3 ms·

Why shouldn't it be expanding eastwards? Seems to me that if a bunch of countries want to get together to protect each other, they have every right to do so. E

Why shouldn't it be expanding eastwards? Seems to me that if a bunch of countries want to get together to protect each other, they have every right to do so. Especially when a near-by country has a habit of being an aggressor: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russo-Georgian_War * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Ru... And let's not forget Malaysia Airlines Flight 17: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_17

sudosysgen 5y ago
If NATO was nothing but a self defense pact, I'd tend to agree, but then if that was the case no one in NATO would want to expand too much. NATO is not just a self defence organisation. It's an offensive tool. NATO has gone into more offensive missions (at least 3) than truly defensive missions (literally zero - I don't count the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan as a defensive act). For many members of NATO, the only existing military threat is within NATO itself (see: Turkey and some of its neighbors). The truth is, NATO expanding is a great way for the West to force it's enemies to increase their defense spending and to lower the cost of offensive military interventions.
- whythre 5y ago
  >The truth is, NATO expanding is a great way for the West to force it's enemies to increase their defense spending and to lower the cost of offensive military interventions. As a westerner, that does sound pretty great- especially in the face of hostility from a glorified KGB thug like Putin.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    Sure. But when you're building up an offensive stance you can only expect hostility back. And it helps strongmen get into power, too.
- Koshkin 5y ago
  It is well-known that offense is the best form of defense.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
- throw0101a 5y ago
  * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion "How Russia Got So Big": * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1R_ycU_fS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1R_ycU_fS4 My ancestry is Slavic. You're going to go have a hard time convincing me not to worry about Russia.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    I'm not trying to convince you not to worry about Russia. I'm explaining why NATO is worrisome to many countries. You can be as worried about Russia as you'd like, and they're going to be just as worried about NATO, and so are the citizens of many other countries.
VictorPath 5y ago
> Especially when a near-by country has a habit of being an aggressor Some Islamic terrorists use terror to try to form a Qoqaz caliphate on Russian territory, and Russia fighting this development within their own borders is "being an aggressor". Meanwhile the US flies to to the other side of the world to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, which I suppose was a defensive action by its Department of Defense.

sudosysgen 5y ago

If NATO was nothing but a self defense pact, I'd tend to agree, but then if that was the case no one in NATO would want to expand too much. NATO is not just a self defence organisation. It's an offensive tool. NATO has gone into more offensive missions (at least 3) than truly defensive missions (literally zero - I don't count the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan as a defensive act). For many members of NATO, the only existing military threat is within NATO itself (see: Turkey and some of its neighbors). The truth is, NATO expanding is a great way for the West to force it's enemies to increase their defense spending and to lower the cost of offensive military interventions.

whythre 5y ago
>The truth is, NATO expanding is a great way for the West to force it's enemies to increase their defense spending and to lower the cost of offensive military interventions. As a westerner, that does sound pretty great- especially in the face of hostility from a glorified KGB thug like Putin.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  Sure. But when you're building up an offensive stance you can only expect hostility back. And it helps strongmen get into power, too.
Koshkin 5y ago
It is well-known that offense is the best form of defense.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
throw0101a 5y ago
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion "How Russia Got So Big": * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1R_ycU_fS4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1R_ycU_fS4 My ancestry is Slavic. You're going to go have a hard time convincing me not to worry about Russia.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  I'm not trying to convince you not to worry about Russia. I'm explaining why NATO is worrisome to many countries. You can be as worried about Russia as you'd like, and they're going to be just as worried about NATO, and so are the citizens of many other countries.

VictorPath 5y ago

> Especially when a near-by country has a habit of being an aggressor Some Islamic terrorists use terror to try to form a Qoqaz caliphate on Russian territory, and Russia fighting this development within their own borders is "being an aggressor". Meanwhile the US flies to to the other side of the world to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, which I suppose was a defensive action by its Department of Defense.