The worst-case scenario is now a possible one: European troops fighting off an invasion largely alone.

It’s by no means clear the Europeans would succeed. Romanian and other European officials at the exercise in Cincu, about 260 kilometers (162 miles) north of Bucharest by road, voiced concerns about how long it would take for NATO allies to make it to the front.

French four-star General Philippe de Montenon said he’s confident Europe could prevail, even without the US on side. “The direction of history is a progressive disengagement of the United States from the European continent,” he said.

archive

top 93 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 40 points 11 months ago (2 children)

NATO/EU needs to start moving resources more into place. This will cause putin to have to move troops out of Ukraine to balance.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Even along the Ukrainian border, the Russian troops guarding the frontier are their least capable units full of troops typically serving their 1 year conscription. Putin knows that NATO lacks the capacity for a Sneak Attack. Unless Poland orders full mobilization, the Russians won't move more than token forces to the border.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 54 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    10 comments and the pro Russia bots are already here

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 22 points 11 months ago*

    Such is life currently: hyperbolic questions in ironic comments like " have you proof about Ruzz agression, because the West..." etc.

    Smh, about the contrast between their potential to embrace a grand selfdeception and the arrogant stubbornness to look away from the invasive destruction and killings Shahed drones cause on a daily bases for more than a thousand days.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago*

    It’s by no means clear the Europeans would succeed. Romanian and other European officials at the exercise in Cincu, about 260 kilometers (162 miles) north of Bucharest by road, voiced concerns about how long it would take for NATO allies to make it to the front.

    Those two things are not synonymous.

    Romanian military are concerned it would take allies time to get to the front (I.e. it would take time for NATO to mobilise in the event of an unanticipated invasion of Romania). However firstly that doesn't mean victory wouldn't be ultimately achieved (allied forces had a bad time of it during the first part of the second world war, but ultimately were victorious) and secondly it assumes that Russia would be able to rally its forces (what forces) and initiate a surprise invasion despite Europe heavily monitoring Russian military activity. Which all seems unlikely.

    I'm also unclear about why 260 km is considered an insurmountable distance. In an emergency that distance could be covered in a couple of hours, (I'm assuming that liberation forces and not required to obey the speed limit) presumably everyone would be going the other way in any case.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    Meanwhile USA is fully prepared to comfort Russia.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (13 children)

    it would really be something else if they fought them off successfully and the united states looked like pussies and assholes

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago

    They already do. US is currently the only country pushing for surrender (note, it's not just Ukraine, peace plan forces stuff from US too, including industry help and money) while negotiating with terrorists. It will take a very long time for me to see US in the same light I used to. Imagine US surrendering to ISIS. Beyond humiliating.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    it would really be something else if they fought them

    No it wouldn't be. Germany is suggesting forced conscription already, and so is France. I don't want to see young men thrown into the meat grinder to satisfy the imperial wishes of either Europe or Russia

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (10 children)

    you raise a good point, and to be honest i haven't figured out what the morally correct answer to this is.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago* (9 children)

    In my opinion, the morally correct answer is to have a mild relation with Russia, consisting of trade and not much more. Europe would get access to a huge pool of resources to boost its industry, and stopping to antagonize our neighboring countries would help to drive down military tensions in the continent.

    NATO was conceived as an anti-Soviet military pact, and any excuse for its usefulness expired after 1991. Now it's just a military playground for US interests, keeping European money flowing to the Wunderwaffen of the USA Military Industrial Complex, and maintaining Yankee military bases in the continent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    how do you suppose a mild relation with russia could be achieved in this scenario?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (4 children)

    so how do you respond to a violent invasion of a country like ukraine, which is made of people who don't want to be part of russia

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

    How did Europe respond to the genocide in Gaza? To the invasion of Iraq? To the blanket bombing of Vietnam, Laos and Korea? To the invasion of Afghanistan? To the coups in essentially all countries in Latin America? To the invasion attempt on Cuba?

