Not to mention Sweden of all places can’t even get into NATO. You think an Ukraine that was partially occupied was getting in? You think the Russian government doesn’t know that?
Are you ignoring NATO membership for Ukraine was already torpedoed by France and Germany who are only changing their mind now because Russia decided to try and take the whole country? So no NATO has not “consistently postured” any such thing. It was explicitly decided at The 2008 summit to not offer them (or Georgia) membership. The US cannot unilaterally add anyone to NATO. Nor does the general-security of NATO get to decide that. No action plan or invitation was offered. The words have about as much weight as countries claiming they will stop global warming. Without concrete action, meaningless.
I’m not sure when you are citing the Monroe doctrine like that established some kind of precedent when Russia has been invading and neighbors before the United States was even a country.
I don’t care who Latin American decides to back. That’s their sovereign right. You know, that thing that’s being violated by Russia. I never said anything about it.
What I adressed was a comment playing apologetics for Russia with inconsistent application of its standards.
So don’t try and hide behind the some “might makes right””geopolitics” BS now.
After all, if our standards and morals don’t apply to the conversation since these are globe coinquering monsters who will do whatever they can get away then why are you still making excuses for Russia and blaming it in NATO.
Because you have an agenda.
Might makes right is literally the foundation of geopolitics. Claiming otherwise shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the world works.
It literally doesn't matter what you or I think because that's the reality we live in.
Irrelevant. That countries do things forcibly doesn’t mean I have to tolerate bad actions or should be quit about when they do bad or ignore bad arguments that try and justify the bad actions.
But I’m glad we now agree the invasion had nothing to do with a nato base.
Last I checked, that's not what Ukraine's Minister of Defense claimed.
Most people on these online platforms are American and implicitly endorse the actions taken by the US government by virtue of being American. It's hypocritical. I did assume that you were American, but if you're not then I apologize.
Nobody's trying to justify that what Russia is doing is morally right... But it is exactly what I'd expect a shit country with no sense of morals and a strong sense of "everything I do is righteous and in the name of my country and to protect my country from both real and imagined threats" like Russia or the US to do.
It's funny to watch Americans try and defend US actions in the context of Russian ones and then wonder why other countries don't want to get involved with either side, which, in case you forgot, was the whole point of the original post.
Considering how much Latin American countries have gotten abused by the US government, why are you even debating that they should be supporting the US side in this conflict?
Not according to Ukraine's Minister of Defense...
Nice revisionist history you got there.
Most people on these online platforms are American and implicitly endorse the actions taken by the US government by virtue of being American. It's hypocritical. I did assume that you were American, but if you're not then I apologize.
Nobody's trying to justify that what Russia is doing is morally right... But it is exactly what I'd expect a shit country with no sense of morals and a strong sense of "everything I do is righteous and in the name of my country and to protect my country from both real and imagined threats" like Russia or the US to do.
It's funny to watch Americans try and defend US actions in the context of Russian ones and then wonder why other countries don't want to get involved with either side, which, in case you forgot, was the whole point of the original post.
Revisionist history from talks about construction in 2020.
When Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014.
Whose history again?
I’d love to see you quote me on when I ever said the US acted righteously. What I did say was that bad behavior by the IS is not grounds to justify bad behavior from Russia.
And again, the comment that started this chain was definitly trying to do that.
The rest is just white noise to try and expand the argument out of its scope.
Also known as arguing in bad faith.
Might want to look at the article you're posting on for an argument in bad faith...
Might wanna reread what I’ve said and what I’ve adressed since you know, I was responding to a comment on the article, not the article itself and this conversation has little to do with the article at all, mostly due to people like you making it about the US.
You know, the article about EU nations asking for support for a European nation from Latin American countries…..
The article about Latin American countries refusing that support? Hmm...
Which brings up the US how? Hmmmm…..
Because Latin American policy has been dictated by decades of US influence, just like how European policy has been dictated by decades of Soviet influence?
From an article that neither mentions the US or does the joint statement by the Latin Americans countries mention the US.
So yeah, maybe go back and read the article. Bringing the US up is conjecture unsubstantiated by the article. And weren’t you big on o Lu focusing on the article just a few comments ago?
I get you struggle not to tie everything back in the United States but American exceptionalism is a fairly toxic idea.
Which of the countries in Latin America haven't had governments flipped by US intervention? I'll wait for you to count.
Case and point. EU nations (aka Not the US) asking for support for an eu nation (which did not have anything to do with US coups in Latin America) is to you about the US.
You can’t even imagine Latin American countires having issues with Europeans treatment of them, like the article states. The response text but up colonial reparations.
The US is not the center of the world. Countries have motivations that don’t factor the US.
For someone who doesn’t like the US they have gotten deep in your head.
2020
So after Russia invaded? Did you forget Crimea?
