3 ms·

What responsibility is that? Should the US have vetoed the NATO membership of all the Warsaw Pact countries that wanted to join?

by jolux 5y ago

dirtyid 5y ago
That was not an unpopular position at the time, with predictable backlash now made manifest. Also on topic US should also not have made NATO an offensive alliance with Kosovo... a "humanitarian" invasion outside UN security council authorization. Or set precedence of unilateral secession to balkanize countries for US interests, which RU rationalized for Abkhazia / South Ossetia in Georgian war. This is exactly the same playbook/justification RU is using to "rescue" Ukraine, for much more valid security considerations. Everything RU is doing has been normalized by previous US interventions, of which there has been too many, with a host of lawyers trying to legitimize them under the liberal international order.
- throwaway290 5y ago
  > US should also not have made NATO an offensive alliance with Kosovo... a "humanitarian" invasion outside UN security council authorization. UN security council is how things like Srebrenica happen. In my eyes, disregarding it is justifiable if there is a high enough likelihood of something like that repeating.
  - disgruntledphd2 5y ago
    It's actually required, under one of the UN treaties.
- jolux 5y ago
  Yeah except the difference is that loads of innocent people were being raped and murdered and ethnically cleansed in Kosovo whereas Russia made their reasons for this invasion quite clear Monday and it’s a desire to reconstitute the Russian Empire. It’s fine to have a principle of non-intervention but the situations are not really comparable outside of both being interventions. The Iraq War is a better comparison, and the US should have been sanctioned for it.
  - dirtyid 5y ago
    >raped and murdered and ethnically cleansed in Kosovo And that has exactly nothing to do with defensive NATO core mission. Sectarian violence happens all around the world, except NATO chose to invade Kosovo under the pretext of ethnic cleansing / "genocide", again current RU excuse, which later investigation pointed out to be unfounded. The real cynical reason was for NATO to rationalize its existence post USSR collapses by reinventing itself as an offensive alliance for LIO/US geopolitical interests, which is how it has been wielded since causing untold deaths in various interventions. NATO is a hegemonic instrument disguised as a humanitarian one. RU sees through the "defensive" narrative. Ultimately, the point is US opened pandora box of bad norms in terms of prosecuting wars and upsetting balance of power. It won't get sanctioned for it, instead wielding sanctions to deter geopolitical adversaries from pursuing more pertinent self interests. Until the sanctions stop working, and US adversaries use US playbook for their own interventions.
- syki 5y ago
  https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/26/china-sees-strategic-advantage-in-russias-ukraine-invasion-00012032 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/26/china-sees-strategi...
  - dirtyid 5y ago
    What is the relevance of this?

What responsibility is that? Should the US have vetoed the NATO membership of all the Warsaw Pact countries that wanted to join?

by jolux 5y ago

What responsibility is that? Should the US have vetoed the NATO membership of all the Warsaw Pact countries that wanted to join?

dirtyid 5y ago

That was not an unpopular position at the time, with predictable backlash now made manifest. Also on topic US should also not have made NATO an offensive alliance with Kosovo... a "humanitarian" invasion outside UN security council authorization. Or set precedence of unilateral secession to balkanize countries for US interests, which RU rationalized for Abkhazia / South Ossetia in Georgian war. This is exactly the same playbook/justification RU is using to "rescue" Ukraine, for much more valid security considerations. Everything RU is doing has been normalized by previous US interventions, of which there has been too many, with a host of lawyers trying to legitimize them under the liberal international order.

throwaway290 5y ago
> US should also not have made NATO an offensive alliance with Kosovo... a "humanitarian" invasion outside UN security council authorization. UN security council is how things like Srebrenica happen. In my eyes, disregarding it is justifiable if there is a high enough likelihood of something like that repeating.
- disgruntledphd2 5y ago
  It's actually required, under one of the UN treaties.
jolux 5y ago
Yeah except the difference is that loads of innocent people were being raped and murdered and ethnically cleansed in Kosovo whereas Russia made their reasons for this invasion quite clear Monday and it’s a desire to reconstitute the Russian Empire. It’s fine to have a principle of non-intervention but the situations are not really comparable outside of both being interventions. The Iraq War is a better comparison, and the US should have been sanctioned for it.
- dirtyid 5y ago
  >raped and murdered and ethnically cleansed in Kosovo And that has exactly nothing to do with defensive NATO core mission. Sectarian violence happens all around the world, except NATO chose to invade Kosovo under the pretext of ethnic cleansing / "genocide", again current RU excuse, which later investigation pointed out to be unfounded. The real cynical reason was for NATO to rationalize its existence post USSR collapses by reinventing itself as an offensive alliance for LIO/US geopolitical interests, which is how it has been wielded since causing untold deaths in various interventions. NATO is a hegemonic instrument disguised as a humanitarian one. RU sees through the "defensive" narrative. Ultimately, the point is US opened pandora box of bad norms in terms of prosecuting wars and upsetting balance of power. It won't get sanctioned for it, instead wielding sanctions to deter geopolitical adversaries from pursuing more pertinent self interests. Until the sanctions stop working, and US adversaries use US playbook for their own interventions.
syki 5y ago
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/26/china-sees-strategic-advantage-in-russias-ukraine-invasion-00012032 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/02/26/china-sees-strategi...
- dirtyid 5y ago
  What is the relevance of this?