Good point.
Also note that Ukraine gave up all of their nuclear weapons voluntarily after
Russia assured them that Russia would protect them. Eric
________________________________
From: uupretirees-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <uupretirees-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of Diane Luft <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 11:36 PM
To: uupretirees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <uupretirees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [uupretirees] Re: Ukraine - revised
So Kruschev's response, placing of missiles, was parallel to NATO placing
missiles in Turkey, but Putin's response was to invade. I think NATO's record
of defensive actions only has been good - no invasions as far as I know. One
commenter I read said that even if every other country in the world besides
Russia joins NATO, Putin would not have to worry about being attacked.
Thanks for the recommended reading.
Diane
On 2/28/2022 10:19 PM, Eric Russell wrote:
Khrushchev and the Politburo were responding to the placement of IRBMs in
Turkey when they began setting up in Cuba.
One of the quieter bits of the resolution of the Cuban Missile crisis was that
Kennedy withdrew the missiles from Turkey. Turkey joined NATO in 1952. In
that respect Khrushchev was seeing an early stage of the current encirclement
and his response was a near parallel of our actions.
If you wish, you can find out more by reading one of the histories of the
period. My personal choice is Robert Caro's series about Lyndon Johnson. "The
Passage of Power" details his career as vice president and his assumption of
power after the Kennedy assassination. I have read all four and hope he lives
to complete the last so I can read it, too.
Eric
________________________________
From: uupretirees-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:uupretirees-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<uupretirees-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:uupretirees-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of Diane Luft
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 6:50 PM
To: uupretirees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:uupretirees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<uupretirees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx><mailto:uupretirees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [uupretirees] Re: Ukraine - revised
Sorry, first attempt was "sent" too early.
Eric, thanks, this NPR article has a good map of NATO expansion and explains
that the promise not to expand NATO "one inch" eastward was floated as an idea
in 1990, but never embodied in a treaty. On the other hand, Russia did formally
agree to respect the existing borders of Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine's
denuclearization (Budapest Memorandum, 1994). Of course these new NATO members
were anxious to protect themselves should Russia decide to roll in tanks and
retake them. Ukraine especially has been horribly treated by Russia, including
the death of millions in a deliberately inflicted famine, so it is ludicrous
that Putin claims now to want to save them from the West and reunite as "one
people."
Regardless of any formal agreements, Russia is increasingly encircled by
Eastern European NATO countries and Putin is not paranoid to point this this
out. My question is, how does this situation compare to the standoff in Cuba
when Russia placed nuclear weapons there?
Diane Luft
ddluft@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ddluft@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On 2/28/2022 12:01 PM, Eric Russell wrote:
From NPR, a historical perspective on the backstory of the current conflict.
Some of the motivational claims are discussed here. Eric