• The Rizzler@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Never ask an EU supporter about why their own country doesn’t get to decide things for its self

  • rdri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 hours ago

    With all that is happening in the world, someone decides to spend time to make a meme about NATO being a bad guy?

    • jackeroni@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Well yeah, considering they are the bad guy, NATO is nothing but an organization for the furtherance of US empire led expansionism

      • rdri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 hours ago

        And what happens if we don’t stop it soon? They will attack… Russia or something?

  • mienshao@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Gotta love 2025. Is this an alt-right post or an alt-left post? No one can tell. Horseshoe theory, etc etc.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      18 hours ago

      The right is pro-NATO, as NATO is the main millitant arm propping up western imperialism, and the left is anti-NATO for the same reasons. There’s no “alt-left,” lol.

        • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          In what way is it untrue? It’s a bit simplified, but I wouldn’t really consider many western right-wingers to be anti-NATO nor any leftists pro-NATO.

          • HasturInYellow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Trump is constantly talking about leaving NATO…? And the o haven’t really heard anything anti NATO from the left except the tankies.

            • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Trump will never leave NATO, it’s a common pattern for him to threaten to leave things to get a more favorable deal, which largely fails to be fair. As far as being anti-NATO as a Leftist stance, it’s an extremely standard take to be against the main millitant arm of western imperialism. It isn’t just the Marxists that are against NATO.

    • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Anyone against NATO is against Western imperialism and would be considered a “leftist” by Western standards (just humane and ethical for the rest of the world). I don’t see what can be misunderstood here.

    • anon@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      Yeah, true. I have observed that too in the last few years. If you see someone saying we should not support Ukraine there is a 50/50 chance they are far-left or far-right. Pretty impossible to tell in most cases.

    • uuldika@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      18 hours ago

      I support NATO, in the sense that if NATO dissolved Europe would get eaten like a three-course meal by Russia. Ukraine shows that all too clearly. it has many problems, though.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        18 hours ago

        There’s no evidence of this, though. Scaremongering about Russia taking Paris and whatnot has no economic backing. Russia has been clear about why it invaded Ukraine, it wants to demillitarize it as it was cozying up to NATO, and NATO has been encircling Russia for decades. If NATO didn’t exist, there would be no reason for the Russo-Ukrainian war to begin with, as Russia doesn’t stand to gain much, if anything, economically.

        • for_some_delta@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I acknowledge the argument NATO is encircling Russia. To what extent does Ukraine differ from other actions by Russia such as Georgia in 2008? Which sorts of actions are not resistance to NATO encircling?

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Ukraine is an interesting case, due to the Euromaidan coup in 2014 leading to the nationalists taking control. Prior to Euromaidan, relations with Russia weren’t so bad, actually.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 hours ago

            If NATO didn’t exist, there would be no reason for the Russo-Ukrainian war to begin with, as Russia doesn’t stand to gain much, if anything, economically.

            What reason do you think is behind the war?

        • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          12 hours ago

          How many of their NATO neighbors have they attacked vs their non-NATO neighbors? There’s a reason countries want to join it lol

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            12 hours ago

            Why do you think Russia invaded Ukraine? Like, what is their primary goal. The impetus that drove them to approve the invasion.

            Secondly, what do you think the functioning role of NATO is?

            • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              12 hours ago

              They wanted to prevent them from joining because they couldn’t bully them if they managed to join. I think that answers for both.

              Now your turn to answer my original question, please.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                12 hours ago

                So the underlying, material reason for why you think Russia invaded Ukraine, was because they wanted to “bully” Ukraine? And that NATO is just an international “anti-bullying” alliance? No, lmao.

                NATO is an alliance of imperialist nations. They band together, agreeing to each exploit their own corner. The biggest players are the US Empire, as well as the former hegemons Germany, the UK, and France. The other NATO members play along so that they can ride along on this system of monopoly capitalism expropriating vast wealth from South America, Africa, Southeast Asia, and more. If countries go against NATO desires economically, they get bombed, like Yugoslavia, Libya, etc.

