will face consequences greater than any of you have faced in history. All relevant decisions have been taken. I hope you hear me.&quot;

This is a tragedy. This is what we get for enabling weak willed leaders and appeasers. People like to joke when basketball players go and visit dictatorships and companies do business with mass murderers. Well here is the result. Another war and more death. We need to have zero tolerance for these psychopathic dictators and their families. Full embargoes. Isolate them to their tiny hell holes and never let them leave.Fuck the &quot;economy&quot;. Freedom is the most important thing, how many more millions need to die before we understand this?

These are laughable numbers, trust me. It&#x27;s the opposite in reality.

Russia is a state that actively dissapears dissenters. I&#x27;m not sure how much you can trust polls.

That was a poll about protecting Donetsk and Luhansk, I believe.

I wonder if it&#x27;s the half who have no risk of getting conscripted into implementing that invasion. I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if it was.

Those numbers seems to come from this CNN poll[0] with 1000 people of each country being asked the questions[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;edition.cnn.com&#x2F;interactive&#x2F;2022&#x2F;02&#x2F;europe&#x2F;russia-ukraine-crisis-poll-intl&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;edition.cnn.com&#x2F;interactive&#x2F;2022&#x2F;02&#x2F;europe&#x2F;russia-uk...</a>

Half of Russia supports an invasion. A minority is opposed. Was a poll

how much support from russians does putin have for this kind of invasion?

It would be easier to take your opinions seriously if they weren’t contradicted by events happening right now; events which match Brzezinski’s “outdated nonsense” from the 90s perfectly.You could very well be correct, perhaps the leaders of these countries are living in the 19th century. But the fact that the current leaders of Ukraine, USA and Russia are acting in line with&#x2F;on these older assumptions makes them relevant still today.Also there’s plenty of information backing up his claims in the book, you’re welcome to go read it. It’s an excellent window into the way geopolics is rationalised, written by one of the people who have shaped it!

This is all assuming you share an underlying rational with the leader of Russia, which you don&#x27;t.  Putin obviously doesn&#x27;t care about having a good economy or making life better for the average Russian.  He cares about making himself look strong and maintaining power, and showing strength.  In the long run Russia is going to hurt over this, but that&#x27;s not what Putin cares about.

sadly, Putin lives in 19th century and wants everyone join him there

Ukraine has excellent farmland. Russia has their own local economy and can produce most of the things they need just with their direct neighbors. French cheeses, American-branded phones, and Italian cars may be too expensive for the Russian economy, but the Russian government doesn&#x27;t care. Close-enough products can be had for a fraction of the price.Thinking of things in terms of raw GDP is what is getting the west into a total mess. For years now people have said Russia won&#x27;t do anything and couldn&#x27;t possibly be a threat because their GDP is so low. China will never be a major player because their GDP per capita is so low.But that&#x27;s, frankly, stupid. People in Switzerland pay $20 for a sandwich. People in Vietnam are paying $0.75 for a sandwich that tastes twice as good. People in China are getting locally made phones with the equivalent of US pocket change and riding high speed trains for the cost of a slow and janky NY subway trip. GDP means absolutely nothing outside of international trade within the global sphere. GDP didn&#x27;t help America beat Afghanistan, one of the absolute poorest countries on earth. It didn&#x27;t help them beat North Korea or Vietnam either. They still haven&#x27;t succeeded in removing communism from poverty-stricken, bottom of the barrel GDP Cuba. If Russia decides to keep moving into western Europe, their GDPs mean nothing. Seizing that land just means Russia gets all of what those countries have, forever, without the high price tag.GDP isn&#x27;t motivating angry dictators to invade. They&#x27;re doing it because they can.

The Mongols didn&#x27;t need an economy to create chaos and conquer most of Eurasia. Babylon was conquered by Macedonia, Constantinople fell to the Turks, and Rome to the Vandals. Mixing up economic power with willingness to bleed for a mythical cause is a mistake. Also, who needs an economy when you can just have a big army and take booty? Definitely not Russia.This is not the modern-day version of USSR vs USA. It&#x27;s the modern version of the Mongol Horde vs Civilization. (No offense to current Mongols; you guys are cool).

