You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-35 points

Not a single paragraph about the actual demands of Russia. Which they have stated often enough. Basically they don’t want NATO right on their doorstep. This is what this whole war was about. But somehow this is never seriously discussed in western media.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

Because they don’t get the option to choose. It’s not that difficult. Those countries weren’t clamoring to join NATO until Russia invaded, so its their own fault.

permalink
report
parent
reply
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Sounds like the kind of ish a settler terrorist would say

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Basically they don’t want NATO right on their doorstep.

Have you looked at a map of Europe lately?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Their demands are irrelevant while on the soil of a sovereign nation without authorization or sufficient leverage. Both of which are not only lacking but severely so.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

I don’t want people like you in my comments but no one acknowledges that. So weird.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Yog has been here for over 4 years, you joined 30 days ago. You can leave anytime.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I don’t want people like you in my comments but no one acknowledges that. So weird.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

But NATO already is on their doorstep. Norway, Estonia, Poland etc. Even USA is only a few mils away across the Bering Strait.

This is not about Ukraine joining NATO, that’s a convenience.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

No one ever invaded Russia through Estonia. The last 2 massive invasions that killed millions of Russians were through the border with Ukraine - Napoleon and The Third Reich. You can’t just pretend that every inch of border is equivalent. If you’re going to pretend you know history, at least don’t expose your clear confirmation bias.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

That’s just such galaxy brain logic there. We’ve already built up a threat on your doorstep, so you shouldn’t worry about us expanding that threat further. 🤡

Furthermore, Stoltenberg has now publicly admitted that this is in fact about Ukraine joining NATO

The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.

You gotta update your script now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Then turning Ukraine into Russian territory is a bit counter productive no? That would literally bring NATO to Russias doorstep.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

They want a buffer zone. Makes sense in terms of military strategy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

This whole shit storm has been about one thing. Putins legacy as the czar that reformed the USSR. That’s it. He wants to lift the iron curtain high once more. It’s all dick stroking by a madman.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

I think you’re missing a paragraph that tells how the border between Russia and NATO increased twofold since (and as the result of) the invasion.

“Hey it’s all about NATO. We always wanted less NATO at our doorsteps, and you can see we tried our best to achieve this. That backfired, yes, but we ask you once again to… Ask all those countries nicely to withdraw from NATO. Having NATO at our borders is not healthy for our people, you see… With all those bio laboratories… And parent№1+parent№2 policy that you force on everyone…”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Basically they don’t want NATO right on their doorstep.

NATO is not the anti-Russia club. They’re a defensive pact. Why would you be concerned about your neighbours agreeing to defend each other? Like a neighbourhood watch, perhaps. Maybe you’d be upset if you’re planning to do the thing they’re defending against. Which is all the more reason for those neighbours to band together.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Yugoslavia would levy a disagreement about NATO’s status as a “defensive pact”; as would every Nazi who’s historically headed that “dEfEnSiVe AlLiAnCe”. They’re just bodies on tap for the Five-Eyed Empire. As offensive as they’re needed, at that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Unironically believing NATO is a defensive pact.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Wait until you hear what that defensive pact did in Yugoslavia and Libya

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

You know, you have a point. But I’ll note both instances had the UN request NATO intervention. Russia could have blocked either with their veto in the UN Security Council, but they didn’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

NATO was founded pretty much explicitly as the anti-USSR club. And it doesn’t even matter what it factually is - it’s what Russia perceives it as. See their final ultimatum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Putin’s_December_2021_ultimatum

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

That’s how Putin claims to perceive it, but that’s also what he would claim if his actual goal was to control his neighbours by force. And don’t forget Finland and Sweden responded to the invasion of Ukraine by joining NATO. If Russia perceived NATO as a threat, then Finland joining would make them more likely to be attacked. Clearly Finland feels NATO is making them safer or they wouldn’t have joined. And since then, Russia has moved tons of their military away from NATO borders and into Ukraine.

In other words, I trust the actions of Finland and Russia more than I trust the words of Russia.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

It is discussed, it doesn’t stand up to any reasoning as to why they captured the Crimean peninsula. They also stated that it was because Ukraine couldn’t stop the rise of Nazism. So which is it? NATO or Nazis?

Ukraine is an independent country and if they want to join NATO they can, having a legitimate grievance doesn’t excuse an invasion.

