Allen Dulles and his Nazi Pals in Ukraine 🇺🇦

[John Cotter]

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Bob: If I need buzzwords, I'll et you know.

John, i understand Bob's response.  I've noticed you've used  this phrase as a crutch probably 5 times as if just the act of  invoking it gives you some sort of mystical power.  Of course, it doesn't.

I am aware of a number of levers that the western powers use of persuasion or coercion to get their way, but it's incumbent upon you to explain specifically what you're talking about.

I do like your subsequent "hegemony" post in that I think it has some meat on the bones there, and agree with some of it. Though I don't agree with your conclusion necessarily, and I want to address it later.

****

Bob as far as your conversation with Chris. I understand some of your frustration with Chris's tendency to evasive long winded non answers. But I do think in your initial question to him, you are a bit vague.

Bob: Just curious. What do you call what Putin is doing? Anxiously waiting...

I understand Chris's need for clarification there. But this current impasse.

Bob:I've asked before (and will again) what NATO member country has experienced sustained conflict within its borders? Nobody seems to be able to come up with that answer. Maybe you can. It's not a trick question.

Chris, this  is a straightforward question. Stop trying to finesse a non answer!

 

I do think Chris is well within his right to ask you questions about what he's posted as well, Bob.

I'm butting in because I do get very frustrated here at the inability, from whatever persuasion to follow a course from a to b to c and develop any consensus of an agreed upon reality.

Kirk and @Bob Ness,

In nitpicking my phraseology you’re sidestepping the substance of what I’ve said – not to mention that the phraseology in question was used by the US Department of Defence, as described by Wikipedia:

As early as April 2001 the United States Department of Defense defined "full-spectrum superiority" (FSS) as:[1]

The cumulative effect of dominance in the air, land, maritime, and space domains and information environment, which includes cyberspace, that permits the conduct of joint operations without effective opposition or prohibitive interference.

 Here’s another extract from the same Wikipedia article:

Critics of US imperialism have referred to the term as proof of the ambitions of policymakers in the US and their alleged desire for total control. Harold Pinter referred to the term in his 2005 Nobel Prize acceptance speech:[4]

‘I have said earlier that the United States is now totally frank about putting its cards on the table. That is the case. Its official declared policy is now defined as "full spectrum dominance". That is not my term, it is theirs. "Full spectrum dominance" means control of land, sea, air and space and all attendant resources.’

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-spectrum_dominance

So, Kirk and Bob, now that I’ve dealt with your rather red herring, perhaps you now understand my argument. If you could explain any flaw(s) that you see in my argument, I would be grateful.

Edited February 9, 2023 by John Cotter

[Guest]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

    I posted my original comments and questions about defending democracy in Europe in response to the outrage about the sabotage of the Nordstream pipeline.

    First, can we agree that the Russian Federation is, in fact, a totalitarian dictatorship that is waging a brutal war on a sovereign democratic nation in Europe?

    That Putin has been openly contemptuous of Western democracy?

    Next, if Putin is funding his brutal war against a sovereign, democratic nation with revenue from the Nordstream pipeline, does it make sense to cut off that source of Russian military funding in time of war?

    In other words, is democracy in Europe worth defending?

    My father, uncles, and great uncles, certainly thought so, when they served in the U.S. military in Europe during WWI and WWII.

    

Thanks William. You’re making the case that sabotage is ethical in this situation, that you support your country in doing so (Biden/USA). With this ‘greater good’ philosophy of yours which places paramount importance on ensuring Ukraine remains democratic. Is there any cost that would be too great for you to proceed with this righteous stand? 

- The destruction of Europe or the world via nuclear exchange? I watched Kubrick’s “Dr Strangelove” the other night, might be worth some others here taking a look. 

- Causing the pensioners and impoverished peoples of Europe to choose between food and heat this winter or any subsequent winter. How many will die? There was already an economic catastrophe because of ill advised C19 protocols. 

- Causing the young boys of Europe to be conscripted for some grotesque NATO Russo war, which could leave the West exposed and China to take military initiative in the East?

