Respectfully, your own comment came across condescending, if you weren’t trolling you might wanna be more thoughtful in the future so we understand you’re being earnest
Edit: that was a different person lol. Nonetheless, that person was condescending, so they were condescending back. That’s the explanation.
But that does not answer my question, I could have lived also under a rock, but my post was a question, didn’t define anything or made any assumption, just asked what do you think is the objective of the russian supermegapower and what do you think is the objective of nato
It does if you have even a bare minimum of reading comprehension. The objective of NATO was to try and break up Russia as outlined in detail in this RAND paper. The goal was to cut off Russia economically from trade and collapse its economy. That obviously didn’t happen, and now NATO finds itself in a proxy war that it lost. The goal of Russia is pretty obvious as well. It’s to remove NATO threat on its border and ideally to break up NATO. This is the goal Russia is currently accomplishing.
NATO has always been a US project. Without the US there is no NATO, Europe can’t even produce basic stuff like explosives at this point. And if you don’t understand that the US turning on Europe is the direct outcome of the war, what else is there to say really.
Russia has never been an actual danger to the west, but it has been a great bogey man to keep Europeans under the US control. Europe was relevant to the US during Cold War because USSR posed an ideological threat to the dictatorship of capital. Now that Russia is capitalist, Europe has lost its value and it’s going to be cannibalized so that the US can focus on their new adversary in the Asia. Hence why NATO is now done.
Sweden and Finland were already so integrated with the western military block through the EU that them officially joining NATO is less a material change and more a symbolic formality. Not to mention that the Finnish-Russian border is an even worst path to invade Russia from Europe than the already difficult paths through Poland and Ukraine, and we know how invasions of Russia through those routes tend to go.
since you’ve obviously been living under a rock all this time, I’ll just refer you to this article in The Hill, so you can get up to speed on the whole situation https://thehill.com/opinion/5198022-ukraine-conflict-disinformation/
You’re really a condescending prick you know that? You talk to people in person like this?
Lol, because the person they were talking to was being so humble and good faith. Shove off.
I don’t make a habit of interacting with trolls like you lot in person.
Respectfully, your own comment came across condescending, if you weren’t trolling you might wanna be more thoughtful in the future so we understand you’re being earnest
Edit: that was a different person lol. Nonetheless, that person was condescending, so they were condescending back. That’s the explanation.
Pretty sure being a condescending prick is a requirement for tankies. I’ve yet to be proven wrong
Being really mad about being called out on being ignorant is a requirement for dronies. Ive yet to be proven wrong.
But that does not answer my question, I could have lived also under a rock, but my post was a question, didn’t define anything or made any assumption, just asked what do you think is the objective of the russian supermegapower and what do you think is the objective of nato
It does if you have even a bare minimum of reading comprehension. The objective of NATO was to try and break up Russia as outlined in detail in this RAND paper. The goal was to cut off Russia economically from trade and collapse its economy. That obviously didn’t happen, and now NATO finds itself in a proxy war that it lost. The goal of Russia is pretty obvious as well. It’s to remove NATO threat on its border and ideally to break up NATO. This is the goal Russia is currently accomplishing.
It broke up nato by making countries who didn’t join for 50 years join it , see Sweden and Finland , wait, where is Finland geographically?
Probably not on the border with the super mega power:D
NATO has always been a US project. Without the US there is no NATO, Europe can’t even produce basic stuff like explosives at this point. And if you don’t understand that the US turning on Europe is the direct outcome of the war, what else is there to say really.
The Us is turning on Europe because russia is not worth keeping an alliance anymore
that’s some impressive galaxy brain logic right there
Unless you think that russia is more of a danger now than it was during cold war
Russia has never been an actual danger to the west, but it has been a great bogey man to keep Europeans under the US control. Europe was relevant to the US during Cold War because USSR posed an ideological threat to the dictatorship of capital. Now that Russia is capitalist, Europe has lost its value and it’s going to be cannibalized so that the US can focus on their new adversary in the Asia. Hence why NATO is now done.
Sweden and Finland were already so integrated with the western military block through the EU that them officially joining NATO is less a material change and more a symbolic formality. Not to mention that the Finnish-Russian border is an even worst path to invade Russia from Europe than the already difficult paths through Poland and Ukraine, and we know how invasions of Russia through those routes tend to go.
So it’s not the loss for Russia you think it is.