Quote (DizzyBusiness @ Jun 1 2023 12:04am)
Maybe they should have been allowed into NATO? It doesn't really seem like they are, or have ever been welcome.
Protecting them from gays and junkies? What is the proper way for them to deal with LGBT issues? Do the Russian people get any say in that or just western governments? How do you want Russian policy decided, exactly? In Washington? Or maybe Brussels?
Most people don't like junkies, have you ever met one? I would prefer my own government was harsher towards them. Watch a video of the homeless problem in Los Angeles or the opioid epidemic in the US in general, is that how a progressive modern society should handle drug addiction?
Who is the arbiter of who is more or less free and do you think they have any bias? And sure Ukraine has expressed willingness to pursue Western values, and it hasn't done a great job of it, almost as if a notoriously poor and corrupt country might lie for financial benefit.
So none of those things that apply to the US not using nuclear weapons apply to Russia? You said it doesn't fear NATO because it has nukes, but you just made the case that a country doesn't want to settle every problem with nukes.
And yes we are talking about US politics here.
Russia never wanted to become friendly either. So its no excuse.
It's not about LGBT per se. It's about keeping people there occupied by opposition to LGBT and identity politics while shitting on the people elsewhere. Ofc Russians decide what happens in Russia... a few Russians to be more precise.
Ive worked with junkies, I know theyre unpleasant. By "junkies" in my post im referring to the Russian "Zelenskyy cokehead" rhetoric. Now that we speak, harsh policies cause more harm. Strong evidence in healthcare points towards less punishments for junkies.
Whos the arbiter? Idk, the hivemind of western political discourse? The academics? Historians? Human rights activists? God? Poland and Romania may have lied, but eventually are getting better. Why not Ukraine?
They apply, but they arent the only side to the matter. NATO isnt interested in direct conflict with Russia and the reverse holds true. Exactly because of nukes. Conventional warfare is there to buy time and stall the situation in case things go wrong and a conflict erupts. Eventually either side will use nukes. Mutually assured destruction is a solid deterrent.
American politics doesn't include coercing European states into its sphere of influence under the threat of violence. This alone makes NATO more in the right in terms of Europe and obviously a more likeable ally than Russia. It's unreliable and will even fuck its own autonomous regions, even twice if needed (Checnya). Yes NATO bad, Iraq and Afghanistan, but we talk about Europe, NATO and Russia.
This post was edited by Neptunus on Jun 1 2023 12:17pm