1. “Ukraine is a sovereign nation, and the right of sovereign nations to decide their own destinies must be respected!”
Apparently that alleged absolute principle only applies to Russia, not the US: Mexico, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Panama, North Africa, Yugoslavia, etc. By The Way, WHERE WAS THAT PRINCIPLE YOU INVOKE WHEN THE US/SOROS ENGINEERED THE COUP THAT DEPOSED THE DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE IN 2014 AND THAT BROUGHT NEONAZIS INTO THE GOVERNMENT AND THE UFA? What’s your grand theory of legitimacy that would force the Donbas to submit to the coup government (or other parts of Ukraine to submit for that matter)?
Further, the quid pro quo for German reunification and dismantling the USSR was no eastward NATO expansion:
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early
We violated that promise, but Russia was too weak to do anything about it until 2014. After that, the RF prepared for NATO’s next move.
2.”Russia already borders other NATO states (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Norway, and Turkey) - some of whom pack much more of a punch than Ukraine. Ukraine is only the latest of a number of sovereign nations who have exercised their right as sovereign nations to join the defensive military alliance of their choice.”
Well, this one is easy: Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Norway pack no punch. Comparing them to Ukraine is ridiculous. Turkey has a larger army than the UFA, but since the coup the UFA has been thoroughly NATOized and, reasonable people before the war would have said that the UFA is arguably more formidable than the Turkish army. That’s beside the point, though. NATO missiles in Ukraine would be about 350 miles from Moscow and other important targets. Even with today’s NATO techology, Moscow could be hit from Ukraine with no effective warning. When the US finishes perfecting its hypersonic missiles, the flight time to Moscow could be under a minute.
3. “Finland and Sweden have now also elected to join NATO - what is Russia going to do about that? Again declare “Special Military Actions,” move their tanks in, rocket-bomb Finnish and Swedish cities, and grab territory?”
As for Sweden and Finland, stupid is as stupid does. What the RF will do will depend on whether their membership stays nominal. If those countries starting heavily militarizing, they may get the treatment WE would have given the Cubans if the Soviets hadn’t pulled the missiles.
Finally, there are no fallacies. I didn’t concede that the RF is equally “evil”. I was trying to get you to see that the US government has become evil, in fact more evil. Moreover, I don’t demand perfection. No human or any human institution is morally “perfect”, but there are degrees of better and worse. If one looks objectively at what our government has become (please review the examples), and is trying to become, it has moved far to the “more evil” side of the spectrum. This isn’t Reagan’s America or even Trump’s. Biden’s America is a totalitarian Gramscian Marxist state in the process of being born.
Finally, I pose no false dilemma. My position is that 1. the RF is doing what’s necessary to eliminate an existential threat and protect ethnic Russians in the Donbas. In fact, the suicidal sanctions stupidly imposed by the US and the EU, as well as the embarrassing defeat of NATO and its proxy Zelensky regime, may go a long way toward helping remove the “progressive” governments of the EU and their Gramscian policies, stop the WEF’s plans for a Great Reset, and drive the Democrats from power in the US, despite massive vote fraud. 2. We need to crush our domestic left. Trump’s plan to fire the Deep State is a beginning.
Do you understand? No dilemma - what happens with respect to 1 is not in our set of choices, while 2 is.
achilles2000: Apparently that alleged absolute principle only applies to Russia, not [...]
Again with the "Tu Quoque" Fallacy! Citing examples of other nations (allegedly) violating this principle does not lessen Russia's guilt, and certainly does not justify Russia seizing Ukrainian territory!
achilles2000: Further, the quid pro quo for German reunification and dismantling the USSR was no eastward NATO expansion [...] We violated that promise, but Russia was too weak to do [...]
Show me the treaty or accord signed by the U.S. president and ratified by the U.S. Congress in which that was agreed!
achilles2000: Finally, I pose no false dilemma. My position is that 1. the RF is doing what’s necessary to eliminate an existential threat and protect ethnic Russians in the Donbas. In fact, the suicidal sanctions stupidly imposed by the US and the EU, as well as the embarrassing defeat of NATO and its proxy Zelensky regime, may go a long way toward helping remove the “progressive” governments of the EU and their Gramscian policies, stop the WEF’s plans for a Great Reset, and drive the Democrats from power in the US, despite massive vote fraud.
You are essentially saying, "If the Russian invasion proves successful and Putin's Russia is able to hold on to the territory it has conquered, then this will so profoundly weaken the Western military alliance (NATO plus Japan plus Australia, etc.) and invalidate the Biden administration as to trigger a socio-political revolution in the U.S. and, somehow, strengthen conservative causes."
That is a very long bet - and a very risky one. You are saying that we must weaken the post-WWII geopolitical order - practically destroy its very foundations - and smilingly accept the redrawing of European borders by force of (Russian) arms in order to - maybe, somehow, someday - restore conservative values in America and burnish her world standing.
That's preposterous! Or worse: It's reckless insanity!
Regards,
So sorry! Forgot POLAND.
The NATO member Poland, of course, likewise has a land border with Russia.
Gee, Russia doesn't seem to border many countries with whom it enjoys friendly relations, does it?
I wonder why that might be?
Regards,