He condemns the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but he does think the US and NATO helped to cause the situation.
I think he makes an argument though perhaps there are counter perspectives to consider.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
This video says there are many people in the southern hemisphere that view US as a provocateur in this current Russian-Ukraine war. The scholar in the included video argues that NATO has threatened Russia by potentially placing nukes there, and he also says that US CIA has promoted right wing candidates in Ukraine thus interfering with its politics. These are seen as provocations which have triggered some anxiety in Russia. He compares NATO's actions to those of the USSR when it attempted to place nukes in Cuba in the 60's. He says that there was a diplomatic way to handle this situation but that "The West was not interested in a diplomatic solution" and also worries that the USA with our enormous military will also stoke tensions in the Far East.
He condemns the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but he does think the US and NATO helped to cause the situation.
I think he makes an argument though perhaps there are counter perspectives to consider.
We should have welcomed Russia too into the NATO.
If Turkey could join...so can Russia.
We should have welcomed Russia too into the NATO.
If Turkey could join...so can Russia.
This is basically one of the things Putin claimed shortly before the invasion. I recommend reading his words even if you don't agree. I think he has a lot of interesting things to say:This video says there are many people in the southern hemisphere that view US as a provocateur in this current Russian-Ukraine war. The scholar in the included video argues that NATO has threatened Russia by potentially placing nukes there, and he also says that US CIA has promoted right wing candidates in Ukraine thus interfering with its politics. These are seen as provocations which have triggered some anxiety in Russia. He compares NATO's actions to those of the USSR when it attempted to place nukes in Cuba in the 60's. He says that there was a diplomatic way to handle this situation but that "The West was not interested in a diplomatic solution" and also worries that the USA with our enormous military will also stoke tensions in the Far East.
He condemns the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but he does think the US and NATO helped to cause the situation.
I think he makes an argument though perhaps there are counter perspectives to consider.
Setting aside the desire the U.S. has for influence and hegemony in different regions, Putin's demands for Ukraine to be neutral, demilitarized, and basically subservient to the Kremlin are so unrealistic and self-serving as to arguably amount to seeking an excuse for war. How many countries would accept such demands from a neighbor who has already shown hostile intentions by annexing Crimea? Can you imagine how much worse Ukraine's situation would be if it had demilitarized prior to this war?
I'm sorry to hear that Brazil is having difficult economic times. You folks deserve a break.I stopped right at the start when he said that Brazil doesn't condemn Russia's invasion, because...well.... it does. I am a brazilian and I can grant you that our president is a scared cat willing to lick anyone's boots, except for China's for some completely arbitraty reason. It has absolutely nothing to do with who is right and who is wrong. But he is alone on this. Everyone else condemns the invasion, including the Vice President.
Is Brazil willing to impose sanctions on Russia though? No. Why? Because our economy is not doing well and imposing sanctions on Russia means we are going to take another hit. As it is already, our money is worth half of what it was worth about 10 years ago.
That seems to be unavailable in my area. If you download the pdf you can attach it to a post by directly dragging the file from a folder on your drive into a newly opened post, and then we'll be able to get it from your post.This is basically one of the things Putin claimed shortly before the invasion. I recommend reading his words even if you don't agree. I think he has a lot of interesting things to say:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/67843
The main problem with this argument is that one country wanted to join, the other didn't.
"Blame NATO for not forcing Russia to join against her will!"
I appreciate your sense of humor.
I see NATO as a preventive measure and not a cause when dealing with authoritarian countries like Russia and China.
That seems to be unavailable in my area. If you download the pdf you can attach it to a post by directly dragging the file from a folder on your drive into a newly opened post, and then we'll be able to get it from your post.
Which is why Putin's motivations are questionable. I'm wondering if he's actually a closet Communist.And I underline that Russia has stopped being Communist in 1989.
So let us distinguish.
And I underline that Russia has stopped being Communist in 1989.
So let us distinguish.
I do blame the NATO because Putin had asked to join, but the NATO was pretty reluctant saying that Russia would become a vassal member.
Obviously totally subjected to the decisions taken in advance by the United States.
The Russia said: no, thank you. I want to be a equal partner.
So I blame the NATO.
Not quiteThe problem with this argument is that you just completely made this all up.
None of that actually happened in the real world.
And therein lies the rub...
Which is why Putin's motivations are questionable. I'm wondering if he's actually a closet Communist.
Too bad Russia didn't have a leader now like Gorbachev was back then. There wouldn't have been a Ukraine invasion today I would think, but of course that's just entertaining a what if scenario.