27
NAziTO doing Nazi things LMBO (thelemmy.club)
submitted 1 day ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

all 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 17 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (3 children)

To be fair, many of the imperialist wars in the middle east have been joint military operations of certain NATO members. They have not really been sanctioned NATO operations though, with quite a few in NATO in opposition to the wars.

That being said, the distinction may seem meaningless when NATO resources are used by the imperialists anyway. However, the level of material support for the US agression towards Iran has been less than before, maybe even remarkably so.

The point is to be historically precise so that we can identify the development of the fracture of US domination within the imperial core.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 hours ago*

    the level of material support for the US agression towards Iran has been less than before, maybe even remarkably so.

    That has nothing to do with morals or the imaginary independence from the US.
    The only difference is that Iran is not a defenseless resource-rich country where they can help the big bully leader in return for some crumbs of the loot.
    They know joining this war would mean actual war and cost them a lot.
    It's pure cowardice.
    You only have to hear what that worm Rutte says or the ghouls VDL and Kallas.
    They shamelessly give full verbal support to the nazi empire, condemn Iran and would be helping the war criminals if it were without consequence.
    There is no fracture.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 25 points 1 day ago

    Ooh the libs don't like people shitting on NATO it seems.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •
    [–] 26 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    "oh, the middle east? idk why you care about it because there's wars there all the time for some reason"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

    I've literally seen libs, who when questioned why African countries shouldn't receive the same priority on aid as Ukraine, responded with "I don't really care about dictatorships", WHICH LIKE IF YOU DON'T THEN KEEP THE MILITARY OUT AND LEAVE THEM ALONE

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 7 hours ago

    Somehow Ukraine, the state where opposition parties are banned, their leaders hunted and elections postponed indefinitely, isn't a dictatorship. This is because they're white Zelenskyuyu is wholesome chungus 100 cool guy comedian

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
    • [–] 16 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    Invading other countries isn’t bad when WE do it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • [–] -2 points 1 day ago (11 children)

    Ahh yes, "liberating" a population by bombing them. A policy shared by both NATO and Russia. Both should look at China's example for an alternative path.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 1 day ago (9 children)

    the difference is in why they're bombing and what they're bombing -- nato/ukraine are bombing the same way the us is bombing iran.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 21 hours ago (8 children)

    And yet China manages to take the high road with Taiwan, Japan, India, etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 18 hours ago* (2 children)

    The difference is not a matter of moral fiber but strategic positioning. The western part of Russia is surrounded by NATO countries over land borders. The capitalist bloc simply can't threaten China in the same way, and if they could then we would be seeing a similar response.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 15 hours ago (1 child)

    China made trade groups with their regional rivals, so no, we do not see a similar response. China's response is rooted in win-win diplomacy that improves the material conditions of all parties involved. It is less a moral calculation and more a material one that creates a moral authority.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

    Russia was trading (on preferrential terms) with Europe and on especially preferrential terms with Ukraine before the West decided to put up Nazis in power in Ukraine, who then immediately started shelling their eastern population for being too Russian and the highest level politicians literally saying "your children will be hiding in the basement while ours go to school".

    Then Euros voluntarily cut themselves off from that fountain of wealth in hopes of getting ALL of it through war.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 21 hours ago (1 child)

    China is the factory of the world, and even then they're constantly told they're bad, and that they should be destroyed, etc. The difference is that they're the most industrialized and well organized country out there so they can call the bluff.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 19 hours ago

    Yes and that is a winning strategy. As another ml account highlighted, war with the global north did not end well for the USSR, which comparatively speaking was much more a peer in terms of power than the current Russia. China's strategy is the one that recognizes that the tactics available flow down stream from material conditions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

    madelinte pendelton postulated that china's foreign relations strategy is to avoid war at all costs with the global north since they saw how they strangled the soviet union into non-existence and it explains why they're willing to accept all the pain and simply walk away from all of their investments in latin america despite having the power to push back like the united states does.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 20 hours ago (1 child)

    Isn't Brazil part of BRICS? Their strategy isn't just to avoid war, they are building soft power at a time when the USA is burning goodwill for short term gain (though with Iran the only gains seem to be oil profits).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 7 points 19 hours ago

    it is part of the brics, but the united states and isreal have been throwing their weight around in latin-american to reverse the soft power gains that china has made by rigging the electronic voting systems and the election in brazil is already 50/50.

    that's why brazil banned american "election officials" from entering their country a few days ago and the americans hit back w sanctions and obstructing the election campaign on facebook and other social media platforms.

    their goal is to get bolsonaro's son elected so that they can isolate mexico and totally reverse the leftwards shift that latin-america has been going towards for the last 20-ish years.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 day ago*

    Actually Russia's first solution was the Minsk agreement, then their second solution was the second Minsk agreement, then they had a war and during the war they agreed to a negotiation with Ukraine (early on into the war) which America and Britain proceeded to have thrown out

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent