• FaeDrifter@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I never framed NATO as a good thing, lol (reading comprehension is difficult I guess). I just pointed out that it costs the US more than it makes. Although given Putin’s invasion, the capitalists of the military-industrial complex are 100% making a profit, so I guess they can thank Putin for his choice to make them lots of money.

    True, the capitalists don’t have homogeneous interests. You can’t have an empire without an emperor - a single unchanging authoritarian leader that decides the movement for the rest of the country.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a no-brainer, if NATO was the imperial profit generating machine you claim it to be, Trump would have been all over it. Trump would have expanded NATO, expanded the borders, made more wealth. That’s what Business men like Trump do. That’s why Nazis, like Tankies, are anti-NATO. Nazis don’t want to pay to protect other countries, Nazis want more power. Nazis would just invade a country, like Russia does, not tried to maintain an expensive treaty.

      That very clearly frames NATO as a good thing since otherwise the orcs would invade you. Never mind the fact that NATO expansion was the reason for the war and that NATO is the primary destabilizing force in the world today.

      You can’t have an empire without an emperor - a single unchanging authoritarian leader that decides the movement for the rest of the country.

      You used so many words to say you’re historically illiterate. Late stage empires have always looked precisely the way US empire looks today where the oligarchs put in political puppets to do the governing. Late Roman empire often had demented old men as emperors who didn’t actually make any decisions.

      I just love how you flaunt your ignorance with each and every comment.

      • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That very clearly frames NATO as a good thing since otherwise the orcs would invade you.

        I wouldn’t call anyone an orc, but Russia is an imperialist power trying to expand its border through a military invasion, so that is always something you need to consider. I don’t consider it to be a good thing to lay down and let colonizers run over you.

        NATO is not good, but Putin gives reason for NATO to not disband yet.

        Never mind the fact that NATO expansion was the reason for the war

        Lol, no. Did it influence Putin? Sure. Did it make the decision to lie about invading and then immediately after invade like he’s a helpless little puppet on strings? No.

        The $1 billion question is why isn’t Putin reaching out to create defensive treaties with his neighbors first. Why not a defense treaty with Ukraine?

        Once you can figure that out, your worldview will start to be a lot more sane.

        Late Roman empire often had demented old men as emperors who didn’t actually make any decisions.

        The US is not a late state empire like Rome. That’s a * hits bong * “what if history is just like repeating itself over and over again man” kind of take. Not that no similarities exist.

        Just list for me for how many years the US has a demented old man in charge.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I wouldn’t call anyone an orc, but Russia is an imperialist power trying to expand its border through a military invasion, so that is always something you need to consider. I don’t consider it to be a good thing to lay down and let colonizers run over you.

          Nobody who has any clue regarding the subject believes that Russia is an imperialist power trying to expand. Plenty of western experts have been saying that NATO expansion would lead to a war for many decades. This only became controversial to mention after the war started. For example, here’s what Chomsky has to say on the issue recently:

          https://truthout.org/articles/us-approach-to-ukraine-and-russia-has-left-the-domain-of-rational-discourse/

          https://truthout.org/articles/noam-chomsky-us-military-escalation-against-russia-would-have-no-victors/

          50 prominent foreign policy experts (former senators, military officers, diplomats, etc.) sent an open letter to Clinton outlining their opposition to NATO expansion back in 1997:

          George Kennan, arguably America's greatest ever foreign policy strategist, the architect of the U.S. cold war strategy warned that NATO expansion was a "tragic mistake" that ought to ultimately provoke a "bad reaction from Russia" back in 1998.

          Jack F. Matlock Jr., US Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1987-1991, warning in 1997 that NATO expansion was "the most profound strategic blunder, [encouraging] a chain of events that could produce the most serious security threat [...] since the Soviet Union collapsed"

          Even Gorbachev warned about this. All these experts were marginalized, silenced, and ignored. Yet, now people are trying to rewrite history and pretend that Russia attacked Ukraine because it’s aN iMpeRiaLisT PowEr TrYinG tO ExpaNd. Maybe you can explain why Russia has never tried to invade places like Kazakhstan which would be a lot easier to do.

          NATO is not good, but Putin gives reason for NATO to not disband yet.

          Oh weird, then why did NATO not disband after USSR dissolved and before Putin was in power?

          Lol, no. Did it influence Putin? Sure. Did it make the decision to lie about invading and then immediately after invade like he’s a helpless little puppet on strings? No.

          Read above and educate yourself instead of making clown of yourself in public.

          The $1 billion question is why isn’t Putin reaching out to create defensive treaties with his neighbors first. Why not a defense treaty with Ukraine?

          Because your regime ran a coup in Ukraine in 2014 and overthrew a democratically elected government to put literal fascists in power. Here’s western media reporting on your friends

          and here’s what they’ve been up to since 2014 as even CNN reported at the time

          The US is not a late state empire like Rome. That’s a * hits bong * “what if history is just like repeating itself over and over again man” kind of take. Not that no similarities exist.

          You really love to straw man don’t you. I gave you an example of a late stage empire not having a strong emperor in charge, nowhere did I make any comparisons with the US.

          Just list for me for how many years the US has a demented old man in charge.

          I dunno can you do basic math to figure out how may years it’s been since you chuds elected Trump and then Biden?

          • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The $1 billion question is why isn’t Putin reaching out to create defensive treaties with his neighbors first. Why not a defense treaty with Ukraine?

