Comments by "Henriikka K" (@henriikkak2091) on "Pyotr Kurzin | Geopolitics" channel.

  1. If the American policy is to provide safe havens for aggressors with nuclear weapons -- not protect the territorial integrity of its partners and allies, not uphold and safeguard international law -- where does that leave NATO members that border Russia? Sorry, can't help you mate because Russia still has nukes? The current strategy makes nuclear non-proliferation, such as Ukraine giving up their stockpile, look like a horrible mistake. That's very shortsighted.
    269
  2. I live a stone's throw from the Russian border and I'm quite confident that Russians know about how we live; what our material living standards are. Having had access to all of that for the past 30 or so years, though, they never developed an understanding that you don't become a Westerner by wearing the same clothes or eating the same food as we do. They want the empire to expand. They see nothing wrong with how they treat their neighbors or the 190+ colonized nations. They've never been forced to. They do need to be forced. They don't have the maturity or the guts to examine their ways out of their own volition, and that's why they are stuck. Hung up on the past.
    65
  3. I think that goes for Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Finland as well, but if we're looking for people who have suffered the most, I'm willing to give that crown to Ukrainians and Belarusians.
    27
  4. France understands one thing better than others. Some ambiguity in messaging is a good thing because it leaves our adversaries guessing. The absolute worst are loud declarations on what we will not do. Those don't deter Putin. They make planning the next escalation easier for him. For example, Russians knew that they could wheel North Koreans in because NATO powers said that they wouldn't respond by deploying troops. This is absurd if you put this in perspective. Self-deterrence in part of Ukraine's allies has led to two nuclear powers invading it!
    18
  5. The Indian version of democracy looks an awful lot like authoritarianism
    12
  6. Please don't do that both-sides-ism thing when talking about figures like Trump. We're - at least I assume that we are - all European and in favor of liberal democracy in the broadest sense. We don't have to bow down to oligarchs or autocrats. Personally, I think we shouldn't.
    12
  7. Have you actually looked at who does what?
    9
  8. Comments like these are empty because you do not explain what you mean and give us an opportunity to assess whether you're factually correct or not. Instead, I'm just going to have to assume that you've fallen into some RT rabbit hole and go around saying that everyone else is wrong, Russia is fantastic
    8
  9. 😂 Lukashenko vol. 2 has no business there
    5
  10. War in Europe might have played a part in that as well
    5
  11. But does Trump do what's in America's interest or his own?
    5
  12. I'm Finnish. There are approximately 30 Finno-Ugric nations in Russia and all of them are at risk of (YouTube wants me to dilute the language) going the way of the Dodo. God, it's depressing because literally no one cares. Even if you want this awful imperial project to go on for another century at the expense of dozens of indigenous nations and ethnic groups, I don't think the chosen approach is the correct one. Surely, dealing Putin a quick and decisive b*ow would have been better for both Russia and Ukraine rather than slow a**rition of both countries which allows the host***ties to continue but des**oys their future.
    4
  13. Because it's Russia.
    3
  14. The life expectancy of men is barely 65
    3
  15. There has never been real capitalism either, with zero state intervention, but that doesn't mean that these terms are useless or meaningless. There is a real difference between living in a country like Finland and next door, in Russia. We see it every day.
    2
  16.  @robertcircleone  No need to feel sorry for one of the most democratic nations in the world (currently the 2th). Maybe I should feel sorry for you, for feeling that you don't have real agency
    2
  17. Yes, I think you're right. It's going to take time but that's the direction of travel
    2
  18. Sending wounded soldiers or people with disabilities to the front is pretty bad. That's what super low unemployment looks like in practice.
    2
  19. Academics are debating that, but they don't presuppose that national identity is included. They ask, when does it become a part of identity politics. Patriotism isn't an example they give. More like populist nationalism used for some end
    2
  20. It's hilarious that Russians think that their living standards are comparable to Europeans' or Americans'
    1
  21. I believe that Trump will be preoccupied with internal affairs once the mass deportations and the backlash to them start. I don't think he cares about Europe all that much.
    1
  22. Of course it's going to be chaos. No one creates these kinds of situations where every option out is bad, quite like Russia. But you know what? Putin is an old man. He is going to go. That's just a fact of life. It'd be worth it to use the opportunity to topple the KGB mafia but I doubt that will happen. It's the most resilient organization in Russia versus a weak opposition.
    1
  23. He produced soft Russian propaganda up until February 2022. After having his 'Russia can do no wrong - it's just misunderstood' bubble burst, he will still deny Russia's responsibility for Crimea and the war in Donbas, the invasion of Georgia, Chechnya, Georgia again, and Moldova... If you ask him, he will say that WWII started in 1941. He denies the Soviet Union being Germany's ally and invading Poland together in 1939. He has heard about the Soviet Union invading Finland but doesn't understand the context (The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact). In other words, he's still Russian.
    1
  24. Americans also support billionaire oligarchs and tariffs. Not very smart
    1
  25. Russia is borrowing from the future because they don't actually believe there is a future for Russia after Putin. It's hanging on for dear life to Ukraine and its imperialist past.
    1
  26. Of course we are. - Russia has normalized nuclear threats. That alone increases the likelihood of the use of nuclear weapons. - Look at Japan or South Korea, who their neighbors are and how they are posturing. If you were in their place, how confident would you be that a conventional army and international treaties were powerful enough deterrents against a conflict? Three, the UN Security Council has been crippled. Putin decided to invade Ukraine because the international order backed in large part by the US nuclear umbrella had collapsed. Not the other way around. Europe needs to reconfigure its security architecture around this new reality. Whatever it is or will be, it includes rearming. Four, US allies around the world need to reassess the situation and their relationship with the US, a fickle ally that's being challenged from the inside and outside. Five, Budapest Memorandum seems like a horrible mistake right now. It didn't have to be. Ukraine and Kazakhstan could have been grat examples of nuclear nonproliferation. There is one country between Ukraine and Russia, though, that enjoys US security guarantees and it's not Ukraine. The US calculation is that striking Russia might destabilize it fatally and therefore keeps blocking it. The thinking is that Russia's collapse would be a bigger crisis than Ukraine's because it has a ton of nuclear weapons. This ignores the catastrophic consequences of the potential collapse of Ukraine. What it would mean for Europe and democratic countries around the world to allow rogue nuclear powers to get away with this. To terrorize others with impunity. I can't think of anything that points in the other direction.
    1
  27. Yeah, there's Muscovy, Petrograd, and the colonies.
    1
  28. I pointed out in my comment that the Soviet Union was 40 times Finland's size when it invaded it, and that the defeatist mentality that Ukraine's Western partners suffer from is uncalled for, so of course, it was removed. Thanks YouTube.
    1
  29. The leadership of Ukraine knows exactly what their chances of getting into NATO are at this moment. Don't you think they pay attention to these things? They've tied the issue of ceding territory to that point because they don't want to cede territory. Not for nothing. If we knew what was best for us, we wouldn't want that either. That would be an invitation for other land grabs in Europe and Asia. Ukrainians have been relatively confident that they can handle Trump. They must be curious about what might be on offer. The outcome, if there is one, might be very different from the starting point of the negotiations. It also seems that the way they want these negotiations to go is that they'll be at the table with the American president whilst the bunker goblin shouts in the corner. Via video link.
    1
  30. Oh my god. If you don't understand why the president or the top oligarch shouldn't bypass the congress and control treasury money flows directly, I don't know what to say
    1
  31. The USA will never risk direct confrontation with Russia. That means NATO is out.
    1