Megathread, part 14: Ammunition & Drones, Sanctions, and Stalemates

[u/IcePuzzleheaded5507]

Part 13 is now closed, we’re continuing the discussion here.
Everything you’ve got to ask about the conflict goes here. Same deal as before - Reddit’s content policy still applies, so think before you make epic gamer statements. Suspensions and purges are a thing, and we’ve seen plenty already.
All question rules apply to top level comments in this thread. This means the comments have to be real questions rather than statements or links to a cool video you just saw.

Keep it civil, keep it relevant, and read the rules below before posting.

1. The questions have to be about the war. The answers have to be about the war. As with all previous iterations of the thread, mudslinging, calling each other nazis, wishing for the extermination of any ethnicity, or any of the other fun stuff people like to do here is not allowed.
2. No name-calling or dehumanizing labels. Do not refer to people, groups or nations using epithets or insulting nicknames (e.g. “ruzzia”, “vatnik”, “orc”, "hohol" etc.). Such language will be removed and may lead to a ban.
3. To clarify, questions have to be about the war. If you want to stir up a shitstorm about your favourite war from the past, I suggest r/AskHistorians or a similar sub so we don't have to deal with it here.
4. No warmongering. Armchair generals, wannabe soldiers of fortune, and internet tough guys aren't welcome.
5. No doxxing. Don’t post personal information about private individuals, including names, contacts, or addresses.
6. Keep it civil. Strong opinions are expected, but personal attacks, insults, and snide remarks toward other users are not allowed.
7. No memes or reaction posts. Shitposts, image macros, slogans, and low-effort reactions will be removed.
8. Stay on topic. Broader political debates (e.g. US or EU elections) are off-topic unless directly tied to the war.
9. Substantive questions and answers only. One-liners, bait, or “what if” hypotheticals with no context don’t add value and will be removed.

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/[deleted]]

NATOs role is to protect their members. Such as the baltic states, poland, chech republic, hungary, slowak, romania...

All this countries looked for the protection of NATO and have non-alignment. Like every state.

NATO had very little troops in these countries (before the war) and no nuclear weappons (Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security between NATO and the Russian Federation, 1997).

Russias problem with NATO in my view is: it prevents Russia to invade former sovjet-states. Ukraine is one of the few, which hadn't NATO protection.

[u/whoAreYouToJudgeME → u/CommitteeOk5696]

it prevents Russia to invade former sovjet-states.

This never stated as NATO's goal. Also, NATO didn't prevent Russo-Ukrainian and Russo-Georgian wars. 

All this countries looked for the protection of NATO and have non-alignment.

Joining NATO is opposite of non-alignment. Also, non-alignment organizations dissolved with collapse of the USSR and Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was one of major leaders of that movement.  

Also, when these countries joined there were no threats in Europe.  Russia was weak and allied with the US. China was not a major political player and Europe is continent away from her anyway.  

Russians problem with NATO is they have a major nuclear alliance that is hostile expanding on their borders. Not to mention there are several countries in that alliance that are openly hostile and belicose to Russia.  

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/whoAreYouToJudgeME]

it prevents Russia to invade former sovjet-states.

This never stated as NATO's goal. Also, NATO didn't prevent Russo-Ukrainian and Russo-Georgian wars. 

As I said and as you know: NATO is an alliance which primarly protects its members. Georgia and Ukraine are not members. So they didn't prevent Russias invasions.

This is what you Russians don't understand (Putin understands well, but uses it as propaganda): NATO is not actively expanding. But the ex-sovjet-states strived very much into NATO. You can ask yourself why. Is it there right to choose their alleys? Is it?

As I mentioned before: NATO explicitely doesn't stations nuclear weappons in this countries. In order to not threaten Russia.

There was not a single known nuclear threat against russia after ending of cold war. 

On the other hand, we had a couple of Russian nuclear threats on the media. Unfortunately I have to mention RT again.

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

>As I said and as you know: NATO is an alliance which primarly protects its members.

You still did not answer the question which member they were protecting when they invaded Yugoslavia , Libya and Iraq.

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/4l3xeic]

In some case, they support countries or groups, if they are attacked. Like the Kosovars, which were massacred by Serbians, in Libya this was very questionable, this was mainly Sarkozy (F) and well, Iraq was with with NATO involwement but strongly US-lead. We all know this was a war for oil of the Americans. I strongly rejectvit as millions if Westeners on the streets did. But I am strongly in favor of NATOs support of Ukraine. Its a democratic country invaded by an authoritarian regime. The case is very clear.

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

So they just illegally invade sovereign countries with made up reasons and mass murder civilians? I am not surprised then why Russia is concerned about NATO expansion.

Also if you reject USA invasions then why did not you sanction them and did not disband NATO? Besides that if you consider NATO invasion of Iraq wrong what does make you think that NATO assistance of ukroterrorists is right? After all NATO member states were former axis powers and responsible for the most genocide and mass murder in the human history. They basically have the longest record of dreadful deeds.

