NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is proposing to establish a fund of allied contributions worth $100 billion over five years for Ukraine as part of a package for alliance leaders to sign off when they gather in Washington in July.
I’m not sure who would say that it was to ‘stop NATO aggression’, but it’s not hard to imagine it as a some kind of response to NATO’s continued expansion around them.
NATO hasn’t been in any direct operations against Russia but they have been involved in the ME where they have been active.
I think of it a lot in the same way as the US’s pacific ocean and Caribbean territorial expansion and involvement in central america as a response to the Cuban Missile crisis and Soviet posturing.
I think of it a lot in the same way as the US’s pacific ocean and Caribbean territorial expansion and involvement in central america as a response to the Cuban Missile crisis and Soviet posturing.
The “Cuban” missile crisis was started by USA putting nukes in Turkey.
I’m not sure who would say that it was to ‘stop NATO aggression’
I think the line might be “in response to” or similar, but it’s parroted by tankies and russophiles.
NATO’s continued expansion around them.
Can we imagine any reasons why Russia’s neighbors might want to join a defensive pact to protect against Russia? No? Oh well, must be US imperialism then.
I’m not saying there isn’t reason for those countries to want to joint an alliance against their imperialist neighbor, but honestly it’s kinda hard not to see how NATO’s influence has been abused for purposes other than defense.
Russia isn’t in NATO, but they are it’s most successful recruiter.
Which is why I’m baffled why people still spread the myth that Russia invaded to ‘stop nato aggression.’
Like, firstly you’re fucking wrong, but if you want to wear that L like a medal then go for it. Russia is the biggest reason the baltics joined.
Because that’s what Russia has been repeating for the past two years. Some people believe lies whan they’re repeated often enough.
A major reason may have been to stop Ukraine’s entry in Nato though.
I’m not sure who would say that it was to ‘stop NATO aggression’, but it’s not hard to imagine it as a some kind of response to NATO’s continued expansion around them.
NATO hasn’t been in any direct operations against Russia but they have been involved in the ME where they have been active.
I think of it a lot in the same way as the US’s pacific ocean and Caribbean territorial expansion and involvement in central america as a response to the Cuban Missile crisis and Soviet posturing.
The “Cuban” missile crisis was started by USA putting nukes in Turkey.
I think the line might be “in response to” or similar, but it’s parroted by tankies and russophiles.
Can we imagine any reasons why Russia’s neighbors might want to join a defensive pact to protect against Russia? No? Oh well, must be US imperialism then.
I’m not saying there isn’t reason for those countries to want to joint an alliance against their imperialist neighbor, but honestly it’s kinda hard not to see how NATO’s influence has been abused for purposes other than defense.
Nato: Invades the entire middle east and fucks it up to steal oil
You: “What a great defensive alliance”
Where those WMD’s in Iraq at?