The whole concept of destroying the pipeline because it will save democracy is not thought through. Russia just turned east and began trading with new markets, which is why its now outstripping the German and British economies in terms of growth. Thats happening in contrast to MSM telling us repeatedly last year that the sanctions will be ruinous for Russia. Not really. 
 

Your former profession was as a psychiatrist (or you’re still practicing). What did your studies tell you happens when a tyrant is put in a corner? 
 

Regarding your nuclear question about threats from Russia. What happens if you put a snake in a corner? It shows you its teeth. I don’t see a nation with a withered military capability doing much else. 

Of course Putin is openly contemptuous of “Western Democracy” as he thinks its an illusion. He has referenced the imploding/fall of the west periodically. I wonder how much of that is because the West treats him with contempt? Or because is in decline?
 

I can’t agree on your definitions. How can you possible call Ukraine a democracy when it had a Western backed coup d’etat, replacing a democratically elected leader 8 years ago and, has been ethnic cleansing a proportion of its society of Russian heritage since? It tolerates and celebrates actual National Socialist’s/fascists living in the country. How is that an example of democracy? The people vote for the wrong candidate and you remove that leader? Then bomb some democracy into them for 8 years killing 14,000 people and let the National Socialist’s hunt them? Does that sound like Solon will be calling out from his grave in ancient Greece and saying “nice job guys, just what I intended” ? 
 

My grandfather, great grandfathers, great uncles all fought too for the allies (Allies). You referencing that is false equivalence. As stated many times earlier in the thread, the US / NATO are the dominant force expanding their sphere of influence, they were already at Russias borders to the west, militarising. The NATO/West’s military is enormous, their resources are so vast. They’ve directly broken accords they made and agitated this very situation that could have been avoided. If the truth be known, the USA doesn’t want Europe buying Russian energy, it wants Europe buying US energy and being dependant on the USA. Its hardly hidden this idea agenda, William. 
 

If you guys cared about Ukrainians; you wouldn’t be cheerleading them until their country is ashes and the children are orphans. It doesn’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again or bring back loved ones from the dead by saying “It was Putin’s fault”. 
 

[Matt Allison]

Germany believes support for Ukraine is imperative, so they figured out how to help their people with the increase in energy prices.

Now the Putin apologists can put away their crocodile tears...

 

The German state is to pay this December’s monthly gas bill for all households and small- to medium-sized businesses, according to a phased two-stage cap on energy prices recommended by a government-appointed expert panel on Monday.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/germany-to-pay-december-gas-bills-for-households-and-businesses

[Bob Ness]

4 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

I can't think of one by these definitions. The Falklands is excluded because of article 6 by an arbitrary rule. I have explained my thoughts in a recent lengthy post, which I hope you understand. 

Correct. Countries bordering Russia have every reason to contemplate joining NATO because they know well other NATO members are precluded from attacking each other and through mutual defense cooperation would withstand aggression from Russia or it's satellites. Although certainly imperfect, it works. Ukraine and Crimea is a perfect exemplar that proves the point. Russia's aggression there will eventually bring more of its neighbors into NATO and could eventually bring Ukraine in also. Ukraine was contemplating inclusion into the EU which is what Putin wanted to stop. NATO wasn't on the agenda as many of the NATO members wouldn't have allowed it.

Diplomatically or ideologically Russia is impotent. Their only methods of influence is tanks, propaganda and murder. I definitely blame the West for missing and botching the opportunity to help Russia early on but that's a different discussion. On a macro level, in the nuclear age, countries have to abide by agreed international borders as that terminates any other discussion which basically amounts to justification to commit war crimes. That's what's happening in Ukraine. That's what happened in Iraq. Recognized borders makes it all black and white and if differences remain, other methods can be tried. The problem is that Russia's ability to prevail diplomatically is virtually nil and they know it. Tanks have always been a realistic option for them because they have and use the nuclear card. All the remaining mumbo-jumbo about Nuland and Turkey and whatever is just fog to justify incinerating civilians until such time as their political leadership cries uncle.

Just curious. Where are you from/located?

