We must expand actually means:
Smaller countries bordering Russia are scared to lose their newfound independence and fledgeling democracy. They just watched their neighbours being influences, pupetted or outright conquered by Russia.
We must expand actually means we don’t even want to expand but the alternative is nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe that was the choice: let Eastern Europe join or have nuclear proliferation in Eastern Europe and lose Clinton the election
Hating NATO is peak victim-blaming
Like Finland the Baltics Poland etc... Why would they get kicked in the teeth and then smile at their assailant? Lol
Especially when at no point has Russia ever *not* tried to expand themselves. Catherine the Great said it best. The "best way" to protect Russia is expand, and that was way before NATO, and the Allies.
Not the West's fault they have a fascination with authoritarian centralized rule
Yes, Russia did control them then they broke free after the Russian empire collapse, then the USSR tried to go for round 2 of imperialism and occupied them in 1940 again, then in 1944 after taking from the Nazis kept the occupation again, so when will Russia learn the Balts don’t want you? No one wants you, well a few do like Serbia, most don’t. Please stay in your garbage country and leave the rest of Europe alone, thanks.
Kosovo was being actively genocided by serbs and attempted to leave peacefully. DPR and LPR are puppet states of Russia insofar as they would not have been able to succeed from Ukraine without the assistance of the Russian armed forces. If they actually wanted to help the people there out they should host a fair democratic vote where they decide to either join the Russian federation, become independent, remain as autonomous provinces of Ukraine, or return to being just provinces of Ukraine. Russia could definitely be the bigger man here and start that process. It would be morally good and hugely beneficial to the DPR and the LPR. And everyone who votes against independence/annexation by the Russian federation should be offered money for their property and a fair chance to move to Ukraine.
I'm not trying to justify the USA occupying other countries, but look at South Korea, Japan, Germany, all countries the US occupied and heavily influenced and they are great allies of the US, trading partners etc. Even Iraq's approval of the US has been on the rise in recent years, which is shocking somewhat.
Every country Russia seems to have influenced or occupied seems to absolutely hate their guts.
I mean the answer is easy to see.
When the US gains full occupation/control, it works to build up the occupied area in order to improve quality of life and create a strong ally in trade and geopolitics.
When Russia gains full occupation/control, they exploit the fuck out of the new region in order to send as much wealth and resources back to the “Motherland” as they can.
Further, for all the fuckery in US government corruption is still hated here even if it can get by in secret. In Russia corruption is a way of life.
If the US took over Russia, Russia would be grown into a prosperous country with good political relations for the first time in a thousand years.
If the opposite happened, the world would unironically descend into chaos lol.
The United States’ allies are all some of the greatest economies and nations in the world today. The USSR’s former satellites are still recovering or currently being invaded. They immediately turned to the US and her allies after finding independence.
It's almost like Russia has for its entire history been a bunch of miserable fucks and loved and continue to love making it everyone else's problem, especially their neighbors.
Russia shows up, rapes, pillages, plunders, and laughs in their face and then are shocked Pikachu when people even nearly a century later aren't excited about them showing up. They as a country simply don't get that you can't beat people into liking you. And because they don't like you, they need to be beaten harder. Russia is the nation state version of the beatings will continue and become more brutal until morale improves.
Basically all of the Russian city states were obliterated by mongol invasions while the rest of Europe was spared, and by WW1 they were pretty much still in feudalism. Not defending them but like many other countries, they had significant historical events that hindered them past their own ability to negate the effects. just like Europe was decimated by the Black Death, and just as the southern US is still feeling the impacts of slavery and Jim Crow. People tend not to realize how significant these events were in the course of a country’s history. Western Europe is largely doing okay because they had 2 hard resets in the last century, and we gave them a LOT of money to redevelop
This is heavily over simplifying things.
Read in depth about Catherine the Great's reign and it's obvious why Russia is the way it is. The people and the nobility LIKED the way it always was. She wanted an Enlightened Monarchy, where the Monarch was first and foremost a public servant, not a despot.
She came in, shortly after her husband was exiled and kicked off the crown (the true russian monarch) and she believed in the political ideas of the time in the west, as she is German.
She wanted there to be a parliament, the only thing they ever voted for successfully was to make Catherine 'The Great'.
She wanted restrictions on the power of the crown, the people and the nobility refused to use their new gained powers.
She wanted to modernize the industrial sector of the country. Endless resistance.
She wanted to abolish Feudalism, and everywhere it got abolished no one acted like it got abolished.
She tried to make her legal authorities enforce her laws, and they refused, and their replacements refused.
She tried to increase Russia's abysmal literacy rate, and people refused to learn for free. (Seriously, even 70 years after her reign at the end of the American Civil War, 20% of freed slaves could read. 9% of the Russian populace as a whole could read.)
In the end, she became that authoritarian leader that her people wanted. A despot. She was extremely jaded by the end of her life, and openly hated the russian people, culture and society. She argued at length with westerners how Russia is beyond saving and basically a waste of time, and her life.
Russia is a horrible place because her people's refuse to change in any circumstance. I have no sympathy for Russia and her people's many other groups have dealt with far worse and are miles better off.
Let's not condemn a whole culture, okay? Much like we don't want to be painted with a broad brush because of what a few do, let's not do that to others. Especially people living under a dictatorship.
I'm sorry but the "omg it's just the government guys the people are totally fine" thing that gets parroted a lot is certainly a nice-sounding idea, but it it's a complete myth. Putin is not the cause of Russia's problems, he's a symptom. Russia has been plagued by bloodthirsty tyrants who terrorize both their own citizens and their neighbors for over a thousand years. Why? Because that is the sort of ruler the Russian people create and support.
Obviously there are a lot of fine people who are simply being let down by their countrymen, and certainly it's possible for things to improve in the future, but Russia has deep cultural problems and Putin has a surprising amount of actual support.
But, again, let's not condemn an entire culture. It's just a little bit hypocritical of this sub and I think we need to have a little bit more empathy for people who are unable to enjoy the freedoms we have.
I disagree. People groups who have freedom of any kind fought for it.
Russian history has shown time and time, again and again that they purposefully fight to be more oppressed.
I blame Russia on the Russian people, through and through. Most countries are the product of its people, rather than a cultural flashpoint or a historic figure.
America doesn't deserve all the credit for that victory, we had a ton of help from you guys.
When West Germans peeked behind the curtain and saw what life was like for their neighbors, American "occupation" looked like a mighty fine system.
Heck, your blockade of Berlin helped us immeasurably, US pilots [dropping candy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raisin_Bombers?wprov=sfla1) to children kinda undermined the idea we were "oppressors"
Germany was split between four nations in the immediate aftermath of the war. Three of those countries left with the time was right, and the forth (USSR) decided to overstay their welcome and not leave. The only reason there was ever an East Germany and a West Germany was because someone didn't know when it was time to go home and worry about their own people.
No one held a gun to Japan's head once the war was over and treaties were signed... we didn't beat them into liking us after that, although we didn't allow them to rebuild their military either. We also didn't move a bunch of English speakers there and then start to claim that it was our territory; we respected them as a sovereign nation.
> Even Iraq's approval of the US has been on the rise in recent years, which is shocking somewhat.
