It’s a liberal cesspool full of people who refuse to listen when you speak. I explained how the SMO in Russia was justified going all the way back to fucking WWII and Stepan Bandera to Russia not wanting Ukraine in NATO and some dickhead told me to “tOuCH gRaSS”. Didn’t even address any of my points, just that “dEnAziFIcaTioN iSnT a gOoD rEasOn, iT’s aS bAd aS wMDs”.
Fucking moron. I hate that fucking place so fucking much.
Russia didn’t want Ukraine in NATO but invades Ukraine and effectively kicks the door open to basically force NATO to let Ukraine into NATO.
Law of unintended consequences?
If NATO is being forced to let in Ukraine, then why is Ukraine still not a part of NATO after all this time?
If you said this about Sweden I could understand. But everything about Ukraine joining NATO has been speculative saber rattling. As I see it they will never allow Ukraine to join.
The vote will happen once the war is over that has already been publicly stated. The only reason it won’t happen while the war is happening is it would create a situation that put NATO in direct conflict with Russia. Right now it’s just handing the arms to Ukraine.
Had Russia not invaded this most likely wouldn’t have happened.
Nato is already in direct conflict with russia
So, by attacking Ukraine to prevent it joining NATO, Ukraine joining NATO can only happen after the war is over (probably, maybe, perhaps)? That’s the opposite of your “unintended consequences” claim, even ignoring how Ukraine’s entrance in NATO is still not even guaranteed after this war ends.
Can a state at war join NATO?
Yes, but it brings the whole NATO to war by default. Since that is an escalation no one wants to play, so the Ukraine continues to suffer alone.
So if the war means Ukraine cannot practically join NATO, and if Russia is unlikely to leave Ukraine in a state where it could join NATO after the war, is it likely that invading Ukraine will lead to Ukraine joining NATO?
You are right. Since deescalation from Russia into a cease-fire would mean the end of the War, now they are pushed to a full blown war of attrition. (That’s depressing AF)
On another note western countries are heavily claiming long term support for Ukraine with huge investments in the military complex. If the support continues there is still a very slim chance for Ukraine to exit out of this victorious, otherwise both will lose.
Once the war is over they will be. The invasion of Ukraine basically created a situation where NATO said enough is enough and has agreed that Ukraine can join. Had Russia not invaded this would most likely not have happened.
Lol this isn’t a marvel movie kiddo and this war isn’t going to be “over” where the “good guys” win and the credits roll. It’s going to end the same way the Iraq war ended. 20 years of bloodshed, every Ukrainian killed, irreparably traumatized, or radicalized, with Azov insurgencies armed to the gills with NATO and US assets with a deep hatred of all three parties involved.
It’s natural landscape raped for it’s resources, it’s “reconstruction” privatized by Global Financial Capital, it’s people’s “identity” will be nothing but a shallow husk of its former self.
Don’t forget what Iraq looked like prior to the deathgrip of imperialism:
In 20 years, the then 20 year olds born around the time of the war won’t even know why we were aiding them, or why we would bother to help a “dirty” “under developed” nation like Ukraine. Just be ready to show them photos of what it looked like before NATO and the US wrapped their filthy, oily hands around their throats and choked them blind.
Were they not on the cusp of joining before Russia invaded? I thought that was one of the reasons for the invasion, to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO?
There has been talk for years. But it never went anywhere and was never going to. I don’t remember right off hand why ( I just woke up and my brain is still foggy) but I do know it was never going to happen. Putin just wanted more land and believed that since NATO was never going to vote to have Ukraine join, it was going to be a quick conflict and the thing would be over. He took Crimea and the world did nothing. If it worked once why wouldn’t it work again?
Man was he wrong.
How does the civil war factor in?
Because if Ukraine is part of NATO and Ukraine is being invaded then NATO basically has to directly join in the fight. Which means direct conflict between NATO and Russia. That is never a good idea.
And there is no civil war. Well no more then there is in the US. There are certain groups in the US that want to break away. Obviously that won’t happen. They never gain any real traction.
In Ukraine they wouldn’t have gained traction either , but Russia decided to back and also arm the separatists. That was done for the sole purpose of giving Russia an excuse to invade and annex Crimea.
You’re missing some facts here. There was a civil war. 14,000 people killed. 30,000 injured. 1.3+million displaced. All reported by the UN.
What civil war are you taliing about? Last one was during 1917-1921 with ukraine being dissolved into Soviet Union AFAIK
Edit: nevermind, found that Donbas War meets the criteria mostly
“Putin just wanted more land” has to be the most ignorant thing I’ve ever heard about this conflict. How do you even imagine this happened? He was just sitting there bored one day and decided “you know what, more land sounds great!”
Do yourself a favor and look up the Euromaidan coup.
“When the war ends, Ukraine will join NATO.” + “Russia can not allow NATO on its borders.” = “Russia has zero incentive to ever end the war and has every incentive to fight the war indefinitely.”
By promising to admit they have actually made Ukraine into a permanent warzone, turning what was a regional dispute into an existential threat to Russia’s national security. And that was the point. Maybe they actually would let Ukraine join after the war, but that’s why they don’t want the war to end. Ukraine has now become a pit where they can throw in money in exchange for Russian blood and treasure.
Removed by mod