&gt; Because if you want to be a world power in 21st century what you need is a huge economy.Lol being a world power was never about the economy, it had always been about military strength. Americans might think that they are a superpower because they have one of the largest economies in the world, but that’s being totally small-minded and missing the fact that the reason why their economy is that big in the first place is that the purpose of economies is to power the military with networks, talent, and money.

And Russias GDP is as big as ItalyRussia’s GDP is 25% smaller than the U.S. State of Texas.It sounds like a joke but it isn’t.Texas GDP is $2.0 trillion.Russia GDP is $1.48 trillion.Most of Russia’s GDP is selling oil and gas which is one of the reasons Putin is able to do this now. Through higher oil prices he’s amassed a war chest of $631 billion in foreign currency reserves that will enable him to weather sanctions. That along with the friendship treaty with China giving them a market to sell their oil and gas and sanctions will prove fairly toothless.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reuters.com&#x2F;markets&#x2F;europe&#x2F;russia-counts-reserves-shield-against-sanctions-finmin-2022-02-16&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reuters.com&#x2F;markets&#x2F;europe&#x2F;russia-counts-reserve...</a>

&gt; Why should the Ukraine be so important?Side note: you&#x27;ve used the old-fashioned (and Putin-favoured) english nomenclature for Ukraine as &quot;the Ukraine&quot; in the first sentence, and the Ukraine-preferred nomenclature in the second.This is actually the crux of the issue in two sentences. Ukraine is a sovereign state, but Putin politically asserts it is merely a territory they control, harking back to a pre-WWII time; Ukraine was a territory regularly divided up and under the control of different neighbouring states as a bargaining chip, gift, settlement, or conquest.This is I guess why Brzezinski talked about it as it was and as it is. Ukraine used to be passed around and fought over as a set of territories without a home. Post WWII, it is a nation state and its existence as a nation state historically perturbs its neighbours, most notably Russia.Ukraine still has all the geographical significance it had. It&#x27;s the second-largest country by land mass in Europe, it is fertile (a nearby breadbasket, geopolitically), it is also mineral rich, etc.So Brzezinski wasn&#x27;t wrong to say it was still a source of conflict, a prize, but now being an independent nation state it has the right to defend itself and enter alliances. That makes it a risk strategic point -- even perhaps a pivot -- in a future conflict.&gt; Why could Russia not be an empire without Ukraine?If Russia is to (re)build an &quot;empire&quot;, it needs Ukraine to do it, for all the reasons above.Bold to say Brzezinski wrote nonsense, though. Good for you: put yourself out there as an international statesman.

Ukraine has gas reserves that seem to be mostly untouched because of regional turmoil and therefore a temporary inability to get that gas out of the ground.

&gt; “Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.”He claims that without any proof. This maybe would have been true in the 19th century given the technologies for war and power at that time.But we have the 21st century now. Why should the Ukraine be so important? Why could Russia not be an empire without Ukraine? Russia is the biggest country with the most sources of raw materials. It has the most nuclear weapons. It has a huge fleet. It is feared by all of its neighbors.But that all doesn&#x27;t matter nowadays. Because if you want to be a world power in 21st century what you need is a huge economy. And Russias GDP is as big as Italy. But invading Ukraine wouldn&#x27;t help Russia to increase its GDP.And that is why what Zbigniew Brzezinsk writes is outdated nonsense. Everyone who believes that still lives in the 19th century.

That&#x27;s because these &quot;predictions&quot;&#x2F;recommendations are taken as school textbook (literally, it&#x27;s required reading!) by Russian military.

I laughed at this one:The United Kingdom, merely described as an &quot;extraterritorial floating base of the U.S.&quot;, should be cut off from Europe.[9]

For a book that seems to be mentioned so much it is confusing that there is no English translation (apart from machine learning one).With &quot;unofficial&quot; translations you will never know if the translators didnt censor&#x2F;change the meaning somehow.

