Hacker News Reader

Comment by nostrebored | Hacker News Reader

I get that we've decided 'NATO Good' now -- but are people really so sure that it's sphere of influence is geopolitically stabilizing?

I don't see how it could be. If I were Russia, or an ally of Russia, an expansionist NATO would be galvanizing for me and would accelerate a counterbalance alliance. Creating a potentially entrenched conflict in countries that have surface-to-surface access to Moscow would be in my benefit. Ukraine falls into that category.

View on HN

> counterbalance alliance

Russia had that in CSTO.

After Russia ignored Armenia’s request for help, it’s worthless.

And Russia has already created entrenched conflicts in a number of countries for exactly that reason.

Maybe if Russia weren't an active threat to all its neighbors, its neighbors wouldn't want to join NATO so badly.

You do realize that Russia invading a peaceful country that was turning more towards democracy and away from dictatorships like Russia is what pushed Sweden and Finland into NATO, in fear of Russia invading and terror bombing them?

Not protecting yourself, and letting Russia do whatever they want, is what countries did to Nazi Germany for years. Have we learned nothing from history?

Russia being bad does not make Nato good. Just like Nato being bad does not make Russia good.

US is literally sending weapons to the perpetrators of a genocide. Genocides do not make the world more stable, just the opposite.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com