    Why should Europe exclusively react to Russia's invasion of Ukraine?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (2 children)

    that isn't much of an answer. I still have no idea what your position is.

    to answer your question though, I don't think any of those invasions you listed are good things. I don't think they had good outcomes, and I don't like them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I equally condemn them, yes.

    My position is: Russian government sucks, it's a far right wing nationalist antidemocratic regime. Europe is just not really better or in a moral position to believe itself better than Russia. We have our own far right problems that we should locally take care of. If you ask me, a communist, I suggest having radical left wing organizations, strong unionization, and class struggle against the oligarchs and capitalists in Europe, and I would strongly encourage Russian citizens to do the same with their own government.

    That said, I think that war is the least desirable outcome, possibly especially because I'm a young conscriptable male by demographics. My stance as a European is antimilitarism, I think Europe is as much an evil empire as Russia if not worse, and I don't want state expenditure to be directed towards weapons and tanks, I want it to be directed to healthcare, education and pensions.

    I believe that Russia assumes an aggressive militaristic stance with its neighboring countries that it considera its sphere of influence, because it doesnt have the soft power tools (propaganda, economics, intelligence, media control, cultural hegemony) that the west does, and it sees the west intruding in its sphere of influence (e.g. color revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia). The only way the Russian oligarchy and capitalists have of maintaining its sphere of influence, given the lack of soft powers to do so in comparison with the west, is through military power.

    I want to leave Russia alone with its sphere of influence, and have friendly relations with it and China, and not have war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 11 months ago (26 children)

    Thankfully Russia can't afford to stretch themselves much more. I implore them to try something it shouldn't take much to fuck them at this point.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [+] -17 points 11 months ago (25 children)

    Why are you so willing to be thrown to the trenches? How is militarism a good position?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago (21 children)

    How is getting bullied without fighting back a good position?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [+] -19 points 11 months ago (20 children)

    How about engaging in deescalation by not pushing for military escalation against our neighbor? How about entering commercial relations with neighboring countries instead of antagonizing them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Yeah, how about no escalation? No hybrid war tactics? No drones in foreign airspace? No threats to neighbouring countries?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    Cool, I agree that all of those things should stop. How about we engage in actual negotiations with Russia instead of grinding down Ukrainian young men in trenches as a form of diplomacy?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (6 children)

    Because appeaemt doesn't work?

    They're not willing to engage in good faith. If they were they never would have started the "special operations" in the first place. Nor would they be asking to keep all of their gains in the war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    They were more than willing to engage in good faith from late 1990s to early 2010s, it's the constant western meddling in Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova and other Russian sphere of influence countries, coupled with the expansion of NATO, that pushed Russia to isolation. Russia doesn't have the economic or soft power to fight the US+EU in that field, so either US+EU accept Russia peacefully having its own sphere of influence, or Russia will naturally attempt to do so militarily.

    The USA doesn't need to militarily engage in Mexico because it already belongs to its sphere of influence, in Venezuela they don't enjoy that so the natural response is to threaten with military invasion (as it's doing now). It's basic geopolitics.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago*

    so either US+EU accept Russia peacefully having its own sphere of influence, or Russia will naturally attempt to do so militarily.

    Aww poor Russia, they were just trying to "peacefully have its own sphere of influence".

    Give me a fucking break.

    And what the US is doing in Venezuela is not a "natural response" to anything, and to try to point to it as a justification for Russia's actions is actually insane.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago* (3 children)

    What about the stolen ukrainian children, was that a de-escalation tactic as well? Face it, theses russians are some of the worst neighbors europe could have, and I'm not even gonna mention the cyber warfare, the arsons, the shooting down of civilian airplanes, that journalist body returned with her fucking eyes scooped out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    What about the stolen ukrainian children

    It's mostly magnified out of reality. The source for the vast majority of "stolen Ukrainian children" numbers (supposedly hovering around the tens of thousands according to western media) is a Ukrainian ministry. You don't believe Ukraine has any reasons to exaggerate the numbers in atrocities for international image purposes? When the numbers are roughly confirmed by independent journalistic work, I'll take the claims as they are, but until then I'll be cautious and not take Ukrainian government propaganda at face value, the same way that I don't take Russian government propaganda at face value when they talk of genocide of ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine pre-2022.

    theses russians are some of the worst neighbors europe could have

    Russians could say the same about Europe contributing to genocide in Palestine, to the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the bombing of Libya and Yugoslavia. Or those don't count somehow? Do you really think Europe has any moral high ground to stand on seeing its current support to the Netanyahu genocidal regime?

