Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

It was a threat to his vision of a greater Russia.  A prosperous Ukraine right on Putin's border is not a military threat but a threat to his dictatorship/kleptocracy.

The concept of a nation state with defined borders is relatively new in history.  Lines were drawn in 1919 that led to other conflicts later.  It's an interesting topic, but I would prefer this specific thread be more about current events, what people are seeing in the "news" and what they think it means.

One curious thing this war brings into some relief, but which doesn't get a lot of attention in U.S. media (which is the only I'm particularly in tune to, and even then not especially), is the history of places and nations in Europe. The U.S. has a very state-centered view of history. Europe, as I understand from my European sister-in-law, really does not. This came up in a discussion about Austria's place in Europe and the world (she's Austrian--that, according to her, is like German, but with a sense of humor). She reminded our family that Austria, as a concept, is only about 150 years old--younger than our "young" country. That's also true of Italy, Germany, Spain, and most of Eastern Europe. Prior to statehood (or nationhood, if you prefer), these areas were united by various monarchies that didn't really have the same borders that we think of today. So the Habsburg monarchy/empire was more the driving force in much of what we think of Austria, but like all monarchies of the time (and basically the preceding thousand years), it expanded and contracted with the changing familial relationships, and borders changed, too. That also means that many of regions of Europe aren't really appropriately considered by the national borders that resulted from the World Wars and the end of the Soviet empire, as much as by their historical regional connections.

My sister-in-law is Carinthian--her region of Austria. She is maybe more Carinthian than Austrian. And at least from her perspective, that's pretty common in much of Europe. As opposed to here where, even--I think--in the former rebellious states, we tend to be more American than [insert your state here]. Look at Spain--there are still separatists in Spain, in Catalonia. The Catalans recently declared their independence from Spain. Didn't do anything to Spain's actual borders or governance, but they are still trying to carve out their own nation. Wales, in the UK, not to mention Scotland and Northern Ireland, is another good example.

That's one of many factors that makes Russia's connections to part of Ukraine (and Georgia, Chechnya, Moldova, Belarus, etc.) much more complicated than simply: this is where the line was drawn (and it had a big part in the annexation of the Crimea back in 2014). There are parts of the Ukraine that *feel* more like Russia--and whose citizens identify more as Russians. What to do about that? I'm no expert in that, though I'm quite sure invading the Ukraine and trying to remove a pro-Ukrainian/pro-Western government to install a puppet Russian regime reminiscent of the Soviet Union isn't the right answer.

I don't really agree with that, in the sense that I don't think that is the motivating factor. I think it makes sense that Russia sees the continued movement of weapons into Ukraine and a stronger Ukraine military as a threat. What led to diplomacy breaking down and military force being used. I don't really know, other than it seems clear that Russia has made very little headway with any of their interests in the region. It's not difficult to imagine a similar scenario playing out here, given the Cuba missile crisis.

i'm no scholar on history, but i remember reading something like this about us citizens feelings abut america. the argument was basically that until sometime after the civil war, most people identified as either a state or even city. they were alabamians, virginians, or even philadelphians. but sometime after the civil war, that attitude shifted to more identifying as americans.

it also would make a lot of sense as we brought those attitudes of local identity with us from our ancestors in europe.

Except that the threat isn't of an invasion of Russia by Ukraine. Literally none of history suggests that.

NATO has been a defensive alliance for ~70 years with a track record of, well, not invading Russia. The former Soviet Bloc states that wanted to join NATO did so not to invade Russia, but to be protected from it.

Russia has piles and piles of nuclear weapons and MAD is still a thing, so he's got quite the deterrent against invasion, should it occur [which it won't].

The idea that Ukraine is a "threat" because they they have weapons and want to join a defensive military alliance is only a "threat" if you have plans to invade at some point and don't want them to be able to protect themselves.