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.”

  • Sniatch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    4 months ago

    I wonder why most neighbours of Russia want to join NATO. Being an aggressive neighbour is the only reason. Russia wants to control their neighbours.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Tankies are never in shambles. If Ukraine doesn’t join NATO they’ll say “See, NATO was just using Ukraine” and if Ukraine joins NATO they’ll say “See, NATO is expanding east again”. Tankies are never wrong when it comes to believing their own delusions.

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

          You posting this screenshot around means you don’t understand that this is a self own on your part. Captain_Pronina is undoubtably correct. The people who believe the Uyghur genocide is happening are morally correct even if they get proven wrong in the future. This is because their stance is against genocide no matter what, which is a just stance. Tankies, on the other hand, don’t care about genocide, they care about simping for the CCP. That is why they’re participating in genocide denial now with Ukraine, Tibet, and the Uyghurs. Genocide denial, especially when it’s plausible, is immoral. So even if their denial turned out to be correct, they’re still evil morons because their initial reaction was to deny the genocide rather to stand against it or figure out the truth.

    • paholg@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      4 months ago

      I mean, I’ve seen tankies spin anything to fit their narrative, I’m sure they’ll continue to do so. Remember, anything resembling support of Ukraine is an act of aggression against Russia, and tantamount to unilaterally starting WWIII.

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

        Probably dented for quite a while but Europe is already in the process of re-arming and there are no existential threats that could prevent it buffalo buffalo buffalo from doing so. Russia can’t take all of the EU or European NATO countries at once and Chinas military and navy aren’t set up with long distance power projection in mind. The only exception would be the US itself if they really went off the deep end on a second Trump term.

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

          Europe is already in the process of re-arming

          They’re in the process of shoveling fortunes into a ravenous private sector arms industry.

          Russia can’t take all of the EU or European NATO countries at once

          None of these countries want a repeat of WW2. Quite a few have large right wing nationalist blocks sympathetic to Putin’s United Russia white nationalist model.

          This won’t be a fight between Russia and the EU. It will be a war of economic attrition that favors the international arms industry and cripples the domestic service sector, to the outrage of domestic people.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    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
      ·
      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.

      • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        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
          67
          ·
          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
            ·
            4 months ago

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

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          30
          ·
          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
          ·
          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
          ·
          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

      • Freefall@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        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.

    • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      ·
      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
      47
      ·
      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
        ·
        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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      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.

    • theprogressivist @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      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
      ·
      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
      ·
      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
      ·
      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
          ·
          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
              ·
              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
      ·
      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.

    • ik5pvx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      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.

    • highduc@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

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

    • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      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.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      78
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, right after Russia invades one country, capturing and killing men, women, and children while threatening other countries. Weird…

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

            That’s why the west calls it the “revolution of dignity” lol. Do you have any sense of self-awareness? Such dignity having the CIA up your ass to make your country more west-friendly.

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

              “revolution of dignity”

              Is what Ukrainians called it after countless of them were murdered by police in the streets and they successfully ran their Pro-Putin dictator out of the country. Seethe harder fascist.

            • Damage@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              4 months ago

              I mean, have you ever been there? I have, it was incredibly corrupt, and this was AFTER 2014. it’s not so unbelievable that people tried to enact a change…

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

          The CIA paid a million people to stand out in the could for months on end? Whoa, where do they keep all these actors?

            • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              14
              ·
              4 months ago

              I’m not doing your work for you tankie. Quote the part of the article that supports your thesis.

              You all do this same thing, throw a book at someone and when they refuse to bow to your demand to waste their time you declare victory.

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

                But while the gains of the orange-bedecked “chestnut revolution” are Ukraine’s, the campaign is an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in western branding and mass marketing that, in four countries in four years, has been used to try to salvage rigged elections and topple unsavoury regimes.

                Funded and organised by the US government, deploying US consultancies, pollsters, diplomats, the two big American parties and US non-government organisations, the campaign was first used in Europe in Belgrade in 2000 to beat Slobodan Milosevic at the ballot box.

                Richard Miles, the US ambassador in Belgrade, played a key role. And by last year, as US ambassador in Tbilisi, he repeated the trick in Georgia, coaching Mikhail Saakashvili in how to bring down Eduard Shevardnadze.

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

                  Arguments against the Orange Revolution being a coup:

                  The protests were sparked by widespread allegations of election fraud and corruption, which were supported by international observers and the Ukrainian opposition.

                  The protests were largely peaceful, with only a few instances of violence and property damage.