The same prediction is made in Dugin&#x27;s Foundations of Geopolitics. Many of his recommendations have come to pass.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Foundations_of_Geopolitics#Content" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Foundations_of_Geopolitics#Con...</a>

Perhaps, but the way the last cold war ended was by economic collapse. The warrior cultists needed somebody feeding and arming them, so they needed an economy, and their economy wasn&#x27;t up to the task. I&#x27;m pretty sure the folks pushing the sanctions understand this.Also, you could choose more neutral labels. The point of the egalitarians isn&#x27;t that people should be soft but that people have rights even if they can&#x27;t defend them. And really Putin believes this too, he just ignores this when convenient. He isn&#x27;t okay with harms done to Russia when it was weak. If he really accepted this warrior ethos, he would think they were perfectly fine. Russia couldn&#x27;t defend its interests, so it deserved whatever it got.A neutral term for might makes right is kraterocracy. &quot;Democracy&quot; doesn&#x27;t quite capture the alternative, but will do. Perhaps &quot;egalitarianism&quot; is better.

I think the Sanctions&#x2F;No Sanctions debate is mostly moot. North Korea has been in the status of pariah state for decades and hasn&#x27;t bent an inch. Compare that to China for whom we gladly swept the Tiananman Massacre under the rug, respected their sovereignty, made them a top trading partner and they have also not bent an inch. And we have hosted thousands of Chinese grad students at our universities. They are also watching the events in Ukraine right now and thinking &quot;Why not Taiwan?&quot; Modern dictators have learned very well the propaganda game. &quot;We&#x27;re rich because our enemies fear us&quot; or &quot;We&#x27;re poor because our enemies are mistreating us&quot; both work pretty well.

Thank you, this is a very useful model of the philosophical differences between Russia and the west since the fall of the soviet union and provides some quality food for thought about how to change the direction geopolitics are going with the resurgence of strongmen across the globe.I have traveled to Ukraine and Russia several times, dated a Russian briefly, then a Ukrainian, worked with Ukrainians in DC for several years, learned a bit of Russian and Ukrainian along the way... One of the things that I did not anticipate at first was the shared philosophical heritage with the west - my Russian ex-girlfriend&#x27;s favorite book was Seneca&#x27;s Letters to Lucilius, for one random example. For another, take a visit (in better times) to the Hermitage in St Petersburg and notice how the museum honors greek&#x2F;roman philosophy and empire as much as any western museum.The philosophical position upon which this country was founded - the rise of what recon517 is calling the &quot;Everybody Must Be Soft&quot; philosophy - has only been a dominant force recently, really only coming onto stage in the 20th century. It is not what has ruled the world for the majority of our 6,000 years of civilization and there is no guarantee that it will continue to do so. The idea that those who take and keep power by whatever means have a moral right to it is not new. I recently finished reading Xenophon&#x27;s Anabasis (aka The Persian Expedition), and this philosophy seeps through just about every page as the Greek army lays waste to anyone not deemed of benefit to them, even fellow Greeks. Xenophon was a close friend of Socrates, remember.Xenophon addressing the army, Anabasis book 6: 
&quot;As long as you stay together united as to-day, you will command respect and procure provisions; for might certainly exercises a right over what belongs to the weaker.&quot;My point with all of this is 1) we have more shared history than you might think, and 2) that if you enjoy the fruits of an equality mindset over the fruits of a winner-takes-all mindset, then do not take it for granted. Its dominance in politics is not guaranteed, at home or abroad.Live it, understand it, be it, calmly share it, never force it. We cannot win this war of ideas by treating it like a war. The irony is that in the end it is far more powerful to cooperate than to take, but the success rests upon preventing individuals from concentrating and exercising that power.My two cents, another imperfect model for consideration.

What do you suppose makes it so impossible for a soft cult politician to recognise a warrior when they see one? Because warriors seem to have no problem seeing the other way around.The Americans had their noses rubbed in it for 20 years in Afghanistan, only to see the warrior Taliban spring right back up overnight. I can’t imagine a more effective wake-up call than that.It would have been better if they had just called Gorbachev and asked if invading Afghanistan could ever work or they should just drop it. He has the experience and I’m sure he would have been happy to share it.