Edited February 9, 2023 by Bob Ness

[Matthew Koch]

15 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Tanks have always been a realistic option for them because they have and use the nuclear card. All the remaining mumbo-jumbo about Nuland and Turkey and whatever is just fog to justify incinerating civilians until such time as their political leadership cries uncle.

 

No Bob.. it's not, and that's a rather pathetic attempt to leave out alot of important information about how we got to were we are in this conflict. Here some of the "Mumbo Jumbo" Imagine calling 8yrs of civil and ethic war fog, because Putin crossed muh State lines.. 

 

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

Thanks William. You’re making the case that sabotage is ethical in this situation, that you support your country in doing so (Biden/USA). With this ‘greater good’ philosophy of yours which places paramount importance on ensuring Ukraine remains democratic. Is there any cost that would be too great for you to proceed with this righteous stand? 

- The destruction of Europe or the world via nuclear exchange? I watched Kubrick’s “Dr Strangelove” the other night, might be worth some others here taking a look. 

- Causing the pensioners and impoverished peoples of Europe to choose between food and heat this winter or any subsequent winter. How many will die? There was already an economic catastrophe because of ill advised C19 protocols. 

- Causing the young boys of Europe to be conscripted for some grotesque NATO Russo war, which could leave the West exposed and China to take military initiative in the East?

The whole concept of destroying the pipeline because it will save democracy is not thought through. Russia just turned east and began trading with new markets, which is why its now outstripping the German and British economies in terms of growth. Thats happening in contrast to MSM telling us repeatedly last year that the sanctions will be ruinous for Russia. Not really. 
 

Your former profession was as a psychiatrist (or you’re still practicing). What did your studies tell you happens when a tyrant is put in a corner? 
 

Regarding your nuclear question about threats from Russia. What happens if you put a snake in a corner? It shows you its teeth. I don’t see a nation with a withered military capability doing much else. 

Of course Putin is openly contemptuous of “Western Democracy” as he thinks its an illusion. He has referenced the imploding/fall of the west periodically. I wonder how much of that is because the West treats him with contempt? Or because is in decline?
 

I can’t agree on your definitions. How can you possible call Ukraine a democracy when it had a Western backed coup d’etat, replacing a democratically elected leader 8 years ago and, has been ethnic cleansing a proportion of its society of Russian heritage since? It tolerates and celebrates actual National Socialist’s/fascists living in the country. How is that an example of democracy? The people vote for the wrong candidate and you remove that leader? Then bomb some democracy into them for 8 years killing 14,000 people and let the National Socialist’s hunt them? Does that sound like Solon will be calling out from his grave in ancient Greece and saying “nice job guys, just what I intended” ? 
 

My grandfather, great grandfathers, great uncles all fought too for the allies (Allies). You referencing that is false equivalence. As stated many times earlier in the thread, the US / NATO are the dominant force expanding their sphere of influence, they were already at Russias borders to the west, militarising. The NATO/West’s military is enormous, their resources are so vast. They’ve directly broken accords they made and agitated this very situation that could have been avoided. If the truth be known, the USA doesn’t want Europe buying Russian energy, it wants Europe buying US energy and being dependant on the USA. Its hardly hidden this idea agenda, William. 
 

If you guys cared about Ukrainians; you wouldn’t be cheerleading them until their country is ashes and the children are orphans. It doesn’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again or bring back loved ones from the dead by saying “It was Putin’s fault”. 
 

Chris,

     Is democracy worth defending?  How about sovereignty?  Self-determination?  Freedom?

     And at what price?

     And whose call is it?  Should the U.S. have stayed out of this European crisis?  Perhaps.

      In your opinion, should Ukraine and Europeans simply cave to Putin's bullying and nuclear blackmail?

      Should Britain have refrained from declaring war on Germany after Hitler invaded Poland in 1939?

       

 

Edited February 10, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

     Is democracy worth defending?  How about sovereignty?  Self-determination?  Freedom?

     And at what price?

     And whose call is it?  Should the U.S. have stayed out of this European crisis?  Perhaps.

      In your opinion, should Ukraine and Europeans simply cave to Putin's bullying and nuclear blackmail?

