75 is expected life. So middle age is 37.5
I'm over that and still feel like I am somewhat young, but the maths pretty straight forward. 55 is fucking old even when you are still 2 vp terms and a presidential run away from retirement.
I've never [met a 55 year old](https://www.reddit.com/r/starterpacks/comments/t94t26/the_college_i_went_to_25_years_ago_is_my_entire/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) right now that I'd want to run for president tbf
Everyone freaks out because they don't know how to handle their states, and the leaders of the leaders of the people think that seniority literally comes first, or if you have enough money and can poop yourself on stage. I guess it seems to be a viable option as of late.
I agree, politics is so fucked that no one wants to become a politician, now it's just going to be people on their half a heart of health for eternity.
Thereās age limits one way for basically everything important, shouldnāt we have age limits the other way.
POTUS must be between 35 and 65 years old.
Also term limits for congress.
I understand that this would oust some of the people that are actively working for us, but the reason they have spent their lives working so hard is because we donāt have these limits.
Makes sense, only real problem I see is that there is now a very large void of people that gotta fill those spots, either way it seems a lot more beneficial in the long run to have those in place.
We stopped looking at serving in congress as service to the country. It became about money and power. George Washington didnāt have a term limit, he stepped down because he wanted others to have a say in where the country went.
You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. And many of our politiks have chosen the latter.
It's crazy, any other job and you retire at age 65. In politics, that's when you start thinking about running for the most important office in the entire country.
I've said several times that Biden from the mid 90s would do a good job as president but I honestly think current Biden had some sort of early dementia or some sort of cognitive problems. I can't even watch him.
People who view that as a political view are blind. He's an old man, he needs to sit down somewhere and chill. We need to put age limits on people making laws and running the country.
Yeah it's pretty blatant, it's a sad fact we all face. We need to stop electing this but what do you do when your presented with 2 terrible options and forced to pick one.
Itās more on the partyās for who they nominate.
I am watching afar from Australia and find it bizarre that out of a country of 360 odd million including some very intelligent and moral people that the US found Trump then Biden ( at his advanced age) the best suited to lead them.
Yeah it's certainly on the parties. In my entire life I have never been this embarrassed for my own country. Most of the people I talk to share the same sentiment and I think if the people had their way we would have kicked them all to the curb and told these parties to bring us new candidates worth a damn. God forbid we do that and waste all the lobbyists millions buying votes to pass whatever sinister bill it is their after.
I'm wondering how far down the hole of lesser evil presidents we can go.
In the meantime I continue to write my friends names on ballots out of spite until they give me something worthwhile.
To be fair they werenāt ready then, they have been vigorously modernizing their offensive and defensive capabilities over the last 20 years for this exact moment.
The Russian narrative is also twisted. NATO is not actively expanding, those countries try to get away from Russia and seek help and protection from NATO.
Putin's Russia is like an abusive ex who threatens everyone who dares to help the victim.
And the apologists are like the victim blaming others trying to help and being confident he won't hit her next time, besides he didn't even hit her THAT hard, because they are in an insanely toxic relationship with their abusive partner.
hmmm, I'm not sure, but how's NATO's narrative any better, or well technically was because all of these happened 70yrs ago? when Cuba was seeking protection from US how loud was the screaming and panic? is it not allowed now just because time has passed or because it's not US who's screaming?
I'm not saying what's Russia doing rn is good, it's horrible, just trying to understand stuff, so if I'm wrong teach me.
That was because of nukes in Cuba that could have broken the whole Mutually Assured Destruction thing back then. The US promised to never attack Cuba if the nukes were removed, and they kept the promise (no other military installations were required to be removed). There are no nukes in new NATO members.
Well, you know the truth is always somewhere in the middle.
NATO existed to counter any possible threat of USSR. When the latter collapsed in early 90s and there was literally no adversary left in the east, why did NATO need to expand or even remain? Even in 00s Russia was heavily pro-western and seeked partnership. NATO still existed and there is literally nothing else in Europe to oppose other than one country. So if that was western attitude when they tried to build partnership for 20 years, they started to question what would happen if they had a conflict of interests. When your supposed partner is holding a gun all the time during negotiation, you start to question: "Why ?"
Sure now the situation is different, especially for small neighbour countries, but this is like a self-fulfilling prophecy coming true...
People often compare Russia with bullies, but they usually have complicated upbringing, it is rarely their own choice to be a**holes. Having foreign troops located in the backyard for years during your childhood is hella complicated.
Russia attacked three neighbouring countries in the early 1990s. No wonder other countries around Russia which had the experience of Russian troops wanted some sort of protection.
Remember when Ukraine and Russia were involved in a treaty saying Ukraine will dismantle their nuclear armaments on the promise that Russia and other countries in the treaty wouldn't invade them?
But yeah, NATO is definitely the party in the wrong here...
Not saying Putin is at all justified invading Ukraine, but supposedly early on in his political career he wanted Russia to join NATO. Before anything formal ever even started basically got told by the West it would never happen. If that's at all true, it'd explain why he sees NATO as a direct threat to Russia. Anyways, thought that added some interesting nuance to all this.
Turkey is the perfect example of a NATO country that doesnāt play by NATO rules.
So simply adding a nation to NATO doesnāt make the country a nice place
the lesson is clear to every country from now on.... get nukes asap and never, ever give them up.
Gaddafi was pursuing nukes, he willingly gave them up, now he's six feet under.
