Eh? What putin says is irrelevant to reality, please stop using him as a source. If you’re about to tell me joining NATO is a reason for wars to break out please make sure it’s real first lmao.
So you’re gonna tell me it’s about the Nazis in Ukraine and you think he’s just going there to liberate them? Yeah right.
EDIT: FFS you got me distracted again. Just like you wanted, I forgot my initial point was just that deterrents aren’t absolute, and alliances do not necessarily deter war - and this is just one example.
Whether Ukraine joining NATO was the actual reason the war broke out, them planning to join NATO didn’t STOP the war, did it?
Again with using putin as a source, what’s wrong with you? :D Anyway, there are some geopolitical analysts you could be interested who have way more credible takes on the issue than you, me or honestly putin. Personally I’m an unapologetic Zeihanist but Fukuyama is another author with great analysis on reality.
Did you read what I said?? I was discrediting that claim you fucking loon.
Okay, I surrender. You are a great troll. You win. You made me mad.
Fukuyama is another author with great analysis on reality
This has to be a joke. Okay, maybe you do know a couple of things, because you can only have included this because you must know I’m aware of the claim of “The End Of History” and how absolutely ludicruous that is.
If you truly think neoliberal capitalism is how humanity is meant to live, and that we wil never and can never progress beyond it, you are hopelessly naive and sheltered.
But, back to the actual point, before I let you distract me again:
them planning to join NATO didn’t STOP the war, did it?
Did you read what I said?? I was discrediting that claim you fucking loon.
Why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims? Alright if it was sarcasm but even that aught to make sense mate
The Fukuyama rant
Aight my boy has not yet learned that an author can make great analysis even if you don’t personally agree with the outcome of his analysis. Once you graduate high school you’ll get used to nuances like that in literature.
them planning to join NATO didn’t STOP the war, did it?
No. Because planning to join doesn’t mean they joined already. Had they joined no war would’ve broken out. Simple as. It’s crazy how reality, out of all things, is the one thing you refuse to believe.
Why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims?
What even is this question?
Aight my boy has not yet learned that an author can make great analysis even if you don’t personally agree with the outcome of his analysis.
I didn’t say anything about his analysis specifically. Just that if “The End Of History” is the kind of stuff you’re interested in, you may be a bit politically naive.
Once you graduate high school you’ll get used to nuances like that in literature.
Puerile.
Had they joined no war would’ve broken out. Simple as.
This is fucking hilarious. They didn’t get the chance to join. Because Putin didn’t want them to. (And also wanted Ukraine but hey ho, an excuse is an excuse)
Sorry let me ask that again, why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims?
Just that if “The End Of History” is the kind of stuff you’re interested in, you may be a bit politically naive.
The analysis in it is interesting. I’m personally a socdem (as you prob already know by now) so no I don’t like him because I think he’s right all the time. What a weird way that’d be to read someone’s analysis lmao. I’ve read marx too. And I laugh at Zeihans predictions on europe. But mostly, I laugh at your attempt at convincing me you read literature.
Puerile.
But true. Explained my thought process more above.
They didn’t get the chance to join.
Doesn’t matter to my point tbh. Friendships don’t help deterrence, only official military alliances do. That is my point and nothing else. putin had no choice but to invade before any NATO stuff come alive, but would’ve invaded with or without any plans of joining.
As I suspected I had been conversing with someone who didn’t even have elementary idea of the geopolitical situation and goals of rus*ia. Except for the things putin says about it, apparently. Please educate yourself on the subject I mentioned prior, Zeihan really is a good and easily understandable source on analysis over it if you want to check it out, even if he’s very memeable.
Eh? What putin says is irrelevant to reality, please stop using him as a source. If you’re about to tell me joining NATO is a reason for wars to break out please make sure it’s real first lmao.
So you’re gonna tell me it’s about the Nazis in Ukraine and you think he’s just going there to liberate them? Yeah right.
EDIT: FFS you got me distracted again. Just like you wanted, I forgot my initial point was just that deterrents aren’t absolute, and alliances do not necessarily deter war - and this is just one example.
Whether Ukraine joining NATO was the actual reason the war broke out, them planning to join NATO didn’t STOP the war, did it?
Again with using putin as a source, what’s wrong with you? :D Anyway, there are some geopolitical analysts you could be interested who have way more credible takes on the issue than you, me or honestly putin. Personally I’m an unapologetic Zeihanist but Fukuyama is another author with great analysis on reality.
Did you read what I said?? I was discrediting that claim you fucking loon.
Okay, I surrender. You are a great troll. You win. You made me mad.
This has to be a joke. Okay, maybe you do know a couple of things, because you can only have included this because you must know I’m aware of the claim of “The End Of History” and how absolutely ludicruous that is.
If you truly think neoliberal capitalism is how humanity is meant to live, and that we wil never and can never progress beyond it, you are hopelessly naive and sheltered.
But, back to the actual point, before I let you distract me again:
Why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims? Alright if it was sarcasm but even that aught to make sense mate
Aight my boy has not yet learned that an author can make great analysis even if you don’t personally agree with the outcome of his analysis. Once you graduate high school you’ll get used to nuances like that in literature.
No. Because planning to join doesn’t mean they joined already. Had they joined no war would’ve broken out. Simple as. It’s crazy how reality, out of all things, is the one thing you refuse to believe.
What even is this question?
I didn’t say anything about his analysis specifically. Just that if “The End Of History” is the kind of stuff you’re interested in, you may be a bit politically naive.
Puerile.
This is fucking hilarious. They didn’t get the chance to join. Because Putin didn’t want them to. (And also wanted Ukraine but hey ho, an excuse is an excuse)
Sorry let me ask that again, why do you feel the need to specifically discredit putins claims?
The analysis in it is interesting. I’m personally a socdem (as you prob already know by now) so no I don’t like him because I think he’s right all the time. What a weird way that’d be to read someone’s analysis lmao. I’ve read marx too. And I laugh at Zeihans predictions on europe. But mostly, I laugh at your attempt at convincing me you read literature.
But true. Explained my thought process more above.
Doesn’t matter to my point tbh. Friendships don’t help deterrence, only official military alliances do. That is my point and nothing else. putin had no choice but to invade before any NATO stuff come alive, but would’ve invaded with or without any plans of joining.
?
As I suspected I had been conversing with someone who didn’t even have elementary idea of the geopolitical situation and goals of rus*ia. Except for the things putin says about it, apparently. Please educate yourself on the subject I mentioned prior, Zeihan really is a good and easily understandable source on analysis over it if you want to check it out, even if he’s very memeable.