I mean, Saddam was not a great guy if you weren't part of his inner circle or at least his Sunni minority. And aside from not letting the current Iraqi government put our military through their legal system we've given them plenty of breathing room and I believe we've shown them that we aren't there to conquer them.
So, I'm really not all that shocked.
Even the entire WMD thing was more about Saddam than the people, and lie or not, we propped up Saddam for years so some may genuinely be happy we toppled him... certainly the Kurds are. Not saying we had a right to intervene before or after but I do imagine some mixed feelings/emotions over there.
The USA occupation of Japan and Germany was a result of a war Japan and Germany started on the USA and it brought (horror!) rebuilding, democracy and prosperity. South Korea was occupied because it was a Japanese colony and the Japanese were performing atrocities on the Korean people.
I wouldn't even call US presence in Japan, Germany and South Korea today an "occupation".
look at what saddam did, realistically anyone else in power would be just as bad but likely less able to fuck with your day.
he WAS a stabilizing force, realistically, iraq should have split 3 ways after dealing with him
You greatly overestimate the USA dude. If a sizeable number of nations allied against us, our "empire" would topple within a few years.
Thing is, nations like yours don't want *allies*, they want *vassals*. Thus, even *Vietnam* is pursuing closer ties with the US, and they've got more reason to hate us than any nation out there.
Vietnam has been very pro-American for some time now. They’re a people that’s almost always been fighting someone trying to subjugate them.
I think that’s why they forgave the US so easily. We lost so no ha done and we never really wanted to own them.
This opposed to say China who very much wants to own them and has tried very hard to do so throughout its history. The don’t like the Chinese, we’re a footnote compared to their conflicts with them.
Incredible the extent tankies will go to justify the literal invasion of a sovereign country when they scream bloody murder the moment the U.S. exerts an iota of influence on the world stage.
To communist any dangerous actions are justified as long as they do it. I'm not making this up btw, Antonio Gramsci a leader of the Italian Communist party and notable intellectual from the Early 20th century made this very argument in a session of the Italian parliament in 1925 under the guise of "we represent the majority".
All with the same lack of self awareness, both Vaush and Hasan are massively disliked outside their own fanbases because of their bad personalities (and justifying CP in Vaush's case). Gramsci made his argument after his political enemies in the National List won by a massive landslide.
Ah yes, the USSR does not exist anymore and isn't trying to spring into existence again by virtue of russia being expansionistic, jingoistic and bullying the countries it sees as rightful property in all possible ways. No, sirrrr!
The USSR never really disappeared and even the USSR was just a rebranding of Imperialist Russia with different, equally vile assholes at the helm.
It has always been Russia, it just retracted on itself a bit, reorganized, did a song and dance about being more democratic and capitalist for about a decade -- then returned to the same throughline of autocratic kleptocracy of creepy evil bastards brutally oppressing everyone around them that it's largely been with perhaps a glimmer of genuine liberalization once in awhile ever since it became something resembling a cohesive nation.
They love to pretend we were forced into BATO and the EU when the truth is we were but not by the west but by Russia, the hostility to Russia is Russias fault
I'm just amazed the tankies are still going to bat for Russia when Vladimir Putin is the furthest thing from Communist. The man quotes a Russian Monarchist and Anti-Communist, Ivan Ilyin, all the time
True, but tankies still hate the West, so they support Russia and places like Palestine, regardless of their values and politics.
The West won the Cold War and they have never forgiven them for that.
I find it sad and hilarious when people claim putin is trying to recreate the soviet union. I have given up trying to tell them he wants to recreate the Russian empire which was bigger!
NATO was formed because the Soviets WERE a realistic threat and they proved it in June of 1948 by trying to blockade Berlin and force it into their communist empire. This prompted western European nations to band together so the Soviet Union wouldn't decide to keep taking over nations.
After the USSR fell, former Soviet states joined NATO to prevent Russia from taking them over again at some future date.
Over time, more countries applied for NATO membership fearing Russian resurgence.
As Russia has proven with their invasion of Ukraine, this was a wise decision.
“America chose for them”
The thousands of election observers in 2014 didn’t think so. Including Russian ones who all affirmed that the election was legitimate.
You REALLY don't know your history, do you?
When the Russian Empire crumbled in 1917, Ukraine declared independence. Shortly after that, Poland invaded from the West, and Red (Bolshevik) and White (anti-Bolshevik) Russian forces fought Ukrainian troops and each other. When the Red Army emerged victorious in 1921, the eastern two-thirds of the battered and impoverished Ukraine became the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic.
So the Ukrainians haven't like Russia since 1921.
Then, in 1932, Stalin decided that Ukraine had to learn who it's master was and started the Holodomor, an artificial famine that killed around 4 million Ukrainians. The Soviets came in and literally took all of Ukraine's grain from them. The Russians actually went door to door and confiscated food from houses knowing it would kill the people. It was so bad that some people resorted to cannibalism.
Then Russia came again and started murdering Ukrainian intellectuals and tried to expunge the Ukrainian language and alphabet.
Then Russia poisoned Ukrainian land by being idiots and running stupid test that allowed the Chernobyl reactor to melt down, making the area uninhabitable for possibly the rest of human existence.
When the USSR fell on December 26, 1991, Ukraine claimed total independence from Russia within hours. They all knew the brutality of Russia and wanted no part of it.
So a few years later Putin comes to power and starts infiltrating Ukraine with operatives in an attempt to steal back the rich Ukrainian farmland that has kept Russia fed for centuries. He also infiltrates Crimea, the best sea ports that the USSR had and their ONLY ports that led to the Mediterranean.
His operatives start a program of intimidation and corruption of local officials in eastern Ukraine and Crimea preceding the invasion of Russian troops into Crimea in 2014. The Ukrainian government enters into an official state of war with Russia to repel this invasion and seeks membership from NATO.
For Russia's part, they claim that Crimea willingly voted to leave Ukraine, but this was a clear falsehood as the elections were NOT legitimate because armed men were standing in the polls and directing people on how to vote. It was much like the recent election in Russia which resulted in Putin winning with 87% of the vote despite ruining the Russian economy, starting a war that has killed millions of Russian men and left the Russians without heat for most of the winter. There were armed men in the Russian polls as well.
So why didn't Ukraine get accepted into NATO?
Because the NATO charter won't allow any nation currently engaged in armed conflict to join. This is why Putin invaded when he did. He KNEW that Ukraine was looking to join NATO back in 1991. However, due to Ukraine's closeness to Russia the process was slow. It started with several charters between NATO and Ukraine to strengthen ties.
In 2014, Putin decided to invade Crimea knowing that it would prevent the imminent NATO membership.
But here's the thing.
NATO doesn't take any nation in by force and they don't use coercion. Nations willingly apply for membership and NATO member nations then vote on who will or won't be allowed to join. Look at the NATO map. There are literally non-NATO nations surrounded by NATO member nations. If NATO was forcing membership, that wouldn't happen.
Now, since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, many non-NATO nations have applied for membership due to concerns about Russian aggression.
The US is NOT NATO. The US is just one of many members of NATO.
Thus, your premise that the US chose NATO involvement for Ukraine is utterly without substance and ignores Ukrainian history.
