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.”

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-156 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
121 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-103 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
63 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Ah indeed, the British empire has been quite bad. /s but not too much

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

“I’m not a fan of Russia, i just unironically spout Russian propaganda.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Of the 3, the US holds far more geopolitical power. Hence the naming bias.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
57 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

Cuba.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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

Seems kinda obvious…

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

What if supporting Ukraine just ends in a loss with a hundred thousand more dead people and less territory; would that have made it a mistake to support Ukraine?

The main issue is that Russia feels that it cant let ukraine join nato, its “the reddest of red lines” and yet they are pushing us toward a direct conflict with russia.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

No, the only mistake would be appeasing the dictator by letting him get away with delusional imperialist conquests.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Propaganda has been turned up to 11 to manufacture consent for this war, it’s no wonder people are so polarized about it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 8.8K

    Posts

  • 99K

    Comments