this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
-4 points (33.3% liked)
Endless War
155 readers
19 users here now
Community critical of US Empire's thirst for endless war, its military and oil oligarchies and colonization of allies.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I never understood how nato is “expanding”. What countries has nato invaded? what land have they took?
Sweden and Finland, which have long held a nonaligned and neutral position, recently joined NATO. And NATO membership was tentatively proposed to former eastern block countries that are known to be considered by Russia to be within their sacrosanct sphere of influence.
That's the expansion.
Much as I hate Putin and Trump, they're both right on that one. NATO should have stayed put and slowly wound down when the Cold War ended. Instead, it - i.e. the US - kept on keeping on and slowly tried to corner Russia, just as it was still sore about losing the Soviet empire. Stupidy stupidy...
So sovereign nations have no right to choose who they align with? Finland has not been "neutral" towards Russia truly probably ever. The only country who frequently talks about attacking/nuking Finland is Russia.
Finland being is NATO is not a threat to Russia unless Russia wants to start a war. No Finn wants to step a foot on Russian soil. I would argue the same is true for any NATO country. So countries being in NATO is only a threat to Russian expansion and influence. I guess that's the point. They are mad that countries dislike listening to their constant threats and warmongering. They talk about russophobia constantly. Who would bot be afraid of a country who frequently talks about nuking European countries.
Finland and Ukraine of course have the right to choose what organizations they belong to. And yes, Finland was never a Russian/Soviet ally, nor did they ever like the Russian. Nobody hates the Russians more than a Finn. But for the longest time, they tried to remain a sovereign nation by not disturbing their aggressive neighbor too much.
No argument from me. I'm simply stating what Russia / the USSR have always believed their God-given rights to influence their immediate neighbors is, and how NATO should have slowly de-escalated the rhetoric after the fall of the Soviet Union instead of providing a reason to stoke the traditional Russian nationalism. A large part of why Putin rose to power is because he sold the idea that the west was gnawing at the weakened Russian bear's toes and the Russians bought it, because from their point of view, it really does easily look like that.
Not taking sides here, just stating facts.
NATO/CIA creates political conditions for democracy to submit to NATO. Ukraine, Finland, Sweden are recent examples of such corruption. EU government appointments all being US approved pro NATO is a conquest point. Recent attempts to subvert Georgia democracy with CIA NGOs resulted in temper tantrum from the fascists. Romania elections overturned because NATO preferred different candidate.
NATO's corrupt demonic evil expansion is not done for Russia's protection, or because of love of the colonies' people. Democracy is the best vector for conquest. US definition of democracy is when a CIA puppet wins. When colonies approve/submit to Nordsteam sabotage. When response to Greenland invasion threat is to "please don't leave NATO, we will buy 3% of GDP in weapons from US instead."
Extortion and media ownership supporting the extortion is still demonic control over nations, even if US media doesn't demonize the puppets installed the same way it does "official adversaries". Was US/JFK wrong in drawing a red line over Russian missiles in Cuba even if Russia did not need to invade Cuba to do it?