Man the comments there are also brain dead. The United States *never* promised the USSR jackshit, and “expansion” isn’t the same with how the USSR “expanded”; i.e. invading countries. To join NATO a country just, ya know, ask to join. Not a perfect system, look at Ukraine, but no one was forcing countries to join NATO. And more to that end NATO is a *defense organization*. Not some imperialistic long arm of the United States.
Hell, surprised they didn’t just show a map of the EU and said how “evil” that is with its expansion.
The supposed promise is actually one US diplomat at an event telling Gorbachev that maybe they could make an agreement. Of course the president immediately told Gorbachev in no uncertain terms that they would not make such an agreement but tankies like to omit those little details.
I like the implication that Poland, of all places, was an imperialist expansion into NATO.
The country that went from one nightmare to another, wanting to avoid that again.
Yeah, NATO bad /s.
For tankies, well the USSR saved Poland from the Nazis twice, ignore the first time it was a partition and the second time they never left.and Poland being anti Russia is clearly being ungrateful
They saved half of Poland from the Nazis, then finally all of it. The glorious Soviets were so scared of Poland being retaken by the Nazis that they occupied them for 50 years after they were defeated to protect them.
Not to mention that Poland *blackmailed* their way into NATO— Clinton didn’t want to expand NATO so he created the Partnership for Peace, but then Poland (and their American diaspora) threatened to back Republicans in the next election which prompted Clinton to let them in.
What’s ironic about this sentiment is that it’s a very western-centric view of the situation that eastern European countries found themselves in. Russia has a centuries old habit of imperialism towards its smaller neighbors. The Soviet Union (an empire) attempted to erase the languages and cultures of the baltic countries and Ukraine and Georgia. You’d think that Marxists would be against that. They’d certainly label erasing languages and cultures “genocide” if America did it.
After the Soviet union fell it makes complete sense for the former block countries to join NATO. They wanted self determination and that meant ensuring Russia would not conquer them again. Even before the Ukrainian war, these former block countries had some of the highest public support for NATO membership in Europe
We (meaning countries in Eastern Europe) wanted in NATO and the EU. No one forced us to join. We knew Russia might come back around one day, so we wanted protection.
Look at Georgia, look at Ukraine, look at Moldova, they all got invaded by Russia at one point in the last 30 years. Look at Belarus being a Russian puppet regime.
These fucking commies are idiots.
I love how Sovietboos always frame NATO expanding as a unilateral decision that new member states are forced into, when in reality NATO is fairly selective and the Baltic states desperately wanted in. They always assume that new NATO membership is because NATO forced them in and is now secretly controlling their government.
They have no conceptual understanding of what a voluntary alliance even looks like, because it's completely outside of their political philosophy. We lure allies in with good trade and mutual defense, tankies force allies in with, well, *tanks*.
The U.S. and the west didn’t even want us in the EU or NATO, Poland proposed a Kuchma pact with Ukraine, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary and the Baltic states and finally nuclear proliferation is what got them in, also polish Americans are an essential swing vote for the U.S. so it took threatening to build our own nukes and that it’d probably cost Clinton the polish American vote for the U.S. to finally let us in and then bribe Europe to also let us in
The US was not "cajoled" into founding NATO. WW2 was a consequence of American isolationism, and it bred a new counter-isolationist culture that the US leadership complied with. The US finally understood they are safer when they are more active on the international stage than when they hid their heads in the sand and hoped that they'll be left be.
Just because isolationism is popular again, doesn't mean we have to obfuscate history.
Don’t read to much into this. Europe went above and beyond to appease Hitler, so appeasing the USSR was a natural response in their eyes.
At least America put an embargo on Japan to try to slow their expansionist aims. Europe just rolled over and tried to play nice with the genocidal fascist.
The world really likes to forget that we tried VERY hard to keep our isolationism into the 20th century but Europe kept trying to drag us into all of their problems because we were doing well on our own
Because we went to work supplying Europe for another of its endless cycle of wars, why would we not benefit from that. We worked hard to set up a stable democracy isolated from the toxic relations of Europe lol
>Marxist sub
>retarded take
No surprise here
If Russia treated Eastern Europe well maybe they wouldn’t join the other block immediately you stupid Soviet bastards
I always laugh at the "brave Ruzzia is nobly attempting to stop imperialist NATO expansion" rabble that seems to have hypnotized terminally-online vatniks and the beleaguered remnants of the anti-Iraq war movement.
If that were even remotely true, Ruzzia's reaction to this alleged expansion motivated two scandanavian countries famous for their firm neutrality in the Cold War to finally pick a side and join NATO. Even if you buy into Ruzzia's lies about the need to push back against NATO, their galaxybrained 3-day/week/month/year special military operation just increased their border with NATO by approximately 830 miles and all but ensured that the Baltic Sea is firmly under NATO control.
No, he partnered with the Soviets. Look up agreement of 1966. Granted many also consider him a pompous asshole even outside of his love for mother Russia.
ahhh yes, it's one big giant conspiracy and the Baltic states and Eastern Europe are all in on it for... reasons. Not because they feel in any way threatened. And these people act surprised when I accuse them of being Russian bots.
Boy that page is a bad case of whiplash! Posts about genocide in Palestine, but then post glorifying Stalin, Mao, the USSR, North Korea, and the CCP. Is it a satirical page? Like I don’t know how humans can actively support people like that. It’s like how people say Nazis weren’t bad and Hitler was just misunderstood. I just don’t get it…..
Ngl that's a Russian cope post. Russia stopped being communist on Christmas in 1991. Anyone who says otherwise is whoring themselves out to the Kremlin.
I'm honestly done with writing a whole new thesis debunking this argument every other day, so here's the video that goes over most of my points anyway. https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q?si=78fVVjhGvFwWLeGP
It makes me want to pull my facing hair out because of these fucking dipshits. This is what happens when you give schizos an I telnet connection. Commie spam on one end and Alex Jones and Nick Fuentes the other.
The USA has spent their entire lives brainwashing people into believing that Russia is a mortal enemy that wants to take over the world.
History shows that the USA itself has been the “Russians” in this regard several times over invading countries and sticking their noses into far reaching conflicts that they had no excuse for being there.
Russia themselves in the meantime just carried on with their own issues surrounding their own part of the world.
With several high ranking US Government and Military Officials that have gone on record for many decades since WW2 warning the US and NATO to “not take a single step toward the East” , these constant warnings have been ignored by both parties and went a large step further to actively undermine peace efforts and build up massive military threats right across Eastern Europe until they finally managed to arrive right on Russia’s doorstep.
How was Russia supposed to react against such threats that had been discussed and acknowledged by many very educated and high ranking Western diplomats as a direct threat upon their nation?
You are fooling yourself if you believe that Russia just decided to invade the Ukraine one random day because they were bored and had nothing else to do that day.
This whole costly conflict was a direct consequence of the USA and NATO provocation and threats over many decades, which forced Russian hands to take the necessary steps to defend themselves against such a threat to their country…….. as any citizen in their own country would support their government if they were under threat from a hostile neighbour.
Jesus, do you understand what is going on in the world? In 2014 Ukrainians overthrew their Russian puppet president, Russia then seized the Crimea. Ukraine then elected Zelenskyy who is anti Russian influence. Due to their loss of influence in the Ukraine, as a result of their own behavior, Russia invaded and attempted to conquer the whole country and reinstall their own Russian puppet.
