Nato members have pledged their support for an “irreversible path” to future membership for Ukraine, as well as more aid.

While a formal timeline for it to join the military alliance was not agreed at a summit in Washington DC, the military alliance’s 32 members said they had “unwavering” support for Ukraine’s war effort.

Nato has also announced further integration with Ukraine’s military and members have committed €40bn ($43.3bn, £33.7bn) in aid in the next year, including F-16 fighter jets and air defence support.

The bloc’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said: “Support to Ukraine is not charity - it is in our own security interest.”

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    176
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s amazing to see how down voted a contrary opinion can be in this subject.

    It’s a little easier to understand if you reversed the situation.

    How would the US react if the Russians supported Mexico in joining a military pact against the US, so that the Russians could build military bases and install short range nuclear weapons in Mexico and point then at the US? What would the reaction be if Russian then spent billions of dollars financing the Mexicans from any kind of military aggression from the US?

    You can’t threaten someone with a gun and not expect them to eventually shoot you.

    It doesn’t matter how anyone feels about my opinion but the more we posture with violence, lies on all sides, anger and an unwillingness to step back and find sensible solutions … the closer we get to nuclear war and the end of civilization.

    • Carmakazi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      122
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      As an American I think that would all be reasonable…if the official US position was that Mexico has no right to exist, the Mexican people should be forcibly integrated into our society as 2nd class citizens, and the US Army was in the process of a “peacekeeping operation” in Mexico to carry all this out.

      For all our flaws, we respect the borders of our neighbors and don’t have irridentist aspirations that belong in the 19th century. Russia is the aggressor here, and they have demonstrated that they have little interest in global peace or human rights, only increasing their sphere of influence.

      Continually rolling over for thugs because it’s what avoids nuclear conflict will only lead to a global order based on thuggery, and it likely won’t even avoid nuclear conflict in the end.

      • Freefall@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I kinda wish the US, Mexico, and Canada were more unified though. I know we are cool, ish, but the American Union (Canadians super love it when you call them North Americans) or something less USA sounding would be kinda great.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Call it the North American Trade Union and try to get some of the Central Americans in on it. Also invite Greenland into it just to make that situation where Denmark is part of the EU but greenland isnt more confusing.

      • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        109
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m no fan of Russia … I’m just stating my opinion because I don’t want to die in a nuclear holocaust because everyone didn’t want to see reason.

        There’s only one country in modern history that has spread global influence and threats in every part of the world, imposed, threatened, created and caused violence everywhere for decades while imposing their financial, political and economic powers on everyone everywhere for all of modern history …

        … and it isn’t the Russians.

        • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          69
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Ah, There it is, the thing that you ultimately wanted to say but tried to be coy about.

          “America bad”

          And here I thought the topic at hand was Ukraine becoming a NATO member, not AmErIcAn ImPeRiAliSm

          • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            46
            ·
            4 months ago

            NATO is an arm of American imperialism so it’s relevant to the article and conversation at hand.

            • Maalus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              25
              ·
              4 months ago

              So if the US gets out of Nato like Trump promised, what then? It magically disolves because there are no sovereign countries in there? Or is it still an arm of american imperialism and all ze eviilz in the world?

              • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                30
                ·
                4 months ago

                It would definitely weaken a ton although I doubt it would immediately dissolve, although its power is heavily based on our leadership and military and anyone who doesn’t see that is pretty naive. Hopefully Europe would help Ukraine enough to make up for us having Trump and probably not helping them anymore, though.

                  • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    24
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    It wasn’t a good question nor was it asked in good faith. I answered what I could with some context. It’s like asking if we know the world would have no wars after we got rid of the Nazis and all the evil in the world would disappear. Well, no, obviously not, but that it doesn’t mean it wouldn’t improve things.

                • Freefall@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Probably not helping them? You mean against a trump US joining the Russians. The dude really wants us on the evil side of WW3.

                  • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    6
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    He could remove aid but I doubt he could convince Congress and the American people to help Russia. Plus, his whole pro-Russia thing with respect to the war has been posed as an isolation thing. Maybe I’m wrong, though. He’s not afraid to be a hypocrite. A Trump candidacy is depressing and I’ve been trying not to dwell on the possibility of it tbh.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            57
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            America bad is literally the reason why countries don’t want NATO on their border. You don’t get to ignore that key point and pretend OP was arguing in bad faith.

            America invades countries to overthrow their government steal their natural resources. Lybia, Afghanistan, Iraq, even the Genocide in Gaza is made possible by NATO countries doing the weapons logistics.

            • Maalus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              37
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              And yet Russia has multiple borders with NATO countries. “Your opinion” is parroting kremlin propaganda about “the nuclear end” that “will totally happen you guys” and can be summarized by “let’s give Russia everything they want, because they have nukes so they can now rule everyone”

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                34
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I really don’t care enough about Russia to defend their actions any further but if you look on a map you see Ukraine does not just encircle Russia but actually sticks inwards quite a bit.

