Current Events > Sweden and Finland agree to apply for NATO membership at the same time.

(+) Yeah! (+)

thronedfire2 posted...

NATO is a defensive pact, the only way Russia can view it as a threat is if theyre planning on attacking the countries that want to join it. Which is exactly the reason those countries want to join now.

this is an extremely naive characterization of NATO

averagejoel posted...

whether or not it's actually a threat, it's pretty clear that Russia views it as one. and given that NATO operates primarily in the interests of the US, that is a reasonable position to hold

It's pretty clear the rest of the world views Russia as a country that threatens them with nukes arbitrarily.

Russia is inherently, fundamentally unreasonable. They are not reasonable by any objective metric. Their justification for invading Ukraine was unreasonable. Their reaction to international condemnation was unreasonable. Their authoritarian propaganda is unreasonable.

Wearing body armor because the other guy has a gun pointed at you doesn't justify that guy shooting his gun.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

NATO being nominally a defensive pact does not mean that its history has been exclusively (or even primarily) defensive in nature

averagejoel posted...

NATO being nominally a defensive pact does not mean that its history has been exclusively (or even primarily) defensive in nature

You: Semantics
Russia: Literally covering mass grave of Ukrainian civilians with concrete

DarkRoast posted...

It's pretty clear the rest of the world views Russia as a country that threatens them with nukes arbitrarily.

it's not arbitrary

Russia is inherently, fundamentally unreasonable. They are not reasonable by any objective metric. Their justification for invading Ukraine was unreasonable. Their reaction to international condemnation was unreasonable. Their authoritarian propaganda is unreasonable.

Wearing body armor because the other guy has a gun pointed at you doesn't justify that guy shooting his gun.

calm the fuck down. I never claimed that Russia's actions were reasonable, and I never claimed they were justified.

"it's not arbitrary"

Holy shit

DarkRoast posted...

You: Semantics
Russia: Literally covering mass grave of Ukrainian civilians with concrete

you said that Russia was attacking unprovoked. I demonstrated that this is not the case. for the purpose of this conversation, their actual actions since invading aren't relevant

averagejoel posted...

you said that Russia was attacking unprovoked. I demonstrated that this is not the case. for the purpose of this conversation, their actual actions since invading aren't relevant

Just saying you were provoked doesn't mean you were actually provoked.

averagejoel posted...

you said that Russia was attacking unprovoked. I demonstrated that this is not the case. for the purpose of this conversation, their actual actions since invading aren't relevant

Casual reminder that "we're taking Ukraine because it's ours" is not being provoked.
And neither is "we're taking Ukraine because we need a buffer zone against NATO"

Both are called excuses. Not provocations.

Vyrulisse posted...

Just saying you were provoked doesn't mean you were actually provoked.

I have already explained why NATO expansion in the area can be seen as a provocation.

averagejoel posted...

whether or not it's actually a threat, it's pretty clear that Russia views it as one. and given that NATO operates primarily in the interests of the US, that is a reasonable position to hold

NATO operates primarily in the interests of countries that dont want to be invaded by Russia

averagejoel posted...

I have already explained why NATO expansion in the area can be seen as a provocation.

because Russia thinks they can take whatever territory they want

Its amusing to watch people who are merely parroting state and popular media talking points about how nobody has ever done anything wrong to anger Russia call other people victims of propaganda. Doubly so when they think attempting to understand why Russia feels provoked means you think the war is justified. You cant make this up.

But for those of us interested in rational discourse, we may consider this article from former diplomat to the USSR, Jack Matlock. I shouldnt have to emphasize that his experience probably gives him a little more insight into Russian thinking than anyone on this board, but here we are.

http://www.defenddemocracy.press/acura-viewpoint-jack-f-matlock-jr-todays-crisis-over-ukraine/

DarkRoast posted...

Casual reminder that "we're taking Ukraine because it's ours" is not being provoked.
And neither is "we're taking Ukraine because we need a buffer zone against NATO"

Both are called excuses. Not provocations.

who are you quoting there? has Russia said either of those things?

regardless, it's still reasonable to view NATO as a threat. by extension, it's also reasonable to view NATO expansion in the area as a provocation.

AloneIBreak posted...

But for those of us interested in rational discourse

...on gamefaqs? CE?

averagejoel posted...

I have already explained why NATO expansion in the area can be seen as a provocation.

No you haven't.

"I don't want to be nuked by you therefore I'm joining a "not getting nuked by you" club" is not a provocation.

AloneIBreak posted...