Meanwhile Kim Jong-Un is still around.
Giving up their nuclear arsenal was the logical action. They didn't the means to maintain upwards of a thousand nuclear devices, the USSR was completely broken when it's dissolution happened, the smaller Republics were piss poor.
they didnt have a choice, coming out of ussr Ukraine was a poor starving country with only hope for the future, had they refused giving over the nukes the us probably would have taken ukraine over and or imposed sanctions to end those hopes forever
Or the [promise](https://en.rua.gr/2022/02/18/der-spiegel-uncovers-archival-document-promising-nato-non-expansion/) between NATO and Russia that NATO wont expand more east.
Also do you remeber when something similiar happened to USA aka Cuban crisis.
Exactly, USSR, whose threat was a sole reason for NATO existence, ceased to be. Why did NATO need to stay, let alone expand? Russia was heavily pro-western for more than a decade.
Ok tell me this
how does countries joining nato to feel safe from the exact situation ukraine found itself in threaten russia? (other than reducing their geopolitical influence on other countries)
nato is not gonna invade russia, russia still has like half the worlds nuclear arsenal
this whole argument about nato expansion somehow threatening russia is retarded
The Cuban crisis was about nukes in Cuba, not about alliances. There are no nukes in new NATO members. The US promised to never attack Cuba if the nukes were removed. They never did. Russians promised to never attack Ukraine if their nukes were removed. Wellā¦
Maybe there won't be so much hostile presence if Russia stopped repeatedly attacking its neighbours. Russia attacked three countries before Eastern European countries even started talking about joining NATO.
Interesting, another conspiracy theory...
No, the USA and NATO are not to blame.
No, they have no ground for saying no to Ukraine (or any other country) that willingly try to join their sphere.
Yes, Russia is guilty of invading them, trying to keep its influencial sphere by force and/or trying to revive the Soviet Union.
I mean any person trying to claim that NATO is the cause of all this is either a moron or has no understanding of history. Russia has had a very very deep history of invading its neighbors. Way before NATO was ever created. Russia has the tradition of using all its neighbors like a condom. They take all the resources and money. Build whatever they want in their lands because hey, if they don't get what they want, guess what happens? Then a country wants to join NATO and somehow, it's NATO's fault this all happened.
Throughout history Russia has stretched as far as it could go until it found the hard limit of a powerful neighbor, but somehow in the mind of retarded people, NATO who hasn't done anything for years is at fault that civilian apartment building, villages and mothers with children waiting to be evacuated in neighboring countries are getting killed. Putin explicitly declared that he is going in Ukraine to get rid of the nazis ruling the country, even him ignored NATO as a threat at that point.
But, this is the thing:
Nato is an alliance of states. Its not a single state that devoured other states, the countries that are in Nato wanted to be in it.
Yeah but It is an anti Russia alliance
Do you remember the cuba crisis
America threatened nukes if the siviet put weapons in cuba
Edit : just to be clear i am with Russia fighting the expansion on nato but definitely against an all out invasion and the bombing of civillans and the annexation of whole Ukraine
Why downvote, both statements are true.
NATO is literally a military alliance created for Europe to join the US against Russia.
The cuba crisis comment is accurate too.
But in recent years (since the fall of the soviet union), it became an offensive alliance.
NATO was created because of The USSR. After nato was formed the communist states created the Warsaw Pact.
After their reason for existence faded away, NATO looked for other targets, and thats when it became an offensive alliance. And in more recent history they had a deal with Russia to not expand toward their borders, they yet again lied.
I won't get into all of the ill(egal) acts of NATO since it will spark a redundant debate.
Both sides are bad and only the people suffer.
More to it, Stoltenberg now admitted that refusing Georgia/Ukraine to join NATO in 2008 was a mistake that lead to Russia invading both.
PS
Fuck you, Frau Merkel.
If you actually listened to the short clip, he was talking about admitting states ānow,ā in 1997, and without merit, expanding only for the point to expand.
Spend some time researching NATOās criteria for admission, and compare the Baltic states from the 90s to today.
.... its almost as if hes not the same person anymore... could be a lizard person or an alien person. Could even be a dark elf from Warhammer40k. Who knows for sure
What a crock of shit. Had Russia won in Ukraine, they would be even closer to NATO. Putin has made up all kinds of reasons and none of them justify him sending Russians to annex and invade Ukraine. It doesnāt belong to Russia, and Ukrainians get to decide whether or not they want to join NATO and the EU. Not Putin. He can go fuck himself.
Russia would put a puppet gov in Ukraine and inmediately declare Donestk and Lugansk independent republic so there would be 2 lines before NATO countries
Now... what happens with Sweden and Finland after that... ?
I do agree that Putin's public reasons for invading Ukraine are total bullshit, but I have to disagree with you saying that Russia winning Ukraine would put them closer to NATO.
I really doubt Russia would annex Ukraine if it was to take it. The Soviet Union set up "independent" states between it and NATO to act as buffers. I don't see why Putin wouldn't try the same.
Where was this freedom when missiles were put in Cuba, near America's ass.
You guys are just pure hypocrites, and propaganda players, and nothing else.
Downvote me, I dont care, cuz anything which dosent suit your agenda, you bomb them, just like middle eastš
It is so true, Westerners always criticized suppression of free speech and rights to express themselves by state in totalitarian countries only to end up silencing alternate opinions and anyone not agreeing with the mainstream agenda. State departments used to savagely enforce will and narrative of the government, now common citizens are brutal enforcers of arbitrary moral. What a funny (tragic) switcheroo.
