4 ms·
> It was set up specifically to oppose Moscow. Wrong. It was set up to oppose the Soviet Union. Not Russia. Putin himself was talking about joining NATO. Regar
by signatoremo 5y ago
> It was set up specifically to oppose Moscow.
Wrong. It was set up to oppose the Soviet Union. Not Russia. Putin himself was talking about joining NATO. Regardless of how serious he was, no country consider joining an organization if it’s hostile to them.
> It is an offensive alliance without question.
Good thing you mentioned Libya, because that’s the only campaign that NATO involved in an offensive role. Even putting aside the circumstances of that campaign, an offensive organization that exists for 73 years but has only waged a single war, does that make any sense?
- pydry 5y ago>Wrong. It was set up to oppose the Soviet Union. Not Russia. I said Moscow. Did Moscow stop being Moscow? >Good thing you mentioned Libya, because that’s the only campaign that NATO involved in an offensive role. One rape makes you a rapist. >an offensive organization that exists for 73 years but has only waged a single war They've waged many. I gave Libya as an example because there are no shades of gray in that war and because it was the war that shaped Putin's view of what NATO's endgame was for Russia (quite fairly, IMHO).