The point is it was never going to launch an attack on that certain very large country to the East. All the rhetorical moaning and puffing of its current incredibly thin-skinned and backward-looking regime notwithstanding.

So why lie about NATO being "purely defensive"?

Beats me, it wasn't my post.

The main thing is that Russia needs to pull its troops out of all of Ukraine; return those 20,000 abducted kids; set and adhere to a timetable for paying full reparations; and re-affirm its commitment to respecting the inviolable sovereignty of all of its neighbors, permanently and irrevocably.

After that we can dissect past NATO transgressions, and fix all the poorly thought / ahistorical comments on HN.

That's clearly is not what Russia needs.

And Germany once thought it "needed" to regain its colonies, and France once thought its very survival would be threatened if it didn't hold onto Algeria, and so on.

The US once thought it needed to prevent Soviet nukes from appearing on Cuba, almost started WW3 over it and got what it needed.

That's what I mean by backward-looking. Putin is so obsessed with his perceived stature and "correcting" past humiliations that he's willing to create a completely fictional crisis and drive his country into a never-ending meatgrinder war just to prove some abstract geopolitical point.

Perhaps you don't know that the US in turn had to remove its nukes from Turkey and Italy.

This just goes to show how incomparable the situation is with the Cuban missile crisis. The US has nothing to remove, because their nuclear weapons stand where they stood 40 years ago.