I hate how “anti-war” has been hijacked by these people to mean, let imperialist countries invade whoever they want with no consequences. (in the case of tankies, any imperialist country that isn’t in NATO).

  • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    If one didn’t, sure. But what happens when NATO as a whole doesn’t defend Poland? What’s Poland going to do? Or even just Trump’s US?

    • Eatspancakes84@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      The trick is that (Eastern) Europe is filled with NATO troops and material from all countries. You would need an extremely nasty retreat of these troops if you do not support (say) Poland. Also at the moment (officially) the US has stationed nuclear weapons in 6 European countries, and there are very likely more also in the form of submarines that are not known to the public. Retreating means leaving those weapons in Russian hands. Then again, maybe Trump does not care about that.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Well ideally if you don’t want to be a part of an agreement, you just tell the people you made the agreement with that you are no longer a part of it.

      If you do so amicably, parties may be fine with it it may not have bad effects. If you wait till one of those counties is being invaded and back out, it likely would not end amicably, and with them having to switch over to a wartime economy, they may cut all trade moving forward with the member who screwed them over. Could cost the U.S. trillions in trade annually.

      Aka it would be more profitable to support your allies, or get out of the agreement early, but that doesn’t guarantee counties don’t say… Why should we trade with someone who would hang us out to dry? And it hurts our economy anyway.