                And Russia did start getting more imperialist the closer NATO came.

                • Maalus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  26
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Ah yes the closer NATO came, since before they had east Germany, Poland and other countries.

                  Dude. Think about what you are saying or read up more. You are repeating russian propaganda and nothing else. This is a land grab invasion. NATO doesn’t have shit to do with it otherwise Russia wouldn’t grab all their troops on NATO borders and move them to Ukraine. They know NATO isn’t an offensive alliance and are using that, then telling people like you bullshit about NATO encroachment, novorossia or other idiotic ramblings.

            • Eximius@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              36
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Sorry, but as Eastern European, we begged for NATO membership because of constant (>200 years) Russian occupation hazard. We only care about America as a strong ally (of many) in the NATO group, there is no imperialism, direct, indirect, effective or otherwise interprettable. It’s a purely defensive pact with all its tenets clearly and publicly laid out.

              We could not fight back alone and we wouldnt be able to, because just as to Ukraine and as to Nazis, the amount of meat Russia (yes the whole country, not just Putin) is willing to throw into the meatgrinder is incomprehensible.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                16
                ·
                4 months ago

                Also, these sorts don’t seem to realize that NATO is on Russia’s border regardless of Ukraine’s status. Even before Russia invaded and Finland joined NATO.

                They’ve never looked at a fucking map.

                • nyctre@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I mean… When they’re claiming russia applied to NATO and was rejected… What did you expect, a sound and reasonable mind? They’re literally just repeating their propaganda, nothing more.

                  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Oh I know, but I’ve heard that particular lie about Russia not wanting NATO on their border being behind the invasion way too many times. NATO has literally been bordering Russia since its inception.

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                44
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Russia might still have invaded without NATO provocation. However while Russia is evil, they do have a very valid point in not wanting NATO next to their border.

                Especially since Russia’s NATO application got rejected.

                • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  28
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Ukraine not joining NATO

                  Russia invade Ukraine

                  NATO now very open to Ukraine joining due to a Russian threat.

                  See how Russia is causing the NATO membership? Not preventing it.

                  To me it feels like Russia saying they’re invading due to NATO is just a smokescreen for something else, and a way to get support from their population.

                  And as it’s caused the NATO membership, Russians can now say “see! We told you so! They are joining just like we said!”, ignoring that they’ve directly caused this outcome.

                  I wonder if the main reason for this is just to try and better secure the black sea for some reason.

                  • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    14
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Russia didn’t just cause NATO membership for Ukraine, they’re the reason NATO was formed in the first place.

                    People should learn about WWII and the roots of these problems. Spend some time with the atrocities coming out of the USSR as they butchered and raped their way through peaceful countries in Europe.

                  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    25
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/2/pdf/220214-factsheet_NATO-Ukraine_Relations_.pdf

                    June 2017, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted legislation reinstating membership in NATO as a strategic foreign and security policy objective. In 2019, a corresponding amendment to Ukraine’s Constitution entered into force.

                    In September 2020, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy approved Ukraine’s new National Security Strategy, which provides for the development of the distinctive partnership with NATO with the aim of membership in NATO

                    Also relevant is Zelensky staging a coup in Ukraine in 2014 to overthrow the Russian puppet regime that was in place at that time. Meaning Russia lost control over Ukraine politically.

            • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              27
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              America bad is literally the reason why countries don’t want NATO on their border

              Well, so far the only country really throwing a shit fit about having NATO on their border is Russia, probably because NATO membership gets in the way of his neo-USSR expansion plans. Don’t use a plural where it doesn’t belong.

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                28
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I recall Afghanistan having a NATO problem within their borders. And Lybia. And Iraq. And many other countries.

                Despite all the marketing NATO is not a defensive alliance. It is an offensive one in actions.

                • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  I also recall Afghanistan having a Russia problem inside their borders. A very large Russia problem that Russia lost. Also NATO didnt even start that, the US did, and was the primary driver of all Afghanistan actions, and then drug some part of NATO into it (which is a separate problem) after the fact. Your point?

                  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    15
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    And you forgot about the NATO problem very convenient. Doesn’t fit your narrative.

            • Miaou@jlai.lu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              4 months ago

              What? None of that would have been different without NATO. Iraq did not even involve NATO at all

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                20
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Oof https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_88247.htm

                The participation in the invasion was also NATO participants. Same with the Genocide in Gaza right now where NATO countries are doing the military logistics to provide israel with bombs and tank shells to blow up Palestinian kids.

                Either directly or indirectly NATO is just an extension of whatever imperialist escapades we go on. And the few times people actually need it it’s utterly worthless such as Srebrenica and NATO just lets a Genocide happen without doing anything.

                • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  You can have independent operations by members states. If a couple of my cousins and myself go and murder someone that doesnt mean it was done by my clan. It just means some people in my clan are murderers, most alliance networks allow independent operations and actions seperate from the alliance.

                  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    The NATO site is literally bragging about it.

                    And yeah it just so happen people in the NATO allience all just keep invading countries together under false pretenses and lies of national security.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Yeah, the Russians totally didn’t force other countries to adopt their economic system and extract their resources for their own gain.

          Totally didn’t happen anywhere, especially not in Eastern Europe.

          /s

          • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            4 months ago

            Me as a Romanian: heh. Yup, no post WW2 puppet government extracted our resources, no sirree bob. Totally benevolent soviet occupational forces who bestowed flowers, kisses and rainbows upon the populace.

        • fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Same old script. “Ohh NATO forced us!!” “Aren’t you scared of nukes!?!?” “What about America!!?”

        • exanime@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’m just stating my opinion because I don’t want to die in a nuclear holocaust because everyone didn’t want to see reason.

          So you are willing to sacrifice Ukraine and its people so you can appeace a dictator for a short while and sleep soundly safe in your bed thousands of miles away … How noble your opinion is

    • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think your downvotes are because your “reversal” is not particularly valid, not because your opinion is contrary.

      As others have said, it would need the US to first be invading Mexico before Russia or other countries start propping Mexico up militarily.

    • SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Cuba (country right next to the US) aligned itself with the USSR after Castro’s revolution, and the US has attempted to coup them, invade them, murder their leaders, then sink them in isolation and starvation. I’ve always defended that Cuba had the right of self-determination for their own foreign and domestic policy, and that the US was in the wrong for retaliating against them.

      It would be extremely hypocritical of me to defend that Ukraine has no right to self-determine whether they want to be in a defensive pact or not, and whether they want to join the EU or not, just because a third country would like them not to do so - just as it’s extremely hypocritical of tankies and campists to say that Cuba had the right to choose their own future but Ukraine doesn’t.

      • Freefall@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Yeah, Cuba decided to choose sides in a (cold)war AND become a very real threat to US civilians. As was their right, as you said. Decisions have consequences.

        The coups and assassinations were a means of punching them in the decision-makers so maybe the next ones would see the value of remaining out of the fight. The isolation and blockading was to make their population decide the fight wasn’t worth it and call upon their leadership to change stance back to at least neutral. We could have just hit everything they had with long range missiles and bombers and said “don’t join our enemies or else!” as their cities fell over and their island burned

        They absolutely had the right to make those decisions and ally with who they want…and had the war gone hot, we would not have taken the time to pick off leaders here and there or blockade them and wag a finger. We would have carpet bombed cities that we heard rumors of leadership being near before entrenched soviet troops could have launched missiles from said cities (they wouldn’t care, it isn’t their country).

        It wasn’t retaliation, it was striking a very real and very bad threat before it could get dug in and become permanent.

        The parallel with Ukraine isn’t really the same. The US is an international bully and does some vile shit, but we, and our allies, don’t care about Russia (before this)…it was just a big sleeping threat to guard against (say…incase they start conquering neighbors…). Even if the US has bases inside a NATO Ukraine, we wouldn’t start shit with Russia or take their land…people don’t want another world war. Also, we already have all the capability and power to do whatever we want to anywhere in the world. Cuba was a threat because we were pretty much logistically untouchable when it came to prosecuting a war against us…Cuba changed that. These days, we can stuff more insane destructive power inside ONE of our cargo planes that reaches out farther than any plans for Cuba ever had. We don’t have to have a base next door to do war. We could ONLY have a base in Spain and still be an existential threat to Russia these days…and they aren’t taking all of Europe. Honestly, with how empty Russia is, we could set up launchers INSIDE their country and attack them if we really wanted to…

        Sorry, I got way ranty…I don’t think your position is without some reason, but I can’t say, for as awful as it was, that Cuba was handled incorrectly given the time frame and threat. I also respect that you stick to your idea that “it is their right to decide” in any case. I just don’t think you realize how fundimentally different those scenarios are beyond a very surface level.

    • neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      For your hypothetical scenario to make more sense, the US would have had to annex Baja California just a decade prior, then straight up have gone to forward invasion war with Mexico to annex more, bombing the shit out of the country including children’s hospitals.

      In that scenario, fuck yes Mexico would be justified in finding allies to help them maintain sovereignty and protect themselves.

      That’s what happens when nations invade one another.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Just putinists apologist nonsense. Just gaslighting the world … they backed us into a corner… they made us deny they have the right to exist as a country, invade them and commit atrocities against their population.

      The call is coming from inside the house…

      No threat to Russia except free prosperous Ukranians living across the Russian border, who speak russian and have deep ties to Russian population. This by far is the biggest threat to Putin’s health, hence the war.

