Latin American countries opposed the participation of President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in their summit with the European Union in Brussels in mid-July and removed everything related to Ukraine from the draft declaration of this summit.
Last I checked, having a military base is not grounds for invasion and sovereign countries have a right to determine their alliances.
What I think doesn’t affect the fact that US policy considers having a military base to be grounds for invasion. In fact, I have no influence on US or Russian foreign policy and what I think about it doesn’t matter. The fact is that the policy is pretty consistent (FWIW, out of the big powers only China hasn’t actively invaded everyone who drops a military base near them). Stick to the facts.
The Minister of Defense claims that they are (were) drawing up plans for the construction of NATO bases in the country as early as 2020.
Now, sure, Eastern European countries are well-known for being hopelessly corrupt and talking out of their asses so anything their government says is worthless, but Ukraine has consistently postured that they would like to join NATO and NATO has consistently postured that they would like for Ukraine to join NATO.
Plus, the Monroe Doctrine (which motivated US action in Cuba, Costa Rica, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, Nicaragua, Grenada, and Panama) literally describes exactly Russia’s motivations… So it doesn’t matter if you or I don’t like it, because geopolitics has no morals and Russia and the US operate on a whole other plane of what’s “right” and what’s “wrong” than the rest of us.
These countries think that they should be in control of the entire world and that the entire world would be a better place if they were in control. They trample over other countries’ right to self-determination and force changes that the population itself doesn’t want in the name of ideals that never realize.
So are you really surprised that Latin American countries don’t want to align themselves with the West?
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.
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.
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.
So you approve of the United States actions towards Cuba then? Since you approve of Russias actions towards Ukraine?
Right, didn’t think so.
Why it’s almost like you aren’t basing your stance on any kind of ethical value or set of principles at all….
What I think doesn’t affect the fact that US policy considers having a military base to be grounds for invasion. In fact, I have no influence on US or Russian foreign policy and what I think about it doesn’t matter. The fact is that the policy is pretty consistent (FWIW, out of the big powers only China hasn’t actively invaded everyone who drops a military base near them). Stick to the facts.
The facts include the fact that Ukraine doesn’t have any American military bases.
So you are still wrong.
https://www.kyivpost.com/post/10511
The Minister of Defense claims that they are (were) drawing up plans for the construction of NATO bases in the country as early as 2020.
Now, sure, Eastern European countries are well-known for being hopelessly corrupt and talking out of their asses so anything their government says is worthless, but Ukraine has consistently postured that they would like to join NATO and NATO has consistently postured that they would like for Ukraine to join NATO.
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/why-nato-has-become-flash-point-russia-ukraine
Plus, the Monroe Doctrine (which motivated US action in Cuba, Costa Rica, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, Nicaragua, Grenada, and Panama) literally describes exactly Russia’s motivations… So it doesn’t matter if you or I don’t like it, because geopolitics has no morals and Russia and the US operate on a whole other plane of what’s “right” and what’s “wrong” than the rest of us.
These countries think that they should be in control of the entire world and that the entire world would be a better place if they were in control. They trample over other countries’ right to self-determination and force changes that the population itself doesn’t want in the name of ideals that never realize.
So are you really surprised that Latin American countries don’t want to align themselves with the West?
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.
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.