Professor Timothy Snyder at the hearing organized by the US Helsinki Commission: “Another idea that the Russians have that we’ve accepted, is that it’s normal for ballistic missiles to rain down on the city (Kyiv) but it’s somehow not normal for ballistic missiles from Ukraine to go into Russia.”
by brezhnervous
19 comments
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
No shit Captain Timothy “Obvious” Snyder.
He’s absolutely spot on and I cannot fathom why the US government and people don’t also seem to understand this very simple concept.
Absolutely.
By show that democratic countries should follow all the rules of war which totalitarian ones could just completely ignore, the West not affirmed rules of war and Geneva Convention, but discredited them and democracy overall.
From day 1, I was always hoping for the chance for Ukraine to stop the rapid advance of Russia. Hearing how Ukraine was able to defeat Russia at the battle of Kyiv. I always sticked around to see how the war is going on. I was happy for Ukraine when learning that Ukraine was taking a good portion of their territory back from the invading Russia forces.
Granted, I was surprise to see Ukraine invade Russia. But at the same time, it’s war. What did Putin think would happen? I’m probably one of the few who didn’t think “war should only be fought in Ukraine.” If your going to invade someone. Don’t be surprised if they turn the tables on you.
Even if moscovia negotiates ‘sincerely’ they never seem to keep their word. Throw out the Budapest memorandum, throw out the lines that were drawn in 1991…it all goes out the window when their checkbook gets a little low.
Indeed. Thank you, Professor, for saying it.
Well articulated , on point ! Super easy to digest even for someone who don’t follow this conflict .
Nah, I don’t think that’s the reason why the US was restricting US arms being fired into Russia.
What they don’t want is an escalation between NATO and Russia. The reality is, the ‘strongest’ members of Europe aren’t combat ready. They just aren’t. One of the reasons they wanted Finland in NATO so badly, they have a decent troop reserve force.
So what would happen is the US would have to carry the bulk of the fighting and that risks escalation in an environment of MAD, which the US doesn’t want. They got a China issue, and Europe needed to step up and they dithered as usual. Germany gets it’s cheque book out but that’s about it.
Secondly, they don’t want complete regime collapse. Europe doesn’t want waves of Russian migrants coming across the border, escaping the violence of the 90s again.
It’s not an establishment of ‘new rules’ it’s the same old political realism. The western nations don’t want Russia to have Ukraine, but they also don’t want to be dragged into a broader conflict.
They just give them enough to drain Russian forces, while not enough to collapse them.
Well said
What I am stunned by is the fact that ruzZia is threatening the west to go to war, really?, you cannot beat Ukraine, a single US combined arms brigade would be in Moscow in 5 days! But the west quake in their boots.
I’d like to see Russia Destroyed
While I love what he says, he is too kind. Congress needs someone to come in and yell some truth, make a spectacle out of it.
Yeah well, i don’t like it either but that “something precious or special” are the idk how many nuclear weapons stored there and the reason why there is no precedent is because this is a post-MAD world now whereby Russia is holding the rest of the world hostage with those nuclear weapons.
The solution lies in making it very very clear that “the West” (for as far you can speak of one entity like that) does not let itself get taken hostage like that and kick Russia out of Ukraine with the help of Nato while also making it clear that if Putin decides to use nuclear weapons doing so would mean the end of existence for everyone.
I had hoped the attack on the childrens hospital last month would be the catalyst for that but it seems more unneccessary bloodshed is needed
Brilliantly explained, logical/reasonable points.
Who ever made up the rule that all/most of the fighting & destruction has to take place on the invaded country’s territory.
Why is it more acceptable/OK for Ukrainian cities & infrastructure to be bonbed, but not acceptable/OK for Ukraine to bomb Russian cities & infrastructure?
There’s no such ‘rules’, never has been in past wars either.
This is so frigging truthful.
Loved this argument but does anyone have evidence that Western limits are not nuclear concerns as stated? Are they pragmatic decisions intended to drain ruzzia? I want the UAF to bring the war to the enemy btw.
Russia has stated they are going to start testing nuclear weapons again.
If the story of Aliens (NHI) turning US missile silos on and off and shooting down a ballistic missile from Vandenberg AFB is true, then why don’t the Aliens neutralize the Russian nukes.
To me it seems that Ukraine is just a pawn for the military industrial complex. They are making billions. If the west really gave a shit they wouldn’t have tied Ukraines hands.
Thanks for coming to my T.E.D. talk.