            Because your regime ran a coup in Ukraine in 2014 and overthrew a democratically elected government to put literal fascists in power. Here’s western media reporting on your friends

            This is astonishingly stupid, you completely sidestepped the question. Let’s assume your point about 2014 is true, that’s still 23 years Russia did not form a treaty, which would have prevented the coup. That should have been the easiest, most obvious first move to counter NATO. Instead Russia is tearing itself apart trying to keep its claws dug into a little bit of Ukrainian territory.

            In any scenario where you create an image of the west as some kind of empire overlord powerhouse that manipulates all global events, you make Russia and ex-Soviets look hopelessly stupid and incompetent.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is astonishingly stupid, you completely sidestepped the question.

              I did not sidestep any questions. Ukraine and Russia had normal relations until the coup, and Russia was even fine with Ukraine joining the EU at the time.

              Let’s assume your point about 2014 is true, that’s still 23 years Russia did not form a treaty, which would have prevented the coup.

              There was no need for a treaty because there weren’t any tensions between Ukraine and Russia, Ukraine also expressed no ambitions to join NATO until the coup, you get that right? All the problems started after the coup.

              Instead Russia is tearing itself apart trying to keep its claws dug into a little bit of Ukrainian territory.

              In what universe is Russia is tearing itself apart exactly? Russian economy is growing, the government has higher approval rating than pretty much any western country, and Russia managed to refocus its trade away from the west. Even mainstream western media is openly admitting all this now.

              In any scenario where you create an image of the west as some kind of empire overlord powerhouse that manipulates all global events, you make Russia and ex-Soviets look hopelessly stupid and incompetent.

              Among the dumb things you’ve said in this thread, this certainly take the cake. The reason US emerged as a global hegemon out of WW2 was for the simple reason that US was not subject to the destruction of the war. While USSR, Europe, and China were completely devastated, US profiteered off the war, and then subjugated Europe to itself after when the Cold War started. I realize that you’ve had the misfortune of being subjected to US “education” system, but not understanding this is frankly embarrassing.

              • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                There was no need for a treaty because there weren’t any tensions between Ukraine and Russia, Ukraine also expressed no ambitions to join NATO until the coup, you get that right? All the problems started after the coup.

                Let me get this right, all the experts are warning about NATO expansion putting pressure on Russia, but Russia is feeling no pressure from NATO expansion. All the experts are warning about it! But there’s no tension. Again, you’re just saying that ex-Soviets are severely stupid and incompetent, because apparently this was a big deal since 1997, but also no big deal until 2014. Your timelines are incoherent.

                In what universe is Russia is tearing itself apart exactly? Russian economy is growing, the government has higher approval rating than pretty much any western country, and Russia managed to refocus its trade away from the west. Even mainstream western media is openly admitting all this now.

                Lol, I would approve of my government if disapproving meant being thrown out of a window.

                You know what, you’re right. Russia is doing great, we’re going to see a massive victory over Ukraine and the war will be over. Any day now.

                The reason US emerged as a global hegemon out of WW2

                Obviously the US had a huge economic advantage, explain how that economic advantage leads to the extreme geopolitical incompetence of ex-Soviets. The incompetence that means they can’t from treaties, they dangle like a puppet by NATO strings, and start wars they can’t finish.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Let me get this right, all the experts are warning about NATO expansion putting pressure on Russia, but Russia is feeling no pressure from NATO expansion.

                  I don’t know what part of this you’re having trouble wrapping your head around. Ukraine was a neutral state that did trade with both Russia and the west and wasn’t joining any military alliances with either side. If you have some new information nobody knows about that contradicts this then feel free to share it.

                  Again, you’re just saying that ex-Soviets are severely stupid and incompetent, because apparently this was a big deal since 1997, but also no big deal until 2014. Your timelines are incoherent.

                  Nowhere am I saying anything of the sort, these are just your delusional ramblings.

                  Lol, I would approve of my government if disapproving meant being thrown out of a window.

                  You’ll have to forgive me, I keep forgetting I’m talking to a child.

                  You know what, you’re right. Russia is doing great, we’re going to see a massive victory over Ukraine and the war will be over. Any day now.

                  How do you think this war is going to end exactly?

                  Obviously the US had a huge economic advantage, explain how that economic advantage leads to the extreme geopolitical incompetence of ex-Soviets.

                  What extreme geopolitical incompetence are you talking about exactly? Last I checked, Soviets managed to fight against your despotic regime for over 70 years.

                  • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I don’t know what part of this you’re having trouble wrapping your head around. Ukraine was a neutral state that did trade with both Russia and the west and wasn’t joining any military alliances with either side. If you have some new information nobody knows about that contradicts this then feel free to share it.

                    It’s not about just Ukraine. You’re so narrow, it’s like you can’t engage with my points outside of a pre-programmed response. Russia could be forming treaties with ANY and ALL neighboring countries. There is (almost…) no reason not to. If NATO has the geopolitical savvy to expand with treaties, what is stopping Russia. That’s what you need to figure out.

                    You’ll have to forgive me, I keep forgetting I’m talking to a child.

                    Lol, do you deny the high rate of people falling out of windows in Russia?

                    How do you think this war is going to end exactly?

                    Likely not for years, and either Russia will back out, or they will successfully genocide the people of Ukraine and take the bombed-out land.

                    What extreme geopolitical incompetence are you talking about exactly? Last I checked, Soviets managed to fight against your despotic regime for over 70 years.

                    “Soviets managed to fight” you mean ex-Soviets, because the USSR is kaput. Plus all the NATO territory expansion, the US empire growing its collection of vassal states, extracting and growing its wealth. That is your story, not mine. What does Russia have to show since 1991?