Not to mention Sweden of all places can’t even get into NATO. You think an Ukraine that was partially occupied was getting in? You think the Russian government doesn’t know that?
Are you ignoring NATO membership for Ukraine was already torpedoed by France and Germany who are only changing their mind now because Russia decided to try and take the whole country? So no NATO has not “consistently postured” any such thing. It was explicitly decided at The 2008 summit to not offer them (or Georgia) membership. The US cannot unilaterally add anyone to NATO. Nor does the general-security of NATO get to decide that. No action plan or invitation was offered. The words have about as much weight as countries claiming they will stop global warming. Without concrete action, meaningless.
I’m not sure when you are citing the Monroe doctrine like that established some kind of precedent when Russia has been invading and neighbors before the United States was even a country.
I don’t care who Latin American decides to back. That’s their sovereign right. You know, that thing that’s being violated by Russia. I never said anything about it.
What I adressed was a comment playing apologetics for Russia with inconsistent application of its standards.
So don’t try and hide behind the some “might makes right””geopolitics” BS now.
After all, if our standards and morals don’t apply to the conversation since these are globe coinquering monsters who will do whatever they can get away then why are you still making excuses for Russia and blaming it in NATO.
Because you have an agenda.
Might makes right is literally the foundation of geopolitics. Claiming otherwise shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the world works.
It literally doesn't matter what you or I think because that's the reality we live in.
Irrelevant. That countries do things forcibly doesn’t mean I have to tolerate bad actions or should be quit about when they do bad or ignore bad arguments that try and justify the bad actions.
But I’m glad we now agree the invasion had nothing to do with a nato base.
Last I checked, that's not what Ukraine's Minister of Defense claimed.
Most people on these online platforms are American and implicitly endorse the actions taken by the US government by virtue of being American. It's hypocritical. I did assume that you were American, but if you're not then I apologize.
Nobody's trying to justify that what Russia is doing is morally right... But it is exactly what I'd expect a shit country with no sense of morals and a strong sense of "everything I do is righteous and in the name of my country and to protect my country from both real and imagined threats" like Russia or the US to do.
It's funny to watch Americans try and defend US actions in the context of Russian ones and then wonder why other countries don't want to get involved with either side, which, in case you forgot, was the whole point of the original post.
Considering how much Latin American countries have gotten abused by the US government, why are you even debating that they should be supporting the US side in this conflict?
Not according to Ukraine's Minister of Defense...
Nice revisionist history you got there.
Most people on these online platforms are American and implicitly endorse the actions taken by the US government by virtue of being American. It's hypocritical. I did assume that you were American, but if you're not then I apologize.
Nobody's trying to justify that what Russia is doing is morally right... But it is exactly what I'd expect a shit country with no sense of morals and a strong sense of "everything I do is righteous and in the name of my country and to protect my country from both real and imagined threats" like Russia or the US to do.
It's funny to watch Americans try and defend US actions in the context of Russian ones and then wonder why other countries don't want to get involved with either side, which, in case you forgot, was the whole point of the original post.
Revisionist history from talks about construction in 2020.
When Russia first invaded Ukraine in 2014.
Whose history again?
I’d love to see you quote me on when I ever said the US acted righteously. What I did say was that bad behavior by the IS is not grounds to justify bad behavior from Russia.
And again, the comment that started this chain was definitly trying to do that.
The rest is just white noise to try and expand the argument out of its scope.
Also known as arguing in bad faith.
Might want to look at the article you're posting on for an argument in bad faith...
Might wanna reread what I’ve said and what I’ve adressed since you know, I was responding to a comment on the article, not the article itself and this conversation has little to do with the article at all, mostly due to people like you making it about the US.
You know, the article about EU nations asking for support for a European nation from Latin American countries…..
The article about Latin American countries refusing that support? Hmm...
Which brings up the US how? Hmmmm…..
Because Latin American policy has been dictated by decades of US influence, just like how European policy has been dictated by decades of Soviet influence?
From an article that neither mentions the US or does the joint statement by the Latin Americans countries mention the US.
So yeah, maybe go back and read the article. Bringing the US up is conjecture unsubstantiated by the article. And weren’t you big on o Lu focusing on the article just a few comments ago?
I get you struggle not to tie everything back in the United States but American exceptionalism is a fairly toxic idea.
Which of the countries in Latin America haven't had governments flipped by US intervention? I'll wait for you to count.
Case and point. EU nations (aka Not the US) asking for support for an eu nation (which did not have anything to do with US coups in Latin America) is to you about the US.
You can’t even imagine Latin American countires having issues with Europeans treatment of them, like the article states. The response text but up colonial reparations.
The US is not the center of the world. Countries have motivations that don’t factor the US.
For someone who doesn’t like the US they have gotten deep in your head.