                  The Supreme Court of Ukraine annulled the election results, citing irregularities and fraud, and ordered a revote.

                  The new president, Viktor Yushchenko, was elected through a fair and transparent process, with international observers monitoring the election.

                  While there are valid arguments on both sides, the majority of evidence suggests that the Orange Revolution was a popular uprising rather than a coup. The protests were sparked by widespread discontent with the election results and the government’s handling of the election, and were largely driven by Ukrainian citizens rather than foreign powers. The Supreme Court’s decision to annul the election results was based on allegations of fraud and irregularities, and the subsequent election was monitored by international observers. Ultimately, the Orange Revolution was a significant event in Ukrainian history that led to the country’s transition towards democracy and closer ties with the West.

                  TL;DR Russia is poor af and everyone but American middle class settler tankies who live comfortably in the US want blue jeans and VW Jettas and not to suffer under the gangster oligopoly of Russia’s petro state.

                  Tankies keep pretending that this isn’t true because the US intelligence agencies opportunistically tipped the the unrest in Ukraine in their favor, just like Putin has done in ever country that is in his sphere.

                  Fun fact: Putin, the man that tankies slavishly uphold as a stalwart of US imperialism was himself installed into power by the CIA to keep Soviet candidates from taking back power through democratic election held after the first term of Boris Yeltsin was about to be ended, which he was almost assuredly going to lose.

                  Tankies continue to be played like a Switch by western intelligence and it will ultimately lead to Russia’s demise. All their accusations of everyone being western stooges is PURE F***ING PROJECTION

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

                First you intentionally make the dumbest interpretation of how a situation can occur, then when I post an article that shows exactly how something like this goes down, you call me a name, refuse to read, and revel in your ignorance. A simple article is not a book. Operations to subvert politics in a country take many years, even decades, and the article talks about US operations to interfere in the politics of Ukraine. Do you think you can make the connection between that and what happened around a decade after that article was written or is this too difficult for you?

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

                  No you threw a link at me and expecting me to strain out whatever point you were trying to make. And you still won’t do the simple act of concisely presenting whatever you think proves you right. Instead you caterwaul for two paragraphs worth of text.

                  It’s probably because you’re trying to walk me to your point of view and the article really doesn’t contain the definitive proof you think it does.

                  All you ML propaganda tactics are predicated on deception which you justify by saying it’s for the revolution.

                  Your praxis does not work in the information age where anyone can fact check your biased premise.

                  And yes I’m well aware that western governments foment decent artificially. That doesn’t prove anything about the euromadien protests. We all know if there were some ML uprising you would not accept the idea that it was BS because western govs do velvet revolutions. Before you say that doesn’t happen Lenin him fucking self was smuggled out of Europe by Anglo bourgeoisie to overthrow the Czar.

        • dwalin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Even if thats true (spoiler, it isnt) there have been plenty of free, internationally recognized (not just by the west), elections since them.

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

    …it is in our own security interest.

    No one’s security interests are served by a new era of escalating tensions between Russia and the West. No country has more nuclear weapons than Russia. All efforts should be taken to prevent Russia from becoming desperate enough to use their nuclear weapons. By further isolating and encircling Russia, I think the chances of them using their nuclear weapons increases.

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

        I didn’t say that. I don’t think the options must necessarily be limited to either escalation or appeasement.

        • illi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          43
          ·
          4 months ago

          Ok, I’ll bite - how do you imagine that? It’s pretty much down to Ukraine and all othet countries laying down weapons if attacked or fighting back and defend their territory. Would love to hear what you imagine being the 3rd option

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

            I think what really scares Russia isn’t Ukraine defending their territory, it’s Ukraine allying with the West. I think Russia sees all these countries joining NATO and it looks to them like their neighbors are joining their enemy, against them. I think that makes them nervous and afraid. I think the only solution is diplomacy.

            • Carrolade@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              74
              ·
              4 months ago

              You’re buying their excuses. Chechnya wasn’t joining NATO. South Ossetia wasn’t joining NATO. Ukraine wasn’t joining NATO before they lost Crimea in 2014.

              Russia is an aggressive power that uses military might to hold power over people that do not want to be ruled by Moscow.

              • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I’ve come to the realization that the only people truly believing ruZZian excuses, are people too young to know better. And not in a “hurr it’s all 12 year Olds” kind of way but in a “you have not paying attention to the wider world for long enough to know how some places just are”

                And yeah, sure we all know what we want the world to be, but unfortunately right now we have to deal with how things are.

                And how things are shows that Russia is clearly in the wrong here, full stop.

