Ukraine was shelling the Russians in the Russian Donbass, killing thousands of Russians, from the U.S. sponsored Maidan Coup in 2014 onward.
On the hypothetical map, the U.N. recognizes “Aztlan” as independent. Radicals begin to shell American towns on what used to be our side of the border. Eventually, as America emerges from depression and collapse, the U.S. Army moves into “Independent Aztlan” to stop the shelling.
You would object to this as “illegal.”
“Ukraine was shelling the Russians in the Russian Donbass, killing thousands of Russians…”
In 2014, and still today, Donbas is internationally recognized as part of Ukraine. Russia sent or supported a bunch of troublemakers to start a fight. They got a fight. Russia also promised and pinky swore that if Ukraine gave up the nukes stationed in their soil Russia would leave them alone forever.
How’d that work out for them?
“On the hypothetical map, the U.N. recognizes “Aztlan” as independent.”
Key word “hypothetical”. Let me know when the UN actually does that.
“You would object to this as “illegal”.
Stop putting words in my mouth. It’s a junior high school tactic that’s beneath you. Or it should be anyway.
Why don’t you address my point? Was it okay for the British to invade us in 1812? After all they didn’t consider us a “real” country.
L
“Ukraine was shelling the Russians in the Russian Donbass, killing thousands of Russians, from the U.S. sponsored Maidan Coup in 2014 onward.
Good grief, but you are fond of hyperbole. Here are the totals from 2014 -2021, as well as for the Russian invasion of 2022:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
And you say “Russian Donbas?” Donbas is in eastern Ukraine, not Russia.
In any event, you are admitting that the Russians went into eastern Ukraine as early as 2014 (although on a far less scale than they did in 2022).
“On the hypothetical map, the U.N. recognizes ‘Aztlan’ as independent. Radicals begin to shell American towns on what used to be our side of the border. Eventually, as America emerges from depression and collapse, the U.S. Army moves into ‘Independent Aztlan to stop the shelling. You would object to this as ‘illegal.’
What a childish argument. You apparently sought to make that a comparison to the present situation between Ukraine and Russia.
If indeed that was your intent, you failed miserably.
Specifically, the make-up of your scenario is not even relative. Ukraine was a former SSR of the defunct USSR. With the collapse, abolition, and dissolution of the USSR some 30 years ago former SSRs (republics) became independent because...well, there was no longer any union of Soviet socialist republics, and they declared independence, and were internationally recognized as such (even Russia recognized and accepted that...at least until they didn’t).
With your “Aztlan” fantasy, you prefaced no dissolution of the United States, no abolition of the union. Thus, there are no “independent” states or territories that could have declared themselves to be “Aztlan.”
That’s the problem with hypotheticals, or “what-ifs.” They are never directly on point; the comparisons inherent in such hypotheticals are never relative. They are what are commonly known as “apples to oranges” arguments.
Some details:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09668136.2019.1684447
Briefly, the conflict in the Donbass, did not arise because of economic reasons and other allegations asserted by Moscow (Putin). Instead, Russia sought to pry the region away from Ukraine, after Russia had summarily invaded and seized the Crimea.
That, after Russia had earlier, during the second George W. Bush Administration, attempted to seize Georgia; *after which,* Bush pushed for more expansion of NATO.
Poland being part of NATO, was good. But the immediate border states around Russia as parts of the so-called “former USSR,” have never seemed to me, at least, to be NATO candidates - *because* of Russia’s history of “requiring” buffer states on Russia’s border.
Recently, I read that Russia keeps moving/nudging the “cease fire” line within Georgia.
And I expect Russia to try and cut off Ukraine’s access to the Black Sea.
Given that possibility, NATO will resist Russian expansion that threatens the Romanian border. (It would be smart of Russia, to not venture further in Moldova.)
I suspect that at least half of the Democrats’ insistance on “Russia, Russia, Russia,” was the party’s aim to disrupt likely negotiations between President Trump and Russia.
And in the other half of the Democrats’ insistance, therein, is the nature of the left to resent any movement of Russia - away from the Democrat Party Plantation.
The Party soldiers having fancied for decades, that they have loyally marched in lockstep with the Kremlin, the Democrat Party seeks a bitter divorce fight.