The Student Room Group

[Official Thread] Russian invasion of Ukraine

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Joel 96
I can understand why they're reacting the way they are. It's a preemptive attack on Russia's part against NATO expansion. If the whole of Europe has joined NATO, then that alienates Russia even more than they already have been. An expansionist international regime is a threat somewhere down the line. It's very obvious that Russia loses power if they lose their neighbouring countries; it would pose a direct threat at their borders.

The idea that the relationship between Switzerland and NATO is anywhere near comparable to the relationship between Russia and NATO is ludicrous, and you know this.

Russia could just... not invade Ukraine though, right? Dare I say it, Russia could actually try to cooporate more with it's Western neighbours or even join NATO itself if it was really so fearful of being attacked.

I'm well aware that Switzerland, Sweden, etc, have a different relationship with NATO than Russia. This isn't the point. The point is that if NATO expansion is a good justification for invading countries, then why shouldn't Switzerland, Sweden, etc, also start invading countries? Clearly Russia and NATO have a much worse relationship, but it's absurd to suggest that NATO poses an actual danger to Russia (either now or later down the line) in the same way it's absurd to suggest that NATO poses a actual danger to Switzerland, Sweden, etc.
The poor Ukrainians :frown:
Original post by SHallowvale
Russia could just... not invade Ukraine though, right? Dare I say it, Russia could actually try to cooporate more with it's Western neighbours or even join NATO itself if it was really so fearful of being attacked.

I'm well aware that Switzerland, Sweden, etc, have a different relationship with NATO than Russia. This isn't the point. The point is that if NATO expansion is a good justification for invading countries, then why shouldn't Switzerland, Sweden, etc, also start invading countries? Clearly Russia and NATO have a much worse relationship, but it's absurd to suggest that NATO poses an actual danger to Russia (either now or later down the line) in the same way it's absurd to suggest that NATO poses a actual danger to Switzerland, Sweden, etc.


Try telling that to Putin, he has already ordered his troops into Ukraine and cities have been bombed.

Whilst I dare say this could have been avoided, the focus now needs to be on:
a) protecting as many lives as possible
b) stopping this conflict from progressing into something a lot more catastrophic
c) imposing forms of 'punishment' essentially for Russia breaking international law
Reply 23
Looks like the pandemic experts are our geo-political and war experts now too.

What an honour to be blessed by their bastion of knowledge.
(edited 2 years ago)
Lost a friendship today after my Russian flatmate tried to excuse the invasion.
Original post by SHallowvale
Russia could just... not invade Ukraine though, right? Dare I say it, Russia could actually try to cooporate more with it's Western neighbours or even join NATO itself if it was really so fearful of being attacked.


But that's the thing, what NATO stands for is in direct opposition to Russia's culture. Sooner or later, Russia will be expected to adopt NATO's cultural values. That's just a matter of fact.

Original post by SHallowvale

I'm well aware that Switzerland, Sweden, etc, have a different relationship with NATO than Russia. This isn't the point. The point is that if NATO expansion is a good justification for invading countries, then why shouldn't Switzerland, Sweden, etc, also start invading countries?


You can't ask this question without taking the country's relationship with NATO into account. Switzerland has no reason to fear NATO in the same way Russia does.

Original post by SHallowvale

Clearly Russia and NATO have a much worse relationship, but it's absurd to suggest that NATO poses an actual danger to Russia (either now or later down the line) in the same way it's absurd to suggest that NATO poses a actual danger to Switzerland, Sweden, etc.


Switzerland's cultural values are more in-line with what NATO stands for. NATO very well considers Russia's treatment of LGBT people to be a human rights violation. It will inevitably come to NATO trying to impose western attitudes onto other countries.
Original post by Joel 96
I can understand why they're reacting the way they are. It's a preemptive attack on Russia's part against NATO expansion. If the whole of Europe has joined NATO, then that alienates Russia even more than they already have been. An expansionist international regime is a threat somewhere down the line. It's very obvious that Russia loses power if they lose their neighbouring countries; it would pose a direct threat at their borders.

I think it was made abundantly clear from Putin's remarks the other day that this has nothing to do with who is in NATO and who isn't frankly thank God we expanded NATO as far as we did. This is about what Russia believes as its right to rule, by proxy or directly, territories of the former Soviet Union / Russian Empire that it believes are rightly its it is irredentism, plain and simple. The West has nothing it can really offer Russia besides complete capitulation and its own denial of the sovereignty of Ukraine and other eastern European states.