Its amusing to watch people who are merely parroting state and popular media talking points about how nobody has ever done anything wrong to anger Russia call other people victims of propaganda. Doubly so when they think attempting to understand why Russia feels provoked means you think the war is justified. You cant make this up.

But for those of us interested in rational discourse, we may consider this article from former diplomat to the USSR, Jack Matlock. I shouldnt have to emphasize that his experience probably gives him a little more insight into Russian thinking than anyone on this board, but here we are.

http://www.defenddemocracy.press/acura-viewpoint-jack-f-matlock-jr-todays-crisis-over-ukraine/

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/defend-democracy-press-bias/

"Merely parroting state propaganda"

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/0/0/9/AAeEwGAADLnZ.jpg
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/0/1/0/AAeEwGAADLna.jpg

Next time you want to tell us about parroting propaganda, maybe use a source that isn't propaganda.

averagejoel posted...

given this information, is it reasonable for Russia to view NATO expansion in the area as a threat?

No.

Go farther, and invite Mongolia and Kazakhstan into NATO.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


All these far-right (and sometimes libertarian and far-left) blogs link back to coordinated Russian misinformation networks if you follow the crumbs.

But the people who read them are too prideful to even consider the possibility that they've been brainwashed.

Epoch Times (the new GOP darling) is literally owned by the Falun Gong cult. And that's not hyperbole.

The US military is one of the largest employers in the world. It's in their economic interest that the US is constantly at war, which it has been for almost its entire existence as a nation. It's not unreasonable to suggest that they would be interested in escalating tensions in various parts of the world. And it's not unreasonable to not want to join a military alliance with them.

scar the 1 posted...

The US military is one of the largest employers in the world. It's in their economic interest that the US is constantly at war, which it has been for almost its entire existence as a nation. It's not unreasonable to suggest that they would be interested in escalating tensions in various parts of the world. And it's not unreasonable to not want to join a military alliance with them.

Thank you for contributing that nonsense.

I suppose its easier to dismiss the host than to consider the arguments, but thats your call. The author can be found here, discussing the same subject, on Democracy Now: https://www.democracynow.org/2022/2/17/jack_matlock_ukraine_russia_nato_us

Being the kind fellow I am, I went ahead and looked up the source on your media bias website: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/democracy-now/

When youre ready for grown up talk, please read the original article and we can proceed.

AloneIBreak posted...

I suppose its easier to dismiss the host than to consider the arguments, but thats your call. The author can be found here, discussing the same subject, on Democracy Now: https://www.democracynow.org/2022/2/17/jack_matlock_ukraine_russia_nato_us

Being the kind fellow I am, I went ahead and looked up the source on your media bias website: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/democracy-now/

When youre ready for grown up talk, please read the original article and we can proceed.

There's no "discussion" it's a transcript.

"One guy says X" is one of the oldest ways to spread propaganda.

"Robert Malone says mRNA vaccines are dangerous and HE INVENTED THEM!"

Experts are not always right (unless you agree with them).
Lin Wood was apparently an extremely effective lawyer, but you wouldn't know it based on the fact that he believes machines not even connected to the internet can be remotely hacked through the internet to alter vote tallies, and that the only solution is to grant the VP the power to throw out electoral votes.

AloneIBreak posted...

When youre ready for grown up talk, please read the original article and we can proceed.

Please stop spreading Russian propaganda on purpose.

If you don't want your neighbors joining NATO, be a fucking better neighbor. Every country that broke free of the USSR has a right to exist independent of Russian fuckery. The invasions of Georgia and Ukraine have made it quite clear the only way to prevent that is to join NATO. I've no love for NATO, but I love invasions, war crimes, and mass graves even less.

And before morons do the "it was because these countries tried to join NATO that Russia invaded", I'm going to preemptively tell you to shut the fuck up. One of the provisions for NATO membership is that you cannot have any outstanding territorial disputes with another country. Which means neither Georgia or Ukraine was ever going to be allowed to join NATO without giving up territorial claims on Ossetia and Crimea. Whichis never going to happe .

Both Western and Russian Imperialism can be bad guys, it doesn't have to be one or the other.

scar the 1 posted...

The US military is one of the largest employers in the world. It's in their economic interest that the US is constantly at war, which it has been for almost its entire existence as a nation. It's not unreasonable to suggest that they would be interested in escalating tensions in various parts of the world. And it's not unreasonable to not want to join a military alliance with them.

Are you referring to the Nordics or to Ukraine? I'd agree with you on the former, but I'm sceptical with regard to the latter

Jesus fuck imagine defending Russia in 2022

thronedfire2 posted...