      Should Britain have refrained from declaring war on Germany after Hitler invaded Poland in 1939?

       

 

Dude, you just completely ignored all of the points, not even addressing a single one. You've followed up by asking me 9 more questions yourself. Earlier today, I proposed a 'quid pro quo" where we responded to each other's questions in turn, and that is how a debate works (usually).

Could you please go back and address my post, or just respond stating that you agreed with all of it completely. And then, we can move forward to my turn in the debate. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Bob Ness said:

Correct. Countries bordering Russia have every reason to contemplate joining NATO because they know well other NATO members are precluded from attacking each other and through mutual defense cooperation would withstand aggression from Russia or it's satellites. Although certainly imperfect, it works. Ukraine and Crimea is a perfect exemplar that proves the point. Russia's aggression there will eventually bring more of its neighbors into NATO and could eventually bring Ukraine in also. Ukraine was contemplating inclusion into the EU which is what Putin wanted to stop. NATO wasn't on the agenda as many of the NATO members wouldn't have allowed it.

Diplomatically or ideologically Russia is impotent. Their only methods of influence is tanks, propaganda and murder. I definitely blame the West for missing and botching the opportunity to help Russia early on but that's a different discussion. On a macro level, in the nuclear age, countries have to abide by agreed international borders as that terminates any other discussion which basically amounts to justification to commit war crimes. That's what's happening in Ukraine. That's what happened in Iraq. Recognized borders makes it all black and white and if differences remain, other methods can be tried. The problem is that Russia's ability to prevail diplomatically is virtually nil and they know it. Tanks have always been a realistic option for them because they have and use the nuclear card. All the remaining mumbo-jumbo about Nuland and Turkey and whatever is just fog to justify incinerating civilians until such time as their political leadership cries uncle.

Just curious. Where are you from/located?

Thanks for the reply and opinion piece, Bob. I did show you the courtesy of writing a longer piece to you. Did you have anything to add, or did you largely agree with my points? If you disagree, please counter them, and we'll continue the debate. 

In answer to your curious question, 'jolly ole England, old boy'. I thought everyone knew I was British. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Germany believes support for Ukraine is imperative, so they figured out how to help their people with the increase in energy prices.

Now the Putin apologists can put away their crocodile tears...

 

The German state is to pay this December’s monthly gas bill for all households and small- to medium-sized businesses, according to a phased two-stage cap on energy prices recommended by a government-appointed expert panel on Monday.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/10/germany-to-pay-december-gas-bills-for-households-and-businesses

Thanks for the link: Interesting paragraph here, Matt:

 

Scholz’s €200bn support package has also proved controversial among other EU member states, with Poland accusing Germany of “destroying” the EU’s internal market by subsidising its own businesses while opposing a pan-European cap on gas prices.

 

I think something has to be done to assist vulnerable people in Europe at present. It's a bad time, and it will only get worse. I suspect Germany being Europe's most powerful economy; they can perhaps afford to do this and help their people. Can the poorer EU nations do the same? Would a pan-European cap have been better? 

Will this give a competitive edge to Germany and put further companies out of business elsewhere in Europe? 

If only war had been avoided or negotiations had been successful early on, eh! 

[Paul Brancato]

Former Israeli Prime Minister says he came close to brokering a deal between Putin and Zelensky in early March of 2022, but western pressure, Boris Johnson prominently, scuttled the deal. You’ve all read the story. Jim D has mentioned this before. What do you think? 
i think Putin is a bad guy. I’m not an apologist, and wish Matt would simply refrain from calling anyone questioning whether the war might have been avoided a Putin apologist. The question I have for all of you is whether you think any deal other than unequivocal withdrawal of Russian troops was worth considering? What is the goal? To win? Regime change? If you want to see a Ukrainian victory what does that look like? Do you support western boots on the ground? High tech aerial weaponry? If the only outcome you will accept is Russian defeat what is your plan for getting there? 