So many commentators did not live through post-USSR 90s to completely miss the mentality and culture which shapes Putin&#x27;s decisions.First, you need to understand values of a person, then their goals, then their methods to achieve the goals. 90s in post-USSR countries were a relatively free environment (from state prosecution) and it naturally selected for individuals which wanted as much power as possible and were willing to take it. For these individuals power is given only to those, who are powerful enough to have it, and must be taken from those, who are not powerful enough to keep it. If you are having your power, than it is moral for you to keep it until you don&#x27;t.This way of thinking is not something new or unique to post-USSR 90s - we as humanity have lived with this way of thinking for millennia and our thinking gave birth to countless empires and kingdoms. Those, who were powerful enough to be emperors, also had a right to be. Those, who challenged them in their power, would be new emperors, if proven powerful enough, otherwise would be painfully killed, their property and wives taken and their name forgotten. Let&#x27;s call this mentality a &quot;Cult of a Warrior&quot;. When you are living in this mentality, nothing is worse than feeling shame of abandoning your ideals or friends; you must be a truthful Warrior of the Cult until you die. But in the same time you can freely take anything you like which does not already belong to any of your friends, because if somebody is not powerful enough to fight you, than this person is not worthy of keeping this thing in the first place.Some of us (humans) during a course of time have countlessly discovered and rediscovered that people can be treated as equal in principle, independent on their physical&#x2F;economic&#x2F;political power. This arrangement led to a more productive economic environment where zero-sum-game of Cult of a Warrior changed to a positive sum game of &quot;Everybody Must Be Soft Cult&quot;. Also less overall human suffering is kind of cool, but economy thing is always first. In Everybody Must Be Soft Cult power over people can be used only with great care, everything is governed by a bureaucracy and no-one is unwilling to take too much responsibility for any action. This Cult uses a strong moral system to prohibit each of its members from using too much power on the others and those, who do not accept this system, are gradually punished with worse and worse strikes of punishment each time to learn their lesson. At the end, those individuals, who do not understand the reason for given punishment (its always abuse of power over others), are brought to death or exiled. Welcome to the Western civilization as we know it.So let&#x27;s go back to Putin and Ukraine. If we accept as an axiom that Putin is an adept of the Cult of a Warrior, then we can make the following conclusions:1. Putin sees himself as a Chief Warrior of his tribe and therefore has factual and moral power to make any decisions for his tribe as he likes it. I will call him the &quot;Chief Warrior&quot; from now on.2. The Chief Warrior sees that as time goes on, more and more fellow members of his tribe are turning from Cult of a Warrior to the Cult of Everybody Must Be Soft. From a point of view of a Warrior nothing is worse than to convert yourself to an Everybody Must Be Soft person. Worse is only when your children convert to Everybody Must Be Soft Cult and become all PC and LGBTQ drug loving hippies. No Warrior wants that to their children.3. So from the Chief Warrior point of view he (in the Warrior cult its always he) does not have any choices at all regarding what to do with his life and how to guide his tribe next. First of all, he must save the tribe from this fucking Everybody Must Be Soft epidemy which is happening right now and must do so ASAP.4. To save the tribe from Everybody Must Be Soft epidemy it must be separated from the source of the illness in the first place. That means economic and information blockade. All key technologies and industries must be developed in house, all external communication must be ceased, the nation must be quarantined until it find its Warrior soul again. Also its awesome if some of the most active bad blood from the Everybody Must Be Soft movement emigrates in the process.5. So how to turn a course of a nation of 100+ million people, rapidly integrating from 1990s into Western economy and system of values? It is not so easy. You nee some help from your opponent in doing so. Remember Eastern martial arts - it takes less power to use your opponent against himself, then to do everything all by yourself? So you need to use Everybody Must Be Soft system of punishment to get yourself excluded and expulsed from its system. Economic sanctions is the name for it. For all sanctions the national economy will get a strong hit in the short term, but will become independent from the Everybody Must Be Soft economic system in the long term. Everything, which does not kill us, makes us stronger - said a fellow Warrior (or something like that) once.6. How to get economic sanctions from the West? Everybody Must Be Soft always punishes for abuse of power, so we must show it to them. Crimea in 2014 was a nice start and we also reminded our fellow Warriors that our soul of the Warrior is not lost yet to the illness, that the times are turning. Also have to make internal reforms regarding freedom of speech, independent news media and political parties to smoke out all the Everybody Must Be Soft elite, so that this liberal pus comes out of an ill body of the Warrior which always has been and always will be Russian Empire, or Russia as it is simply called right now.So what can people from Everybody Must Be Soft Cult can do to gain advantage in this fight? First of all, get their heads out of their arses and imagine that some people from another culture living on another continent might think differently than they are regarding fundamental ways of living and morality. Take some LSD and watch Chinese martial arts movies for Christs sake if you have so limited imagination.Second, launch a program of giving free Western university education to Russians with a condition of returning back to their shitty dictatorial country as it is right now and starting improving something in this regard. Subsidize creation of Russian voice-over for all Western movies, give free English language classes to people over 30 and overall increase cultural transfer to people living currently in Russia. To kill Putin you have to convert all these people into the Everybody Must Be Soft mentality.Third, in NO CASE create any new economic sanctions to Russia and repel all the old ones. Going the sanctions route would be like giving the Chief Warrior exactly what he wants on a silver plate. Give large amounts of aid to Ukraine to compensate for inconvenience of having a bully neighbor at the same time.Fourth, either Everybody Must Be Soft Cult wins by converting everyone over, or it dies from hands of the Great Russian and Chinese Warriors who are getting stronger in the meantime.PS. Sorry for my grammar and typos, not a native speaker.
Also slightly edited regarding grammar&#x2F;typos.

