Hitler was more about wanting more land and resources for Germany, and he saw war as being a legitimate tool for achieving his aims that he deployed early and enthusiastically.
Is that why Russians rejected negotiations when Ukraine offered to never join NATO and Russians insist on keeping invaded territories?
Just Russia advancing into the Ukraine (after promising not to if the USSR nukes were given to Russia)?
Gotcha.
I have considerably more concern about the ability of a post MAGA USofA to successfully navigate such a world via soft power as they appear to have flushed all the competent diplomatic talent down a golden toilet.
But somehow you are extremely concerned about one country which is on the other side of planet of you.
which country are you talking about, what trade bloc are they trying to join, and what extreme concern have I expressed?
His rationale for invading Ukraine was to "demilitarise and denazify" it. The NATO point seems largely be invented by people who dislike NATO in the west.
> They've only turned to violence after long attempts at resolving the tension diplomatically and the US has been implacable.
I hope the "tension" you are referring to was not the little green men taking over Crimea and the Donbas in 2014.
> Putin's actually been pretty hesitant in his escalations so far; he's 70 and has a long history of trying to avoid war.
This is a totally unseriousness statement. Can you remind me what Putin was doing in Syria again?
> I will begin with what I said in my address on February 21, 2022. I spoke about our biggest concerns and worries, and about the fundamental threats which irresponsible Western politicians created for Russia consistently, rudely and unceremoniously from year to year. I am referring to the eastward expansion of NATO, which is moving its military infrastructure ever closer to the Russian border.
They're claiming the NATO thing is relevant. Opening paragraph justification.