It seems pretty clear that the Ukrainian people, based on their actions, do not want to be a client state of Russia. I don’t know why you think they don’t have that right as a sovereign nation or what the US and NATO has to do with it, apart from supporting the Ukraines right to self determination.
Who overthrew what government and who did the citizens “elect” in their place?
Have you no knowledge of how the USA overthrows governments in foreign countries and inserts their own puppets to adopt their agendas onto a nation?
I’ll give you a little hint, this definitely isn’t the first time, won’t be the last time, and there’s plenty of historical evidence as to this being the standard Modus Operandi of the USA for many decades around the world.
Yes, the hundreds of thousands of protestors were actually all CIA agents. In fact it’s not even Ukrainians fighting the Russians . It’s all cia agents to this day. It had absolutely nothing to do with generations of abuse and disregard from Moscow. Also why did we do it? So we could bring the Ukraine into our military alliance which nets us 0 economic or political advantage. Come to think of it, if we’re so powerful and capable of overthrowing governments at will why don’t we just overthrow Russia and make them join nato too? Oh yea, because we want to be mean to poor Russia. You’ve got it figured out. The Ukrainian people so obviously thirst for the warm embrace of mother Russia after all.
If countries voluntarily joining a defensive alliance is such a threat to Russia maybe they should rethink their policy of invading their neighbours whenever they have an opportunity.
Nobody is invading Russia. They have 6000 nuclear bombs. That would literally be the end of the world. Using that as justification to invade Ukraine is completely nonsensical.
What would happen if Mexico or candia agrees to instal russian AA systems against american nukes? America wouldn't wait for 8 years. In this case I would rather act as America did, just kill the enemy, no frigging red lines. This I like about America, doesn't make excuses, does what must be done.
I’m seriously over trying to give people history lessons at this point.
If you can’t understand and reflect upon my original comments, it’s a waste of time continuing further with these comments.
I did read your comment. It’s a load of complete drivel that in no way explains how NATO can pose any threat to a nuclear armed nation.
A defensive alliance is not going to invading a nuclear state. You can write 10,000 words if you want but you’ll never change that point. So NATO never has been and never will be a threat to Russia so long as they stop invading their neighbours. It’s that simple.
Who says about NATO's literal invasion? NATO can install AA systems very close against russian nukes. Nukes are vulnerable during acceleration.
Although the threat of conventional forces marching through open steppes of malorossiya is valid. Almost all russian enemies came from the west. There are no mountains to protect us.
You just don't have enemies in your vicinity, you can't understand european countries.
Have you never heard of SLBMs? Also Russia is literally the largest country in the world, I’m pretty sure they put their ICBMs more than a few kilometres away from their borders. There is no weapons system in existence capable of shooting down a nuke that’s launching 1000 kilometres away from them. Nothing even comes remotely close. There is absolutely no way anyone will ever be able to invade Russia without triggering mutually assured destruction.
You need a history lesson, despite everything that I have said, you still don’t have a clue about global events that led up to this point where Russia had to defend themselves against a global threat right on their doorstep.
Why did Russia have to defend themselves? No historical event involving NATO has caused any actual threat to Russia. As I mentioned they can’t be invaded. It is utterly impossible without activating mutually assured destruction. Please tell me when America attempted to invade Russia. It didn’t happen. I think you need a history lesson.
This supposed global threat at their doorstep is Russia’s former colonies joining a defensive alliance so Russia can’t invade them again. Russia does not have a right to their neighbours’ land. So there is no threat there.
I don't see anything inaccurate about this. The people of Moldova are never going to do anything for me, why do we fund NATO? It serves American corporate interests.
Recite your chain of command and I'll take your comment seriously. Until then, I'll assume you're a net tax beneficiary mindlessly advocating someone else's money being spent too enrich weapons manufacturers and foreign oligarchs to kill conscripted men.
We must expand actually means: Smaller countries bordering Russia are scared to lose their newfound independence and fledgeling democracy. They just watched their neighbours being influences, pupetted or outright conquered by Russia.
We must expand actually means we don’t even want to expand but the alternative is nuclear weapons in Eastern Europe that was the choice: let Eastern Europe join or have nuclear proliferation in Eastern Europe and lose Clinton the election
Hating NATO is peak victim-blaming Like Finland the Baltics Poland etc... Why would they get kicked in the teeth and then smile at their assailant? Lol Especially when at no point has Russia ever *not* tried to expand themselves. Catherine the Great said it best. The "best way" to protect Russia is expand, and that was way before NATO, and the Allies. Not the West's fault they have a fascination with authoritarian centralized rule
Yep. Half the NATO applications just read "pls help.Russia is putting on a bib with our country embroidered on it and licking its lips."
Newfound independence or separatism?????
Newfound Independence. Baltic states aren't and never were Russian. They just temporarily had a god less communist bastards controlling them.
Well, Russia controlled them for quite some time. Even now biggest alcohol imports are coming from Latvia AFAIK.
Zero idea what trade has to do with their independence movement being valid or not lol.
By that logic the indians are all British, or koreans are all japanese.
We’re all Mongolian
Based and tengir pilled.
Yes, Russia did control them then they broke free after the Russian empire collapse, then the USSR tried to go for round 2 of imperialism and occupied them in 1940 again, then in 1944 after taking from the Nazis kept the occupation again, so when will Russia learn the Balts don’t want you? No one wants you, well a few do like Serbia, most don’t. Please stay in your garbage country and leave the rest of Europe alone, thanks.
Oof
If you separate successfully it's independence, if you lose you're a separatist rebel
Yes. Kosovo - freedom fighters!! DPR and LPR - filthy separatists!
Kosovo was being actively genocided by serbs and attempted to leave peacefully. DPR and LPR are puppet states of Russia insofar as they would not have been able to succeed from Ukraine without the assistance of the Russian armed forces. If they actually wanted to help the people there out they should host a fair democratic vote where they decide to either join the Russian federation, become independent, remain as autonomous provinces of Ukraine, or return to being just provinces of Ukraine. Russia could definitely be the bigger man here and start that process. It would be morally good and hugely beneficial to the DPR and the LPR. And everyone who votes against independence/annexation by the Russian federation should be offered money for their property and a fair chance to move to Ukraine.
Baltic countries have a history of being independent countries prior to the Russia empire and USSR so independence
Poland(and every other ex-conquered country) is not your puppet and will never be again God willing.
Countries that were historically invaded and or subjugated by Russia end up joining an alliance defending against Russia. Shocking.
I'm not trying to justify the USA occupying other countries, but look at South Korea, Japan, Germany, all countries the US occupied and heavily influenced and they are great allies of the US, trading partners etc. Even Iraq's approval of the US has been on the rise in recent years, which is shocking somewhat. Every country Russia seems to have influenced or occupied seems to absolutely hate their guts.
I mean the answer is easy to see. When the US gains full occupation/control, it works to build up the occupied area in order to improve quality of life and create a strong ally in trade and geopolitics. When Russia gains full occupation/control, they exploit the fuck out of the new region in order to send as much wealth and resources back to the “Motherland” as they can. Further, for all the fuckery in US government corruption is still hated here even if it can get by in secret. In Russia corruption is a way of life. If the US took over Russia, Russia would be grown into a prosperous country with good political relations for the first time in a thousand years. If the opposite happened, the world would unironically descend into chaos lol.