    Cyber warfare is universal, and CIA actually dominates simply by the fact that most social media are owned by US companies. If you don't think Twitter being owned by Elon Musk counts as western Cyberwarfare you're plainly wrong. Chinese cyberwarfare through TikTok arguably is the biggest contributor to awareness of the Palestinian genocide in the west. As for the rest of comments, they're isolated minor incidents during wartime, I could be talking shit about Poland keeping a Spanish journalist prisoner for years without evidence because he has Russian ancestors, but I don't bring these things up because all states do dirty shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (1 child)

    All states do dirty shit, yet its not your job to defend the dirtiest of them all. Unless complied to, like a russian would be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    How is rhe invasion of Ukraine any worse than the indiscriminate blanket bombings of Korea and Vietnam, the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, or the support of genocide in Palestine? Seriously, by which metric is Russia the dirtiest? I hate the Russian far right nationalist government as much as any other, I'm a communist, but why is it "the dirtiest"?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Already tried that. We hoped that by buying massive amounts of Russian oil and gas they would see that peace is worth a lot more than war.

    But they decided war anyways. And suddenly we had to find a replacement for all that energy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Already tried that. We hoped that by buying massive amounts of Russian oil and gas they would see that peace is worth a lot more than war

    And Russia responded to that positively. In the late 2000s and early 2010s, there were even negotiations to make Russia enter the European Union. Those hopes for Russia were shattered when Europe and the US kept interfering in its sphere of influence (Georgia, Ukraine, etc) through colour revolutions and propaganda. The culminating point where Russia saw there was no possibility was when in 2014, the democratically elected president of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovich was removed by a US-sponsored colour revolution (see Victoria Nuland's leaked phonecalls), that's actually what triggered the invasion of Crimea. It was Russia's way of saying "I cannot win the soft-power competition against the US, so if my only way to maintain a sphere of influence is through military power, so be it".

    If you still don't believe allowing for a Russian "sphere of influence" is an important geopolitical item if we want worldwide peace, imagine how USA people and their government would react to Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Cuba, Costa Rica, Venezuela, Colombia and Peru entering a military alliance with Russia and China and started to import military material from said countries and have Chinese and/or Russian military bases. Last time something similar happened with Cuba, the world was on the brink of nuclear war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    My brother in foreign affairs, Russia has been an aggressor of Ukraine it's whole existence.

    Ukraine signed an agreement which cited that it would give up nuclear warheads for protection by the USA against Russia.

    That protection never happened. Crimea was taken. Chaos ensued on the borders. Then Russia struck their fucking capital.

    AND YOU WANT US TO FUCKING TRADE WITH RUSSIA, lol... Surely that will fix everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    We trade with USA, aggressor of half of the world, and Europe itself participated in the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan and the bombing of Libya and Yugoslavia. Currently, the EU stance is to support the genocidal apartheid regime of Netanyahu. Why is Russian aggression worse and should be punished more than any other aggression?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    The fact that I think Russia should be put in its place doesn't mean I don't despise that devil called Netanyahu and his zionists, Trump, and everyone else orchestrating violence for profit. I hate all of them, and I don't want my country being buddy-buddy with any of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Cool, then push for the economic isolation and total sanctioning of USA in the EU and for the same with Israel, we are already in progress with Russia in that regard and not at all with USA. In fact, when militarism is discussed, most of the times it implies buying expensive military jets and missiles from the USA

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Me saying I'll defend my home is not antagonizing anyone other than those that intend to invade.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (3 children)

    This you?

