Hacker News Reader

Comment by TeeMassive | Hacker News Reader

NATO did escalate with Russia since the fall of the USSR. Even former Bush admins protested against this.

Hard disagree. NATO doesn't expand; independent countries choose to join NATO as is their right. No country is in someone's natural sphere of influence, that's 19th century thinking. Joining a defensive alliance is not an escalation except in the eyes of an empire that wants to annex its neighbours.

Like walking alone while wearing a very short skirt in the wrong part of town after midnight, I find that idea principled but self-destructive. Is it your right to ask to join a military alliance? Absolutely. Is it surprising that provokes a violent reaction from the state whose power is threatened by that alliance? Only if you're very naive. Is that reaction ok? Of course not, but silly of you if you weren't expecting it and is the principle really worth the personal cost?

In this case, yes it's clearly worth it. The alliance is more than capable of dealing with the bully, so there's no need for concessions.

All empires have to face their end eventually and it's well past the time for Russia to demilitarize and make amends for their violent past.

Has it been worth the price for Ukraine, and the common people who paid it with their lives? Couldn't the same point be made regarding the US? Would every Iraqi be in favour of the West being the only military power on Earth?

A good place to note I fully condemn Russia for the invasion and loss of lives... I just don't find it surprising in the least and do think NATO expansion catalysed much preventable harm.

Ukraine did not join NATO, and it's not ok to draw a direct line between former Warsaw Pact countries joining NATO and the current war in Ukraine.

Also, as said you shouldn't say "NATO expansion". That's the imperialistic Russian viewpoint. NATO doesn't expand, countries join the alliance.

And I repeat that that's a very naive point of view. NATO absolutely expands and is aligned with a political point of view. I'm part of it and presumably so are you, but that doesn't give it magical properties. Ignoring NATO's historical context does no good.

The alliance is capable of dealing with the bully, but it clearly prefers not to, and will probably say meh even if Ukraine gets totally destroyed. Which may cause some leaders in Ukraine, just as some already do in EU/America, think that maybe the whole nation building and bear poking on its doorstep wasn't worth it. But it is also possible that Russia won't be strong enough to keep this up and some stalemate will be reached. Time will tell.

NATO is not just a defensive alliance as we saw in Afghanistan. Defense activities don't result in a twenty year occupation.

Lots of 3-month old accounts spewing nonsense in this thread.

I wished it was limited to those.

Yes they do. Russia occupied Germany for decades after a defensive war.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com