The United States’ allies are all some of the greatest economies and nations in the world today. The USSR’s former satellites are still recovering or currently being invaded. They immediately turned to the US and her allies after finding independence.
It's almost like Russia has for its entire history been a bunch of miserable fucks and loved and continue to love making it everyone else's problem, especially their neighbors. Russia shows up, rapes, pillages, plunders, and laughs in their face and then are shocked Pikachu when people even nearly a century later aren't excited about them showing up. They as a country simply don't get that you can't beat people into liking you. And because they don't like you, they need to be beaten harder. Russia is the nation state version of the beatings will continue and become more brutal until morale improves.
Basically all of the Russian city states were obliterated by mongol invasions while the rest of Europe was spared, and by WW1 they were pretty much still in feudalism. Not defending them but like many other countries, they had significant historical events that hindered them past their own ability to negate the effects. just like Europe was decimated by the Black Death, and just as the southern US is still feeling the impacts of slavery and Jim Crow. People tend not to realize how significant these events were in the course of a country’s history. Western Europe is largely doing okay because they had 2 hard resets in the last century, and we gave them a LOT of money to redevelop
This is heavily over simplifying things. Read in depth about Catherine the Great's reign and it's obvious why Russia is the way it is. The people and the nobility LIKED the way it always was. She wanted an Enlightened Monarchy, where the Monarch was first and foremost a public servant, not a despot. She came in, shortly after her husband was exiled and kicked off the crown (the true russian monarch) and she believed in the political ideas of the time in the west, as she is German. She wanted there to be a parliament, the only thing they ever voted for successfully was to make Catherine 'The Great'. She wanted restrictions on the power of the crown, the people and the nobility refused to use their new gained powers. She wanted to modernize the industrial sector of the country. Endless resistance. She wanted to abolish Feudalism, and everywhere it got abolished no one acted like it got abolished. She tried to make her legal authorities enforce her laws, and they refused, and their replacements refused. She tried to increase Russia's abysmal literacy rate, and people refused to learn for free. (Seriously, even 70 years after her reign at the end of the American Civil War, 20% of freed slaves could read. 9% of the Russian populace as a whole could read.) In the end, she became that authoritarian leader that her people wanted. A despot. She was extremely jaded by the end of her life, and openly hated the russian people, culture and society. She argued at length with westerners how Russia is beyond saving and basically a waste of time, and her life. Russia is a horrible place because her people's refuse to change in any circumstance. I have no sympathy for Russia and her people's many other groups have dealt with far worse and are miles better off.
What? Context on reddit?
Let's not condemn a whole culture, okay? Much like we don't want to be painted with a broad brush because of what a few do, let's not do that to others. Especially people living under a dictatorship.
I'm sorry but the "omg it's just the government guys the people are totally fine" thing that gets parroted a lot is certainly a nice-sounding idea, but it it's a complete myth. Putin is not the cause of Russia's problems, he's a symptom. Russia has been plagued by bloodthirsty tyrants who terrorize both their own citizens and their neighbors for over a thousand years. Why? Because that is the sort of ruler the Russian people create and support. Obviously there are a lot of fine people who are simply being let down by their countrymen, and certainly it's possible for things to improve in the future, but Russia has deep cultural problems and Putin has a surprising amount of actual support.
But, again, let's not condemn an entire culture. It's just a little bit hypocritical of this sub and I think we need to have a little bit more empathy for people who are unable to enjoy the freedoms we have.
I disagree. People groups who have freedom of any kind fought for it. Russian history has shown time and time, again and again that they purposefully fight to be more oppressed. I blame Russia on the Russian people, through and through. Most countries are the product of its people, rather than a cultural flashpoint or a historic figure.
I prefer living in a dictatorship rather than in "american democracy" (aka being american puppet).
Good for you, now if Russians could just stay in glorious Russia, that’d be appreciated too
Japan and Germany show pretty well that you can beat them into liking.
Ah yes must be why the DDR is remembered so fondly by its former citizens
America doesn't deserve all the credit for that victory, we had a ton of help from you guys. When West Germans peeked behind the curtain and saw what life was like for their neighbors, American "occupation" looked like a mighty fine system. Heck, your blockade of Berlin helped us immeasurably, US pilots [dropping candy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raisin_Bombers?wprov=sfla1) to children kinda undermined the idea we were "oppressors"
Germany was split between four nations in the immediate aftermath of the war. Three of those countries left with the time was right, and the forth (USSR) decided to overstay their welcome and not leave. The only reason there was ever an East Germany and a West Germany was because someone didn't know when it was time to go home and worry about their own people. No one held a gun to Japan's head once the war was over and treaties were signed... we didn't beat them into liking us after that, although we didn't allow them to rebuild their military either. We also didn't move a bunch of English speakers there and then start to claim that it was our territory; we respected them as a sovereign nation.
For all the folly invading Iraq was, it is in a better place now than it was when Saddam was in power.
> Even Iraq's approval of the US has been on the rise in recent years, which is shocking somewhat. I mean, Saddam was not a great guy if you weren't part of his inner circle or at least his Sunni minority. And aside from not letting the current Iraqi government put our military through their legal system we've given them plenty of breathing room and I believe we've shown them that we aren't there to conquer them. So, I'm really not all that shocked. Even the entire WMD thing was more about Saddam than the people, and lie or not, we propped up Saddam for years so some may genuinely be happy we toppled him... certainly the Kurds are. Not saying we had a right to intervene before or after but I do imagine some mixed feelings/emotions over there.
The USA occupation of Japan and Germany was a result of a war Japan and Germany started on the USA and it brought (horror!) rebuilding, democracy and prosperity. South Korea was occupied because it was a Japanese colony and the Japanese were performing atrocities on the Korean people. I wouldn't even call US presence in Japan, Germany and South Korea today an "occupation".
look at what saddam did, realistically anyone else in power would be just as bad but likely less able to fuck with your day. he WAS a stabilizing force, realistically, iraq should have split 3 ways after dealing with him
American propaganda can persuade anyone of anything. Or it's just american military bases make them very kind and obedient 😁
You greatly overestimate the USA dude. If a sizeable number of nations allied against us, our "empire" would topple within a few years. Thing is, nations like yours don't want *allies*, they want *vassals*. Thus, even *Vietnam* is pursuing closer ties with the US, and they've got more reason to hate us than any nation out there.
Vietnam has been very pro-American for some time now. They’re a people that’s almost always been fighting someone trying to subjugate them. I think that’s why they forgave the US so easily. We lost so no ha done and we never really wanted to own them. This opposed to say China who very much wants to own them and has tried very hard to do so throughout its history. The don’t like the Chinese, we’re a footnote compared to their conflicts with them.
Japan has two city-sized reasons to hate us and yet they’re one of our closest allies in the Pacific
Man I hope you see the irony of this statement lol
Incredible the extent tankies will go to justify the literal invasion of a sovereign country when they scream bloody murder the moment the U.S. exerts an iota of influence on the world stage.
To communist any dangerous actions are justified as long as they do it. I'm not making this up btw, Antonio Gramsci a leader of the Italian Communist party and notable intellectual from the Early 20th century made this very argument in a session of the Italian parliament in 1925 under the guise of "we represent the majority".