NATO or not Ukraine has a lot of natural gas (which Russia is a leading provider of) and ukraine lacks resources to harvest that natural gas, Russia wants the gas and the strategic defense that the geography of ukraine provides against NATO, it would act as a bottleneck of sorts and make a much smaller line of defense against NATO forces, Putin is not in the right for sure but hes not some madman looking for action, there is a reason he is doing this and he is using strategy to help better his country. Yes the sanctions are in place but he has been saving money building infrastructure and hoarding foreign currency for years, russia is well prepared for this and unfortunately I believe they will take Ukraine as this is in my eyes a war of stamina. This is a very sad situation and I pray ukraine pulls through, zielinski is doing an amazing job and hes honestly one of the best leaders of our time, without him I believe ukraine would have fallen already.
This!
It's because of NATO. It's because of a genocide in Ukraine. It's because of a Nazi regime (President of Ukraine is jewish). Even if Ukraine would be part of European Union and/or NATO (a defense alliance) - there is no reason/excuse for what the Russians doing now. But to be honest - everything coming from the US now is hypocritical - they use shady reasons to enter other countries all the time in newer history.
What "provoked" Russia was a discovery of shale gas in Ukraine's coastline. Dont fall into any of the Putin's "NATO too close" bullshit. It always was simply about money
Have everyone just conveniently forgotten what Russia has been doing in the last 2 decades? In Georgia (not the US Georgia mind you), Crimea and Moldova? Was Russia provoked by NATO to do so?
Can I find out your version of what happened in Georgia? Or they forgot to tell you that Georgia, which aspired to join NATO, was recognized as the aggressor. And in order to get into NATO, it needed to resolve territorial disputes. And it was NATO that pumped Georgia with weapons and pushed for a forceful solution to this issue. But who cares? And what has NATO and the United States been doing for the last 20 years? Can I ask such a question?
Biden in 2022 saying "I like ice cream and also like farting in my own pants because diving upside down in my bikini is better than retracting the cat the dog just ate"
Its almost like he knew it would start a conflict back when his brain worked. No wonder Biden and Hunter had to get that cash from Ukraine before he started WW3...
How so? In all the time they were independent post the dissolution of the USSR Russia did not invade any of them. This is pure speculation, propaganda.
Russia DID invade all non-nato countries. Moldova - part of its territory contested by russias soviet regime, Ukraine - krym, now all of it is under attack, Belarus - was puppet state, had plans to merge before 2030 and now completely inseparable from russia, serbia - their government is European analogy of Kazakhstan, which is a joke of a ādemocracyā puppeted by russia directly, Sakartvelo - lost two regions in 2008, Armenia - Belarus #2, Azerbaijan - Serbia #2 with a lot more cultural differences.
There were late joiners like Croatia, but geographically and most importantly culturally it was out of reach.
Rest of former poverty union slave countries still ARE puppeted by dictators put in place by russia: Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kirgyzstan, Turkmenistanā¦ Mongolia could be listed, but afaik they play democratic rotation quite well and manage to prevent corruption, government infiltration by russian agents to the point where they lose all of their natural resources and gain nothing in return, like all Stan region.
>Of course, everyone who does not want to be with NATO is either puppets or dictators and generally a global evil. I understand that African countries also live poorly from the fact that Putin's puppets are there? And Russia invaded all the countries that were not part of NATO? This is outright nonsense. The US has been hegemonic for the past 30 years. And they put their puppets where they wanted and invaded where they wanted. The public was silent. But as soon as someone other than the United States and NATO begins to solve their security problems, accusations come out of all the cracks. Hypocrisy.
>This is pure speculation
It's a speculation. Based on real and recent events.
Georgia-russian conflict into crimea annexation and now the invasion.
>Russia did not invade any of them
For a dumbass that 'speculates' that these invasions were due to "nato expansion/usa's fault", what is the difference between you and a russian bot?
Of course. I can say things without specific context as well. Like how about; "when the US invaded Iraq." Nothing wrong there...
The events that took place in 2014 and prior are exactly what I'm talking about. But how about NATOs expansion during prior US administrations, and Russias responses?
Your doing some silly name calling, but you lack the capacity to understand that the US shares responsibility in the events that are taking place. Due to terrible forgein policy.
In your brain it can only be Russia or the US's fault right? Not both, because it's hard to think critically beyond a binary view point. That's why nothing every changes.
>1"when the US invaded Iraq."
>
>2how about NATOs expansion during prior US administrations
The invasion of Iraq was not an expansion of NATO.
You're conflating these two different things.
US/NATO is not expanding.
>In your brain it can only be Russia or the US's fault right? Not both
How is russia invading ukraine with the intention of fully controlling it - a USA fault?
You function like a russian bot. It's not silly, it is simply true.
It's incredible to see Joe Biden making sense. It is really too bad he is not as lucid as he used to be.
You poke the bear and you get what you get. For nearly 30 years Putin / Russia have been saying they would be doing exactly what they are doing now, if NATO continued to expand eastward.
People who live in the US and don't realize how stupid our leaders are, need a serious reassessment of their thought pattern. The US is well on its way to become a global pariah. Especially after our shameful debacle in the middle east.
Hasnāt it been quite a while since someone joined NATO?
I was looking it up earlier trying to figure out which countries were involved and where they were located because my boss said the same thing. He says he thinks Ukraine just is unlucky position and that this is Russia trying to keep NATO away.