I would urge posters to not swallow the Russian propaganda wholesale.
(edited 2 years ago)
Original post by Joel 96
But that's the thing, what NATO stands for is in direct opposition to Russia's culture. Sooner or later, Russia will be expected to adopt NATO's cultural values. That's just a matter of fact.

You can't ask this question without taking the country's relationship with NATO into account. Switzerland has no reason to fear NATO in the same way Russia does.

Switzerland's cultural values are more in-line with what NATO stands for. NATO very well considers Russia's treatment of LGBT people to be a human rights violation. It will inevitably come to NATO trying to impose western attitudes onto other countries.

So are you saying that Russia's fear of NATO is justified because NATO support LGBT rights and Russia doesn't? That's pretty far fetched, and honestly an awful reason to be paranoid of NATO.

NATO clearly aren't going to invade Russia because Russia isn't as friendly to the LGBT community as, say, Switzerland or Sweden is. You can't claim that "sooner or later" Russia will be expected to adopt NATOs cultural values either. Even if we assume they will, how is this justification for an invasion? Are LGBT rights, or lack thereof, seriously so important that it's worth invading a neighbouring country, killing dozens of people, displacing thousands and wasting billions?

There's no justification for this invasion.
Original post by Joel 96
As horrible as this is, the idea that NATO didn't see this coming is just bizarre to me. I don't blame Russia for reacting.



I have to agree with this, Putin has repeatedly said he feels threatened by the expansion of NATO up to the Russian border. That does not condone at all what he has done but at the same time the issue has been seen coming and not so long ago the British did a massive combined operation with the US to drop paratroopers into Ukraine on exercise. NATO has been repeatedly poking the Russian bear.
It's not a random out of the blue move by Putin.
Again, it doesn't justify it but it's been becoming more inevitable over time.

The invasion is greedy, Russia is already huge it doesn't need more land. Its awful timing (likely intentional) considering Europe is reeling in covid debt.
Ordinarily I would say we should support Ukraine with our military. However given we now have the worst debt since WWII I'm not sure we can afford anything but humanitarian aid.

Its a complex issue. I'm glad people more qualified than me are making the big decisions but it's still a worrying situation. Especially financially (however selfish that may be) since energy bills are already soaring as is the cost of living.

I do empathise with the Ukranian people, as much as we here in the UK are worried about finances they are now worried about their entire lives.

The whole thing is so needless.
Reply 29
NATO doing jack **** as Ukraine is being pummelled from all quarters.

"Sending thoughts and prayers" might help though.
Original post by Joel 96
NATO very well considers Russia's treatment of LGBT people to be a human rights violation. It will inevitably come to NATO trying to impose western attitudes onto other countries.

Because it is.
Countries are entitled to their culture but harming other people is not cultural.
The persecution of other humans or things like mutilation (such as FGM) should never be tolerated regardless of culture.

It is concerning that you would defend Russia simply because you are opposed to the LGBT community.
Original post by SHallowvale
So are you saying that Russia's fear of NATO is justified because NATO support LGBT rights and Russia doesn't? That's pretty far fetched, and honestly an awful reason to be paranoid of NATO.


It's a culmination of things dating back to the Cold War. The LGBT thing is just one example.

Original post by SHallowvale

NATO clearly aren't going to invade Russia because Russia isn't as friendly to the LGBT community as, say, Switzerland or Sweden is. You can't claim that "sooner or later" Russia will be expected to adopt NATOs cultural values either. Even if we assume they will, how is this justification for an invasion? Are LGBT rights, or lack thereof, seriously so important that it's worth invading a neighbouring country, killing dozens of people, displacing thousands and wasting billions?


Yes, the current western view is that other countries should adopt our values.

Whether NATO will invade Russia or not, the expansion to the East would make an invasion very, very easy. Russia can't afford to take the view that "NATO will never invade us". There is always a possibility of this happening, and if it did then it would be too late for Russia because they didn't act preemptively. The more I think about this, the more I think Russia would have been idiots to not invade Ukraine.

Original post by SHallowvale

There's no justification for this invasion.


Russia has to inductively reason that an invasion from NATO is possible. As a result, their options are very limited.

It's hard to justify an invasion on Ukraine, because it's based on a specific set of observations and expectations which someone in the west can plausibly deny as crazy conspiracy theorizing.
Original post by CoolCavy
Because it is.
Countries are entitled to their culture but harming other people is not cultural.
The persecution of other humans or things like mutilation (such as FGM) should never be tolerated regardless of culture.