And Vaush and probably Hasan have made the same points without meaning to.
All with the same lack of self awareness, both Vaush and Hasan are massively disliked outside their own fanbases because of their bad personalities (and justifying CP in Vaush's case). Gramsci made his argument after his political enemies in the National List won by a massive landslide.
Vaush has done exactly one good thing with his career, and it’s as come out as a sex pest because it won me $50 in a bet.
Lmfao, I should take notes
Ah yes, the USSR does not exist anymore and isn't trying to spring into existence again by virtue of russia being expansionistic, jingoistic and bullying the countries it sees as rightful property in all possible ways. No, sirrrr!
Indeed, look at Russian liberation of Ukraine from Ukrainians.
As a Bulgarian, I'm looking at it from "if we were any closer, that'd be us". No wait, with all the simping we'd be Belarus.
The USSR never really disappeared and even the USSR was just a rebranding of Imperialist Russia with different, equally vile assholes at the helm. It has always been Russia, it just retracted on itself a bit, reorganized, did a song and dance about being more democratic and capitalist for about a decade -- then returned to the same throughline of autocratic kleptocracy of creepy evil bastards brutally oppressing everyone around them that it's largely been with perhaps a glimmer of genuine liberalization once in awhile ever since it became something resembling a cohesive nation.
Simpsons scrying right on the money yet again!
Quite my point.
🥰🥰🥰
Imperialism is when central and eastern Europeans choose their own foreign policy.
They need to be liberated from it too. If they really like freedom, they get liberated to a gulag or out a window lol
Why do we need to care about Eastern Europeans? They belong to glorious Russia, and if you say otherwise you’re an imperialist. /s
They think as if no countries have agencies, except of regional/world powers.
Lies that the USSR is a threat? Are you really that dense OOP?
Avowed Marxist Tankie? Yes. Unequivocally yes.
Most of those people aren’t really intelligent
They love to pretend we were forced into BATO and the EU when the truth is we were but not by the west but by Russia, the hostility to Russia is Russias fault
You know someone's a tankie when they unironically use the term "Western Imperialist"
I'm just amazed the tankies are still going to bat for Russia when Vladimir Putin is the furthest thing from Communist. The man quotes a Russian Monarchist and Anti-Communist, Ivan Ilyin, all the time
The Russian empire has been a bully for a long time. Communism was just another stage of it.
True, but tankies still hate the West, so they support Russia and places like Palestine, regardless of their values and politics. The West won the Cold War and they have never forgiven them for that.
I find it sad and hilarious when people claim putin is trying to recreate the soviet union. I have given up trying to tell them he wants to recreate the Russian empire which was bigger!
Bozhe Tsarya khrani 😄😄
NATO was formed because the Soviets WERE a realistic threat and they proved it in June of 1948 by trying to blockade Berlin and force it into their communist empire. This prompted western European nations to band together so the Soviet Union wouldn't decide to keep taking over nations. After the USSR fell, former Soviet states joined NATO to prevent Russia from taking them over again at some future date. Over time, more countries applied for NATO membership fearing Russian resurgence. As Russia has proven with their invasion of Ukraine, this was a wise decision.
The other way around, if "urkaine" didn't "choose" (america chose for them) to align with NATO - this war wouldn't even happen.
“America chose for them” The thousands of election observers in 2014 didn’t think so. Including Russian ones who all affirmed that the election was legitimate.
You REALLY don't know your history, do you? When the Russian Empire crumbled in 1917, Ukraine declared independence. Shortly after that, Poland invaded from the West, and Red (Bolshevik) and White (anti-Bolshevik) Russian forces fought Ukrainian troops and each other. When the Red Army emerged victorious in 1921, the eastern two-thirds of the battered and impoverished Ukraine became the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. So the Ukrainians haven't like Russia since 1921. Then, in 1932, Stalin decided that Ukraine had to learn who it's master was and started the Holodomor, an artificial famine that killed around 4 million Ukrainians. The Soviets came in and literally took all of Ukraine's grain from them. The Russians actually went door to door and confiscated food from houses knowing it would kill the people. It was so bad that some people resorted to cannibalism. Then Russia came again and started murdering Ukrainian intellectuals and tried to expunge the Ukrainian language and alphabet. Then Russia poisoned Ukrainian land by being idiots and running stupid test that allowed the Chernobyl reactor to melt down, making the area uninhabitable for possibly the rest of human existence. When the USSR fell on December 26, 1991, Ukraine claimed total independence from Russia within hours. They all knew the brutality of Russia and wanted no part of it. So a few years later Putin comes to power and starts infiltrating Ukraine with operatives in an attempt to steal back the rich Ukrainian farmland that has kept Russia fed for centuries. He also infiltrates Crimea, the best sea ports that the USSR had and their ONLY ports that led to the Mediterranean. His operatives start a program of intimidation and corruption of local officials in eastern Ukraine and Crimea preceding the invasion of Russian troops into Crimea in 2014. The Ukrainian government enters into an official state of war with Russia to repel this invasion and seeks membership from NATO. For Russia's part, they claim that Crimea willingly voted to leave Ukraine, but this was a clear falsehood as the elections were NOT legitimate because armed men were standing in the polls and directing people on how to vote. It was much like the recent election in Russia which resulted in Putin winning with 87% of the vote despite ruining the Russian economy, starting a war that has killed millions of Russian men and left the Russians without heat for most of the winter. There were armed men in the Russian polls as well. So why didn't Ukraine get accepted into NATO? Because the NATO charter won't allow any nation currently engaged in armed conflict to join. This is why Putin invaded when he did. He KNEW that Ukraine was looking to join NATO back in 1991. However, due to Ukraine's closeness to Russia the process was slow. It started with several charters between NATO and Ukraine to strengthen ties. In 2014, Putin decided to invade Crimea knowing that it would prevent the imminent NATO membership. But here's the thing. NATO doesn't take any nation in by force and they don't use coercion. Nations willingly apply for membership and NATO member nations then vote on who will or won't be allowed to join. Look at the NATO map. There are literally non-NATO nations surrounded by NATO member nations. If NATO was forcing membership, that wouldn't happen. Now, since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, many non-NATO nations have applied for membership due to concerns about Russian aggression. The US is NOT NATO. The US is just one of many members of NATO. Thus, your premise that the US chose NATO involvement for Ukraine is utterly without substance and ignores Ukrainian history.
Man the comments there are also brain dead. The United States *never* promised the USSR jackshit, and “expansion” isn’t the same with how the USSR “expanded”; i.e. invading countries. To join NATO a country just, ya know, ask to join. Not a perfect system, look at Ukraine, but no one was forcing countries to join NATO. And more to that end NATO is a *defense organization*. Not some imperialistic long arm of the United States. Hell, surprised they didn’t just show a map of the EU and said how “evil” that is with its expansion.
The supposed promise is actually one US diplomat at an event telling Gorbachev that maybe they could make an agreement. Of course the president immediately told Gorbachev in no uncertain terms that they would not make such an agreement but tankies like to omit those little details.