NATO operates primarily in the interests of countries that dont want to be invaded by Russia

one specific country that doesn't want to be invaded by Russia; that being the US

DarkRoast posted...

No you haven't.

"I don't want to be nuked by you therefore I'm joining a "not getting nuked by you" club" is not a provocation.

NATO is very much not a "not getting nuked by you" club. characterizing them as such isn't just naive; at this point it's active disinformation

DarthAragorn posted...

Jesus fuck imagine defending Russia in 2022

These people live in an alternate reality constructed by a deliberately-crafted misinformation echo chamber that advances Russia's state interests.

averagejoel posted...

NATO is very much not a "not getting nuked by you" club. characterizing them as such isn't just naive; at this point it's active disinformation

Bruh.

Stop being wrong.

AloneIBreak posted...

Anti-vaxxer logic in full force.

On-topic: A video of one expert saying something contrarian does not a definitive counterpoint make.
THAT is anti-vaxxer logic. The Robert Malones, Andrew Wakefields, etc profit off of their desperate need for confirmation bias fulfillment.

averagejoel posted...

you said that Russia was attacking unprovoked. I demonstrated that this is not the case. for the purpose of this conversation, their actual actions since invading aren't relevant

I'm still not clear on what you mean by "unprovoked" - what specifically did Ukraine do to provoke Russia? They didn't join NATO...

Ruvan22 posted...

what specifically did Ukraine do to provoke Russia?

Russia is still pissed off about the Kulaks.

Ruvan22 posted...

I'm still not clear on what you mean by "unprovoked" - what specifically did Ukraine do to provoke Russia? They didn't join NATO...

He'll spin something up that makes no sense, fueled entirely on the reasoning that if he believes hard enough then he must be correct.

averagejoel posted...

you said that Russia was attacking unprovoked. I demonstrated that this is not the case. for the purpose of this conversation, their actual actions since invading aren't relevant

Wife: I went shopping today
Husband: what the fuck bitch. *Hits her* why you gotta provoke me and make me hit you.

Ironically you could make a far better argument that Russia provoked Sweden and Finland to join NATO by threatening them first.

There is no defense of Russia and their actions. They've been needlessly violent and aggressive. Trying to defend them is not just bad optics for leftists, but also morally unjustifiable.

That said - NATO is also completely indefensible. It has been in practice a tool for spreading American imperial reach into Europe much the same way that our friendly relationship with Israel is a gate to spreading influence in the Near East.

Ukraine has every right to defend itself from foreign invasion. It's allies have every right to aid them. It's also reasonable for other nations to preemptively join together in solidarity against a potential threat to their existence.

NATO ain't it tho.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

Wife: I went shopping today
Husband: what the fuck bitch. *Hits her* why you gotta provoke me and make me hit you.

This is the most accurate take so far.
Ukraine is essentially Kansas, while Russia itself is terrible at agriculture in both dirt and competency.

DarkRoast posted...

Ironically you could make a far better argument that Russia provoked Sweden and Finland to join NATO by threatening them first.

I'm no expert, but I don't see a situation where Finland and Sweden are seriously threatened by Russia. If they do decide to join NATO now, it'll be out of solidarity with Ukraine and not out of solidarity with the aims of NATO

Imo, the best solution would be for Ukraine to quickly join the EU. That would give it support on the world stage without bowing down to the US

teep_ posted...

I'm no expert, but I don't see a situation where Finland and Sweden are seriously threatened by Russia. If they do decide to join NATO now, it'll be out of solidarity with Ukraine and not out of solidarity with the aims of NATO

Russia: "We will nuke you"
Sweden and Finland: "lol he kid he kid"

teep_ posted...

I'm no expert, but I don't see a situation where Finland and Sweden are seriously threatened by Russia. If they do decide to join NATO now, it'll be out of solidarity with Ukraine and not out of solidarity with the aims of NATO

You are aware that Russia has invaded Finland in the past and has been saber rattling at them again right?

DarkRoast posted...

Russia: "We will nuke you"
Sweden and Finland: "lol he kid he kid"

You really think that's a credible threat and not mere bluster?

ScazarMeltex posted...

You are aware that Russia has invaded Finland in the past and has been saber rattling at them again right?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the invasion a complete failure?

teep_ posted...

You really think that's a credible threat and not mere bluster?

Russia has invaded Finland before FYI (1939)

Threatening with nukes is always a credible threat unless you don't have nukes. Full stop.