What exactly is Ukraine trying to defend?

[Moksha]

So Ukrainians are fighting for their right to join NATO? Seriously WTF! Zelensky isn't much better than Putin.

I am not defending Russia.

Whenever countries are invaded by a hostile foreign force bent on conquest, the invaded country is upset and fights for its right to exist. Russia is the invading country and the invasion is his doing. Sometimes observers from other countries become dazed and confused base on being fed news from the CCP or Fox.

[Chap]

So Ukrainians are fighting for their right to join NATO? Seriously WTF! Zelensky isn't much better than Putin.

I am not defending Russia.

Whenever countries are invaded by a hostile foreign force bent on conquest, the invaded country is upset and fights for its right to exist. Russia is the invading country and the invasion is his doing. Sometimes observers from other countries become dazed and confused base on being fed news from the CCP or Fox.

I am amazed that anybody needs to have this explained to them. It is clear from the (to many observers) astonishing failure of the Russian army to achieve its objectives in the first few days that the Ukrainians, as a people, are resisting this invasion with absolute determination.

It's their country. They don't want to be part of a new Russian empire. The deserve support and encouragement by free people everywhere.

[Kishkumen]

I am amazed that anybody needs to have this explained to them. It is clear from the (to many observers) astonishing failure of the Russian army to achieve its objectives in the first few days that the Ukrainians, as a people, are resisting this invasion with absolute determination.

It's their country. They don't want to be part of a new Russian empire. The deserve support and encouragement by free people everywhere.

Word.

Can't believe this needs explaining.

[doubtingthomas]

An aggressive Russia that invades sovereign states is the point.

But again, the US would do the same thing. Imagine Canada or Mexico making a military alliance with Russia. Don't you think the US would invade them?

Here is some history

"Following this news, many people feared the world was on the brink of nuclear war. However, disaster was avoided when the U.S. agreed to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev’s (1894-1971) offer to remove the Cuban missiles in exchange for the U.S. promising not to invade Cuba. Kennedy also secretly agreed to remove U.S. missiles from Turkey."
https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war ... ile-crisis

Whenever countries are invaded by a hostile foreign force bent on conquest, the invaded country is upset and fights for its right to exist.

Russia perceives Nato a threat, it is a valid point. The US has a history of attacking other countries.

It's their country. They don't want to be part of a new Russian empire. The deserve support and encouragement by free people everywhere.

All the fighting and defending should have happened at the border, or near Ukraine's side of the border, not near the cities. Don't you agree? Jesus Christ!

are resisting this invasion with absolute determination.

All the resistance should stop in my opinion because thousands of innocent people are dying and it is increasing the risk of a nuclear war. Soon there would be no Ukraine if all the fighting continues.
Imagine cops showing up to your house to arrest you, would you resist?

[doubtingthomas]

The hypocrisy of people is astonish. The overwhelming majority of Americans supported the invasion of Iraq. I understand the invasion of Ukraine is worse, but it would be like saying that Paddock is much worse than Crumbley.

[Moksha]

Doubtingthomas, what's with the Russian apologetics? It is a Trump/Fox News thing?

[doubtingthomas]

Doubtingthomas, what's with the Russian apologetics? It is a Trump/Fox News thing?

I am simply using my brain. I am not defending the Russian invasion at all, I am just pointing out all the hypocrisy. Is Sanders also a Russian apologist?

"Senator Bernie Senator has said that the U.S. was "hypocritical" in dismissing Russia's concerns"

[Kukulkan]

But again, the US would do the same thing. Imagine Canada or Mexico talking with Russia about forming a military alliance. Don't you think the US would invade them?

