3 ms·
To nix23's answer, which is now dead and can't be further replied to: Funny, that link you posted was already grey on my browser, and yet I rest my case: NATO
by gruturo 5y ago
To nix23's answer, which is now dead and can't be further replied to:
Funny, that link you posted was already grey on my browser, and yet I rest my case: NATO didn't invade any country and forced it to join. The fact that most eastern European countries lined up to join the very first moment they could, is because they knew fully well what monster lied to the east, and experienced its brutality within living memory. Most importantly, they lined up to join because they are free to choose, and so they did.
Attacking countries because they don't like you and join your opponent is a laughably thin bullshit pretext. Russia already bordered 6 NATO countries, annexing Ukraine would actually push that number UP. Is that going to be justification for further aggression?
You either accept that Ukrainians are in charge of their own destiny, therefore they are free to join NATO, the EU, my book club and whatever else they choose, or you don't, in which case I'd like to understand why, in your opinion, they are not free, and, apparently, why it's ok in your opinion to murder and invade them if they try.
I won't even argue that NATO is a defense organization, despite being convinced of that, because that's not the point here: even if they weren't, it's still NOT OKAY to attack countries who wish to stop being threatened by you, and seek its protection.
- nix23 5y ago>NATO didn't invade any country Oh really that's new for me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations >You either accept that Ukrainians are in charge of their own destiny So was Cuba (Cuba-crisis). >I won't even argue that NATO is a defense organization Funny that you say that, because they think they are. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO >>NATO constitutes a system of collective security, whereby its independent member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party
- signatoremo 5y ago> Oh really that's new for me: Which countries NATO invaded again? > So was Cuba (Cuba-crisis) Cuba is still in charge of their destiny. They are still hostile to the US 60 years on. Cuba crisis was settled by the Soviet withdrawing their nuclear weapon, not by a US invasion. Apparently the Soviets cared more about having a stable relationship with the US than popping up Cuba.
- nix23 5y ago>Which countries NATO invaded again? -Bosnia and Herzegovina -Kosovo -Macedonia -Afghanistan They call it "peace mission" and "Security mission" , putin calls it "special operation" >They are still hostile to the US 60 years on Just the US still imposes sanctions toward Cuba, not the other way around, and btw Cuba never tried to invade the US...Bay of pigs? Guantanamo? >the Soviet withdrawing their nuclear weapon Would be nice if the US would do the same with the nuclear weapons in turkey no? The double standards you have are fascinating.
- k_sze 5y agoRussia is not trying to annex (the whole of) Ukraine, at least that’s what they say. My understanding is that Russia wants a neutral buffer zone between themselves and NATO. This is basically Putin’s negotiation conditions. Putin isn’t even asking Ukraine to join CSTO, if I understand correctly.
- cuteboy19 5y agoThey also said they won't be invading Ukraine... Days before they invaded it >Putin isn’t even asking Ukraine to join CSTO They should genuinely be thankful for that. Just like its predecessor Warsaw Pact, CSTO has exclusively invaded its own member countries. It's probably the worst organization you'd want to join
- csee 5y agoHe said he wasn't going to invade. He said he'd respect Ukraine's borders in a 2014 signed agreement. He denies poisoning his opponents in London and Salisbury. Assume everything he says is gaslighting or some kind of deception. Words are just weapons for him.