"It’s frankly scandalous that #Russia, after having terminated the Black Sea grain initiative, is blocking and attacking Ukrainian ports. This must stop."
I totally agree. #NATO must send the navy to open the #BlackSea ports. But of course, they are all words and no action, scared of boogeymen #Putin and his mafia state of #terrorists. What a bunch of cowards NATO turned out to be. Totally useless.
What navy? NATO has no military forces of its own.
If NATO member countries would use their navies to protect those ports by exercising military threat, that will al too easily result in actual confrontation. It makes sense that those countries want to avoid getting into an actual war with Russia.
@sibrosan@joaocosta
There already is an actual war with Russia and NATO is very much a part of it. It's just NATO is letting #Ukraine do all the fighting.
I'd like to see #NATO be more assertive in the defense of international shipping and defending the airspace of Ukraine away from the frontlines. Russian attacks on both are war crimes that NATO should be trying to stop.
It's past time #Russia played by international law.
"the one’s already operational in Black Sea should take a more aggressive posture,"
You mean NATO countries whose navies have military ships in the Black Sea, should actually confront the Russians, which could very well result in actual war waged against them?
I wouldn't blame countries bordering the Black Sea such as Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, wanting to avoid Russian bombardments on their population such as #Ukrainia has been suffering.
"You mean NATO countries whose navies have military ships in the Black Sea, should actually confront the Russians, which could very well result in actual war waged against them?"
Yes, absolutely. That's the point of NATO: to defend against Russian aggression. Or have you forgotten this and insist on using bureaucracy to hide the responsibility of the largest, wealthiest and most powerful military defensive alliance in the world?
"It is often said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded in response to the threat posed by the Soviet Union. This is only partially true. In fact, the Alliance’s creation was part of a broader effort to serve three purposes: deterring Soviet expansionism, forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration."
"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several Western European nations to provide collective security against the Soviet Union."
Shall we stop debating the obvious? NATO has failed, and continues to fail to provide collective security against the Soviet Union, now called the "Russian Federation".
NATO's own description: "deterring Soviet expansionism, forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration."
Russia is expanding in Europe, launched an unprovoked imperialist war to re-establish a Soviet empire, is committing genocide in Europe, and is using acts of terror, war crimes and nuclear threats against Europe. Every single day. Wake up.
Agreed, the aims of NATO include(d) deterring Soviet expansionism.
To this end, member states subscribe to article 5, by which they commit themselves to protect each other if one or more member states are attacked.
But you have it wrong if you conclude from this that "the point of NATO" would be "to defend against Russian aggression" of any kind, or against non-member states.
Not of any kind. Aggression against Europe. If Ukraine would have fallen, the Baltic States would be next. Putin said it many times, and the entire Russian propaganda prepares Russians for this.
Why is Ukraine being helped? Because NATO knows that without Ukraine's monumental sacrifice, war will come to the EU.
To my mind, seeing NATO leaving Ukraine to be the single shield in Europe is unfair, and shows NATO has and is failing its core mission as described.
Since these are NATO member states, Article 5 would apply, requiring the other NATO members to engage in collective defense.
But the current situation is that there has been no military attack by Russia on a NATO member state.
Can you tell me which article of the North Atlantic Treaty specifies that, as you claim, NATO's core mission should include actual military intervention to protect a non-member state?
Anyway, I'm squarely behind #Ukraine, I despise Putin and Russia, and I'm in favor of providing Ukraine with all the weapons, intelligence, training and advice it needs to kick the invader out, but my point is that by blaming NATO for "failing its core mission", you are barking up the wrong tree.
All the above + Russia has interfered in elections in the USA, UK, France, Italy and likely more.
#Putin is a serious danger but now at his weakest ever. The West should stop letting him set the terms. To some extent, they have already taken initiative with their active military support for #Ukraine. They should extend support to protect int'l shipping and Ukraine civilian areas.
Note: I removed at-sibrosan, who I believe is trolling.
@sibrosan@nf3xn@joaocosta
I don't believe Russia is in any position to expand it's war into NATO territories. Russian savers rattling should be seen for what it is.
As for which air forces/navies, any NATO country willing to deploy them. Right now #NATO politics prevent any of them deploying outside their territory.
"I don't believe Russia is in any position to expand it's war into NATO territories."
Easy for you to say. I imagine the governments of the countries involved, especially those closer to Russia, who would have military vessels in the Black Sea, do not readily count on this.
"You've explicitly speculated that Russia could bombard the population of NATO countries."
Isn't it evident that Russia is capable of doing that? It is unlikely their missiles couldn't be just as easily be programmed to hit targets outside Ukraine.
Recognizing this is not the same as speculating whether Russia would actually do that.
@sibrosan@nf3xn@joaocosta
You said: "I wouldn't blame countries bordering the Black Sea such as Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, wanting to avoid Russian bombardments on their population such as #Ukrainia has been suffering"
Clearly, you are speculating that Russia would ... or at least that countries think Russia would
This conversation is increasingly pendantic. I won't be continuing. Have a nice day.
doing nothing to disrupt the flow of dirty Russian billions.
It's what the West did after every war crime and outrage. Supporting #Ukraine was a major surprise. Putin thought Trump has caused more disarray than he did.
Add comment