44
Turkey Bids to Join BRICS in Push to Build Alliances Beyond West
(www.bloomberg.com)
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 02 Sep 2024
44 points (97.8% liked)
World News
32281 readers
460 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
My expectation is that NATO's days are numbered. Essentially, NATO serves as a protection racket spearheaded by the United States. With China emerging as the main rival for America, while their proxy conflict with Russia falters, Europe is destined to be discarded so that the US can redirect its focus towards Asia. Turkey, sensing an impending shift in global dynamics, is now diversifying its alliances.
Also it seems they are finally entirely disillusioned about their accession to EU.
Oh yeah, I don't think anybody with a functioning brain thinks Turkey would ever get into the EU. At this point, it's not even clear what the benefit would be either given that EU is imploding.
I don't think this is true. Turkey has been playing both sides for a long time, and this is just another step in that direction. But NATO is still resilient unfortunately.
Turkey absolutely likes to play both sides, but I can't see how NATO survives without the US being committed to it. Meanwhile, the US has to pick its battles because it can't be everywhere at once. And China is now a far bigger concern for US than Europe is.
NATO is an instrument of US hegemony. I can't imagine they'd stop committing to it. They know there are too many who think Russia is a threat to them and will just do whatever to keep NATO alive. I don't think US would want to let go of something so useful to them.
At the end of the day the US doesn't see Russia as a primary threat, and they lack the resources to both fund NATO and threaten China. With the war in Ukraine having been lost, I expect that the US will leave Europe to deal with the fallout and refocus on Asia. If the war achieved its goals of accomplishing a regime change in Russia or even Balkanizing it, then it would be a different story. The US would absolutely invest into NATO to surround China from the west at that point. However, now that Russia has come out stronger, it would just be throwing good money after bad from US perspective.
what
NATO is essentially a gang of Imperialist countries combining strength to maintain their Imperialist status militarily.
even if that was an accurate description of nato, that's not an accurate description of a protection racket
It is both. NATO spreads in a rent-seeking manner.
no it isn't, and also, it's rent-seeking by having countries ask to join? yes this makes sense
That's the same logic as saying Capitalism is voluntary because workers agree to work for their wages. Such analysis sees the subservience in a vacuum devoid of external pressures or developmental practices.
in this case the external pressure is a rogue state doing a cheeky land grab on its neighbor
i'm not sure why that's nato's fault, although i'm very excited that you're about to tell me
NATO was formed to be anti-USSR, after the collapse of which the Russian Federation tried to join NATO, and was denied. The RF then complained about NATO expansion, which had not ceased.
Regardless of whether or not you believe Russia's invasion of Ukraine is justified or villianous, it was provoked by NATO expansion, as admitted by NATO leaders themselves.
NATO didn't start after 2022, many of its leaders were Nazi officers and it has always been a way to exert Western supremacy.
in the same way the us wouldn't be allowed to join csto
i don't see how it's nato's fault that people are so sick of russia's shit that they're signing up to the defensive alliance against them in their droves
nato expansion that existed because of russian land grabs
nato isn't the warsaw pact. they aren't sending in tanks to force people to be a part of their alliance.
this is just you doing the thing you accused me of doing by refusing to consider externalities
russia didn't start misbehavin' after 2022 either
east germany was part of the warsaw pact, and had plenty of ex-nazis in its ranks
the reason you can't draw a line from that to today is because the ussr folded like a cheap suit 30 years ago
you're just kind of saying things now
Have NATO countries complained of CSTO expansion? Has the US been denied entry into CSTO? Has the CSTO expanded against the will of NATO?
It's NATO's fault for consisting of the absolutely most grotesque reaches of Imperialist countries, and expanding against the wishes of non-NATO countries.
Bzzzt wrong. NATO has been expanding long before.
Quite the contrary, you're deliberately erasing historical context.
When and why did Russia start "misbehavin?"
Whataboutism, lmao. East-Germany purged Nazis, that's one of the reasons the west complains that the GDR was authoritarian. NATO was led by Nazis.
Anyone that considers themselves a good person cannot be *pro-*NATO. You can disagree with Russia's invasion of Ukraine without being pro-NATO.
i don't think nato cares about csto
russia is literally doing an imperialism right now, but nato is the one with grotesque reaches, okay
lmao because nato predates russia
and russia started getting into iffy wars basically at its inception
probably because they're an imperialist power? i don't know
okay
So then why bring it up?
Invasion and Imperialism are not the same thing. Regardless of the morality or immorality of invasion, NATO retains its status as Imperialist via surplus extraction and exploitation of the Global South.
This kinda verges on anti-Russian racism, there's no analysis of why you believe this.
You indeed do not know.
The GDR indeed purged Nazis, as they were attacked by western Germany, which largely retained its Nazis.
because it's the closest equivalent to nato? the us also wouldn't be allowed to join brics, if that helps de-confuse you.
please provide a definition for imperialism that doesn't include what russia's doing in ukraine now
says the one who's just been continuously stating without expounding that nato is a collection of spooky imperialist powers
or don't respond to what i posted that's cool too i guess
i think it's pretty clear you don't have much of an argument here, given that this started as "nato is a protection racket" and across 6 replies you've provided absolutely nothing to support that statement past whinging
peace
It's the Russian equivalent, you say, except the power dynamic is entirely different and CSTO isn't expanding. Interesting.
Export of Industrial and Financial Capital to exploited Countries to super-exploit for super-profits, like an international Capitalistic relation. You know, the standard definition Leftists follow.
I have explained how and why, your refusal to read is no longer my problem.
Quite the contrary, your selective reading and blinders mean you can't be reached with words.
alright you get one more, then i kind of need to stop wasting my time with you unless you get more entertaining quickly
because nobody wants to join the alliance run by the country most likely to invade you? "russia is too disliked for their alliance to be popular" or "russia is too incompetent to run an effective alliance" is an incredible argument
why don't we ask azerbaijan and armenia how their membership is going if you're confused as to why csto is unpopular?
ohhhhhhh so you mean like sending in pmcs to countries in africa? or setting up debt traps for countries in africa?
literally nothing you've said has justified nato behaving in an imperialist way, other than your definition of imperialism, which includes russia and china, so good job
to paraphrase you, "membership expansion isn't imperialism", which is the only thing you've been arguing over, which is wild when the thing you're meant to be justifying is that "nato is a protection racket".
i don't think you know what a protection racket is
Lmfao ~~the fourth reich~~ west germany literally had more nazis leading it in its government than during the third reich. The socialist states did the opposite and purged nazis — obviously, since fascism is actually a threat to socialist states whereas it's more of an asset to capitalists with them able to scapegoat marginalized people for capitalism's faults the more prevalent it is.
You can't argue with these people. I'm starting to learn the hard way.
There is literally an entire "argument" under this comment between these two lmao wtf are you on about
Dah, comrade