      Oh and the fact that Russia sold gas to Europe though Ukraine and needed to pay. But now Ukraine found a lot of gas in the Donbas also did not help.

    • theprogressivist @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s all on Russia. Maybe if they weren’t terrible neighbors to neighboring countries, this wouldn’t happen. NATO doesn’t force countries to join, nor does it seek other countries to join. If the country wants to be a part of NATO, they have to apply. I’m tired of seeing this tired talking point.

    • ealoe@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah if the US had invaded Mexico maybe it would be understandable if they sought Russian help. Your whole comment ignores the fact that Russia invaded a sovereign country in 2014 and continues to kill people every day there trying to take it over. There’s no arguing with bullies like Putin, we learned this lesson with Hitler. Burying them in the ground is better than appeasing them.

    • rdri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s not an opinion. That’s the lack of it. Plus a few grams of whataboutism. You’re a victim of Russian propaganda agents.

      find sensible solutions

      For example? How do you do that with terrorists?

    • Freefall@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      False premise. “A military pact against”.

      While it looks that way because Russia is a military invader and overall aggressor, NATO is a defensive pact. If the US decided to attack someone to be a dick, it doesn’t draw NATO in automatically…but if someone attacked a NATO member obligations trigger and everyone dogpiles the foolish attacker. Yes Russia was the boogieman use to get people to join, but it was not “against” Russia exclusively, it was against aggressors.

      I get the cuban missile crisis parallel too. But this would be more like Russia and Mexico doing a “we will protect you if the US actually attacks” agreement and the US would just be annoyed with Russian bases that close and halt trade with Mexico as whiney punishment or some such. However, the US doesn’t seem to want to conquer Mexico, so it doesn’t parallel well to reality. Cuba was “let’s put offensive capabilities next to you during a war (cold…but it was a war)” that is self defense and very different.

      No matter what, there will be hostile borders around the world and deterrence is all we can do to keep it quiet. Ukraine war would have never happened if it was in NATO, and the US woulda just let Russia sleep despite the strategic advantage of having Ukraine right there. The US has plenty of other horrible shit it does, we don’t conquer with military might.

      I also know the story about how Putin tried to play nice with the world and got shit on and not let into the club fully, and this is part of him acting out for that. There is some very small legitimacy, or at least a logic to that claim…but you just don’t take countries anymore, especially if it makes you a threat to the EU.

        • Freefall@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          It wasn’t relevant. The topic was not about USSR justifications for threatening US soil.

          Seems kinda obvious…

            • Freefall@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              The conversation was NOT about the USSR (not Russia) putting missiles there or if it was justified. It was about Cuba deciding to allow itself to be the staging ground for that action and being dealt with for it…

    • paholg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      If the US invaded Mexico, I would fully support any and every country that supported Mexico in pretty much any way.

      Wild that you call out posturing with violence, but seem fine to forgive actual violence.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        If the U.S. even thought about invading Mexico, I would support Mexico arming themselves to the teeth.

        But Mexico is clearly not worried about it. It would be so catastrophic for the US, even if it somehow succeeded.

    • Kedly@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Sucking Russia off is not a contrary opinion. I’m not going to entertain anyone saying that maybe Russia isnt in the wrong for Invading Ukraine, and maybe the countries providing military support for Ukraine to defend itself are in the wrong for maybe making Russia feel threatened. America does a lot of shit wrong, supporting Ukraine is not one of them in any way.

      edit: added accidentally missed half of sentence

    • ik5pvx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      This happened once with the Cuban crisis, and humanity still exists thanks to the level headedness of JFK. I’m not sure the situation is comparable as, afaik, no new nukes have been stationed in Europe after the end of the cold war. And it is useful to remind that nobody would have felt the need to join NATO after the end of cold war if they hadn’t felt threatened.

    • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      The US would react with diplomatic protests and perhaps sanctions. If Russia had acted that way with Ukraine it would have been their right.

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

      How would the US react if the Russians supported Mexico in joining a military pact against the US, so that the Russians could build military bases and install short range nuclear weapons in Mexico and point then at the US?

      This a convoluted scenario, as why would they do this in the first place? The US, as big of an asshole as it is, is not invading Mexico. Mexico is not the least bit worried about it.

      Ukraine was very worried about Russia invading them, for years, for legitimate reasons. And what does Russia do to alleviate those fears? Repeatedly threaten them, then actually invade.

      A gun happy neighbor you are complicated friends with is very different than a gun happy neighbor who is repeatedly saying they want your house. If the situation afterwards feels unfair, well, that’s Russia’s fault for getting there in the first place.

      And if the U.S actually postured itself for invading Mexico, for heavens sake, I would want them to arm themselves to the teeth.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      4 months ago

      We already know how we treat Cuba even without them installing a military base. Direct invasion and cutting it off from the world. The hypocrisy is staggering.