“Why are these nations joining NATO?”
Because NATO regime changed each of them and then offered the new government a choice: Be part of the mob or the ones getting beaten up.
Of course, NATO can’t possibly be imperialist
Of course not, they label themselves a defensive alliance. Which means it is 100% true and they can’t possibly be imperialist. Any territory they claim is driven by uh…defense.
We should ask them to describe Russian imperialism. Maybe they’d realise how little sense this makes
They absolutely wouldn’t. Baby leftists have a genuinely hard time accepting imperialism isn’t defined by “troop movement, bad touch.” Spicy and otherwise liberals are absolutely incoherent when it comes to what is and isn’t imperialism, their worldview doesn’t allow even a coherently incorrect definition.
“Imperialism is when big country hurt small country, tankie!”
Not even that I guess since US interventions would qualify under this definition but not all liberals agree they are
Did you forget that US are the Good Guys and Russian are the Bad Guys? Only Bad Guys can be imperialist.
No, that’s different. Big country invaded little country to defend little country.
That made me laugh, thanks.
You’re right actually. What is the generally accepted definition of imperialism outside of the capitalist tool one?
Imperialism = Whatever the US is not doing (except when Trump is in charge)
On a serious note, liberals are idealists. They don’t understand imperialism. It’s just a synonym for “evil” to them. They think imperialists imperialize because they are evil imperialists. Russia is evil, therefore Russia is imperialist. If Ukraine was evil in their eyes, then Ukraine would be imperialist instead/as well.
Some liberals understand on a surface level that US is doing imperialism, but only because they’ve heard others speak of this in this way. If you ask them about what the US is actually doing, they might even admit it’s the “bad kind” of imperialism, but they’ll frame it as “however, the US has no other choice, so it has to do this bad thing, but for a good reason”. Because the US are the good guys, and therefore can’t be evil imperialists. If they are being imperialists it’s because it’s going to help the greater good. Or it’s because bad people have momentarily come to power, but the liberal thinks that quite soon the bad people will go away, and the natural order of things will be restored. Then years later they’ll rehabilitate the “bad people” (e.g. see Reagan, Bush senior, Bush junior)
You mean to liberals?
a policy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means.
Which is absolutely useless because everything would be imperialism.
Thanks!
Oh wow this is dumb. Feels like highschool level geopolitics
or other means.
Damn this part does some very heavy lifting. Or none at all, if you point to liberals all the “other means” west use.
Carthago delenda est
I am well aware of the fact that the masses have mobilized to join the EU (like in Georgia) but I don’t think I have ever seen mass protests in favour of joining NATO.
Also, genuine question, I know Russia has a very real reason for wanting Ukraine out of NATO, but why wasn’t the same sentiment shared for the Baltics? This Reddit post just made me remember that…
I am well aware of the fact that the masses have mobilized to join the EU (like in Georgia) but I don’t think I have ever seen mass protests in favour of joining NATO.
There’s a reason most of those countries had a referendum about joining EU but not about joining NATO
why wasn’t the same sentiment shared for the Baltics?
Baltics joined NATO in 2004 when Russia was still very much appeasing USA. Also Baltics are way harder to use to invade Russia than Ukraine for several reasons.
The border between Russia and the Baltics is much more wild and undeveloped, and much harder to push an army through as a result. The border between Ukraine and Russia is mostly flat farmland, very easy to send troops through.
That makes a lot of sense, thank you! I see people use the Baltics as a “gotcha” against the argument that Russia does not want NATO on its borders so I am glad there’s an explanation for why they don’t really count.
If the Baltics were just imaginary land that everyone agreed was real, they’d have the same geopolitical relevance as they do now: a flag and a voice cheerleading the West on international fora and trying to convince the world that the duality of being both pro-Nazi and innocent victims of communism was a real thing that they could be in the war.
That is why the Baltic nations asked to join.
