3 ms·
It's not a invalid point per se, but I think everyone knows NATO's recent moves against Russia are a direct consequence of Russia invading and annexing Crimea.
by mtgx 9y ago
It's not a invalid point per se, but I think everyone knows NATO's recent moves against Russia are a direct consequence of Russia invading and annexing Crimea.
It probably won't end well if everyone decides to "one-up" each other, though, similar to how WW1 started.
- d1ffuz0r 9y agotry digging deeper, like ready history of NATO from 90s til current days. you will find something new for yourself
- the_gastropod 9y agoAmbiguous "read history" statements aren't helpful. If you have a point, we'd love to read it.
- rovek 9y ago> invading and annexing Crimea This is one of few times I've seen "invade" used to describe Russia's actions in Crimea. I find it strange that even western media talks about "annexation" when they usually employ exaggerated terminology for all kinds of trivial events. edit: I'm not saying the invasion was trivial, I'm saying the media response was/is understated compared to non-events they exaggerate
- gandhium 9y agoWell, at least media don't play the Russian-proposed "we were heroic defenders" tune, like it was with Georgia in 2008.
- ionised 9y agoWasn't NATO putting missile bases/defences in Turkey long before all this though? Russia saw that as a provocation and a breach of previous agreements.