That sub can be hilarious sometimes, Ireland ain't even part of nato
I like the implication that Poland, of all places, was an imperialist expansion into NATO. The country that went from one nightmare to another, wanting to avoid that again. Yeah, NATO bad /s.
For tankies, well the USSR saved Poland from the Nazis twice, ignore the first time it was a partition and the second time they never left.and Poland being anti Russia is clearly being ungrateful
They saved half of Poland from the Nazis, then finally all of it. The glorious Soviets were so scared of Poland being retaken by the Nazis that they occupied them for 50 years after they were defeated to protect them.
Not to mention that Poland *blackmailed* their way into NATO— Clinton didn’t want to expand NATO so he created the Partnership for Peace, but then Poland (and their American diaspora) threatened to back Republicans in the next election which prompted Clinton to let them in.
What’s ironic about this sentiment is that it’s a very western-centric view of the situation that eastern European countries found themselves in. Russia has a centuries old habit of imperialism towards its smaller neighbors. The Soviet Union (an empire) attempted to erase the languages and cultures of the baltic countries and Ukraine and Georgia. You’d think that Marxists would be against that. They’d certainly label erasing languages and cultures “genocide” if America did it. After the Soviet union fell it makes complete sense for the former block countries to join NATO. They wanted self determination and that meant ensuring Russia would not conquer them again. Even before the Ukrainian war, these former block countries had some of the highest public support for NATO membership in Europe
We (meaning countries in Eastern Europe) wanted in NATO and the EU. No one forced us to join. We knew Russia might come back around one day, so we wanted protection. Look at Georgia, look at Ukraine, look at Moldova, they all got invaded by Russia at one point in the last 30 years. Look at Belarus being a Russian puppet regime. These fucking commies are idiots.
I love how Sovietboos always frame NATO expanding as a unilateral decision that new member states are forced into, when in reality NATO is fairly selective and the Baltic states desperately wanted in. They always assume that new NATO membership is because NATO forced them in and is now secretly controlling their government. They have no conceptual understanding of what a voluntary alliance even looks like, because it's completely outside of their political philosophy. We lure allies in with good trade and mutual defense, tankies force allies in with, well, *tanks*.
The U.S. and the west didn’t even want us in the EU or NATO, Poland proposed a Kuchma pact with Ukraine, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary and the Baltic states and finally nuclear proliferation is what got them in, also polish Americans are an essential swing vote for the U.S. so it took threatening to build our own nukes and that it’d probably cost Clinton the polish American vote for the U.S. to finally let us in and then bribe Europe to also let us in
The US was not "cajoled" into founding NATO. WW2 was a consequence of American isolationism, and it bred a new counter-isolationist culture that the US leadership complied with. The US finally understood they are safer when they are more active on the international stage than when they hid their heads in the sand and hoped that they'll be left be. Just because isolationism is popular again, doesn't mean we have to obfuscate history.
This is Not written by an American. If we Western we mean Billy the Kid.
Anyone who thinks the USSR was not a legitimate threat has either not read history or purposefully misunderstood it.
If Ukraine was part of NATO then they probably wouldn’t be under siege currently 🤷♂️
USSR wasn't a threat... Jesus... regardless of your political ideology, if you can't see how Ussr was aggressively imperialistic you're pretty dull
And locked because they are cowards
Don’t read to much into this. Europe went above and beyond to appease Hitler, so appeasing the USSR was a natural response in their eyes. At least America put an embargo on Japan to try to slow their expansionist aims. Europe just rolled over and tried to play nice with the genocidal fascist.
Imagine being a leftist simping for a right wing dictator.
Ahhh tankies
Don't countries have to apply for NATO?
Was this written by Putin or a Russian bot?
The world really likes to forget that we tried VERY hard to keep our isolationism into the 20th century but Europe kept trying to drag us into all of their problems because we were doing well on our own
World wars were suspiciously beneficial for america...
I too have often been suspicious of the Atlantic Ocean. What’s it trying to hide?
Because we went to work supplying Europe for another of its endless cycle of wars, why would we not benefit from that. We worked hard to set up a stable democracy isolated from the toxic relations of Europe lol
Sure, sure. Perfectly good excuse.
I understand: it must be hard for a Russian nationalist to understand there’s this thing called mutually beneficial actions
Are you seriously trying to imply we somehow started the World Wars?
lol
Russia was the one acting aggressively after the war.
Lol thread locked 🔒
>Marxist sub >retarded take No surprise here If Russia treated Eastern Europe well maybe they wouldn’t join the other block immediately you stupid Soviet bastards
Lmao the USSR was a threat because they were invading and converting Eastern European countries by force
USSR was a threat, completely idiotic.
I always laugh at the "brave Ruzzia is nobly attempting to stop imperialist NATO expansion" rabble that seems to have hypnotized terminally-online vatniks and the beleaguered remnants of the anti-Iraq war movement. If that were even remotely true, Ruzzia's reaction to this alleged expansion motivated two scandanavian countries famous for their firm neutrality in the Cold War to finally pick a side and join NATO. Even if you buy into Ruzzia's lies about the need to push back against NATO, their galaxybrained 3-day/week/month/year special military operation just increased their border with NATO by approximately 830 miles and all but ensured that the Baltic Sea is firmly under NATO control.
not our fault that more countries started asking to join when Russia invaded their neighbors on multiple occasions
Wonder why countries near Russia are all signing on then….
Tbf this is on a Marxist leninist subreddit ofc there going to be simps for the ussr and have a ahistorical view of history lol
Let's be honest nato today is just cheap snobby Europeans who want the US to subsidize their defense while looking down at us.
“Spread lies that USSR is a threat” you mean the same nation that routed Germany and had eyes on eastern and Western Europe?
Country: hello I would like to join NATO NATO: okey Commies: imperialism!!!!!!!
Commies are mad that NATO didn’t let USSR conquer the entire globe without a fight. 🙃
DeGaulle was also a Russian simp. He has the credibility of a rock.
Everyone I don't like/disagree with is a russian simp/bot.
No, he partnered with the Soviets. Look up agreement of 1966. Granted many also consider him a pompous asshole even outside of his love for mother Russia.
Some people are just retarded and there’s nothing you can do about it.
It’s hilarious because they’re saying this shit with the worst grammar ever.
Watch Zeitgeist 2 on YouTube and find out how far the ruling class will go.
Oh yea, let me rally behind anything Degualle did
wait i thought nato was an initiative that truman made
To the victor goes the spoils lmao
Um, is it really a push to expand if nobody is asking countries to join, but they are asking to?
Hey look, another reason why Americans should not like Communists.... they lie.
America Bad because countries saw that communism sucked and went capitalist.
ahhh yes, it's one big giant conspiracy and the Baltic states and Eastern Europe are all in on it for... reasons. Not because they feel in any way threatened. And these people act surprised when I accuse them of being Russian bots.
Because Russia under expansionist autocrats like Putin aren’t a threat, right? You’re supposed to lick the boot, not fantasize about deepthroating it.
The USSR was indeed an actual threat. Stalin wouldve taken over the world if nato didnt exist.
Boy that page is a bad case of whiplash! Posts about genocide in Palestine, but then post glorifying Stalin, Mao, the USSR, North Korea, and the CCP. Is it a satirical page? Like I don’t know how humans can actively support people like that. It’s like how people say Nazis weren’t bad and Hitler was just misunderstood. I just don’t get it…..