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

                  It also tends to be people farthest away from what’s going on. The most anti-Russian countries tend to be those geographically closest to Russia. Those on the border with them know what’s at stake and why having military backing against Russian aggression is so important.

                • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  They also have the support of the minority that wants to tear down democracy as a ruling principle. Some of those people are quite intelligent, they’re just mean and believe in power, violence and the importance of suffering. In their world the truth is not objective, what is true is whatever the strongest person says it is, because he will hurt you if you disagree. This destruction of objective factuality is a core part of their methodology and overall worldview.

                  We had to defeat them in a World War just to get to where we are today, but they never did fully give up. Stubborn sorts.

              • thetreesaysbark@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                17
                ·
                4 months ago

                Funny how there was no reply to this comment. I wonder why they didn’t get back to you. Maybe they needed to cook dinner, or go to work, or rethink their entire life.

                I hope it’s the last one but I’m not counting on it.

            • ThePyroPython@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              35
              ·
              4 months ago

              We’ve tried this. Blair’s talks with Putin, Obama’s Russia Reset, energy cooperation in Europe, and that non aggression deal Russia signed with Ukraine.

              Putin threw all of that away when he invaded Crimea and then Ukraine.

              True peace in the region will be achieved by Putin being removed from power by the Russian people, ending the war at internationally recognised boarders, rebuilding Ukraine letting them choose their own path geopolitically, AND helping Russia rebuild from decades of corruption and kleptocracy.

              Until then the only way to stop Putin, who only recognises strength, is to fight back.

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

                True peace in the region will be achieved by Putin being removed from power by the Russian people, ending the war at internationally recognised boarders, rebuilding Ukraine letting them choose their own path geopolitically, AND helping Russia rebuild from decades of corruption and kleptocracy.

                If that is the best path to peace, then I hope all of those things are achieved. But, if other possibilities need to be considered, I’m open to considering them.

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

                  He’s not interested in peace. Russia’s demands for a ceasefire are maximalist and would essentially erase Ukraine as a nation. They only pay lip service to diplomacy for international optics.

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

                  An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. -Winston Churchill

            • illi@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              You didn’t answer the question.

              Diplomacy was utilized before Russians crossed the Ukraine border to launch a full scale invasion. Also back when Russia was “intimidated” by Ukraine’s inherited nuclear arsenal and made agreement they will leave Ukraine alone - and this, among other things led us here.

            • Bronzie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              19
              ·
              4 months ago

              Now why would they fear Ukraine joining a non-confontational alliance?

              And how do you rationalize the fear of your neighbour making new friends by physically attacking them?

              I don’t know if you are a russian bot or actually conflicted so I’m giving you a chance to explain what you think Ukraine should really do. In my mind, bowing down to a bully is never ever the answer and support any aid they get in their purely defensive war.

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

                Now why would they fear Ukraine joining a non-confontational alliance?

                I don’t think Russia sees NATO as non-confrontational.

                And how do you rationalize the fear of your neighbour making new friends by physically attacking them?

                I don’t think Russia sees it merely as a “neighbor making new friends,” I think they see it as a neighbor, that they feel culturally connected to, making alliances with their enemy.

                I don’t know if you are a russian bot

                I am not. I’ve never been to Russia, I don’t know any Russian people. I’m American, I’ve lived in the US my entire life. I’m just trying to look at things from Russia’s perspective, because I think that’s critical, regardless of how we proceed.

                explain what you think Ukraine should really do.

                I am not against Ukraine defending itself from invasion, nor am I necessarily against them joining NATO. I completely understand why they would want to do that, and I would probably want to do the same. I simply want to find a solution that will result in the least possible loss of life and an end to the conflict as quickly as possible.

                • barsoap@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Now why would they fear Ukraine joining a non-confontational alliance?

                  I don’t think Russia sees NATO as non-confrontational.

                  If Russia is so afraid of NATO attacking them, then why did they withdraw pretty much all troops from the Finnish border? There’s barely border guards there.

                • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Try to empathize with the Russian people and not with the Russian state and things will make a lot more sense.

                • Bronzie@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt then, mostly because I agree with you that the best solution is the one where the fewest amount of people die.

                  I think where we diverge is how to achieve this. From what we’ve seen so far, Ukraine surrendering would probably not end the war. At least long term. Russia would use the time to re-arm and retry. Even if they don’t, the people in these new russian territories would be poorly treated and potentially murdered, especially those disagreeing with the peace agreement. That is my honest opinion. Therefore, the only other ways are Russia going home or Ukraine beating them.

