1:10:08 "There really isn't anything like [Russia's actions against Ukraine] in post-WWII history", then goes on to cite Soviet invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan as other examples of the "evil empire's" wars of aggression against neighboring countries. On the other hand, US covert operations, economic strangulation or military interventions in its own sphere of influence, against such countries as Guatemala, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Grenada, Panama, Venezuela or Honduras, as late as 2009, really don't come to mind. There still is a level of wishful ignorance, or actual deceitfulness, in US foreign policy circles to which this fellow belong regarding US imperialism and the role of the US in the Cold War that is astonishing.
Remarkably little on 'what Putin wants' here. The realist perspective is completely missing; instead we get a lot of speculation about Putin's psychology. Hopefully this crisis can be resolved with a neutral Ukraine sans NATO and the West's misguided belief in liberal hegemony can be put on the shelf for a while.
A hypothesis is rarely proposed with the expectation of achieving answers but rather invites speculation to encourage discussion. I think the devil is in the details with any lecture/discussion on this topic but that question was eventually addressed directly at 1:44:18.
@@simoncolombo6640 no that’s reality doing the denying. Their choice is costing them lives and territory. Blaming Putin doesn’t change the outcome. Neutrality would have been far preferable to this.
@@brendanbeirne2 As a Finn I can tell you that we got neutrality because we fought the Russians/USSR. And still Putin talks about reversing the mistake Lenin did (like with Ukraine) in granting Finland its independence. That is, what you are avoiding is the other reality of Russian imperialism. Putin has always been imperialist and so is the narrative that Russians tell themselves about their country. Neutrality did not help Ukrainians (=they are not in NATO), because Putin explicitly said that they could not tolerate a pro-European leader in Ukraine. That is, NATO refused Ukraine's entry into NATO but that was not enough for Putin. That is why, even if I supported Finnish neutrality before this crisis, I am for NATO membership now, because Putin deleted the concept of a neutral buffer state by invading Ukraine. When you live next to Russia freedom does not come for free.
“Putin has always been imperialist” - Putin’s near abroad adventures in Georgia, Crimea and Ukraine have been direct responses to NATO expansionism. US imperialism = unprovoked invasions / occupations / attacks on Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan to name just a few… “Neutrality did not help Ukrainians (=they are not in NATO)” Ukraine was never neutral. It was a defacto NATO state since at least 2014. Russia’s demand to formalize the commitment that Baker / Bush made to Shevardnaze / Gorbachev was simply an effort to clarify the existing consensus, i.e. that Ukraine membership would constitute a threat to Russia’s legitimate security concerns. “NATO refused Ukraine's entry into NATO but that was not enough for Putin.” This is false. The West has held out the prospect of NATO membership to Ukraine - see Zelensky’s recent comments to that effect.
I watched another show where someone said "The West play's by the rules while Putain play's with the rules ".. what l see is , the West play's with the rules against it's own people but not aginst strong foreign powers..Look at Canada..but all over "Democracy's "..people are really tired of being run around in circles while just a few are becoming filthy rich..of course we must defend Ukraine but..afterwards let's be alittle more fair with our own people.."Democracy " will go over alot more believable..anyway..bisous a tous..
I asked RUclips,”Putin Ukraine lecture”. I’m a historian so I hope this is based on research rather than opinion. Really looking forward to hearing and really hoping…Thanks either way!
1:10:08 "There really isn't anything like [Russia's actions against Ukraine] in post-WWII history", then goes on to cite Soviet invasions of Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan as other examples of the "evil empire's" wars of aggression against neighboring countries. On the other hand, US covert operations, economic strangulation or military interventions in its own sphere of influence, against such countries as Guatemala, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Grenada, Panama, Venezuela or Honduras, as late as 2009, really don't come to mind. There still is a level of wishful ignorance, or actual deceitfulness, in US foreign policy circles to which this fellow belong regarding US imperialism and the role of the US in the Cold War that is astonishing.
