• @nachtigall@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    NATO being able to put nukes in Ukraine would mean that they could reach Moscow in five minutes. This is a red line for Russia.

    Serious question: why should Ukraine be a red line when NATO could already put nuclear weapons in Latvia, which is about the same distance from Moscow?

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
      link
      fedilink
      02 years ago

      They’re not happy about Latvia either, and the current demand is that NATO rolls back to where it was in the 90s. However, when Latvia joined NATO, Russia was in no position to make any kinds of demands. Situation today is very different than it was then.

      • @iagev@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Wouldn’t that totally invalidate the point of NATO, if Russia (whose expansion NATO was founded to curb) can just demand that countries that already joined it should leave it?

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
          link
          fedilink
          -12 years ago

          The point of NATO was invalidated when USSR fell. NATO has been responsible for practically all the instability in Eurasia since then, and the sooner this alliance falls apart the better off the world will be. The countries NATO assimilated should’ve never been admitted into NATO based on the agreements made between NATO and Russia in the 90s.

          • Agreements like Ukraine giving up it’s nukes in exchange for never being invaded? Russia’s word is worthless. Maybe the best thing for Ukraine is to join NATO.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
              link
              fedilink
              02 years ago

              NATO already made it pretty clear that Ukraine will never join. Meanwhile, all the westerners fled Ukraine from the phantom invasion that the west invented. What Ukrainians know now beyond all doubt is that the west threw them under the bus and never intended to fight for them.

              • It is a phantom invasion meant to distract Russia’s real move in Kazakhstan. “Russian troops withdrawn in days”, you say? But their mercenaries linger, to prop up their sock puppet regime with I can’t imagine what kinds of violence.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  02 years ago

                  LMAO, Kazakhstan is a member of CSTO and formally invited Russia to intervene. It’s absolutely shocking just how ignorant some people can be.

          • @iagev@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            0
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            NATO has been responsible for practically all the instability in Eurasia

            Can you elaborate? I can think of Kosovo, where NATO practically stopped a genocide from fully happening. Are you referring to the so-called spreading to the east?

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆OP
              link
              fedilink
              -12 years ago

              Yugoslavia, Georgia, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq are all NATO projects. Meanwhile, ethnic cleansing in both Kosovo and Serbia were a direct result of the destruction of Yugoslavia by NATO. Yugoslavia provided a framework that allowed peoples of different nationalities to coexist peacefully. When that framework was destroyed we saw atrocities happen both in Serbia and Bosnia.