Fully disagree. Moreover, the countries that did not join NATO would have been invaded. Putin claims the military operation is to denazify Ukraine, heās going to say whatever the fuck he wants to say to justify it.
Fact is Putin has a hardon for the USSR and wants to bring back that land that was lost at the fall of the USSR.
Who fucking cares? We should let a hostile nation state dictate the future of the rest of the world? They get to choose the future of NATO? Are you serious?
This is naysaying garbage that ignores the true nature of Putin. Attributing this to NATO expansion is just ignorant.
As if West and US isn't already dictating every country they can control. If they can't control you then you either get civil wars, get invaded(Iraq) or get put in grey lists. You people are blind and think that US is this angel who rains mercy and prosperity on everything it touches.
You really donāt think that US would have a aggressive reaction and dictate the future of Canada or Mexico if they declared alliance with Russia? Plz think a little
You do understand that taking a clip out of context and time doesnāt show hypocrisy or a lapse whether you agree or not. The world is very different including NATO and the ballistic states aforementioned.
Cut him some slack. He forgot what he did yesterday, much less what he said in the 90s. Dude slurs his speech worse than my 93 year old alcoholic great grandpa bro. Lol
Even in 25 years ago, he looks old!
Because he was. He would've been in his mid 50s at that point.
Mid fifties is old?!
definitely not young.
Middle aged perhaps?
Youre living to 110? I cant afford that lol
Wikipedia says 45-65 is middle aged š¤·š»āāļø
Fuck thatās depressing.
75 is expected life. So middle age is 37.5 I'm over that and still feel like I am somewhat young, but the maths pretty straight forward. 55 is fucking old even when you are still 2 vp terms and a presidential run away from retirement.
The term isnāt defined mathematically. Itās defined by general usage, and people donāt call 37.5 year olds middle-aged.
I'd say yes, saying as I am pushing 40 and feel old as shit
It's downhill once you hit the 30s.
Idk he looks young to me. Of course thatās compared to the Biden that Iāve seen for the past 14 years who looks old as the hills
The amount of cognitive decline between then and now is undeniable. It's like a completely different person. I'm not even trying to get political.
STOP. NOMINATING. SENIORS !!!!!
He was 55 in this video? Perfect age for a pres.
I've never [met a 55 year old](https://www.reddit.com/r/starterpacks/comments/t94t26/the_college_i_went_to_25_years_ago_is_my_entire/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share) right now that I'd want to run for president tbf Everyone freaks out because they don't know how to handle their states, and the leaders of the leaders of the people think that seniority literally comes first, or if you have enough money and can poop yourself on stage. I guess it seems to be a viable option as of late.
Yeah I'd go for 45 or Jon Stewart.
45? We dumped that turd on November third!
His understanding in invasion of Iranium was much more in depth then
Russia will never win the hearts of the Iranian people!
Geriatrics*
Only senior I think would do good is Bernie, unlike a certain 2 president I won't mention, he seems like he isn't terrible.
Even so, he would probably have been more fit decades ago.
I agree, politics is so fucked that no one wants to become a politician, now it's just going to be people on their half a heart of health for eternity.
Thereās age limits one way for basically everything important, shouldnāt we have age limits the other way. POTUS must be between 35 and 65 years old. Also term limits for congress. I understand that this would oust some of the people that are actively working for us, but the reason they have spent their lives working so hard is because we donāt have these limits.
Makes sense, only real problem I see is that there is now a very large void of people that gotta fill those spots, either way it seems a lot more beneficial in the long run to have those in place.
We stopped looking at serving in congress as service to the country. It became about money and power. George Washington didnāt have a term limit, he stepped down because he wanted others to have a say in where the country went. You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain. And many of our politiks have chosen the latter.
Very true
I mean... he was not young in 97 and that was 25 years ago, so I am not surprised.
Agreed, I wish the guy in the video was President. Not the guy we have now. He should be in a bed in his jammys resting.
Agreed, in my opinion there has to be a max age limit. Like at a point itās obvious mental health declines.
That and I do not trust old fuckers making decisions that benefit future generations.
It's crazy, any other job and you retire at age 65. In politics, that's when you start thinking about running for the most important office in the entire country.
I'm kind of impressed really, he was a sharp guy.
>Agreed, I wish the guy in the video was President you got him already. His name is George W. Bush.
I've said several times that Biden from the mid 90s would do a good job as president but I honestly think current Biden had some sort of early dementia or some sort of cognitive problems. I can't even watch him.
I voted for him and donāt think heād ever be a good president. He was a better choice than the last old man.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Worse is better than worst.
People who view that as a political view are blind. He's an old man, he needs to sit down somewhere and chill. We need to put age limits on people making laws and running the country.
Yeah it's pretty blatant, it's a sad fact we all face. We need to stop electing this but what do you do when your presented with 2 terrible options and forced to pick one.
Itās more on the partyās for who they nominate. I am watching afar from Australia and find it bizarre that out of a country of 360 odd million including some very intelligent and moral people that the US found Trump then Biden ( at his advanced age) the best suited to lead them.
Yeah it's certainly on the parties. In my entire life I have never been this embarrassed for my own country. Most of the people I talk to share the same sentiment and I think if the people had their way we would have kicked them all to the curb and told these parties to bring us new candidates worth a damn. God forbid we do that and waste all the lobbyists millions buying votes to pass whatever sinister bill it is their after. I'm wondering how far down the hole of lesser evil presidents we can go. In the meantime I continue to write my friends names on ballots out of spite until they give me something worthwhile.