                NATO promised Gorbachev that they wouldn’t expand eastward, decades ago. This is because originally, NATO was an anti-communist alliance. However, with the fall of the USSR, the west needed a new enemy, so they stuck with Russia even after Russia tried to join NATO. With NATO building up in Ukraine, following the Euromaidan coup of 2014 cementing the Ukrainian Nationalists as the leaders of Ukraine, and their relentless shelling of the donbass region, Russia invaded as it didn’t feel like it wanted a belligerent neighbor, and decided to take pre-emptive action.

                The entire invasion never would have happened without NATO.

            • FreeFacts@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              6 hours ago

              Why do you think Russia invaded Ukraine? Like, what is their primary goal. The impetus that drove them to approve the invasion.

              Because they want to become a global power once again. That is their dream. They want to be imperialists themselves, but unfortunately for them, they have failed to do so. In the past decades they have poked their noses into Africa and the Middle East, with some success. But simultaneously they have lost their grip on regions they previously considered to be under their imperialist umbrella. It started with Georgia, which they solved with violence. Next it was Ukraine, and then Syria. And then all the unrest in Belarus. They got spooked that their imperialist dream was failing, so they went in to change the regime in Ukraine. But that didn’t work out as they planned. And to top that, they also lost their foothold in Syria completely. And now, just recently, they are losing Azerbaijan too.

              Secondly, what do you think the functioning role of NATO is?

              Honestly, it is to protect US geopolitical interests in Europe. Making Europe depend on the US for its defense. But it is not that bad of a deal for Europe, as it keeps the peace (in “western” Europe).

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 hours ago

                Russia was never “imperialist” in the way the west is. They never had an Empire as the Soviet Union. Russia cannot become an empire by invading other countries, imperialism functions by massive financial capital to extract from the global south. Russia doesn’t have the capital for that, and is more industrialized than western countries that need it to stay afloat.

                As for NATO, it’s to ensure western imperialism stays intact. The US is the main beneficiary, but western Europe participates because they also profit from brutal exploitation of the global south.

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            17 hours ago

            Dunno, I live in the US. Surely you can look it up, no? Nice 2 month old, 1 comment account, by the way.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                15 hours ago

                Nothing I said was wrong, nor does that make it “Russian propaganda.” The RF has been clear, they oppose NATO encirclement. Gorbachev was promised decades ago that NATO wouldn’t expand eastward, yet it has over the decades. NATO is used primarily as a threat towards countries that don’t let the west economically dominate them, be it the USSR to Iran to Libya to Yugoslavia to the modern Russian Federation.

                Joining NATO is indeed voluntary, yes. Russia even tried to join it a couple decades ago, and was denied. Russia was barred entry from the imperialist alliance, as if they were allowed in, NATO could not be used as a threat against them to force them to open up their economy more. The ex-soviet now-NATO states faced immense economic crisis and right-wing takeover due to the chaos that ensued when socialism was ended and the USSR dissolved, making them very western-friendly.

                No, I’m not a Trump supporter, I’m a communist. I strongly oppose western imperialism, and based on the evidence we have, there’s no proof that Russia intends on taking on all of Europe. This is just scaremongering to fuel the millitary industrial complex and justify the perpetuation of NATO even after the collapse of the USSR, which it was formed to fight.

                Either Russia is too weak to take Ukraine and thus NATO isn’t even necessary, or it’s strong enough but uninterested in total war and is happy with its level of involvement. The former means NATO isn’t even needed as Russia would be too weak, the latter means NATO isn’t needed as Russia has no plans to expand, nor does it have any economic basis for it.

                I think it’s very telling that you can’t actually dispute any of my points, you just call me Russian and a Trump supporter for stating the standard leftist line on NATO and the Russo-Ukrainian War.