Comment by sedan_baklazhan
4 days ago
"Rules-based international world order" consists of just two rules:
1. The Western countries (basically meaning USA makes the decision) may attack any country.
2. Other countries may not defend themselves nor attack any country.
Iraq, Iraq (several separate agressions on Iraq, that is not a typo), Afghanistan, Cuba, Serbia, Libya, Sirya, Venezuela... the list goes on, Venezuela is of no particular significance here.
Whatever coutry has the most firepower you mean.
Hungary, Chechoslovakia, Afghanistan, Angola, Ethiopia, Azerbaijan, Lithuania, Moldova, Georgia, Tajikistan, Ichkeria, Ukraine, Syria... The list goes on
Lithuania?
Lithuania fought two distinct wars with Soviet Union, both conflicts involved USSR attempts to control the Baltic region and establish communist rule.
Where does Russia's attack of Ukraine fits within this?
If you're genuinely curious dig into the protests 2014, who won the election, who asked her supporters to take to the streets, and what has she been advocating for for a long time before.
It's all about Crimea and the black sea fleet and pipelines. Every time the same conflict, as Orwell put it: We've always been at war with Eurasia.
Edit: Instead of down-voting, tell me where I'm wrong. All of the facts are public information and you won't even have to leave Wikipedia.
I'll bite: speaking for myself, I can't figure out what point you are trying to make
First sentence says to look up 2014 protests and "her" supporters, second sentence says "it's" about the Black Sea and Crimea. Third sentence "we've" always been at war with Eurasia
Maybe fill in the blanks for us?
2 replies →
According to West, not allowed. However, the West does not exist anymore, and we have two different ideological camps within it. According to USA, it’s bad, but it did not hurt American interests, so a good deal is possible. According to EU, foreign policy of which is hijacked by Baltic right, it is still not allowed, but… Deep currents indicate that as soon as it’s done with formal condemnations, it is desirable that business will resume as usual.
You might want to look into opinion polling on Russia in the Baltics or Finland. The idea that only the right considers Russia a threat is ridiculous.
1 reply →
> Deep currents indicate that as soon as it’s done with formal condemnations, it is desirable that business will resume as usual.
What deep currents are those? As a European situated close to Russia, I do not feel that this is the case.
3 replies →
> nor attack any country
It is not like citizens of Iran decide to attack Israel or like sponsoring terrorist orgs attacking Israel. I am not sure if Russians freely vote in referendum to attack Ukraine. These decisions are made by despots ruling these countries and then their citizens suffer. Either they die in trenches or suffer economic misery. What for? China too can live without Taiwan. Chinese people do not need to have another island belonging to their country. Only despots wants to have statues raised after them, or write their names in history books, because all other things: Power, Money, Sex they already have.
It's true that Russians didn't vote to attack Ukraine. Nevertheless, the invasion had broad popular support at the beginning.
>the invasion had broad popular support at the beginning.
According to whom?
You should understand that public opinion surveys in authoritarian countries are problematic. In autocracies, people might want to hide their opinions and give socially desirable answers that conform to the official government position for fear of facing repression or deviating from the consensus view.
2 replies →
> I am not sure if Russians freely vote in referendum to attack Ukraine
They sure as hell didn't protest much when Russia occupied Crimea and started war in Eastern Ukraine.