• HikingVet@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    So Poutine wanted to weaken NATO, ends up adding countries, including one that has been neutral for an incredibly long time.

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Sweden has a strong military industry too and Finnland is literally right at Russia’s border. Putin is a master strategist.

      • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Dude really read a history book about Hitler fighting a one front war and somehow turning it into a three front war and said “Hold my beer”

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        This has happened exactly zero times in the one thousand year history of Sweden. Except for when the Danes came, but they got disposed of.

        • kaffiene@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You’re right. Go tell them they have nothing to fear from Putin because the Shield Of History is protecting them. Meanwhile Australia, New Zealand, USA et al should all dispand all of their defense forces because they’ve never been invaded before so of course, history protects them too

          • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Ok, I’m not the one to call strawman on people, I strawman all the time, but holy strawman batman.

            • kaffiene@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              No. It’s not a strawman. I’m not making a claim about your argument, I’m being sarcastic

    • bumphot@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I think this haterred towards Putin blinded most of us to let governments increase their authorariansim. Like in US after 9/11. Of course Putin is dangerous, but he can’t even win a war in a small country right next to his. Lost more troops then Ukraine. Meanwhile NATO expansion across the World and US influance is truely scary and unprecedented. Most of the wars in World are started by NATO counties and here we don’t hear about is as much.

      All the invasions of Iran, Afganistan, Vietnam, Syria, etc where unjustfied invasions just like Ukraine and in case of Palestine, far worse. Yet, media successfully is pointing our focus on a single war in Ukraine where Russia has made no advencments and is clearly inferior military power. It reminds me of 9/11, when fear from a small group of terrorist gave the government power to spy on all of its citizens, run torture camp in Guantanamo and remove citizens rights one by one.

      • Eximius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Ah, yes, the scary defense-only alliance. Purely by design it doesn’t have the lawful capacity to do any of the things you said, and single members (US or UK) don’t represent it.

        Ah yes, no advancements in Ukraine where 1/3 of the country is under occupier control and in entrenched positions.

        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          In is defensive only on paper. In reality it is NATO weapons that supply wars in Middle East. Joining NATO isn’t just mutual defense, you need to sign a lot of other requirements that inevitably gets you under strong influance of US military and finances. Check out military intervantions of NATO, they are all offensive, no one ever attacked a NATO country, they are too strong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Military_operations None of these counties they invaded where part of NATO, Iraq, Afganistan, Kosovo, Bosina, Libya.

          Laws don’t matter when you have the military power. Laws only apply to the weak. Powerful countires (and people) don’t protect them selves with laws, since they have the military. When Assange and Manning published US war crimes, militry officials didnt go to jails, but they, whistlblowers and journalists did. Don’t fall for the laws for a second, they don’t apply to them.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Iraq, Afganistan

            The US called on NATO following an attack on them. The idea was to fight those who had attacked the US, which is in the purview of a defensive alliance. Of course that didn’t end up being the reality because the bush admin lied about Iraq.

            Kosovo, Bosina

            This was not defensive, you’re correct. But it was instead to stop a genocide of Muslim people by Serbia. Kosovo exists because of NATO involving themselves to stop genocide.

            Libya.

            This was a UN coalition to aid rebel groups.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Well if you claim that you are attacked by “Terrorism” and you declare war on it, you can make any invasion a defensive action. That is my point, in theory it is defensive, but they can twist it any way they want to make it offensive. Also if you go around the World claiming you are there to stop a genocide (ironically while funding a genocide yourself) just so you can send your army there, than you have no reason for CIA not to just finance some genocidal maniacs on one side to justify you going in there to “save” them (like Israel funded Hamas, and HIlary funded Trump). This is not even legally clean, just ignoring the laws when they don’t suit your interests.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        There’s a difference between NATO countries and NATO the organisation.

        The United States would be going around the world starting wars regardless of whether it’s in NATO or not. Got to feed that industrial military complex

        • bumphot@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          But they also influence NATO organizations through various requirements of joining the NATO so that in the practice, they are involved. NATO as an organization has participated in mmultiple invasitions around the World, it is on the Wikipedia page. All of their military involvements where in non-NATO countries. Nobody ever attacked a NATO country, they never did a defensive war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO#Military_operations

          • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            they never did a defensive war

            Great success then.

