On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:41 PM, <xorc...@sigaint.org> wrote: > > No, this is Putin's baby. He's set it up so that if he can't have > Ukraine, > > nobody will. > > No, it is quite likely that the coup in Ukraine was instigated and > organized by U.S. interests. > > There are a lot of interests that would have good reason to do so. > > Economic: Soros, Geithner, and pals have been looking to depress the > Russian currency for years. At least back to 2008, that I am aware of. One > can speculate why, the simplest reason is to make money themselves. > > NATO: Yanukovych's government was Russian-leaning, while there were > "Orange Revolution" leaning politicians, activists, and so on in Western > Ukraine. Having Ukraine be Russian-leaning, and theoretically independent > puts NATO in a difficult position. Poland and Romania are NATO members, > with Ukraine right between them. For supply-line and airspace reasons, it > is strongly desirable to NATO interests to bring Ukraine under the > umbrella. This also provides another, angle of attack on Moscow. > > Understand the situation: NATO is encircling Moscow. Estonia and Lativa to > it's NW, Lithuania due-West, with Belarus as a buffer. Both countries are > positioned to place rockets within 800km of Moscow. If Ukraine were to go > NATO, it also would be able to position rockets or troops within 800km of > Moscow from the SW, with no buffer. Assuming Russia is unconcerned about > Lithuania, trusting Belarus to be able to intercept any aerial attacks, > that still leaves the possibility for simultaneous attacks from two > directions. > > It is entirely unacceptable, from a purely strategic of view. These > nations going to NATO represents an existential threat to Russia. > > Putin's response, of "taking" Crimea, was quite measured, in my opinion. > The Black Sea is of vital national interest. Were NATO able to get a > carrier group into the to Black Sea, along with the other listed > positions, it would be impossible to stop the capital from getting > captured in an invasion. > > Finally, your suggestion that Putin is somehow not letting the "poor > Ukrainians" from exercising their rights is blinded. The fact is, there > are BOTH strong pro-Western, and pro-Russian sides to Ukraine. This is not > a recent development. The tensions have been there for several > generations. > > Whether you like it or not, it is Putin's job to protect his country and > to prevent the very ABILITY for foreign nations to have that potential, > regardless of whether or not you believe NATO has the will to do so. > Regardless of the will, it should not be POSSIBLE from Russia's > perspective. > > That said, it is also arguably NATO's job to expand, and to position > itself so that Russia joining NATO, becomes the only strategy left to the > Russians. > > This, of course, is called Empire
I staked out a stronger position than I actually hold, a hopefully forgivable mistake in response to Zenaan's black-and-white "Russia good, US evil" propagandizing. Thanks for the thoughtful response.