Bruv you're not this dense. NATO, an alliance constructed for the express purpose of destroying Russia, which did not disband when the USSR was destroyed, which continued to advance towards and encircle Russia for decades after the fall of the USSR, which refused the RF's attempts to join the alliance, which has engaged in numerous illegal wars of aggression, is the man holding the gun and I swear to god just because you were born there that does not make them the good guys.
You know sovereignty isn't real, right? Like it's just not? Countries invade whoever they want whenever they think they can get away with it? Most of Europe just went in to Iraq illegally and murdered a million people? Ukraine sent a lot of troops on that adventure. The US just kills people and topples governments all over? France controls colonial possessions in Africa? Canada de-facto runs a bunch of African territory through it's ruthless resource extraction firms? South Korea and Okinawa are under US military occupation? North Korea only remains Sovereign because they can make Seoul glow in the dark if the US tries something? The west uses ruthless monetary manipulation, dumping of consumer goods and food, outright piracy and theft, to control other countries?
Yes, but the point is with Cuba, missiles were removed, peace deal was reached.
You get that in this analogy Ukraine is taking the place of Cuba, right? Like NATO is using Ukraine as a disposable proxy to bleed Russia... okay well the metaphor falls apart because the details are really different, but Cuba was threatening the US in a vaguely similar way to how Ukraine is threatening Russia, and the peace deal was that Cuba would remove all the missiles and in exchange the US would remove it's missiles from Turkey and not massacre the Cuban population. So the equivalent would be Ukraine agreeing not to join NATO (not that NATO was ever going to let them), disarm, and stop trying to wipe out Russian speaking Ukrainians.
NATO is not hostile to russia
NATO's explicit purpose is and always have been the destruction of the Russian state and the pillaging of it's resources and it's beyond bad faith to state otherwise.
NATO and BRICS are fundamentally different. You cannot compare them in good faith. NATO exists for the explicit purpose of destroying Russia. BRICS does not exist for the explicit purpose of destroying NATO, or America for that matter. It's an extremely bad faith comparison.
Also yeah America would flatten the Mexico City if Mexico tried to join BRICS. They've already agitated for a coup a number of times in the last decade.
Hell, compare East Germany to the reich West Germany. West Germany's economic conquest of East Germany was incredibly ruthless and brutal, and East Germany never recovered from having it's entire economy pillaged and burned.
living standards in the ex-soviet countries have improved considerably since joining the EU
Yeah the living standards sure did improve after one of the worst demographic disasters in that era. Easy for things to get better when you start from the bottom I mean come on do better.
I regret to inform you that you have failed your introduction to 21st century history class
Like just little things.
Do you know that the Russian Black Sea Fleet is based in Sevastopol? Did you know that it's an incredibly important strategic asset? What do nation states do when an incredibly important strategic asset is threatened? Do they defend it?
Did you know Crimea has a 30 year long history of seeking more autonomy, or even independence, from Ukraine?
Do you know what the very first action of the coup Rada was?
Do you know what "encirclement" means?
I know Plato's Allegory of the Cave gets used a lot when discussion the hegemonic power of western propaganda over western people, but come on bruv.
Do the words "Minsk II" mean anything to you?
Are you aware of the tariff agreements in place between Russia and Ukraine in 2013?
Do you know who Bandera was?
Do you know what the Russian Federation's stated causus belli for the invasion is?
Yeah, that's a good analysis. I've gotten in to it with friends over "consumer choice", where they tell me "Oh, the customers didn't want x thing that's why you can't get x thing" and I'll hit back with "The manufacturers decided they didn't want to support x thing for whatever reason, or that they could squeeze people for more money without x thing, and they have hegemonic control over the market share for that kind of product, so they can force the consumers to do what they tell the consumers to do" and they look at me like I have three heads. : p
Makes me think of the guy who, afaik, is the only guy in the world who is a reliable source for working floppy disks. The little ones, the big ones, the really big ones that are from before even my time. He works really hard to track down any intact ones he can get, then re-sell them to people who have ancient, ancient systems running key infrastructure.
Dammit someone turned on accessibility features and now there's confetti on my screen whenever I click.
I love that Fred Mother-Fucking Rodgers, ie Mr. Rogers, ie "I fought the Klan and I won" Fred Rogers, had a critical role testifying in front of the supreme court in favor of allowing people to record things at home for later viewing. Such an incredible man. |
If you're not familiar with it check out the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, probably one of the most destructive censorship regimes in terms of sheer scope in human history
Y'all can't hear it because I built a deep subterranean insulated bunker to protect the local ecosystem from the noice, but I am screaming "I HATE LIVING IN THIS FUCKING NIGHTMARE SOCIETY" over and over and over again, as I am want to do.
It is, I shit you not, a cold war tariff on fucking chickens. There's some other shit that's glommed on over the centuries, but the mad-science breeding program to create a pickup truck big enough to swallow the sun started with a stupid trade dispute over chickens between the krauts, the frogs, and the yanks.
![Frank [he/him, he/him]](https://hexbear.net/pictrs/image/7a7a0556-ce69-4e05-a56c-89b65fb37753.jpeg?format=webp&thumbnail=128)
Bruv you're not this dense. NATO, an alliance constructed for the express purpose of destroying Russia, which did not disband when the USSR was destroyed, which continued to advance towards and encircle Russia for decades after the fall of the USSR, which refused the RF's attempts to join the alliance, which has engaged in numerous illegal wars of aggression, is the man holding the gun and I swear to god just because you were born there that does not make them the good guys.