            Only non-Nato countries have to fight defensive wars. Thanks for convincing me of NATOs effectiveness

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              I never said NATO is not effective defensive strategy for the government, just that it is effective offensive strategy as well. However this only applies to the government, not the people. Troops are sent to die in these offensive wars, while otherwise they would be safe at home. Don’t spin this as an opposite claim that all non-NATO countries end up in a war. Some of the countries now in NATO where invaded by NATO first and then forced to join. That is like saying surrendering is safer then being nutral, bacause they can’t attack you if you are already surrendered.

              • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                No country has ever been forced to join NATO. a country has to apply to join and a defensive alliance only works if all members are willing

      • someguy3@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        So so dangerous to have a defense alliance. What is this world coming to.

          • someguy3@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            You are confusing members (the US) doing their own thing, with the organization.

            • bumphot@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Organization can’t be better then it’s members that are controlling it.

              • someguy3@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Whoops, you admitted the organization and the members are different! Lol. Ok really ciao.

                • bumphot@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  You clearly see this as a game. You know exactly what I said and you are running away from it, just to have some kind of play of semantics like that somehow communicates some greater point. I really have no idea what is the point of this comment of yours.

    • Davidchan@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      NATO is strictly a defensive alliance so any power that did start WW3 would be pretty damn stupid to be aggressive against NATO. And better for everyone this way, rather than give Russia a chance to chew up Eastern Europe country by country like they tried against Ukraine, Georgia and Chechnia.

      • bumphot@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        NATO is defensive only on paper. Almost all of the wars in the World right now started with invasion of NATO countries in middle east and african countries still unofficaly under collonial rule of western european countries.

        This is classic case of fearmongering. Russia can’t even win a war in Ukraine, despite local support of some of the Crimean citizens and proximity to their nations. They can’t get to Sweeden by the end of this century, Meanwhile, NATO is the biggest war allience this World has ever seen and it is scary how centralized the power in the World has become and US oil companies running the whole show.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          You keep spewing out this Putin Propaganda, yet nobody cares since it is obviously false.

          How much do you get paid by Putin?

          Blink twice if your family is in danger of being pushed out of a window.

          • bumphot@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            If only thing you can say to someone who is proving you wrong that they must be paid by some boogieman, you are insane. Just because I critize the government doesn’t mean I support other governments. This is some cold war type of red scare. During cold war if you speak about worker rights you are branded a communist soviet spy. Now you say that NATO is resposible for wars that they admit to, you are all of a sudden a russian bot.

            • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              It’s generally suspicious when someone with atrocious grammar and spelling says Russia isn’t a real problem, but NATO is, and then shows a fundamental misunderstanding of NATO and can’t distinguish formal NATO action from other Western military action.

              • bumphot@lemy.lol
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                When you debate grammar it shows you have no good arguments. I don’t always spell things correctly, because I am more focused on making sense, then appearance. If you understand what I mean, that is good enough for me. I understand that Russia and NATO are both problems and I understand that NATO is obviously far more powerful and bigger. I also understand what NATO claims to be, but I also see their presence in places where legally shouldn’t be. Take Kosovo for example, by the UN it is not recognized as independent, legally it is part of Serbia and Serbia does not support NATO troops there. Legally speaking, that is an invasion. Practically NATO countries invade many Middle Eastern countries as well, they wear NATO hats when they speak of peace, but often (but not always) remove that hat when they invade other countries. You can either accept that both NATO and countries that invade Middle East are the same countries run by the same people with same interests and same goals, making it the same thing. Or you can pretend that only what is legally defined as separate is important, but then accept that legally NATO also sometimes invades countries and were never invaded themselves, making them more offensive then defensive. You can’t have it both ways.

    • kautau@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s wild watching all the “human entropy” build up at the same time to hit in a really shitty fruition of shittiness. Religious conflict and genocide in Gaza, hottest planet records month after month, Russia/china/North Korea building up for WW3, a massive rise in fascism across western nations, with a culmination in this year’s US presidential election, unprecedented corporate profits as inflation skyrockets, AI companies abandoning ethics for financial gains as the LLMs rapidly grow in capability

      It’s like Murphy’s law hitting the planet all at once, we’d just need some new COVID super strain to hit right as WW3 kicks off to be the cherry on top