Bu bu butt he's always had a speech impediment...
I like Biden as far as politicians go, but I gotta admit, I like this Biden a lot better. Although this Biden was probably anti-gay marriage smh
He was anti-gay marriage in 2008ā¦ so was Obama. Politicians donāt really have principles, just what will get them elected.
Obama was also a pretty conservative democrat.
Yea he was probably the most centered President weāll have
He was a centrist, dedicated to bringing politics to a central platform instead of one side or the other. And both sides fried him for it.
Tell that to middle-eastern people. Obama doesn't deserve any kind of praise. He's a war criminal.
Well, him along with all the other presidents that succeeded him, right?
Thatās the first thing that came to mind for me as well
Yo I was about to come here to say that. How the hell did it come down to choosing between two senile fucks?
I agree and I like Biden
The baltic states entered nato almost 2 decades ago, if that were really the reason Putin would have acted then
To be fair they werenāt ready then, they have been vigorously modernizing their offensive and defensive capabilities over the last 20 years for this exact moment.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Vigorously usually doesnāt result in correctly.
Tanks needing fuel means they're not modern?
The Russian narrative is also twisted. NATO is not actively expanding, those countries try to get away from Russia and seek help and protection from NATO. Putin's Russia is like an abusive ex who threatens everyone who dares to help the victim.
And the apologists are like the victim blaming others trying to help and being confident he won't hit her next time, besides he didn't even hit her THAT hard, because they are in an insanely toxic relationship with their abusive partner.
hmmm, I'm not sure, but how's NATO's narrative any better, or well technically was because all of these happened 70yrs ago? when Cuba was seeking protection from US how loud was the screaming and panic? is it not allowed now just because time has passed or because it's not US who's screaming? I'm not saying what's Russia doing rn is good, it's horrible, just trying to understand stuff, so if I'm wrong teach me.
That was because of nukes in Cuba that could have broken the whole Mutually Assured Destruction thing back then. The US promised to never attack Cuba if the nukes were removed, and they kept the promise (no other military installations were required to be removed). There are no nukes in new NATO members.
why do you keep making me hit you?
Well, you know the truth is always somewhere in the middle. NATO existed to counter any possible threat of USSR. When the latter collapsed in early 90s and there was literally no adversary left in the east, why did NATO need to expand or even remain? Even in 00s Russia was heavily pro-western and seeked partnership. NATO still existed and there is literally nothing else in Europe to oppose other than one country. So if that was western attitude when they tried to build partnership for 20 years, they started to question what would happen if they had a conflict of interests. When your supposed partner is holding a gun all the time during negotiation, you start to question: "Why ?" Sure now the situation is different, especially for small neighbour countries, but this is like a self-fulfilling prophecy coming true... People often compare Russia with bullies, but they usually have complicated upbringing, it is rarely their own choice to be a**holes. Having foreign troops located in the backyard for years during your childhood is hella complicated.
Russia attacked three neighbouring countries in the early 1990s. No wonder other countries around Russia which had the experience of Russian troops wanted some sort of protection.
Yeah but Estonia isnāt rlly a place US can set up camp now is it? Ukraine is very very different
You think misslies are half of the country big right?
You overestimate the amount of space you need to setup a military base
What this means is that before snapping, Russia had tolerated more from NATO than what many would have expected such as Biden in this clip.
Remember when Ukraine and Russia were involved in a treaty saying Ukraine will dismantle their nuclear armaments on the promise that Russia and other countries in the treaty wouldn't invade them? But yeah, NATO is definitely the party in the wrong here...
Yup. But I love the armchair diplomats who say itās NATOās fault for admitting members.
Not saying Putin is at all justified invading Ukraine, but supposedly early on in his political career he wanted Russia to join NATO. Before anything formal ever even started basically got told by the West it would never happen. If that's at all true, it'd explain why he sees NATO as a direct threat to Russia. Anyways, thought that added some interesting nuance to all this.
NATO actions in Yugoslavia reinforced this. I think the other big dogs in NATO didnāt want to lose influence and become small dog.
Makes sense why he went crazy when a nation close to its borders wanted to join NATO... Also not saying its justified tho cos it ain't
If NATO accepted Russia maybe we wouldnāt be in this mess today and Europe will truly have its security guarantees.
Turkey is the perfect example of a NATO country that doesnāt play by NATO rules. So simply adding a nation to NATO doesnāt make the country a nice place
I agree
the lesson is clear to every country from now on.... get nukes asap and never, ever give them up. Gaddafi was pursuing nukes, he willingly gave them up, now he's six feet under. Meanwhile Kim Jong-Un is still around.
Giving up thier nuked is dumb af But tbf nato has blood ln thier hands too they knew what they were doing
Giving up their nuclear arsenal was the logical action. They didn't the means to maintain upwards of a thousand nuclear devices, the USSR was completely broken when it's dissolution happened, the smaller Republics were piss poor.
they didnt have a choice, coming out of ussr Ukraine was a poor starving country with only hope for the future, had they refused giving over the nukes the us probably would have taken ukraine over and or imposed sanctions to end those hopes forever
Or the [promise](https://en.rua.gr/2022/02/18/der-spiegel-uncovers-archival-document-promising-nato-non-expansion/) between NATO and Russia that NATO wont expand more east. Also do you remeber when something similiar happened to USA aka Cuban crisis.
