ex-nato head said they wanted to over and over again when putin got to power, in the early 2000s, im sure they kept trying for a while. i vaguely remember news about this at the time.
russias multiple attacks came much much later when it became clear they were actually hostile to russia, and because moscow is in a pretty delicate, difficult to defend location, before the aral mountains. even the soviets had this in mind, almost a century ago.
damn, the cia knew war on ukraine would eventually happen if they kept pushing by, like, the late 2000s or something? i’m not sure on the timeline on this one.
if we are bringing other small and unrelated conflicts, perhaps this might give an idea of why russia would be hesitant to let NATO/US do whatever they please around them.
i suggest you look up the cia involvement i mentioned for more details on your original question though.
Unrelated? We are specifically discussing Russia and how they, according to you, went to war “much later” and only after it was clear that “the West was against Russia”. While both were obviously not the case.
with the west. bad way to turn smaller conflicts into a big nasty war with nuclear threats going around. meddling and escalating and provoking is never the answer to any of that.
it does seem like its ending with russia taking a big bite of ukraine over though, all that hamfisted destruction for their enemies to accomplish almost nothing
Instead of this"provoking" I assume NATO should have simply attacked instead? You know, like Russia did over and over again?
no, NATO/US should have not provoked, simple as.
russia wanted to join NATO over and over for years.
Provoke how?
What about Russias multiple attacks?
When did Russia ever say they want to join NATO?
ex-nato head said they wanted to over and over again when putin got to power, in the early 2000s, im sure they kept trying for a while. i vaguely remember news about this at the time.
russias multiple attacks came much much later when it became clear they were actually hostile to russia, and because moscow is in a pretty delicate, difficult to defend location, before the aral mountains. even the soviets had this in mind, almost a century ago.
damn, the cia knew war on ukraine would eventually happen if they kept pushing by, like, the late 2000s or something? i’m not sure on the timeline on this one.
Perhaps this read can refresh your memory on wars Russia was involved/started. Perhaps “much much later” turns into “always present”.
if we are bringing other small and unrelated conflicts, perhaps this might give an idea of why russia would be hesitant to let NATO/US do whatever they please around them.
i suggest you look up the cia involvement i mentioned for more details on your original question though.
Unrelated? We are specifically discussing Russia and how they, according to you, went to war “much later” and only after it was clear that “the West was against Russia”. While both were obviously not the case.
Calling those small… whatever you want.
with the west. bad way to turn smaller conflicts into a big nasty war with nuclear threats going around. meddling and escalating and provoking is never the answer to any of that.
it does seem like its ending with russia taking a big bite of ukraine over though, all that hamfisted destruction for their enemies to accomplish almost nothing