• I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 months ago

    Why should the expansion of NATO past Germany not have happened? No one forces countries to join NATO, they all willfully joined, often having to jump through several hoops to do so.

    • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      As I said, I know they willfully joined, I’m saying they shouldn’t be allowed to join a military alliance with NATO, the same way I would want China not to create a military alliance and then incorporate Mexico and Canada, even if Mexico and Canada wanted to. Joining a military alliance isn’t a human right.

      • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Actually that is a human right. Countries are free to ally with whatever country they want pending any previous agreements. Eastern European countries made zero promises and had zero obligation to not join NATO. Russia doesn’t have fucking “dibs” on them, just like the US doesn’t have “dibs” on Canada or Mexico. I wouldn’t have a problem with Mexico or Canada willfully joining an alliance with China because that is, in fact, their right to do so. And it would speak volumes to how far relations would have had to deteriorate between them and the US to get there, but that is their right to do so. Maybe if Russia wasn’t such a shitty, untrustworthy neighbor, more countries would be willing to ally with them instead of NATO, but hey, that’s Russia’s problem.

        • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Actually that is a human right

          Source?

          Countries are free to ally with whatever country they want pending any previous agreements

          Free to do so, for sure, I’m not claiming illegality, I’m claiming it’s wrong. It leads historically to escalation, not to mitigation of tensions. Remember the missile crisis

          Eastern European countries made zero promises and had zero obligation to not join NATO

          Again, you’re not understanding me for some reason. I’m not putting the blame on those countries, I’m putting the blame on NATO itself. It’s not that these countries shouldn’t want to join a pre-existing military alliance, it’s that a supposedly defensive military alliance shouldn’t incorporate member countries ever closer to the declared enemy of the US of A.

          I wouldn’t have a problem with Mexico or Canada willfully joining an alliance with China

          I would have immense problems with China fostering military relations with the neighbouring countries of their geopolitical adversary, and if you don’t, I think you should rethink that.

          Maybe if Russia wasn’t such a shitty, untrustworthy neighbor, more countries would be willing to ally with them

          I don’t want any countries to ally militarily with Russia. I fully understand that Russia has a fascist aggressive government and I’m glad I don’t currently live next to it as a Spanish citizen. My whole point is that NATO isn’t a “purely defensive military alliance of independent countries”, it’s an organization subservient to the interests of the USA which has shown no remorse to act on foreign countries which didn’t threat military action against member states of NATO, as was the case in Libya and Yugoslavia, and unofficially in Iraq.

              • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                That’s a declaration of human rights, not a philosophical logical demonstration of why we are endowed with rights. The person was pointing out the silliness of your original question.

                • volodya_ilich@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  They literally said “Actually it is a human right”, referring to the right of a nation to join a particular military alliance. They are the ones defending that, not me.

                  • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    It might be a language issue. You asked for a source that nations have a right (some would argue a ‘human’ right) to join alliances:

                    Actually that is a human right

                    Source?

                    So the question asking for a source on ‘human rights’ is kinda nonsensical, that’s why they responded the way they did. You can’t provide a source for ‘human rights’. That’s a philosophical / metaphysical question. There is no official source for human rights hence why the question makes no sense.

                    On another note, are you the guy I was discussing a while back about conscription in Ukraine? Can’t remember. Hope you are all right if you are.