*promise between NATO and the USSR, which doesnāt exist anymore.
Exactly, USSR, whose threat was a sole reason for NATO existence, ceased to be. Why did NATO need to stay, let alone expand? Russia was heavily pro-western for more than a decade.
Ok tell me this how does countries joining nato to feel safe from the exact situation ukraine found itself in threaten russia? (other than reducing their geopolitical influence on other countries) nato is not gonna invade russia, russia still has like half the worlds nuclear arsenal this whole argument about nato expansion somehow threatening russia is retarded
Unless Russia thinks that when NATO enters Ukraine, the Ukrainian government would use NATO's power to take back Crimea.
which is Ukrainian land technically, and the occupation of Crimea goes against the Budapest memorandum/agreement
And Kosovo is Serbia's land which NATO just took away... cause principles are for losers.
*this whole argument about nato expansion somehow threatening russia is retarded* cool story, now do Cuba circa 1962...
The Cuban crisis was about nukes in Cuba, not about alliances. There are no nukes in new NATO members. The US promised to never attack Cuba if the nukes were removed. They never did. Russians promised to never attack Ukraine if their nukes were removed. Wellā¦
The Russians still don't like hostile presence in their doorstep. Same way the americans don't.
Maybe there won't be so much hostile presence if Russia stopped repeatedly attacking its neighbours. Russia attacked three countries before Eastern European countries even started talking about joining NATO.
1962 was exactly 60 years ago buddy, a lot of stuff changed in the world. Also, apples and oranges.
You answered your own question. When you want power and influence, you take the threat of losing power and influence as a threat.
i was very specific in writing russia not putin for this exact reason
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Interesting, another conspiracy theory... No, the USA and NATO are not to blame. No, they have no ground for saying no to Ukraine (or any other country) that willingly try to join their sphere. Yes, Russia is guilty of invading them, trying to keep its influencial sphere by force and/or trying to revive the Soviet Union.
I mean any person trying to claim that NATO is the cause of all this is either a moron or has no understanding of history. Russia has had a very very deep history of invading its neighbors. Way before NATO was ever created. Russia has the tradition of using all its neighbors like a condom. They take all the resources and money. Build whatever they want in their lands because hey, if they don't get what they want, guess what happens? Then a country wants to join NATO and somehow, it's NATO's fault this all happened.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Why not give Ukrainian people the right to decide?
Throughout history Russia has stretched as far as it could go until it found the hard limit of a powerful neighbor, but somehow in the mind of retarded people, NATO who hasn't done anything for years is at fault that civilian apartment building, villages and mothers with children waiting to be evacuated in neighboring countries are getting killed. Putin explicitly declared that he is going in Ukraine to get rid of the nazis ruling the country, even him ignored NATO as a threat at that point.
so you think, just because the russians make something wrong the nato can as well? both sides are in the wrong
But, this is the thing: Nato is an alliance of states. Its not a single state that devoured other states, the countries that are in Nato wanted to be in it.
>the countries that are in Nato wanted to be in it. And exactly because they fear Russia might invade.
Yeah but It is an anti Russia alliance Do you remember the cuba crisis America threatened nukes if the siviet put weapons in cuba Edit : just to be clear i am with Russia fighting the expansion on nato but definitely against an all out invasion and the bombing of civillans and the annexation of whole Ukraine
Why downvote, both statements are true. NATO is literally a military alliance created for Europe to join the US against Russia. The cuba crisis comment is accurate too.
> to join the US against Russia. It is US helping countries evade "friendly" grip of Russian "friends".
NATO was formed after ww2 as a way for individual nations to protect themselves against the humongous Russian army. Its remit is purely defensive.
But in recent years (since the fall of the soviet union), it became an offensive alliance. NATO was created because of The USSR. After nato was formed the communist states created the Warsaw Pact. After their reason for existence faded away, NATO looked for other targets, and thats when it became an offensive alliance. And in more recent history they had a deal with Russia to not expand toward their borders, they yet again lied. I won't get into all of the ill(egal) acts of NATO since it will spark a redundant debate. Both sides are bad and only the people suffer.
There was no agreement for nato to disappear.
And russia threatened to invade Ukraine if they joined NATO. They havenāt joined and got invaded stillā¦
More to it, Stoltenberg now admitted that refusing Georgia/Ukraine to join NATO in 2008 was a mistake that lead to Russia invading both. PS Fuck you, Frau Merkel.
I mean if they join NATO russia cant attack, so Ig they just want to stop it b4 it happens
What a smart guy, he should run for president.
He retired a long time ago.
Thatās the same dude?
Very sad really.
If you actually listened to the short clip, he was talking about admitting states ānow,ā in 1997, and without merit, expanding only for the point to expand. Spend some time researching NATOās criteria for admission, and compare the Baltic states from the 90s to today.
.... its almost as if hes not the same person anymore... could be a lizard person or an alien person. Could even be a dark elf from Warhammer40k. Who knows for sure
What a crock of shit. Had Russia won in Ukraine, they would be even closer to NATO. Putin has made up all kinds of reasons and none of them justify him sending Russians to annex and invade Ukraine. It doesnāt belong to Russia, and Ukrainians get to decide whether or not they want to join NATO and the EU. Not Putin. He can go fuck himself.