    I implore them to try something it shouldn't take much to fuck them at this point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    Yup, because it's fuckin true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    Bro I'm not gonna be in any trenches, I'm going to be in the alleyways, the sewers, the steam tunnels. As in I'm going to go full French resistance on anyone who invades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 11 months ago

    That is for the best. The US is a hostile power, and allowing it to embed enemy troops or sabotage NATO operations should not be permitted. Europe is better off without the traitorous Trump Regime.

    It sucks that it has to be this way, but to deny the intent and nature of the current United States, is to invite disaster.

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 11 months ago (13 children)

    Let the comments here be a friendly reminder to people that they should block and boycott the .ml instance

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    I missed the drama. This was the first Lemmy account I made. Is this server overrun with bots now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 11 months ago (9 children)

    So the .ml stands for Marxist Lenin... Just to get you started.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Not really, .ml stands for Mali domain. And just because someone believes in Marxist principle or communism isn't a issue. Personally for me why I am wary of .ml domain is because often I do see people posting obvious Chinese and North Korean propoganda with shady source and wild claims and their refusal to accept criticism of China or other communist past and present regimes. Also they get really defensive and assume you are pro west or pro imperialism when you happen to criticize china for something and then their whole argument would be bashing the west when both are to fault.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 26 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    How much can one bullet cost?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    By US support, they just mean Trump telling them to do whatever Daddy Putin wants.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    The US can go fuck itself with limited support!

  • source
  • [+] -23 points 11 months ago (24 children)

    Why do we fucking still Need to use military confrontation for everything?

    Fr in this modern world with phones, internet and much more, why do we have to confront by sending young people in a year grinder?

    I am ashamed of my species

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Well because no amount of "phones internet and much more" is going to stop a foreign invading soldier with a gun from taking your shit and killing you, would be the very short answer.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Apperently yall havent got this isnt a realistic thing but a call on how war isnt that good you know?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    ok, well if the point you were trying to make is "war isnt that good you know?" then hard agree from me, but that's a serious motte-and-baily retreat from your original words wondering why we still sometimes need armed confrontation even in today's world.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Aremed confrontation as in military, especially if the people dont want to be there fighting, Isnt good.

    Unfortunately with some governments you cant treat in peace and the people Will Need to arm themselves and do stuff.

    I still Think that in any case there should be the leasts deaths possibile

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    No one is arguing otherwise.

    But your original question is why do we still need the military when we have smartphones, and of course the answer is because the existence of smartphones does not dissuade the likes of Putin, because why would it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The funny thing is Russia should know full well how effective psyops are. They're installing friendly far right assholes abusing the senility of boomers. They legitimately have a ton of countries on the path to destroy themselves. They could just... wait a decade and win.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    They could just... wait a decade and win.

    Is Putin going to be alive in a decade? He doesn't give a shit about Russia, he only cares about his own glory. What good is controlling the world after he's dead? He'd rather control Ukraine now and let the entire country crumble after he's dead.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 11 months ago

    "Everything in Europe is Russia's fault" is not good analysis. Europe literally invented fascism the previous century, and it's not just boomers voting far right, plenty of young men too. Europeans predominantly consume non-Russian social media such as Instagram, Facebook or Twitter (increasingly TikTok), and the far right surge is a radical response to a system which for the past 20 years has worsened peoples' living conditions and has allowed no left-wing outlet for such tensions. The far right problem is NOT primarily manufactured by Russia but by our own governments' inabilities to respond with anything else than austerity, austerity and more austerity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -11 points 11 months ago (14 children)

    UH OH - you did a 'leftism' in the warmongering liberal instance. you get sentenced to several downvotes and a brainwashed accusation!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    What a wild thing to say about supporting a sovereign nation in defending its borders.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    "Preparing to confront Russia" (post title) is not supporting any nation in defending its borders.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    Oh, and if you read even for 2 seconds past the headline what does it say? Does it say "The worst-case scenario is now a possible one: European troops fighting off an invasion largely alone"? Does that sound like nations defending their borders or not like nations defending their borders?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Surely western propaganda frames it as a defensive war. So does Russian propaganda, you know? In Russia, all media talk of the "Special Military Operation" as a defensive push to protect Russian ethnics from genocide in Eastern Ukraine. Do I believe this? Not one bit. Do I believe that Europe's mliotaries, traditionally used to invade the entirety of Africa and carry out colonial exploitation, or to invade middle eastern nations for their oil, are only good boys trying to defend ourselves from an evil third country? Absolutely fucking not. Europe is also a rabid militaristic dog. Half of Europe is about to elect fascists into government, and the last thing I want to see are fascists with military power in my country and the neighboring ones.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (6 children)

