War in Ukraine

#87,276
#87,276
Orange. said:
It’s absolutely not an appeal to authority.

It was a one-stop shopping recommendation of a simply told, well sourced, overview of how the US pressured Russia.

And alas you weren’t able to do what you said you could do.
Click to expand...
Scott Horton makes the same nonsensical "Russia is the victim' argument that's been debunked ad nauseum.

Russia was not lied to about NATO expansion. Gorbachev is on record himself putting that to rest, you can even watch him say it on video if you need to.

In 1997, Russia went on to sign the NATO founding act, which they agreed that sovereign nations have the right to determine their own alliances (there was no exception for Ukraine or any other country).

Anecdotally, the United States propped up Russia all through the 90s through direct donations of food, and through supporting them with IMF loans that kept the country from breaking up into hunger-fueled chaos, and US business invested in Russia to the tune of billions a year.

1748451331718.png

So citing Scott Horton's tired arguments, do not substantiate any of these claims of US pressure on Russia, that somehow warrants Russia invading and committing genocide in Ukraine.

The burden of proof is on you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill, bamawriter and tvolsfan
#87,277
#87,277
Orange. said:
It’s absolutely not an appeal to authority.

It was a one-stop shopping recommendation of a simply told, well sourced, overview of how the US pressured Russia.

And alas you weren’t able to do what you said you could do.
Click to expand...
Here is the debate where “non-expert” foreign policy hobbyist Scott Horton obliterates foreign policy “expert” Bill Kristol.
 
#87,278
#87,278
Ritzwatch said:
Well, I guess you got your answer, No, BV didn't care about the case for it. He wanted to take cheap shots at whatever you posted. Once that was done, never having explained how his background or training makes him any more qualified, or better sourced than the author whom you cited, BV will claim to have prevailed.

BV has no interest in actually engaging on issues.

It doesn't take much to find out that the author did his homework, whether one agrees with him or not. Your response to BV deserved better.

Click to expand...
Thanks for linking those footnotes to Provoked. That's handy.

Provoked was so far from the formative book on my views that I'm not quite to the end. I've been reading about Russia and Eastern or Middle Europe for a long time. But it is easy to recognize how useful Provoked is.

The book is more a running presentation of events over several decades in simple chronological order than an "argument" in organization. In clear writing and with sourcing (as you showed).

Something I recommended earlier is an article called "The Harvard Boys Do Russia."

That article tells a little of the story of how the US, (CIA-affiliated and profiteering) Harvard, various CIA-"connected" NGOs, and some of our very own precious oligarchs plundered, abused, and betrayed Russia and the Russian people in the formative days of Russian democracy. This is the immediate post-Soviet era, when Russia and the Russian people were actively and sincerely seeking to become part of the West. You want to know how you end up with a Putin rising up to defend "the Motherland" (as they call it), shoving aside the duped and discredited Russian Westernizers after we had stunk up the reputation of words like "democracy," "free markets," "privatization," and "friend" in the eyes of ordinary Russian people? That article, in a nutshell, shows you how. Might have to search a few names or terms. @BeardedTrueBeliever, btw, had a reason to poo poo that article, too, and without reading it, of course.
Even when I posted links to declassified documents in US archives ole @Bearded somehow attacked those primary sources, too.
 
Last edited:
#87,279
#87,279
Orange. said:
Thanks for linking those footnotes to Provoked. That's handy. I found the book rummaging around in the Ukraine books on Amazon. It was so far from the formative book on my views that I am just now reading it and not quite to the end. But it was easy to recognize how useful a book it is. I wasn't being sarcastic in the least in recommending it my friend @BeardedTrueBeliever.

Something I recommended earlier is an article called "The Harvard Boys Do Russia," which tells a little of the story of how the US, (CIA-affiliated) Harvard and various NGOs, and some of our precious oligarchs plundered, abused, and betrayed Russia and the Russian people in the immediate post-Soviet era -- when Russia and the Russian people were actively and sincerely seeking to become part of the West. You want to know how you end up with a Putin rising up to defend the Motherland, shoving the duped aside after we had humiliated and discredited "democracy" and "free markets" in the eyes of the people? That article in a nutshell shows you how. Might have to search a few names or terms. BeardedTrueBeliever, btw, had a reason to poo poo that article on the spot, too, without reading it.

A significant bit of what I have read on the subject are declassified documents from the US, some NATO partners, and the Soviet Union and Russia in the archives. This, being what historians call "primary sources," were also somehow the target of his snark and dismissal.

I'm still hoping he reads Provoked, on the quiet. Just so he knows what others are talking about and why they are interested in knowing that side of the history and how it is essential to understand present events.

I'd recommend the book to everyone, whether it's you first of hundredth book on the subject.
Click to expand...
How do you know they sincerely wanted to be part of the west? they didn't rise up and overthrow their government because of ideological disputes. they rose up because communism failed them and they had no other option. joining the west was seen as the next welfare source.
 
#87,280
#87,280
BeardedVol said:
You made the claim that we have pressured Russia, the burden of proof lies with you to substantiate the claim.
Click to expand...

