• 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Think about what you’re saying.

      • The USSR just existing next to you is a threat.
      • But Russia is in the wrong for thinking NATO existing next to them is a threat.

      Why is it OK when you say it but bad when they do? If you’re encouraging others to put themselves in your shoes (“you had to be there”), why can’t you put yourself in Russia’s shoes and see how they could reasonably perceive NATO as a threat?

      • mellowheat@suppo.fi
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m not actually saying that Russia just existing close to us is a threat. I’m saying that what Russia is doing and how it’s behaving, and how it talks publically is a threat.

        But I do understand how NATO might be viewed as a threat to some nations or world leaders. I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to, however. Perhaps you can refresh my memory.

        • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t immediately remember any particurarily good (liberal, free, non-oppressive, democratic) nations that NATO poses a risk to.

          God, this is so mask off. Just because a country doesn’t meet some extremely vague notion of “good” that you’ve arbitrarily decided to apply (and which almost always just means “part of the West” in practice) you think it’s not aggression to bomb their people into poverty and famine. Fuck liberals.