I would direct you to George Kennan[1] and his 1997 NYT article where he said, among other things:
"... expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era. Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking ..."
Is it your position that he was paid for, or in some way disingenuously held, this view ?
I don't have strong opinions on this topic but I note with interest that there seem to be contrary viewpoints that aren't not puppets/trolls.
It doesn't matter if he was paid and I have no indication Greenwald ever was either. Only that this line of thinking aligns with Russian propaganda and is also complete nonsense.
Saying we should constrain the sovereignty of Eastern European nations to not hurt the feelings of their most dangerous rival is just bullshit. Russia's goals are simply neoimperialist and they obviously had no intention of waiting for Ukraine to join NATO or the EU before invading. They certainly had no similar provocation to snatch territory from Moldova and Georgia.
Kennan was arguing a Russian position, which makes sense given his long focus on Russia, and time there. What he wrote doesn’t actually support the idea that the West “started” anything.
Strengthening a defensive alliance is not “starting” something, that’s just the usual narcissistic gaslighting used by people with nefarious intent.
You missed the news where our own state dept officials are on leaked calls hand selecting the anti Russian government of Ukraine weeks before their coup or the news where Merkel admitted we negotiated treaties with Russia over Ukraine in bad faith.
The war started with our expansion of NATO, followed by couping Ukraines govt, multiple fake peace treaties, and finally Ukraine murdering thousands of culturally Russian civilians in Eastern Ukraine. I count a war as started when someone starts murdering people w the military not when someone walks over a border. Although your narrative doesn’t work then right?
Ah yes, the "culturally russian civilians" that... were mostly part of the ukraine army or the russian sponsored rebellion. Boy. How awful.
> I count a war as started when someone starts murdering people w the military
So saddam hussein started the second iraq-america war?
Don't answer that.
Also tell me more about your evidence of united states soldiers landing in ukraine and killing/capturing the existing government to replace it, that sounds like a really big scandal we should be talking about!
(Also, gee, I wonder why a government would be "anti-russian" during the past 50 years. Hmmm, nope, nothing comes to mind. Must be racism or something)
tell me more about your evidence of united states soldiers landing in ukraine and killing/capturing the existing government to replace it
We have the phone recordings of our government picking the new government BEFORE the coup. What part of that don’t you understand?
So saddam hussein started the second iraq-america war?
Don't answer that.
Whatever your counterpoint is here it’s so weak I don’t even know what it is. Using the military to kill civilians in Eastern Ukraine was definitely the start of the war, you can save the attempt at cleverness.
Is this talking point still being paid for? I haven't seen it in a while, but I guess I don't keep track that closely.
What are the other russian provided talking points these days?