But that's not what you asked in your last response to me. Now that the goalposts have been moved to a more reasonable point I can answer.

Encouraging their neighbors to increase defense spending is pressure.

Sending diplomats to a neighbor you are seeking to retain influence over is pressure.

Two quick and easy examples. There are many more I'm sure.

I think you may have the wrong idea about my intentions here. Not everyone commenting here is a T-totaller.

I don't think Russia was right or that the invasion was legitimate. I think they are looking out for what they believe are their best interests, right or wrong. Not much different than we would or even have done in the very recent past.

I'm simply stating that we aren't innocent in all of this. Simple as that. We didn't help Ukraine because we thought it was the morally sound thing to do. And if you believe that there's not much sense in having this discussion with you.
 
#87,281
#87,281
BeardedVol said:
Scott Horton makes the same nonsensical "Russia is the victim' argument that's been debunked ad nauseum.

Russia was not lied to about NATO expansion. Gorbachev is on record himself putting that to rest, you can even watch him say it on video if you need to.

In 1997, Russia went on to sign the NATO founding act, which they agreed that sovereign nations have the right to determine their own alliances (there was no exception for Ukraine or any other country).
Click to expand...
So does Gorbachev from your article:

“One of the reasons, albeit not the only reason, is a lack of desire on the part of our Western partners to take Russia’s point of view and legal interests in security into consideration. They paid lip service to applauding Russia, especially during the Yeltsin years, but in deeds they didn’t consider it. I am referring primarily to NATO expansion, missile defense plans, the West’s actions in regions of importance to Russia (Yugoslavia, Iraq, Georgia, Ukraine).” - Gorbachev
 
#87,282
#87,282
KB5252 said:
But that's not what you asked in your last response to me. Now that the goalposts have been moved to a more reasonable point I can answer.

Encouraging their neighbors to increase defense spending is pressure.

Sending diplomats to a neighbor you are seeking to retain influence over is pressure.

Two quick and easy examples. There are many more I'm sure.

I think you may have the wrong idea about my intentions here. Not everyone commenting here is a T-totaller.

I don't think Russia was right or that the invasion was legitimate. I think they are looking out for what they believe are their best interests, right or wrong. Not much different than we would or even have done in the very recent past.

I'm simply stating that we aren't innocent in all of this. Simple as that. We didn't help Ukraine because we thought it was the morally sound thing to do. And if you believe that there's not much sense in having this discussion with you.
Click to expand...
how are either those pressure on RUSSIA? I could see it being pressure on the subject nation, but its not on Russia. those aren't russian lands. NATO has never fought Russia, so there isn't even a history to go back to.

Mexico increased their defense budget by 39% in 2024, the US certainly isn't pressured by that.

China's increased military budget puts pressure on us because they are actively engaged in disputes with our allies. there is no such issue between Russia and the rest of the world, until they invaded Ukraine.
 
#87,283
#87,283
BeardedVol said:
Scott Horton makes the same nonsensical "Russia is the victim' argument that's been debunked ad nauseum.

Russia was not lied to about NATO expansion. Gorbachev is on record himself putting that to rest, you can even watch him say it on video if you need to.

In 1997, Russia went on to sign the NATO founding act, which they agreed that sovereign nations have the right to determine their own alliances (there was no exception for Ukraine or any other country).

Anecdotally, the United States propped up Russia all through the 90s through direct donations of food, and through supporting them with IMF loans that kept the country from breaking up into hunger-fueled chaos, and US business invested in Russia to the tune of billions a year.

View attachment 744798

So citing Scott Horton's tired arguments, do not substantiate any of these claims of US pressure on Russia, that somehow warrants Russia invading and committing genocide in Ukraine.

The burden of proof is on you.
Click to expand...
Have you read Provoked?

Also @bamawriter @tvolsfan since you liked Bearded's comment, have you read Provoked?
 
Last edited:
#87,286
#87,286
midnight orange said:
So does Gorbachev from your article:

“One of the reasons, albeit not the only reason, is a lack of desire on the part of our Western partners to take Russia’s point of view and legal interests in security into consideration. They paid lip service to applauding Russia, especially during the Yeltsin years, but in deeds they didn’t consider it. I am referring primarily to NATO expansion, missile defense plans, the West’s actions in regions of importance to Russia (Yugoslavia, Iraq, Georgia, Ukraine).” - Gorbachev
Click to expand...

Zero treaties with Russia stating that NATO would not allow new members to choose to join.

Russia went on to sign the NATO Founding Act in 1997, where they specifically agreed with the premise that membership in NATO or any other security organization (CSTO) was the business of sole business of sovereign nations.
1748459899182.png
 
#87,287
#87,287
KB5252 said:
But that's not what you asked in your last response to me. Now that the goalposts have been moved to a more reasonable point I can answer.

Encouraging their neighbors to increase defense spending is pressure.

Sending diplomats to a neighbor you are seeking to retain influence over is pressure.

