Ivo's comments about Ukraine seeking security were outrageous. The implication was that this "security" was to be gained by continuing to fight the war for another decade -- doesn't seem very secure. And the idea that (paraphrasing) "the US's neighbors to the north and south have no security fears regarding the US because we have no bases there" was shocking sophistry. Nowadays it's hard to know who's lying and who's just high on their own ideology supply, but it is ridiculous to paint US relations with those south of its border in that way.
You mischaraterise what Daalder said. Currently Ukraine is having to maintain it's own security through actively fighting Russia, but in fact this is not sustainable so "tomorrow" Ukraine will need to find alternative forms of security that don't rely on Russian good will, which "can't be trusted", such as neutrality
There are no Russian funds to seize anymore, they can't find them. Also, Russia is annihilating the Ukrainian army, so there will be no reparations. You have been watching too much CNN.
America should look at what large swathes of the world are doing to distance themselves from American hegemony, to understand what they think of the conflict in Ukraine between Russia and NATO.
141 nations condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, see UN resolution ES 11/1. Meanwhile, Finland and Sweden are about to join NATO. Japan, South Korea, the Philippines are aligning themselves with AUKUS.
Ah yes... Russia annexes Crimea, installs its paramilitaries in Donbas and then launches the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, thereby committing acts of genocide. But, of course, it's somehow the US/West's fault...
Any naive and honest observer of these sorts of debates would be perplexed by people like Daalder's ongoing insistence that Russia's professed geostrategic concerns about NATO expansion are disingenuous, illegitimate, and/or irrelevant. Beebe is quite right to point out not only that taking Russia's professed security concerns seriously is compatible with basic 101-level IR principles in a way that categorically refusing to discuss those concerns simply isn't, but also that the figures within the 90s-era US security establishment who opposed NATO expansion already made such arguments 30 years ago in anticipation of a scenario more or less exactly like we're seeing today, a reality that people like Daalder also seem to prefer to toss into the proverbial memory hole whenever they can. Of course, once such a naive and honest observer grew less naive, they'd come to see that very insistence itself as an information warfare tactic by pro-NATO-expansion elements within the US security establishment, intended to keep the issue of NATO expansion away from the negotiating table, catastrophic consequences of ongoing war for Ukrainians (and potentially apocalyptic consequences of ongoing US/Russian escalation for the entire world) be damned.
What if China stepped up and signed a security pact with Russia like we have with NATO? It seems to me that a security pact between those two would put a stop to Russia’s need to expand and would thwart any attempt by NATO to attach either of those nations and vice versa as well as making Ukraine a NATO member a mute point for Russia.
How is Zelensky a puppet, when he refused to leave Kiev at the start of Russia's invasion - despite the US recommending him to leave? If you want to see a (Russian) puppet, look at Lukachenko in Belarus.
Ivo's comments about Ukraine seeking security were outrageous. The implication was that this "security" was to be gained by continuing to fight the war for another decade -- doesn't seem very secure. And the idea that (paraphrasing) "the US's neighbors to the north and south have no security fears regarding the US because we have no bases there" was shocking sophistry. Nowadays it's hard to know who's lying and who's just high on their own ideology supply, but it is ridiculous to paint US relations with those south of its border in that way.
You mischaraterise what Daalder said. Currently Ukraine is having to maintain it's own security through actively fighting Russia, but in fact this is not sustainable so "tomorrow" Ukraine will need to find alternative forms of security that don't rely on Russian good will, which "can't be trusted", such as neutrality
Instead of using Russian seized funds for reconstruction, those funds could be held as security until reparations are made.
There are no Russian funds to seize anymore, they can't find them. Also, Russia is annihilating the Ukrainian army, so there will be no reparations. You have been watching too much CNN.
You are fine with theft of billions of dollars but probably flip out if you are overcharged at Starbucks. Typical non-reading, unthinking hypocrite.
America should look at what large swathes of the world are doing to distance themselves from American hegemony, to understand what they think of the conflict in Ukraine between Russia and NATO.
141 nations condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine, see UN resolution ES 11/1. Meanwhile, Finland and Sweden are about to join NATO. Japan, South Korea, the Philippines are aligning themselves with AUKUS.
@@enigmaticzigfried7557 81 nations are attending the St. Petersburg Economic Forum this year...
@@gandhi9936 good luck building those Russian pipelines to India or Subsahara Africa.
Should headline be: Future of America’s proxy war with Russia in Ukraine?
Ah yes... Russia annexes Crimea, installs its paramilitaries in Donbas and then launches the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, thereby committing acts of genocide. But, of course, it's somehow the US/West's fault...
Hmm I wonder who initiated the "proxy war"?
usa is done ....rip
Ivo, why is then OK for the US to change the borders of Serbia? Or occupy 1/3 of Syria for 8 years?
Exactly. Bigotry is now in style for neoliberals.
Is this a new comedy show whos this guy did he even been to Ukrainie during this war
💥the globo lists view on the war, "UA must win", why worry about the enemy? Where is amo for UA? The war ends soon.🇦🇺⚖️🇵🇱
Well this was shallow in comparison to what Timothy Snyder and Fiona Hill have to say.
Any naive and honest observer of these sorts of debates would be perplexed by people like Daalder's ongoing insistence that Russia's professed geostrategic concerns about NATO expansion are disingenuous, illegitimate, and/or irrelevant. Beebe is quite right to point out not only that taking Russia's professed security concerns seriously is compatible with basic 101-level IR principles in a way that categorically refusing to discuss those concerns simply isn't, but also that the figures within the 90s-era US security establishment who opposed NATO expansion already made such arguments 30 years ago in anticipation of a scenario more or less exactly like we're seeing today, a reality that people like Daalder also seem to prefer to toss into the proverbial memory hole whenever they can.
Of course, once such a naive and honest observer grew less naive, they'd come to see that very insistence itself as an information warfare tactic by pro-NATO-expansion elements within the US security establishment, intended to keep the issue of NATO expansion away from the negotiating table, catastrophic consequences of ongoing war for Ukrainians (and potentially apocalyptic consequences of ongoing US/Russian escalation for the entire world) be damned.
You are using a lot of big words to justify Russia's war of aggression and genocide in Ukraine.
What if China stepped up and signed a security pact with Russia like we have with NATO? It seems to me that a security pact between those two would put a stop to Russia’s need to expand and would thwart any attempt by NATO to attach either of those nations and vice versa as well as making Ukraine a NATO member a mute point for Russia.
💥21 Feb 2014, the US funded coup started the war which will steamroll into the BIG one,🇦🇺⚖️🇵🇱
Bakhmut has Fallen, Its original name is "Artyomovsk" period. Slava Russia
3 Clowns!
🤡
Comedic puppet zelensky 🤡💯
How is Zelensky a puppet, when he refused to leave Kiev at the start of Russia's invasion - despite the US recommending him to leave? If you want to see a (Russian) puppet, look at Lukachenko in Belarus.
"Liar, liar, pants on fire!" 🤡🤦
The clowns in the Kremlin, e.g. Pootin, Lavrov, Peskov? Yes, absolutely.
🤡