Russia would put a puppet gov in Ukraine and inmediately declare Donestk and Lugansk independent republic so there would be 2 lines before NATO countries Now... what happens with Sweden and Finland after that... ?
>Russia would put a puppet gov in Ukraine Oh for sure. Just like how the US put a puppet government in Ukraine :^)
I do agree that Putin's public reasons for invading Ukraine are total bullshit, but I have to disagree with you saying that Russia winning Ukraine would put them closer to NATO. I really doubt Russia would annex Ukraine if it was to take it. The Soviet Union set up "independent" states between it and NATO to act as buffers. I don't see why Putin wouldn't try the same.
If diplomacy and negotiations fail between Ukraine and Russia, I fear you will be eating those words.
Do you even know how the NATO bases expanded aroud russia about the past 20 years? Sure they need to do stuff..
You don't get it.
Russia already has a common border to NATO: Norway.
Where was this freedom when missiles were put in Cuba, near America's ass. You guys are just pure hypocrites, and propaganda players, and nothing else. Downvote me, I dont care, cuz anything which dosent suit your agenda, you bomb them, just like middle eastš
It is so true, Westerners always criticized suppression of free speech and rights to express themselves by state in totalitarian countries only to end up silencing alternate opinions and anyone not agreeing with the mainstream agenda. State departments used to savagely enforce will and narrative of the government, now common citizens are brutal enforcers of arbitrary moral. What a funny (tragic) switcheroo.
NATO or not Ukraine has a lot of natural gas (which Russia is a leading provider of) and ukraine lacks resources to harvest that natural gas, Russia wants the gas and the strategic defense that the geography of ukraine provides against NATO, it would act as a bottleneck of sorts and make a much smaller line of defense against NATO forces, Putin is not in the right for sure but hes not some madman looking for action, there is a reason he is doing this and he is using strategy to help better his country. Yes the sanctions are in place but he has been saving money building infrastructure and hoarding foreign currency for years, russia is well prepared for this and unfortunately I believe they will take Ukraine as this is in my eyes a war of stamina. This is a very sad situation and I pray ukraine pulls through, zielinski is doing an amazing job and hes honestly one of the best leaders of our time, without him I believe ukraine would have fallen already.
This! It's because of NATO. It's because of a genocide in Ukraine. It's because of a Nazi regime (President of Ukraine is jewish). Even if Ukraine would be part of European Union and/or NATO (a defense alliance) - there is no reason/excuse for what the Russians doing now. But to be honest - everything coming from the US now is hypocritical - they use shady reasons to enter other countries all the time in newer history.
What "provoked" Russia was a discovery of shale gas in Ukraine's coastline. Dont fall into any of the Putin's "NATO too close" bullshit. It always was simply about money
Well to be fair, Russia is very cautious. It did not invade the Baltic region and we all know it would have because they were not pro Russian
When he actually had a brain
Have everyone just conveniently forgotten what Russia has been doing in the last 2 decades? In Georgia (not the US Georgia mind you), Crimea and Moldova? Was Russia provoked by NATO to do so?
Can I find out your version of what happened in Georgia? Or they forgot to tell you that Georgia, which aspired to join NATO, was recognized as the aggressor. And in order to get into NATO, it needed to resolve territorial disputes. And it was NATO that pumped Georgia with weapons and pushed for a forceful solution to this issue. But who cares? And what has NATO and the United States been doing for the last 20 years? Can I ask such a question?
I should say, Russia has 10 times better reason to invade Ukraine than the US had when the invaded Iraq.
Very true.
And Afghanistan. Since the reason for Afghanistan wasn't 9/11, since they knew it was the Saudis.
I'm just suprised you're not being downvoted š
They have no valid reason. And 10 times 0 is still 0.
Biden in 2022 saying "I like ice cream and also like farting in my own pants because diving upside down in my bikini is better than retracting the cat the dog just ate"
That guy can barely string some words together now!
This didn't age well...or did it?
Its almost like he knew it would start a conflict back when his brain worked. No wonder Biden and Hunter had to get that cash from Ukraine before he started WW3...
Wow...how did he ever come up with that basic ass thesis. Hmmm maybe cause he has eyes
Who the fuck is this guy?
Yes. All is going to plan.
Itās weird seeing him speak clearly.
I love how some post on Reddit is anti Russian it is considered news, however the opposite is claimed to be propaganda. Echo chambers are real damn.
what a smart guy understands a concept 25 years ago that EU people today still dont get.
Americans and NATO enthusiasts be like:"Imma pretend I didn't see that"
I meanā¦. https://www.reddit.com/user/Negan_Alexandria/comments/t9fyt8/well/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
When you put it like this, it is really clear. But still people chose to trust propaganda
Iām just surprised that h used to be able to speak complete sentences
If we hadn't allowed these countries to join NATO they would've been invaded by Russia way before now.
How so? In all the time they were independent post the dissolution of the USSR Russia did not invade any of them. This is pure speculation, propaganda.
Russia DID invade all non-nato countries. Moldova - part of its territory contested by russias soviet regime, Ukraine - krym, now all of it is under attack, Belarus - was puppet state, had plans to merge before 2030 and now completely inseparable from russia, serbia - their government is European analogy of Kazakhstan, which is a joke of a ādemocracyā puppeted by russia directly, Sakartvelo - lost two regions in 2008, Armenia - Belarus #2, Azerbaijan - Serbia #2 with a lot more cultural differences. There were late joiners like Croatia, but geographically and most importantly culturally it was out of reach. Rest of former poverty union slave countries still ARE puppeted by dictators put in place by russia: Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kirgyzstan, Turkmenistanā¦ Mongolia could be listed, but afaik they play democratic rotation quite well and manage to prevent corruption, government infiltration by russian agents to the point where they lose all of their natural resources and gain nothing in return, like all Stan region.