                  The first one isn’t happening, so we end up alternative three.

                  Do you agree or disagree with my assessment?

            • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              4 months ago

              If Russia hadn’t invaded Ukraine they wouldn’t be joining NATO. Same with Finland and Sweden.

              Also, if they stopped being dickweeds they could have normal and friendly relations with the West. Russia’s paranoia is the problem, not NATO.

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

              Ukraine isn’t allying with the west per se, it’s allying with the countries that aren’t in violation of the Budapest accords.

              Thank you for the chance to clarify.

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

                Reality and Russia’s perception are likely at odds with one another, but even if Russia’s perception is inaccurate and based on delusion and paranoia, it is nonetheless their perception.

            • ik5pvx@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              4 months ago

              In the last 30-ish years nobody in Europe had considered Russia “the enemy”, on the contrary a lot of people were happy of doing business with them and putain could have chosen a path to integration with the rest of Europe and “the West” in general. I even dreamt of them being a civilised part of EU, along with the rest of the countries on the continent. But no, he had to revive the tsarist empire instead.

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

                In the last 30-ish years nobody in Europe had considered Russia “the enemy”

                I don’t doubt that, but I do think there has remained a fair amount of mistrust and animosity between Russia and the United States, possibly a hold over from the cold war era, and I don’t think Russia sees much, if any, distinction between NATO and their enemy the United States.

                • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Before Russia did their heel turn in the aughts, they almost joined NATO after a period of significant cooperation. Russia seeing the U.S., or it’s allies, as enemies is a symptom of Putin turning a fledgling democracy into a dictatorship, not the natural state of affairs.

                  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia–NATO_relations

                  Go to the “Development of post-Cold War cooperation (1990–2004)” section and check out “NATO-Russia Founding Act”, “NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council”, and “NATO-Russia Council”.

                  Back then the talk was pearl clutching over NATO with Russia being seen as some racist white alliance against China, MENA, India, and others in the global south.

                  Russia only sees us as enemies because Putin needed to create enemies to seize and consolidate power.

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

              Russia should focus inward and become a country that people want to ally with and that people don’t fear will come for them. Start by putting a halt to invasions and murder. It’s some incel, victim-blaming shit from them…work on yourself Russia, be better so you aren’t the creepy guy noone trusts. Sorry if that takes generations of self sacrifice until a new population grows up only seeing your good acts for themselves and wondering why great!grandpa is so mad at a reasonable economic system that they don’t even use in Russia.

    • Psiczar@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      56
      ·
      4 months ago

      Where do you draw the line? If you are happy to give up Ukraine to avoid a nuclear war, where do you stop? Can he take all of Eastern Europe? What about the whole of Europe? Everywhere except your country?

      Putin is a bully, and you stand up to bullies.

      Besides, he might have the most nukes, but given the maintenance costs for 5,000+ of them and the corruption in Russia, most of them probably won’t work.

      • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I have more cars than all my friends put together.

        Of course, they’re all in various pieces, parting out for scrap, and in storage, so only my main driver works…

        But hey, I’ve got the most cars!

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Besides, he might have the most nukes, but given the maintenance costs for 5,000+ of them and the corruption in Russia, most of them probably won’t work.

        I don’t disagree with the rest of what you said, but this is kind of a silly dismissal. First of all “most of them” don’t need to work. Only a few need to and vast numbers of people will die and the Earth may be poisoned for many years.

        Yes, stand up to Putin. Absolutely give Ukraine NATO membership. But don’t act like there’s no risk here. There’s a huge risk.

        • Psiczar@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I wasnt acting like there was no risk, 1 nuke is too many, especially when a dictator has his finger on the button. Russia might have the highest quantity of nukes, but i’d be surprised if they had the most working nukes as the US stockpile isnt far off Russia’s.

          Regardless, I wouldnt let the fact Russia is a nuclear capable nation deter us from doing what is right.

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

        You draw the line at “stop attacking outside your borders and we don’t have an issue” it isn’t hard…Russia has decided it wants to be seen as the villain and it wants the war to keep going … Has nothing to do with NATO or the US.

    • Flexaris@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      4 months ago

      By allowing Russia to expand it further provokes the west to use nuclear weapons. Huh, guess we’re at a deadlock. I guess Russia could give back what they stole.

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

        I guess Russia could give back what they stole.

        They should, but if they don’t, what should be done, knowing that no one’s interests are served by all out war between Russia and the West?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Do you feel that there should be some similar sort of compromise if Israel decides to occupy Gaza and the West Bank in perpetuity?

    • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s funny because Ukraine gave up their nukes and Russia signed the agreement to defend their territorial integrity. Russia’s feelings are irrelevant and if they want to nuke us all so they can get out of a contract they signed, that’s their problem.

      Another thing is you can appease someone completely in reality and people like Vladimir Putin will just turn around and say it’s still not enough.

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

      You may want to look up the Sudeten crisis/Munich agreement and how effective it was at preventing war.

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

        Ok, I give up. I’ve been down voted to hell and told repeatedly by multiple people that I’m an idiot or a coward or a Russian bot for wanting a peaceful resolution to the conflict, so I’m going to defer to the expertise of all these people and concede the point. It’s not like my opinion was going to change anything anyway.

        • Freefall@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          Peaceful resolution is not only the easiest thing in the word, it is 100% Russia’s choice…stop invading and go back home and try to make yourself a productive member of the world…start with your own suffering people.Russia was old news and no one cared before the invasions. If you are always treated like the bad guy, you have to put a lot of effort in to selflessly prove you aren’t and the world will take notice…or invade and get shit on and be the villain everyone said you are…

          It’s not the world’s call here. Debate the people that actually can change this situation.

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

          That’s the hivemind for you. Personally I don’t think you deserve downvotes for these comments and I don’t think you are a Russian shill. I replied to you because I understand where you’re coming from, and I was trying to get you to see things the way I see them : I actually held the same opinion when Russia annexed Crimea by force in 2014 even though people were already screaming that it was basically Hitler’s playbook. But the fact that Putin didn’t take that easy, huge W when basically the entire world went for appeasement, and instead decided to keep escalating convinced me that he is actually literally applying Hitler’s playbook (and backing it with mutually assured destruction, of all things).

          • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’ve been thinking about it, and I think I understand why many people have such strong reactions to the situation. Russia did illegally invade a sovereign nation, without provocation. They have killed thousands of innocent people and they have done incredible harm. It’s abhorrent. Any such unjustified invasion (like the US invasion is Iraq, for instance) is abhorrent. I suppose some people view my attempts to dispassionately look for peaceful solutions to the conflict as a kind of tacit support for Russia, or at least indifference. I am not indifferent, and I certainly don’t support their illegal and immoral actions, I just don’t want anything that could lead to more war, or more widespread war. However, as you’ve said, Russia has likely left the rest of the world with few other choices.

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

          Good on you for trying. I gave up a while ago. A consensus has formed, at least on here and on most of the English-speaking internet and lines have been drawn. Contrary opinions are rarely tolerated. Thankfully the rest of the world isn’t as gung-ho on isolating Russia and is actually helping restore some balance, because at the end of the day whether Ukraine is a NATO country or a Russian protectorate in ten years time matters little in the grand scheme of things.

          What matters more is that the global pecking order between great powers is disturbed and this will likely lead to frequent local and perhaps generalized conflict in the future. It would be helpful for more countries to remain neutral, so as to help maintain balance and independence, while limiting the reach of great powers, but under such intense competition for global dominance most countries have to pick a sponsor for better or worse. And Ukraine’s leadership has chosen NATO, naturally. Whether they could have remained neutral or not is for historians to debate. Right now, as the saying goes, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

          Do the US, Russia, and China have to be enemies? Yes, unfortunately they do. They have competing interests and the decline of the US is leaving space open for others. Hence also the focus on getting Europe more heavily militarized again. So that it can hold its own in the uncertain times to come. That is my understanding.

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

            I’ve learned my lesson, I’m not commenting on anything related to Russia, Ukraine, or NATO again. These people are…passionate, and they are not interested in hearing opinions that run counter to their own.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      No, there’s no possible way the NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, former Prime Minister of Norway, would know anything about European politics and military policy.

      And there’s certainly no one he could consult on the matter.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          4 months ago

          There’s lots of things to worry about. The Earth has gone above an average temperature of 1.5° C since the Industrial Revolution began. We’re running out of fresh water globally. PFAS is everywhere and microplastics are in every man’s testes.

          And you’re worried about whether or not someone who likely knows a hell of a lot more than you do about international policy along with all of their expert advisors know what they’re doing.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              30
              ·
              4 months ago

              And then when I told you that he does, you responded with a sarcastic, “well then I guess there is nothing to worry about.”

              And now here we are.

  • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    That was a way worse path to NATO membership than just fixing the corruption issues that were keeping them out of NATO in the first place.

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

      On one hand, Russia deserves to be nuked. On the other hand, I don’t want innocent people to die. So unfortunately no nukes.