&#x27;Prisoners of Geography&#x27; is a book that helps me understand some of the these things. Recommended. The first chapter is about Russia.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Prisoners_of_Geography" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Prisoners_of_Geography</a>

In his 1997 book The Grand Chessboard Zbigniew Brzezinski did say that if Europe went to war again it would start in Ukraine.Some choice quotes:“Ukraine, a new and important space on the Eurasian chessboard, is a geopolitical pivot because its very existence as an independent country helps to transform Russia. Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire.”“However, if Moscow regains control over Ukraine, with its 52 million people and major resources as well as access to the Black Sea, Russia automatically again regains the wherewithal to become a powerful imperial state, spanning Europe and Asia.”

If you are Russian in Russia right now I&#x27;d love to hear what the majority public sentiment in the country is.

Hi Russian friends. Good to see you here and good to read your view.You might see me se me support Ukraine or be angry about Russia, but rest assured that I have nothing against Russians as a people, only the ones who tries to invade Ukraine etc.I&#x27;m living in the shadow of Russia too and I&#x27;ve just filled my spare water tanks with clean water and I&#x27;ll fill my car and get some extra fuel for my cooking stove later today.I&#x27;ve already been training for a few months now, but I&#x27;m still hoping for a good miracle to avoid a full European war.For the rest of HN, don&#x27;t forget the thing most preppers seems to ignore: as far as possible, be friendly towards everyone. If others want you to survive that should help a lot.Have a nice day everyone.Edit: when&#x2F;if this ends maybe we can meet at the server again and play CS:GO or something :-)Edit 2: if anyone wonders, the official rule for prepping here in Norway includes stocking up with 9L of clean water for each person in the household, keeping some food that has long shelf life, radio, lights, batteries, some way to heat food and rooms even if the electricity disappears and to cooperate with neighbors if you cannot fix everything yourself (e.g. not all houses here have alternative heating sources except electricity).

+, Russian here. Putin will burn in hell. My thoughts are with Ukraine. Stay safe and fuck the war.

&gt; wholeheartedly despise this outrageous war crime act of our so-called governmentThen, protest it on the street.

Stay safe, brother, my thoughts and prayers are with you. I&#x27;m Russian and wholeheartedly despise this outrageous war crime act of our so-called government.

Kharkiv, 25 miles to Russia.
Just want to say that we are strong, we are confident about our army and I hope that everything will be fine.
I&#x27;m sorry that I share content like this on this platform, but that&#x27;s my reality

Russian forces invade Ukraine after Putin orders attack