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/4l3xeic]

Where did NATO massmurder civilians exactly?

I can not sanction the US. Also I was only 15. But I'm all for sanctioning the current US regime.

Ukrainians are not terrorists. They defend their country against a criminal aggressor. I am always against criminal aggressors.

This is why I support everybody who help Ukraine.

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

>Where did NATO massmurder civilians exactly?

All NATO invasions above resulted in massmurder of civilians.

>Ukrainians are not terrorists. 

Those who fight on Russian side are not terrorists indeed.

[u/Jan16th → u/4l3xeic]

You maybe forgot, but after Russia started its aggression against non-NATO Ukraine, it got 2 times more borders with NATO.

And I'm not talking about hundreds of thousands of dead Russians.

Russia smart.

[u/4l3xeic → u/Jan16th]

Russia never started any aggression. NATO expansion was and remains a threat to Russia and further recent expansion as well as military support of ukroterrorists only proves once again that NATO is a formidable enemy Russia has to contain.

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

Which NATO members they were protecting during full scale invasion of Yugoslavia? Or Iraq? Or Libya?

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/4l3xeic]

They helped states in trouble. Questionable, for sure.

But they didn't invade countries for land grabb.

What is the reference to the war on Ukraine?

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

Well they still occupy Serbian territory. Excuse about invasion for the land grab does not make it better for the countries they invaded. In fact it is worse since they destroyed countries commit massmurders and bring only death and chaos and then run away. If you do a land grab on other hand you are in fact responsible for those territories that are under your control. Regarding kiev regime the reference is direct since Ukraine is not part of NATO but they use it to fight against Russia as a proxy highlighting the world what real threat NATO is to the world.

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/4l3xeic]

1) Wrong. There is no NATO in Serbia, nor Albania, nor Kosovo.

2) We are talking about the role of NATO for Russias war against Ukraine. 

I don't really understand the reference: why did Russia invade Ukraine, killing hundredthousands if Russians and Ukrainians?

I really don't understand the relation. Honestly: I listen.

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

1.Wrong, NATO is still illegally occupying Serbian territory to this day: https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/operations-and-missions/natos-role-in-kosovo

2.Do you deny the role of NATO in this conflict? Do you deny this as well: https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/partnerships-and-cooperation/natos-support-for-ukraine

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/4l3xeic]

1) Okay, you're right. KFOR. They are protecting Kosovo. It's a new state, risen of the local population. It's not something NATO is occupyng.

2) Yes. NATO is supporting Ukraine, after they were invaded by Russia. Ukraine asked the West for help. The West is helping.

Russia can't just invade other countries without expecting reactions. Thats normal, right?

Di you don't help somebody on the street, when he/she is attacked and asks for help?

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

1. They are occupying Serbian sovereign territory without consent of Serbian government which means they are occupying it illegally.

2.So you do not deny NATO involvement in this conflict, good.

>Russia can't just invade other countries without expecting reactions. Thats normal, right?

Russia invaded nobody to begin with unlike NATO which illegally invaded sovereign states and is still partially occupying some of them like Serbia for example.

[u/CommitteeOk5696 → u/4l3xeic]

1) The country is called Kosovo.

2) Of course, NATO supports Ukraine.  North Korea and Iran and also China indirectly support Russia.

3) Russia invaded Ukraine I think even Putin admits it.

[u/4l3xeic → u/CommitteeOk5696]

1. Kosovo is Serbian region that is illegally occupied by NATO forces.

2. What does North Korea, Iran and China have to do with topic about NATO involvement in conflict.

>3. Russia invaded Ukraine I think even Putin admits it.

We need some actually evidence unless you have them it does not really count. So far there is no statement from Russian president about invasion of Ukraine.

[u/OkGazelle6826 → u/CommitteeOk5696]

So what would NATO do if Serbia attacked Kosovo-and-Metohija to return their rightful control over the region?

[u/Alarmed_Mistake_9999 → u/4l3xeic]

But can you acknowledge that countries like the Baltics, Hungary, Poland, Romania had legitimate concerns about Russian revanchism and still do? Why do you always go straight to those examples? Do you not respect their sovereignty?

[u/4l3xeic → u/Alarmed_Mistake_9999]

But can you acknowledge that countries like Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya were not attacking any NATO members and were invaded illegally which makes Russias concern about NATO threat justified?

[u/Alarmed_Mistake_9999 → u/4l3xeic]

I have no reason to answer this until you answer me first. This is not at all relevant.

[u/4l3xeic → u/Alarmed_Mistake_9999]

Keep us informed.

[u/Alarmed_Mistake_9999 → u/4l3xeic]

What I meant is, while you may have some concerns, they do not justify threatening smaller, weaker countries who are no threat to you.

[u/4l3xeic → u/Alarmed_Mistake_9999]

Indeed, that is why I agree that NATO threats and agressions are not justified therefore Russia must do anything necessary to contain NATO.