    Warmongering in this case being defined as discussing the possibility of another nation state attacking them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    the situation in ukraine did not happen in a vacuum. there are reasons why russia decided to invade.

    there is no logical explaination why russia would want to attack NATO and trigger article 5.

    but hey as long as the fear exists we can watch line go up in rheinmetall, saab & dassault stocks so the capital of a stagnating empire can save itself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (4 children)

    there are reasons why russia decided to invade.

    Yeah the reason being that they believe that Ukraine had little in the way of defence and that they would be able to get away with it. Hence why military posturing is necessary, to convince the Russians they wouldn't be able to get away with it.

    If some disaster took down Poland's electrical and communication network Russia would be in there like a shot. Don't try and claim otherwise they have form of taking advantage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah the reason being that they believe that Ukraine had little in the way of defence

    This is bad analysis. You may disagree with the invasion and call it illegal while simultaneously understanding that NATO is a military alliance created specifically against the USSR and should have been dismantled (as was promised to former Soviet citizens during the dissolution of the country). NATO was never supposed to get to Poland, let alone Ukraine or Finland.

    Add to that the Victoria Nuland leaked audios discussing which president the US would put in place during the Euromaidan in 2014, the anti-Russian policies the Ukrainian government has taken for the past decade towards ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine, and you have plenty more arguments than "Russia just wanted to invade Ukraine and spoil their economic and diplomatic relations with all of Europe just because Pootin bad".

    Again, you can still oppose and criticize the invasion, but try to do some realistic geopolitical analysis beyond the Lord of the Rings "Sauron is very evil and so are the Orcs".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    I don't know what Nita was never supposed to get to Poland is supposed to mean. NATO was a defence pact to defend against any threat to its members, the idea was to prevent something like what happened in the first world war where everyone ended up fighting each other because of all of the complicated interrelations that had all been independently agreed.

    The reason they ended up being butting heads with the USSR was the USSR was constantly interfering with Western affairs. Just as Russia is doing today.

    NATO has a policy of never initiating an attack the only reason the military would ever enact would be if a threat was made against one of its member states.

    There is zero reason for Russia to consider NATO a threat. But they clearly do so NATO has to defend itself that's not fear-mongering that's just being pragmatic.

    My problem is your interpretation of NATO's fairly logical response to a potential threat as seditious or part of some evil conspiracy on the part of the industrial military complex. Sure they're benefiting from this but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're involvement isn't partisan.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    NATO expanding into Poland as per Wikipedia article on controversy of NATO expansion eastwards.

    NATO was a defence pact

    ...which has historically been used to bomb considered enemy nations such as Yugoslavia or Libya.

    the idea was to prevent something like what happened in the first world war where everyone ended up fighting each other

    Not true. Per Wikipedia's article on NATO: "Throughout the Cold War, NATO's primary purpose was to deter and counter the threat posed by the Soviet Union and its satellite states, which formed the rival Warsaw Pact in 1955".

    NATO has a policy of never initiating an attack

    Ask Libyans or Yugoslavians what they have to say about that. And that's just official NATO interventions, without counting Iraq or Afghanistan, in which some but not all NATO members participated.

    There is zero reason for Russia to consider NATO a threat.

    This is absolutely delusional, it's patently obvious that you have never talked to a Russian person, and I say this as a Spaniard. NATO has consistently been a formation hostile to Russia, and has for the longest time been carrying out "simulacrum exercises" in the Baltic sea and regions near Russia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Warmongering... that sounds so unhinged in the current situation of the world.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›