[Ron Bulman]

3 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Former Israeli Prime Minister says he came close to brokering a deal between Putin and Zelensky in early March of 2022, but western pressure, Boris Johnson prominently, scuttled the deal. You’ve all read the story. Jim D has mentioned this before. What do you think? 
i think Putin is a bad guy. I’m not an apologist, and wish Matt would simply refrain from calling anyone questioning whether the war might have been avoided a Putin apologist. The question I have for all of you is whether you think any deal other than unequivocal withdrawal of Russian troops was worth considering? What is the goal? To win? Regime change? If you want to see a Ukrainian victory what does that look like? Do you support western boots on the ground? High tech aerial weaponry? If the only outcome you will accept is Russian defeat what is your plan for getting there? 

Off the top of my head, and I'm not familiar with the big picture as some experts on here.  At this point, for the sake of Peace, and an end to dying, Ukraine should negotiate for the release of the Donbas region.  With time for Ukraine citizens/ patriots there to relocate to the west if they choose.  Without harassment.  Is part of a country worth destroying it in whole or nuclear war?  A loss?  Yes.  "We", all, coulda/shoulda/woulda.  Stop the dying and destruction.  I know it will never happen.

[W. Niederhut]

Chris,

    I'm responding to your points here (in red.)

Chris wrote:

Thanks William. You’re making the case that sabotage is ethical in this situation, that you support your country in doing so (Biden/USA). With this ‘greater good’ philosophy of yours which places paramount importance on ensuring Ukraine remains democratic. Is there any cost that would be too great for you to proceed with this righteous stand? 

My point about Nordstream is that it was a source of funding for Putin's genocidal war in Ukraine.

Putin is committing mass murder of civilians in Ukraine with missiles and drones. 

Is it ethical in this situation to establish a blockade on his military resources and funding?

- The destruction of Europe or the world via nuclear exchange? I watched Kubrick’s “Dr Strangelove” the other night, might be worth some others here taking a look. 

Are you naive enough to imagine that I am not familiar with Dr. Strangelove and Cold War history?

As for 2023, is it judicious to allow Putin to successfully engage in nuclear blackmail against Europe-- to simply let the bully have his way?

And I noticed that you didn't comment on Putin's threats to nuke the U.K., other than criticizing Boris Johnson.

- Causing the pensioners and impoverished peoples of Europe to choose between food and heat this winter or any subsequent winter. How many will die? There was already an economic catastrophe because of ill advised C19 protocols. 

Is democracy worth defending?  And at what cost?

Perhaps Biden and the U.S. military should have left that Nordstream issue up to you Europeans.

But we Americans waited too long to intervene against Hitler, and you Europeans paid a high price for our isolationism prior to 1942.

(Incidentally, my father fought with the U.S. 753rd Tank Battalion for the entire duration of U.S. military action against Hitler-- from North Africa to Sicily, Rome, France, and into Germany at the war's end.  Over 70% of his original comrades in his battalion from Fort Hood, Texas were killed in WWII.)

- Causing the young boys of Europe to be conscripted for some grotesque NATO Russo war, which could leave the West exposed and China to take military initiative in the East?

Is Ukrainian sovereignty and democracy worth defending?  And at what cost, in your opinion?

The whole concept of destroying the pipeline because it will save democracy is not thought through. Russia just turned east and began trading with new markets, which is why its now outstripping the German and British economies in terms of growth. Thats happening in contrast to MSM telling us repeatedly last year that the sanctions will be ruinous for Russia. Not really. 

I have read that the Russian economy is on the verge of collapse.

Your former profession was as a psychiatrist (or you’re still practicing). What did your studies tell you happens when a tyrant is put in a corner? 

A better question is, "What happens when bullies get away with bullying people?

How did that work out for Neville Chamberlain after Munich?

Regarding your nuclear question about threats from Russia. What happens if you put a snake in a corner? It shows you its teeth. I don’t see a nation with a withered military capability doing much else. 

Putin can withdraw from Ukraine.  No one is putting that snake in a corner.

Of course Putin is openly contemptuous of “Western Democracy” as he thinks its an illusion. He has referenced the imploding/fall of the west periodically. I wonder how much of that is because the West treats him with contempt? Or because is in decline?

The fall of the West?  Get real.

My grandparents were from Slovenia, and I visited there before the fall of communism in 1990.

