9 Comments

Our "wise" elites would have not pushed NATO expansion to the doorstep and pulled color and Maidan revolutions. We are here because of Atlantic Council wisdom.

Expand full comment

So, with your thinking, the countries most at risk of aggression from Russia are the countries who least need NATO membership?

Is "Extinct Designator" on your birth certificate?

Expand full comment

"The 80's called and they want their foreign policy back."

Joking aside, our vital national interest in opposing the Soviet Union (Russia) was some variant of "preventing a Hegemon in Eurasia." Communism did/still does have messianic/end of history motivations. Russia was never this threat even after the coronation of Putin as President for life with Medvedev occasionally keeping his seat warm. No, sometime during the Bush 2 admin while they were planning their nation building idiocy after 9/11, our nat sec geniuses decided that they were going to keep poking and prodding and advance the NATO goal posts. Put yourself magically into the nat sec policy makers places in the Kremlin. NATO rolls right up to your borders. Color revolutions oust your "friendlies" and in the case of Maidan you could argue a coup that no Western country would tolerate was enacted by the cast of well-known players who boast about it. Cherry on top, Merkel crows about never intending to honor Minsk II. The list goes on and on. We got to this point because our policy makers pushed it too far and our military industrial complex is a hungry beast. Tools like the Atlantic Council and the Victoria Nulands of the world did this. There are legions more.

Btw the "unprovoked" part of Putin's unprovoked invasion mantra is the tip off. It was 110% provoked. And no, I'm not a Neville Chamberlain fan. Nor am I an appeaser. I'm the analyst who would tell you to pick your battles smartly and justify which vital national interest is being protected.

Now where the hell is my spot on the Burisma board, Jack. I actually speak pretty good Russian and I have a gas stove.

And if Donbass had a real, honest plebiscite, it would most likely decide to go Russian. Russo-Ukraine is a civil war.

Designator was 1610. It is extinct.

Expand full comment

Do you think Russia has ANY security issues?

If so, what and where?

And, where will they draw a real red line?

We do not run the world.

Iraq and Affuqistan should have taught us that.

Expand full comment

Cold War ends. Are all nations of the Soviet bloc now under NATO nuclear umbrella?

Doubt many Americans agree.

Russia has security interests, but we never care. Arrogance leads to catastrophe.

IE Iraq/Afghanistan. When did we last win a war?

Expand full comment

NATO values aren't what they used to be.

Expand full comment

Prisoners of Geography: Ten Maps That Explain Everything About the World (Politics of Place) Paperback – October 11, 2016

Russia cannot allow a Ukraine that is part of NATO and Sevastopol as an unfriendly port.

Reality hits imagineers from Obamaland?

Expand full comment

Why should we risk poking the nuclear bear because of a kleptocracy in Ukraine, the second most corrupt country in eastern europe? And where Russia has geographic concerns about national security?

Expand full comment

Morons and Black Swans.

Expand full comment