Once Is Chance, Twice is Coincidence, Third Time Is a Pattern

I need some help.  Bringing this difficulty to a head is the recent action in the Ukraine by Russia; this is the event behind the second and third episode. 

Once: the first episode was due to a post I wrote regarding World War II and Wilson’s actions during the First World War that helped to move Europe toward the second.

This post received, by far, the most comments of any post I have written.  I had an extended dialogue with who I believe to be (as the comments were by “Anonymous”) one individual.  He had no problem criticizing me for my lack of understanding about the war from an Eastern European perspective – which at the time was certainly true and today is still somewhat so.  The tone was often derogatory; at the same time, I learned quite a bit from the exchange. So, to the extent I felt the conversation was somewhat productive, I continued.

However, I stopped replying after the following comment – after first recognizing that I might have enlightened him a bit regarding Roosevelt’s actions:

Anonymous July 24, 2013 at 2:31 PM

Also let me ad[d]ress this literary crown jewel:

BM: "What would happen? I envision, in the end, two spent countries, neither capable of doing any significant harm to western states – who, in the meantime, armed themselves sufficiently."

Take a look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WwII_casualties

Are you in a habit of telling Jews that "Holocaust was not a big deal".  Because that statement actually would be more accurate. Where do you think WWII happen? Connecticut? The North Pole? That statement is so out there that here you go: Some relevant WWII jokes for you

Q: Do you know what is the title of the chapter on "western front" In Russian textbooks?

A: The bombing of civilians.

Q: Why did Americans drop the atomic bombs on Japan?

A: Because after 3 years of bombing Germany they finally realized they can't hit sh*t with normal bombs.

Q: Where are western casualties of WWII listed in the comparison table?

A: Under "statistical error".

I could go on. Sorry for the burn but you were sooo asking for it :D

A simple premise – the US had no business getting involved in European wars, and even France and England could have minimized if not avoided the harm of a European war if they just stayed out and / or didn’t instigate matters in the first place.  This is where I came from in the subject post and in much of my writing to date on the subject. 

Since then, certainly I have looked into other perspectives, including from a Russian – Suvorov.  While my understanding of the roots of the war as well as the events during the war continues to increase, I have read nothing to change my view that the west, and especially the US, should have just stayed out.  With or without the US involvement, life for those in central and eastern Europe was going to be intolerable, if not deadly.

In any case, this was almost a year ago.

Twice: Recently, in a conversation about the situation in Ukraine with someone well-versed in Russian history and perspective, a similar comment came to light.  Not similar, like obnoxious, but similar like sentiment.  To paraphrase, the comments from individuals like Ron Paul and posts at LRC are seen as horrendous by people living in the Ukraine.  Putin is being painted as a saint.

Now I have not read such comments – I see criticism of US actions, but not praise of Putin or his actions.  Some issues of relativism (which I will further expand upon shortly), but not praise. 

Am I blind to this because of my western perspective?  Or are the critics blind to this because of their Eastern European perspective?

Third: In the comments section of a Paul Craig Roberts post at The Daily Bell, I read the following by “vanyam”:

My first question.. how much is Russia Today supporting sites like PCR , Lew Rockwell (which both run on shoestring budgets by the way) who are both stumping for Russian domination in Ukraine…

Before spouting all this pro Moscow propaganda of their own, perhaps these guys need to stop and realize that they are throwing Ukraine under a bus "blindly" as they attack the West's agenda for control.

Again, I don’t see this; what I see is condemnation of US involvement.  The commenter vanyam seems to recognize the distinction:

Before you throw Ukraine under the bus, place your disgust over US hegemony where it belongs.. in America.

This is what I read when I read PCR or posts at LRC.  I don’t see this as the same as approval of Russian actions (although some statements can be read in relative terms – for example, Russia has more interest in Ukraine than does the US.  This is, it seems, undeniably true – to the extent one can speak of national interests). 

What am I missing?