Like other former communist countries in Eastern Europe, it is far more prosperous in the EU.
 

I can’t agree on your definitions. How can you possible call Ukraine a democracy when it had a Western backed coup d’etat, replacing a democratically elected leader 8 years ago and, has been ethnic cleansing a proportion of its society of Russian heritage since? It tolerates and celebrates actual National Socialist’s/fascists living in the country. How is that an example of democracy? The people vote for the wrong candidate and you remove that leader? Then bomb some democracy into them for 8 years killing 14,000 people and let the National Socialist’s hunt them? Does that sound like Solon will be calling out from his grave in ancient Greece and saying “nice job guys, just what I intended” ? 

Yanukovych was an utterly corrupt Kremlin puppet.

Yulia Timoshenko was a political prisoner.

Zelensky was elected by a plurality of voters.

He's Jewish.  How can his government be considered "National Socialist?"

Meanwhile, Putin's Russian Federation has become a fascist, totalitarian police state in the 21st century.

Putin even has his own Russian version of the Hitler Youth.

He murders journalists and opposition politicians, and his thugs beat up gay rights protesters.

He bombs civilian apartment buildings and playgrounds in Ukraine.

If you're looking for Yahtzees, Putin is your man.
 

My grandfather, great grandfathers, great uncles all fought too for the allies (Allies). You referencing that is false equivalence. As stated many times earlier in the thread, the US / NATO are the dominant force expanding their sphere of influence, they were already at Russias borders to the west, militarising.

False equivalence?  My dad was permanently deaf from fighting the N-a-z-i-e-s in a tank battalion from 1943-45 on your behalf.  You're welcome.

As for NATO, their primary mission in Europe was an outgrowth of Churchill and FDR's Atlantic Charter--to preserve democracy in Europe from Soviet totalitarianism.  And our Marshall Plan helped Western Europe rebuild and prosper after it was destroyed by the N-a-z-i-e-s. 

In contrast, the Soviet Bloc was oppressed and impoverished.

What did the U.S.S.R. (or the Russian Federation) ever do for you guys--after defeating the N-a-z-i Wehrmacht?

You are mislabeling our defense of democracy in Europe as American imperialism.

The NATO/West’s military is enormous, their resources are so vast. They’ve directly broken accords they made and agitated this very situation that could have been avoided. If the truth be known, the USA doesn’t want Europe buying Russian energy, it wants Europe buying US energy and being dependant on the USA. Its hardly hidden this idea agenda, William. 

I think you're wrong to interpret our defense of Ukrainian sovereignty as an economic agenda.

We're spending billions of our own U.S. taxpayer resources to help Ukraine, just as we did to bail you guys out in WWI and WWII.

If you guys cared about Ukrainians; you wouldn’t be cheerleading them until their country is ashes and the children are orphans. It doesn’t put Humpty Dumpty back together again or bring back loved ones from the dead by saying “It was Putin’s fault”. 

As an Orthodox Christian, I am deeply aggrieved by Putin's massacre of both Ukrainians and Russians.

This war has been deeply depressing for me.  But I mainly blame Putin.

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

5 hours ago, John Cotter said:

In nitpicking my phraseology you’re sidestepping the substance of what I’ve said

John we're not "nitpicking your phraseology". We're asking you to define your term, "Full spectrum dominance" which is the substance of what you're saying, since you said nothing else but the term.

It's not a "red herring" to define your terms. John. .

 

5 hours ago, John Cotter said:

not to mention that the phraseology in question was used by the US Department of Defence, as described by Wikipedia:

Well actually you just mentioned it here. Perhaps if you had said "Full spectrum dominance or "superiority" as defined by Wikipedia" and a speech by playright Harold Pinter, and  substituted your blurb as you've just done. You understand , we would have understood it better, but you've probably used this term 5 times, including on another thread before ever defining it.  That's the issue.

I was also outraged as Harold, in 2005 with Bush's War in Iraq and protested against it beforehand. 

However, I don't think the full spectrum you've laid out is complete or insidious enough. As it's just the conventional warfare aims any major super power says they aspire to have. (air, land, maritime, and space domains and information environment,)

I would extend that to include an element of economic and financial blackmail as well.

