3 ms·

what business does the US have policing the affairs in europe? https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/feb/07/eu-us-diplomat-victoria-nuland-phonecall-lea

what business does the US have policing the affairs in europe? https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/feb/07/eu-us-diplomat-victoria-nuland-phonecall-leaked-video https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/feb/07/eu-us-di... > Do you think the US is the only NATO country? in the same way that ussr was the only country that mattered in the warsaw pact ..... edit: it is highly likely that russia would never have invaded ukraine had the us not meddled and sponsored the overthrow of an elected ukranian government. russia and eu would have a stable energy contract. russia would not form an alliance with china and would continue to be europe orientated, eventually becoming a normal european country. ukraine would have kept its original borders, paid off its debts to russia, and have a stable country for all its citizens

arrrg 4y ago
Ok, so you agree that the US couldn’t have done anything to prevent Putin from invading Ukraine. That‘s great. Could you then explain why it would be in the interest of European countries not to react to Russia invading countries on their doorstep? It seems inconceivable to me that European countries wouldn’t have reacted with sanctions and arms for Ukraine even if the US had kept completely out of it. It seems crystal clear to me that making sure that Russia cannot win this war is both in the interest of the US but also and especially the interest of European countries. You don’t want a dictator that invades neighbors and is successful at that at your doorstep.
- SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
  Agreed. I don't even think that the Russian state would really dispute that "making sure that Russia cannot win this war" is in the interests of e.g. Polish or Lithuanian states. They just ... have other interests.
jcranmer 4y ago
> in the same way that ussr was the only country that mattered in the warsaw pact The list of NATO interventions are: former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, and counter-piracy in Yemen. The list of Warsaw Pact interventions: invading Hungary and Czechoslovakia when they wanted to leave. Quite a distinction. Only one of the NATO interventions was driven by the foreign policy of the US--all of the others were being driven more by Europeans' foreign policy concerns.
- medo-bear 4y ago
  im sorry. you are completely right. superb distinction

arrrg 4y ago

Ok, so you agree that the US couldn’t have done anything to prevent Putin from invading Ukraine. That‘s great. Could you then explain why it would be in the interest of European countries not to react to Russia invading countries on their doorstep? It seems inconceivable to me that European countries wouldn’t have reacted with sanctions and arms for Ukraine even if the US had kept completely out of it. It seems crystal clear to me that making sure that Russia cannot win this war is both in the interest of the US but also and especially the interest of European countries. You don’t want a dictator that invades neighbors and is successful at that at your doorstep.

SideburnsOfDoom 4y ago
Agreed. I don't even think that the Russian state would really dispute that "making sure that Russia cannot win this war" is in the interests of e.g. Polish or Lithuanian states. They just ... have other interests.

jcranmer 4y ago

> in the same way that ussr was the only country that mattered in the warsaw pact The list of NATO interventions are: former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Libya, and counter-piracy in Yemen. The list of Warsaw Pact interventions: invading Hungary and Czechoslovakia when they wanted to leave. Quite a distinction. Only one of the NATO interventions was driven by the foreign policy of the US--all of the others were being driven more by Europeans' foreign policy concerns.

medo-bear 4y ago
im sorry. you are completely right. superb distinction