1110
Remember me comrades!
(lemmy.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
1110 points (88.3% liked)
Memes
45660 readers
810 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
There are more types of alliance than military, dude. Global capitalism be like that.
And this thread is talking about military alliances. So stay on topic.
...is it?
Damn those must have prevented war in ukraine
Is there a point being made with this comment?
Yes. Friendships dont prevent wars. Official alliances do
Deterrents are not absolute. Also, I don't know how you're not aware of this, but it was Ukraine's announcement they'd be joining NATO that provoked Russia. That doesn't sound like an alliance preventing war, does it... As I said - deterrents are not absolute. They never are. Police and prison (allegedly) deter crime, for instance.
Boggles me how some people actually think this. Finland's announcement they’d be joining NATO that provoked Russia into a second war, right? No wait
Yeah, it's a stupid fucking reason but it's the one Putin gave. It was a convenient excuse for his imperialist ambitions.
Eh? What putin says is irrelevant to reality, please stop using him as a source. If you're about to tell me joining NATO is a reason for wars to break out please make sure it's real first lmao.
So you're gonna tell me it's about the Nazis in Ukraine and you think he's just going there to liberate them? Yeah right.
EDIT: FFS you got me distracted again. Just like you wanted, I forgot my initial point was just that deterrents aren't absolute, and alliances do not necessarily deter war - and this is just one example.
Whether Ukraine joining NATO was the actual reason the war broke out, them planning to join NATO didn't STOP the war, did it?
Again with using putin as a source, what's wrong with you? :D Anyway, there are some geopolitical analysts you could be interested who have way more credible takes on the issue than you, me or honestly putin. Personally I'm an unapologetic Zeihanist but Fukuyama is another author with great analysis on reality.
Did you read what I said?? I was discrediting that claim you fucking loon.
Okay, I surrender. You are a great troll. You win. You made me mad.
This has to be a joke. Okay, maybe you do know a couple of things, because you can only have included this because you must know I'm aware of the claim of "The End Of History" and how absolutely ludicruous that is.
If you truly think neoliberal capitalism is how humanity is meant to live, and that we wil never and can never progress beyond it, you are hopelessly naive and sheltered.
But, back to the actual point, before I let you distract me again:
Why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims? Alright if it was sarcasm but even that aught to make sense mate
Aight my boy has not yet learned that an author can make great analysis even if you don't personally agree with the outcome of his analysis. Once you graduate high school you'll get used to nuances like that in literature.
No. Because planning to join doesn't mean they joined already. Had they joined no war would've broken out. Simple as. It's crazy how reality, out of all things, is the one thing you refuse to believe.
What even is this question?
I didn't say anything about his analysis specifically. Just that if "The End Of History" is the kind of stuff you're interested in, you may be a bit politically naive.
Puerile.
This is fucking hilarious. They didn't get the chance to join. Because Putin didn't want them to. (And also wanted Ukraine but hey ho, an excuse is an excuse)
Sorry let me ask that again, why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims?
The analysis in it is interesting. I'm personally a socdem (as you prob already know by now) so no I don't like him because I think he's right all the time. What a weird way that'd be to read someone's analysis lmao. I've read marx too. And I laugh at Zeihans predictions on europe. But mostly, I laugh at your attempt at convincing me you read literature.
But true. Explained my thought process more above.
Doesn't matter to my point tbh. Friendships don't help deterrence, only official military alliances do. That is my point and nothing else. putin had no choice but to invade before any NATO stuff come alive, but would've invaded with or without any plans of joining.
?
As I suspected I had been conversing with someone who didn't even have elementary idea of the geopolitical situation and goals of rus*ia. Except for the things putin says about it, apparently. Please educate yourself on the subject I mentioned prior, Zeihan really is a good and easily understandable source on analysis over it if you want to check it out, even if he's very memeable.
Russia is not justified in invading Ukraine. I have zero interest in entertaining that notion.
Keep licking boots.
Huh? In the rare case you are not misreading my comments due to being embarrassed, you REALLY need to educate yourself on the subject.
Russia did not need to invade Ukraine.
Ukraine is existential to rus*ia. The invasion was always going to happen, it was just a matter of when.
You'd know this if you'd knew even a little bit of geopolitics over the region. Like literally the tiniest amount of education would've saved you all these messages.
If you agree with Putin, yes.
Hold on - am I talking to Putin right now? Or just his personal aide?
Am I going to read about a Russian (that's how you spell it, not Rus*ia) social media secretary being disappeared after embarrassing themselves online?
Who I agree with is irrelevant to reality. Sadly, he never asked my opinion on the invasion. I'm just stating the facts here, facts about reality which does seem like the sticking point with you.
And I don't spell rus*ia with a capital r, they don't deserve it.
So, you do agree.
Also, it's not the capitalisation I'm disputing. And I don't believe your posturing.
I don't agree with him. But I acknowledge the existence of his reasons. Very simple concept.
You seem to think his reasons are valid. Stop dancing around that. You said he "had no choice but to invade". That means you think he was justified in invading.
He wasn't.
I also "acknowledge the existence of his reasons" just the same as I "acknowledge the existence" of the reasons a child steals candy. They wanted it. The reason exists, sure, but it doesn't make it a good or valid one.
I dont
Yep
What? :D you literally just quoted me? :D Did I say “I think he had no choice but to invade and I agree with his reasons and the conclusions he came to” or “had no choice but to invade”.
Man, you truly are a tankie. Like a labgrown unfiltered nazi, sorry, tankie.
You literally said he had no choice but to invade. That is, from you, a statement of believed fact. Why are you trying to backpedal, here? This is what you said. You even agree that I quoted you. How can you say "he had no choice but to invade", and now imply you never claimed to agree?
If you didn't agree, you'd have said "Putin claimed he had no choice". But you didn't. You said, flat out, he had no choice.
I still don't see the problem with the statement. He really didn't, rus*ian geopolitic doctrine insists on Ukraine being existential for their country, he had no choice but to invade.
He had no choice but to invade.
Aw, poor little put upon Putin was so blocked in, he really had no choice but to brutally murder thousands of people for conquest. He had a gun against his head, don't you see!
Wtf is wrong with you? You don't think he could have just... NOT FUCKING INVADED?
Fucking Nazi.
Not sure if you have challenges in reading or are just pretending to be retarded. Since you are a commie I actually can't tell if you can't read or pretend to be retarded for the lulz.
Also bro I'm going to bed now, sleep tight tty tmr <3