Remarkably little on 'what Putin wants' here. The realist perspective is completely missing; instead we get a lot of speculation about Putin's psychology. Hopefully this crisis can be resolved with a neutral Ukraine sans NATO and the West's misguided belief in liberal hegemony can be put on the shelf for a while.
A hypothesis is rarely proposed with the expectation of achieving answers but rather invites speculation to encourage discussion. I think the devil is in the details with any lecture/discussion on this topic but that question was eventually addressed directly at 1:44:18.
You surely are not a liberal, denying the Ukrainians the right to choose their own future.
@@simoncolombo6640 no that’s reality doing the denying. Their choice is costing them lives and territory. Blaming Putin doesn’t change the outcome. Neutrality would have been far preferable to this.
@@brendanbeirne2 As a Finn I can tell you that we got neutrality because we fought the Russians/USSR. And still Putin talks about reversing the mistake Lenin did (like with Ukraine) in granting Finland its independence. That is, what you are avoiding is the other reality of Russian imperialism. Putin has always been imperialist and so is the narrative that Russians tell themselves about their country. Neutrality did not help Ukrainians (=they are not in NATO), because Putin explicitly said that they could not tolerate a pro-European leader in Ukraine. That is, NATO refused Ukraine's entry into NATO but that was not enough for Putin. That is why, even if I supported Finnish neutrality before this crisis, I am for NATO membership now, because Putin deleted the concept of a neutral buffer state by invading Ukraine. When you live next to Russia freedom does not come for free.
“Putin has always been imperialist” - Putin’s near abroad adventures in Georgia, Crimea and Ukraine have been direct responses to NATO expansionism. US imperialism = unprovoked invasions / occupations / attacks on Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan to name just a few…
“Neutrality did not help Ukrainians (=they are not in NATO)”
Ukraine was never neutral. It was a defacto NATO state since at least 2014. Russia’s demand to formalize the commitment that Baker / Bush made to Shevardnaze / Gorbachev was simply an effort to clarify the existing consensus, i.e. that Ukraine membership would constitute a threat to Russia’s legitimate security concerns.
“NATO refused Ukraine's entry into NATO but that was not enough for Putin.”
This is false. The West has held out the prospect of NATO membership to Ukraine - see Zelensky’s recent comments to that effect.
If the world just let's this go we would have to apologize for all those who sought justice in the Nerenberg trials.
I watched another show where someone said "The West play's by the rules while Putain play's with the rules ".. what l see is , the West play's with the rules against it's own people but not aginst strong foreign powers..Look at Canada..but all over "Democracy's "..people are really tired of being run around in circles while just a few are becoming filthy rich..of course we must defend Ukraine but..afterwards let's be alittle more fair with our own people.."Democracy " will go over alot more believable..anyway..bisous a tous..
Thank you for providing this information.
I hate War I hate to see countries go to war no one wins under American and I love all people
I asked RUclips,”Putin Ukraine lecture”. I’m a historian so I hope this is based on research rather than opinion. Really looking forward to hearing and really hoping…Thanks either way!
Former Ambassador 🔊 not Khruchev nor Gorbachev
How comes putin/Russia have no problem rather they helped facilitate Baltic states in joining NATO. Why is their red line only Georgia and Ukraine?
Well this mystery is somehow tied to China and Taiwan.
so boring and main stream, same old stupid arguments
🦆for ✌Crimea ✌ 45 45 45 45 45
👍
PROFESSOR OF WHAT? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Send in the USS Milk....
Elections elect vote 🦆 (+none of et, 💕)= 45 45 45 45 = it's it's = uuuu
🐻🇱🇷♥️
uuu 🔊😈 UUUU
93yrs💥 Lenin 💥Lenin 💥Lenin poo🐜STRONG Milita🥀 Coup 💕91Gorbachev ⚘🇷🇺new new new new 🇰🇭new
🦆✌👖+✌👡+✌💰+✌🗝🔑+✌building +✌☕+✌Son Tay Son 17yrs 💥47yrs kissingirl 30yrs💥💥 43yrs
Well this aged like milk.
ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz..!!