• Saleh@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    If it was only about conquest, there is countries like Kazachstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tschadjikistan that Russia could conquer easily and w.o. consequences from the West.

    The key strategic goal for Russia is to prevent NATO standing on their homeland doorsteps.

    For a good explanatiom see this talk by Prof. John Mearsheimer, who foresaw this war coming ten years ago already.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4&pp=ygULbWVhcnNoZWltZXI%3D

    • SleafordMod@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      58 minutes ago

      NATO has already been on Russia’s borders - the Baltics and Poland were already NATO members that bordered Russia.

      I think the invasion of Ukraine was indeed a conquest for land. John McCain over 10 years ago predicted that Putin wanted to grab a “land bridge” between mainland Russia and Crimea:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLAzeHnNgR8&t=58s

    • perestroika@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      My guess: it was Putin doubling down on his bet made in 2014, which in turn was triggerd by chance (protests over an EU accession treaty triggering a revolution in Ukraine) and opportunism.

      Putin seized Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 and his popularity ratings soared. He allowed the conflict to be frozen and undertook a campaign of military reforms, but Ukraine also undertook their own.

      He subsequently isolated himself to such degree that he was surrounded by yes-men, and they told him Ukraine could be conquered with 200 000 men (and “was about to collapse anyway”, etc). He thought it would be over in days and told them to get it done.