And even if it was true and was accepted, what a disaster it was because it bolstered a floundering NATO, grew membership and increased military spending across the continent. Truly a genius move.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Ukraine is an independent country and if they want to join NATO they can, having a legitimate grievance doesn’t excuse an invasion.

The context of the thread is that U.S. rejects peace talks. Nothing speaks of Ukraine’s sovereignty more than a foreign country rejecting negotiations on its behalf. 🤡

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So which is it? NATO or Nazis?

Hitler’s chief of staff was never prosecuted and later became NATO chief of staff. Many such cases.

Nazism wasn’t defeated by the US, it was successfully internationalized by them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

which is a perfectly reasonable demand.

but since the US wants blood…

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

No, demanding your neighbours all remain weak enough for you to continue bullying is not perfectly reasonable at all

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

as opposed to having your biggest aggressor right in your doorstep?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

My friend it was never about NATO. There is no prospective out there based in fact where NATO has anything to do with it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

The British news outlet The Guardian: “Many predicted Nato expansion would lead to war. Those warnings were ignored.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/28/nato-expansion-war-russia-ukraine

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

By “the Guardian” here what you mean is “an opinion piece from the fucking Cato Institute”

It was an excellent question, and neither the Clinton administration nor its successors provided even a remotely convincing answer.

The answers are South Ossetia, Abkhazia, and Transnistria

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Russia said since 2014 this was about NATO. Even before they protested strongly the NATO expansion. So how can it not be about NATO? You’re either completely uninformed or lying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

and US fascists say banning trans people is about protecting children. only a fool believes the narrative of a fascist

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

You have the media literacy of a fly. Not even Russia supporters believe this is about NATO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

While that may or may not be the case this does not permit interference of sovereign state from acting in its own best in own best interest.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Agreed - but it does make it somewhat of an “own goal”. The invasion was predictable. Western PR says it was totally surprising but it wasn’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

What’s wild is that Western PR was actually saying that Russia was going to invade and Ukraine kept saying that they weren’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points
*

If this war was about having NATO on their doorstep, why is it an invasion of a non-NATO country twenty years after the first neighbours of Russia joined NATO? It’s never seriously discussed because it’s either a lie or unfathomably stupid, and whichever of those two it is doesn’t much matter.

Just for a second, imagine you’re a neutral country in eastern Europe. Russia has been fucking with Georgia and Moldova since the fall of the Soviet Union, and now it invades Ukraine for the second time within a decade. Russia has never touched a NATO country despite bordering several of them for literally decades. And then Russia acts all shocked when you say you want into NATO

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Yeah and Russia protested strongly every time. But Ukraine was their red line. Just because you didn’t read it in western media doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

I don’t condone the invasion but it was predictable and a colossal “failure” of diplomacy if you look at it charitably. At worst it was a long term plan to force Russia into a conflict with the aid of western media to obscure the reason why this war was happening. Russia is acting just like the US would.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

I guess ignoring how Ukrainians ran the russian puppet heading their country out of the country just before the Crimean invasion of 2014 is convenient for your point.

Appeasement does not work. It has never worked. It didnt work in Sudetenland, it didnt work in Crimea, and it would never have worked with Donbas, either.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

What are you talking about? There were no concrete plans for Ukraine to enter NATO prior to the invasion in 2014.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

plan to force Russia into a conflict

Please explain how exactly do you force someone (who suggests to be reasonable) into conflict, basically force them to invade anyone.

Did the Poland “forced” Hitler to start the WW2 the same way?

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

So invading Ukraine fixes what for Russia, exactly? The fastest way to make more of Russia’s neighbours join NATO is to show them that they’re safer in NATO. Like Finland.

Ukrainians mostly weren’t interested in joining NATO until Russia took Crimea. Russia pushed Ukraine towards NATO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Because Europe never invaded Russia through the border at Belarus. They always invade Russia through Ukraine. First Napoleon, then the Third Reich.

Russia was appeasing the fascist West as they expanded their multinational nuclear military without democratic accountability into territories populated with leave-behind armies of fascists that they created. Ukraine was the obvious redline because it is the dominant strategic border, as demonstrated by all European and Russian military strategists in history.

You’re confused about history because you don’t understand it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Learn history, or stop lying. Napoleon invaded Russia through (today’s) Lithuania and Belarus.

Napoleon invasion map

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 5.3K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 119K

    Comments