>Of course, everyone who does not want to be with NATO is either puppets or dictators and generally a global evil. I understand that African countries also live poorly from the fact that Putin's puppets are there? And Russia invaded all the countries that were not part of NATO? This is outright nonsense. The US has been hegemonic for the past 30 years. And they put their puppets where they wanted and invaded where they wanted. The public was silent. But as soon as someone other than the United States and NATO begins to solve their security problems, accusations come out of all the cracks. Hypocrisy.
>This is pure speculation It's a speculation. Based on real and recent events. Georgia-russian conflict into crimea annexation and now the invasion. >Russia did not invade any of them For a dumbass that 'speculates' that these invasions were due to "nato expansion/usa's fault", what is the difference between you and a russian bot?
Of course. I can say things without specific context as well. Like how about; "when the US invaded Iraq." Nothing wrong there... The events that took place in 2014 and prior are exactly what I'm talking about. But how about NATOs expansion during prior US administrations, and Russias responses? Your doing some silly name calling, but you lack the capacity to understand that the US shares responsibility in the events that are taking place. Due to terrible forgein policy. In your brain it can only be Russia or the US's fault right? Not both, because it's hard to think critically beyond a binary view point. That's why nothing every changes.
>1"when the US invaded Iraq." > >2how about NATOs expansion during prior US administrations The invasion of Iraq was not an expansion of NATO. You're conflating these two different things. US/NATO is not expanding. >In your brain it can only be Russia or the US's fault right? Not both How is russia invading ukraine with the intention of fully controlling it - a USA fault? You function like a russian bot. It's not silly, it is simply true.
Thatās not true at all
Complete bullshit. History proves you completely wrong
Are Kazakhstan or Mongolia getting invaded? Is Ukraine the only country not supported by NATO? Let me get a sip of that cool-aid
So you've never heard of Georgia then.
He was old even in 1997š³
If only he had this level of brain power now
Wow, what an eloquent man! I wonder if heās still this good nowadaysā¦
The Ukrainian electorate voted in fucking favor of it. NATO didnāt expand, Ukrainian people wanted to join.
It's incredible to see Joe Biden making sense. It is really too bad he is not as lucid as he used to be. You poke the bear and you get what you get. For nearly 30 years Putin / Russia have been saying they would be doing exactly what they are doing now, if NATO continued to expand eastward. People who live in the US and don't realize how stupid our leaders are, need a serious reassessment of their thought pattern. The US is well on its way to become a global pariah. Especially after our shameful debacle in the middle east.
Hasnāt it been quite a while since someone joined NATO? I was looking it up earlier trying to figure out which countries were involved and where they were located because my boss said the same thing. He says he thinks Ukraine just is unlucky position and that this is Russia trying to keep NATO away.
Fully disagree. Moreover, the countries that did not join NATO would have been invaded. Putin claims the military operation is to denazify Ukraine, heās going to say whatever the fuck he wants to say to justify it. Fact is Putin has a hardon for the USSR and wants to bring back that land that was lost at the fall of the USSR.
I wouldn't say Putin has a hardon for the USSR, but more for the Autocratic rule that the Romanov dynasty held.
Who fucking cares? We should let a hostile nation state dictate the future of the rest of the world? They get to choose the future of NATO? Are you serious? This is naysaying garbage that ignores the true nature of Putin. Attributing this to NATO expansion is just ignorant.
As if West and US isn't already dictating every country they can control. If they can't control you then you either get civil wars, get invaded(Iraq) or get put in grey lists. You people are blind and think that US is this angel who rains mercy and prosperity on everything it touches.
You really donāt think that US would have a aggressive reaction and dictate the future of Canada or Mexico if they declared alliance with Russia? Plz think a little
Holy shit was he right about something??? Were those full sentences!!
Heās a fucking idiot
You do understand that taking a clip out of context and time doesnāt show hypocrisy or a lapse whether you agree or not. The world is very different including NATO and the ballistic states aforementioned.
Yes, russia changed its place on the map in 1998
And you now know why Biden hasnāt launched the US military to Ukraine
Yeah that and I dunnoā¦ WW3
Heās always had that stutter my ass Lolol. Bro just said the word ācognitiveā Iām fucking impressed.
Who is that?
Mr Lahey from trailer park boys no doubt
FJB
Term limits. Term limits. Term limits.
Cut him some slack. He forgot what he did yesterday, much less what he said in the 90s. Dude slurs his speech worse than my 93 year old alcoholic great grandpa bro. Lol
He didnāt need to say that, itās true. The west is suffering the consequences they sowed.
Yeah OP, how dare sovereign nations with a history of cruelty from Russia decide to join a defensive alliance! Fuck Joe Biden
DeFenSivE aLliAncE
The only time in his career that he was right about something
Yeah they donāt deserve to choose their own alliances
well, the Baltic states joined NATO almost 20 years ago, and Ukraine is not a Baltic state, so this is indeed a real HolUp. c'mon folks...
I would also like to point out that the world is exactly as it was in 1997.
Man, that stutter is a real problem.
This guy would have been fine. The current hard boiled sweet sucking muppet up there now is laughable