It is concerning that you would defend Russia simply because you are opposed to the LGBT community.


It depends on whether you think we should be moral-policing the rest of the world, something which the US has been notorious for.

My defense of Russia has nothing to do with my personal views on LGBT.
Original post by Joel 96
It's a culmination of things dating back to the Cold War. The LGBT thing is just one example.



Yes, the current western view is that other countries should adopt our values.

Whether NATO will invade Russia or not, the expansion to the East would make an invasion very, very easy. Russia can't afford to take the view that "NATO will never invade us". There is always a possibility of this happening, and if it did then it would be too late for Russia because they didn't act preemptively. The more I think about this, the more I think Russia would have been idiots to not invade Ukraine.



Russia has to inductively reason that an invasion from NATO is possible. As a result, their options are very limited.

It's hard to justify an invasion on Ukraine, because it's based on a specific set of observations and expectations which someone in the west can plausibly deny as crazy conspiracy theorizing.

So the invasion of Ukraine is justified because NATO might invade Russia in the far flung future? That's not a good justification, it's a weak one. Should Russia invade other non-NATO parts of Europe, like Finland and Sweden, for the same reason?
Original post by SHallowvale
So the invasion of Ukraine is justified because NATO might invade Russia in the far flung future?


If that's their reason for doing it, which I think is evident, then I believe so.

Original post by SHallowvale

That's not a good justification, it's a weak one. Should Russia invade other non-NATO parts of Europe, like Finland and Sweden, for the same reason?


I'm not a Russian tactician.
Original post by Joel 96
If that's their reason for doing it, which I think is evident, then I believe so.

I'm not a Russian tactician.

If you think the invasion of Ukraine is justified as a pre-emptive strike against NATO expansion... then surely you must think that an invasion of Sweden and Finland must also be justified?
Original post by Joel 96
It's a culmination of things dating back to the Cold War. The LGBT thing is just one example.



Yes, the current western view is that other countries should adopt our values.

Whether NATO will invade Russia or not, the expansion to the East would make an invasion very, very easy. Russia can't afford to take the view that "NATO will never invade us". There is always a possibility of this happening, and if it did then it would be too late for Russia because they didn't act preemptively. The more I think about this, the more I think Russia would have been idiots to not invade Ukraine.



Russia has to inductively reason that an invasion from NATO is possible. As a result, their options are very limited.

It's hard to justify an invasion on Ukraine, because it's based on a specific set of observations and expectations which someone in the west can plausibly deny as crazy conspiracy theorizing.

NATO has massively disarmed since the early 1990s to the point where it would impossible to launch a land assault on the RF even if it wanted. The major focus on the War on Terror and "Asian Pivot" of the 2000s and 2010s respectively shows that US didn't even class the RF as a major threat.
The RF made the vast majority of Ukrainians their enemy in 2014 when they tried to intervene and prop-up a leader that started killing his own people because they no longer wanted to in the Russian sphere of influence. This action also brought more NATO combat power to its borders, as will this current folly by President Putin.

President Putin claims to be de-Nazifiying Ukraine which is very ironic considering he's far closer to that autocratic ideology than Ukraine and the West is.
Original post by SHallowvale
If you think the invasion of Ukraine is justified as a pre-emptive strike against NATO expansion... then surely you must think that an invasion of Sweden and Finland must also be justified?

Not at all. Ukraine is a very different country to Sweden. They differ in their relationship to Russia, their geographical positioning, etc. There's so many different variables that you'd have to take into account to make that assessment.
Original post by Joel 96
Not at all. Ukraine is a very different country to Sweden. They differ in their relationship to Russia, their geographical positioning, etc. There's so many different variables that you'd have to take into account to make that assessment.

Such as...?

The argument thus far has been that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is justified as a pre-emptive strike against NATO expansion. Why couldn't the same be said about Sweden or Finland? Neither of them are in NATO but could easily join in a heartbeat, which wasn't the case for Ukraine. Finland specifically has a very large border with Russia.
Trying to confirm what's going on in a warzone certainly isn't going to be easy, especially as both nations are probably not going to be entirely truthful. But if reports are to be believed, the UK-supplied NLAWs have already knocked out RF armour.

https://twitter.com/ELINTNews/status/1496843580044120066?s=20&t=ggr2AKIQPkGDQgfdYNyBrQ

Quick Reply