Two quick and easy examples. There are many more I'm sure.

I think you may have the wrong idea about my intentions here. Not everyone commenting here is a T-totaller.

I don't think Russia was right or that the invasion was legitimate. I think they are looking out for what they believe are their best interests, right or wrong. Not much different than we would or even have done in the very recent past.

I'm simply stating that we aren't innocent in all of this. Simple as that. We didn't help Ukraine because we thought it was the morally sound thing to do. And if you believe that there's not much sense in having this discussion with you.
Click to expand...
Lol, I didn't even erect any goal posts, you made the claim compadre:
1748460045354.png

The fact that you can't substantiate your statements, is not my fault.
 
#87,288
#87,288
And, look, this is not about Scott Horton or ad hominem diversions and attacks.

I don't know who is he and I made that clear in my first post. I do know a lot about what he is discussing, and I very much like it that Horton put together an easy to read, well-documented, chronological history in a single straightforward book.

And if you’re informed by American and British media, you do not know all of the events. Ot their context.
It's a book that specialists take notice of, but it's also a perfect book for a beginner or near beginner. Read it, and then read a different take on the era as a second book.
 
Last edited:
#87,289
#87,289
BeardedVol said:
Zero treaties with Russia stating that NATO would not allow new members to choose to join.

Russia went on to sign the NATO Founding Act in 1997, where they specifically agreed with the premise that membership in NATO or any other security organization (CSTO) was the business of sole business of sovereign nations.
View attachment 744818
Click to expand...
Don’t care. You said Scott Horton made “unsubstantiated” claims of victim hooded and posted as your proof an article where Gorbachev is basically claiming victim hood.
 
#87,294
#87,294
Orange. said:
The arguments in Provoked are the same as other arguments you have seen?
Click to expand...
I think he just posts articles that he thinks proves his point without either reading or understanding them and misuses a logical fallacy website as a gotcha while not really understanding the difference between formal and informal fallacies.
IMG_0236.jpeg
 
#87,295
#87,295
Ritzwatch said:
All right Bearded, I know what you are trying to do here, but choosing a gif of the lovely Blanche Devereaux to try to make this point is a bridge to far.

Mary Ann Summers, Jeannie (NLN) and Blanche Devereaux are off limits to you from now on, sir, or I shall have to report you to the moderators for potential banishment from VN.
Click to expand...
Is that how Bearded got whatshisname banned? 😂
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ritzwatch
#87,298
#87,298
BeardedVol said:
Lol, I didn't even erect any goal posts, you made the claim compadre:
View attachment 744819

The fact that you can't substantiate your statements, is not my fault.
Click to expand...
Nothing we did forced Russia into conflict.....But you don't think sending diplomats to Ukraine to help steer them toward Western interest when Russia was intent on the opposite played at least some small role in their handling of Ukraine?

Again I'm not saying we are right or wrong, just acknowledging the obvious.

My statements are substantiated by the facts. We involved ourselves in Ukrainian politics, and it was at least some small part of the reason Russia decided to invade.

Again, I supported Ukraine in their fight against Russia, but at this point the battle has already been decided. Nothing we do short of entering into a conflict with Russia can change that.
 
#87,299
#87,299
KB5252 said:
Nothing we did forced Russia into conflict.....But you don't think sending diplomats to Ukraine to help steer them toward Western interest when Russia was intent on the opposite played at least some small role in their handling of Ukraine?

Again I'm not saying we are right or wrong, just acknowledging the obvious.

My statements are substantiated by the facts. We involved ourselves in Ukrainian politics, and it was at least some small part of the reason Russia decided to invade.

Again, I supported Ukraine in their fight against Russia, but at this point the battle has already been decided. Nothing we do short of entering into a conflict with Russia can change that.
Click to expand...
Yanukovych got elected in 2010 on a campaign of closer ties to the EU, you think that it was US diplomats that crafted that strategy for him?

Was it also US diplomats that told him to backpedal on his campaign promises 3 years later and take a big Russian dump on the citizens of Ukraine and then start killing them outright when they protested?

We'll just pretend that during this time that Russia didn't embargo all Ukrainian imports, and threaten their very sovereignty, just for even thinking of signing a trade agreement with the EU.

As much as some of you can't stand to admit it, there are things that happen on this planet that have little to nothing to do with the US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol and bamawriter
#87,300
#87,300
BeardedVol said:
Yanukovych got elected in 2010 on a campaign of closer ties to the EU, you think that it was US diplomats that crafted that strategy for him?

Was it also US diplomats that told him to backpedal on his campaign promises 3 years later and take a big Russian dump on the citizens of Ukraine and then start killing them outright when they protested?

We'll just pretend that during this time that Russia didn't embargo all Ukrainian imports, and threaten their very sovereignty, just for even thinking of signing a trade agreement with the EU.

As much as some of you can't stand to admit it, there are things that happen on this planet that have little to nothing to do with the US.
Click to expand...

Nothing that happens on this planet has little to nothing to do with the US. The MIC and our operatives around the globe see to it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top