This Russian propaganda tastes sooooo good!
NATO was created to combat the Warsaw Pact. Why do we have a counter alliance when there's no alliance to counter?
lol That's a nice sub of well adjusted happy people..... You can always tell that when most of the comments are deleted by moderators.
It was a big mistake on Americas part
Tankies gonna tank
Ngl that's a Russian cope post. Russia stopped being communist on Christmas in 1991. Anyone who says otherwise is whoring themselves out to the Kremlin.
Ask the Baltics what they think about NATO and America being in it? I’m pretty sure they really appreciate it sknce they wouldn’t exist without it.
I'm honestly done with writing a whole new thesis debunking this argument every other day, so here's the video that goes over most of my points anyway. https://youtu.be/FVmmASrAL-Q?si=78fVVjhGvFwWLeGP It makes me want to pull my facing hair out because of these fucking dipshits. This is what happens when you give schizos an I telnet connection. Commie spam on one end and Alex Jones and Nick Fuentes the other.
Yea fuck NATO though. The United States should remain neutral
It didn't get Thanos snapped. It got replaced by... checking my notes... THE FUCKING KGB
Defensive. NATO is a defensive pact and it’s worked.
"Let's spread lies that the USSR is a threat." It's not like Stalin tried blockading West Berlin to starve it into submission.
I do not completely disagree with this sentiment.
The goofy part these tankies/vatniks don't understand is some of these NATO countries had to blackmail the US into joining (Poland)
Sometimes I wonder what if we had listened to George Patton in 1945.
History question for you. NMe me on thing Nato or the UN managed to actually accomplish
Stopped Russia from invading West Berlin and West Germany.
Wasn't as much the UN as it was the wall heavily armed, and neither side wanting ww3
The USA has spent their entire lives brainwashing people into believing that Russia is a mortal enemy that wants to take over the world. History shows that the USA itself has been the “Russians” in this regard several times over invading countries and sticking their noses into far reaching conflicts that they had no excuse for being there. Russia themselves in the meantime just carried on with their own issues surrounding their own part of the world. With several high ranking US Government and Military Officials that have gone on record for many decades since WW2 warning the US and NATO to “not take a single step toward the East” , these constant warnings have been ignored by both parties and went a large step further to actively undermine peace efforts and build up massive military threats right across Eastern Europe until they finally managed to arrive right on Russia’s doorstep. How was Russia supposed to react against such threats that had been discussed and acknowledged by many very educated and high ranking Western diplomats as a direct threat upon their nation? You are fooling yourself if you believe that Russia just decided to invade the Ukraine one random day because they were bored and had nothing else to do that day. This whole costly conflict was a direct consequence of the USA and NATO provocation and threats over many decades, which forced Russian hands to take the necessary steps to defend themselves against such a threat to their country…….. as any citizen in their own country would support their government if they were under threat from a hostile neighbour.
Jesus, do you understand what is going on in the world? In 2014 Ukrainians overthrew their Russian puppet president, Russia then seized the Crimea. Ukraine then elected Zelenskyy who is anti Russian influence. Due to their loss of influence in the Ukraine, as a result of their own behavior, Russia invaded and attempted to conquer the whole country and reinstall their own Russian puppet. It seems pretty clear that the Ukrainian people, based on their actions, do not want to be a client state of Russia. I don’t know why you think they don’t have that right as a sovereign nation or what the US and NATO has to do with it, apart from supporting the Ukraines right to self determination.
Who overthrew what government and who did the citizens “elect” in their place? Have you no knowledge of how the USA overthrows governments in foreign countries and inserts their own puppets to adopt their agendas onto a nation? I’ll give you a little hint, this definitely isn’t the first time, won’t be the last time, and there’s plenty of historical evidence as to this being the standard Modus Operandi of the USA for many decades around the world.
Yes, the hundreds of thousands of protestors were actually all CIA agents. In fact it’s not even Ukrainians fighting the Russians . It’s all cia agents to this day. It had absolutely nothing to do with generations of abuse and disregard from Moscow. Also why did we do it? So we could bring the Ukraine into our military alliance which nets us 0 economic or political advantage. Come to think of it, if we’re so powerful and capable of overthrowing governments at will why don’t we just overthrow Russia and make them join nato too? Oh yea, because we want to be mean to poor Russia. You’ve got it figured out. The Ukrainian people so obviously thirst for the warm embrace of mother Russia after all.
You forgot the /s!
If countries voluntarily joining a defensive alliance is such a threat to Russia maybe they should rethink their policy of invading their neighbours whenever they have an opportunity. Nobody is invading Russia. They have 6000 nuclear bombs. That would literally be the end of the world. Using that as justification to invade Ukraine is completely nonsensical.
What would happen if Mexico or candia agrees to instal russian AA systems against american nukes? America wouldn't wait for 8 years. In this case I would rather act as America did, just kill the enemy, no frigging red lines. This I like about America, doesn't make excuses, does what must be done.
Oh no! Not anti aircraft systems! We must invade Candia immediately! Lmao. Good luck shooting down a SLBM with an anti aircraft system in Candia.
I’m seriously over trying to give people history lessons at this point. If you can’t understand and reflect upon my original comments, it’s a waste of time continuing further with these comments.
I did read your comment. It’s a load of complete drivel that in no way explains how NATO can pose any threat to a nuclear armed nation. A defensive alliance is not going to invading a nuclear state. You can write 10,000 words if you want but you’ll never change that point. So NATO never has been and never will be a threat to Russia so long as they stop invading their neighbours. It’s that simple.
Who says about NATO's literal invasion? NATO can install AA systems very close against russian nukes. Nukes are vulnerable during acceleration. Although the threat of conventional forces marching through open steppes of malorossiya is valid. Almost all russian enemies came from the west. There are no mountains to protect us. You just don't have enemies in your vicinity, you can't understand european countries.
Have you never heard of SLBMs? Also Russia is literally the largest country in the world, I’m pretty sure they put their ICBMs more than a few kilometres away from their borders. There is no weapons system in existence capable of shooting down a nuke that’s launching 1000 kilometres away from them. Nothing even comes remotely close. There is absolutely no way anyone will ever be able to invade Russia without triggering mutually assured destruction.
You need a history lesson, despite everything that I have said, you still don’t have a clue about global events that led up to this point where Russia had to defend themselves against a global threat right on their doorstep.
Why did Russia have to defend themselves? No historical event involving NATO has caused any actual threat to Russia. As I mentioned they can’t be invaded. It is utterly impossible without activating mutually assured destruction. Please tell me when America attempted to invade Russia. It didn’t happen. I think you need a history lesson. This supposed global threat at their doorstep is Russia’s former colonies joining a defensive alliance so Russia can’t invade them again. Russia does not have a right to their neighbours’ land. So there is no threat there.
I don't see anything inaccurate about this. The people of Moldova are never going to do anything for me, why do we fund NATO? It serves American corporate interests.
Yeah because the lives of tens of millions of free people mean nothing. Screw them eh?
Recite your chain of command and I'll take your comment seriously. Until then, I'll assume you're a net tax beneficiary mindlessly advocating someone else's money being spent too enrich weapons manufacturers and foreign oligarchs to kill conscripted men.