Here is some history

"Following this news, many people feared the world was on the brink of nuclear war. However, disaster was avoided when the U.S. agreed to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev’s (1894-1971) offer to remove the Cuban missiles in exchange for the U.S. promising not to invade Cuba. Kennedy also secretly agreed to remove U.S. missiles from Turkey."
https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war ... ile-crisis

You are missing a key point here. NATO is a DEFENSIVE military alliance. It can only engage in warfare if and only if one of it's member states are aggressed on. It is quite literally written into its articles. And no, I sincerely don't believe that if Canada or Mexico started to cozy up to Russia the USA would not invade them. Would it probably involve CIA operations to foster a rebellion to install a US backed leader? Yes. We have a long history of such behavior. But a full on military invasion? Absolutely not.

Russia perceived Nato a threat, it is a valid point. The US has a history of attacking other countries.

This is funny because the only reason NATO has reason to expand and has expanded historically is because of the actions of the former USSR and now the Russian Federation itself. Their actions in Georgia (Abkhazia and South Ossetia), Moldova (Transnistria), and Crimea and the Donbas most recently have shown a CLEAR pattern of behavior of Russia quite literally sending in troops into a country, holding a record breaking 'referendum', recognizing them as independent states, and then graciously accepting them into the new Russian Empire. You have to remember, countries have to ask to be in NATO. This isn't NATO invading a country and establishing them as a member state. Each country that has been admitted into NATO had to go through quite a lengthy and arduous process to be added. NATO expanding is more an indictment of Russia's behavior than it is of your critique of the US. Russia really mucked up here because countries (Finland, Sweden) that historically have been hesitant to join are now showing renewed interest in joining NATO.

All the fighting and defending should have happened at the border, or near Ukraine's side of the border, not near the cities. Don't you agree? Jesus Christ!

I see you don't have a fundamental understanding of how wars are fought.

All the resistance should stop in my opinion because thousands of innocent people are dying and it is increasing the risk of a nuclear war. Soon there would be no Ukraine if all the fighting doesn't stop.
Imagine cops showing up to your house to arrest you, would you resist?

Nuclear war is not going to happen. It is all saber rattling. The Ukrainians are quite literally fighting for their existence. They have every right to do so. If you want innocent people to stop dying then critique the Russians for dropping dumb bombs and indiscriminately firing on innocent civilians.

[Kishkumen]

But again, the US would do the same thing. Imagine Canada or Mexico making a military alliance with Russia. Don't you think the US would invade them?

I think ultimately the question is whether we are going to trust Putin at the helm of an expanding nuclear empire such that when he states his objective to enlarge that empire to take in neighboring states that don't want to belong to it, we just sit on our hands and do nothing.

We can argue until the cows come home about the logical merits of various arguments, but when it comes down to the practical question of what the outcome of capitulation to the authoritarian criminal Putin would look like, I am going to go with supporting Ukraine because Ukrainians choose to resist Putin. I applaud them, and I admire them for making the sacrifice to choose freedom over tyranny. Live free or die, as the saying goes. Someone around the globe chooses to stand by that ideal. Bully for them.

[doubtingthomas]

You are missing a key point here. NATO is a DEFENSIVE military alliance. It can only engage in warfare if and only if one of it's member states are aggressed on. It is quite literally written into its articles.

What about the possibility of a false flag?

"U.S. Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba...The plans were motivated by an intense desire among senior military leaders to depose Castro, who seized power in 1959 to become the first communist leader in the Western Hemisphere — only 90 miles from U.S. shores."
https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

No one can 100% guarantee that a Nato member won't create a false flag.

Yes. We have a long history of such behavior. But a full on military invasion? Absolutely not.

Again, that is like saying that Paddock is worse than Crumbley. The US attacked Japan with a nuclear missile and thousands of innocent Japanese civilians (who had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor) died.

NATO expanding is more an indictment of Russia's behavior than it is of your critique of the US. Russia really mucked up here because countries (Finland, Sweden) that historically have been hesitant to join are now showing renewed interest in joining NATO.

Okay. but don't you agree all the fighting and defending should have happened at the border or near the Ukraine's side of the border?

The resistance should stop. What would you do if some guy with a gun tells you "Your family or your car keys"?