 

 

 

[Matt Allison]

On 2/9/2023 at 11:51 PM, Kirk Gallaway said:

However, I don't think the full spectrum you've laid out is complete or insidious enough.

Because it's absurd. A ridiculous claim.

The U.S doesn't annex countries.

Russia regularly does.

 

 

[Bob Ness]

10 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

Thanks for the reply and opinion piece, Bob. I did show you the courtesy of writing a longer piece to you. Did you have anything to add, or did you largely agree with my points? If you disagree, please counter them, and we'll continue the debate. 

In answer to your curious question, 'jolly ole England, old boy'. I thought everyone knew I was British. 

Well then! My dad was at Polebrook wasting his youth defending exactly the type of action were seeing Putin take right now. He helped feed the people of Berlin when Khruschev decided it was time to starve them. My Grandfather was in the Pacific defending your treasured Colonies. They both lost valuable years of their lives because Europeans are such a mess they absolutely can't stop killing each other. That's been true for centuries. My Uncle volunteered and was with Monty until such time as he shifted over to the USA. All of those men and others paid a dear price for their service keeping Europe from completely slaughtering each other. That cost made it home to the mainland in the form of servicemen with undiagnosed PTSD, which in my view colored their outlook and resulted in among other things, the JFKA.

So excuse me when I hear someone from the UK preach from on high about the evils of US geopolitical brinksmanship because I for one can clearly see that Europe is not capable of controlling themselves. Russia (or the USSR) has engaged in roughly 38 wars or military conflicts since 1800 (PRIO), making the US look like pikers. That's just Russia. Who knows what the other countries, past and present, would add to that total. 

My point is this. There are borders for countries for a reason. We're not talking about disputed land. The Ukranian borders have been established for decades. Crimea is part of the Ukraine. As are the Eastern regions. NATO has stabilized Europe for many decades now. That's a fact. They are a sovereign country. Just like we helped you during WW2 and prior to our entry, NATO is helping Ukraine maintain their sovereignty. Is that clear enough? Simple really.

Putin does not have to do anything to stop the bloodshed. All he has to do is stop shooting. Fact. The Russian people don't have to make any sacrifices. Putin doesn't lose territory or treasure. They don't have to do anything but stop shooting. That is apparently a bridge too far for you and that's sad.

Come up with your own points someday Chris, not other's. I'm glad somebody showed you how to copy and paste a link from some academic in Chicago but maybe you should do your own thinking. I don't run around like an idiot doing research for other people. I'm actually smart and experienced enough to be able to judge for myself with what information is available. I don't need to waste my time listening to someone rationalize and justify abhorrently criminal behavior. It's sick. The cynicism reflex is so strong in you and many of these critics it blinds them to a fairly easy take on what needs to happen to make it better. STOP SHOOTING! DO NOTHING! 

I certainly don't think of the US or NATO of being lilly-white roses and used to be more sympathetic to Putin's situation but once he crossed the line into Crimea that was over. NATO's critics remind me of battered spouses who swear over and over "they're really a nice person" while getting kicked around the block. There are points at which a stand must be made, and invasion is an uncontroversial point (unless you want to get kicked around the block some more).

Once more. In order to maintain some semblance of stability in a nuclear armed world borders must be respected, and a country's sovereignty maintained. The UN is one place differences can be hashed out as well as diplomatic channels. Pulling a gun out and telling someone "Let's negotiate" while pointing it at their head is NOT negotiating. In the international diplomatic world, a "promise" is not a "treaty" and Russia knew it at the time and was well aware a future American President isn't bound by a lick and a kiss.

By breaking their AGREEMENT not to attack Ukraine in exchange for Ukranian transfer of nuclear stockpiles (the Budapest Memorandum -1994) and their explicit agreements as members of the OCC and UN, Russia has broken every agreement they made to assure Ukrainian independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, LONG BEFORE 2014! Like beginning in 1997. This defense of Putin and Russia at this point is sickening.

Edited February 10, 2023 by Bob Ness