• Joncash2@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    That was a paper talking about history. That it started before Obama even. Though, as the wiki article states at a minimum it started with Obama. Also, why would Russia lose? The implied threat is your going to be facing down J20s if it gets bad enough.

      • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’m clear. The EU talks about wanting to stop Russia, but doesn’t actually work with the partner that can stop Russia. That’s as clear as it gets.

        • Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          I guess that depends on what the US turns into…and there is no clarity there… :/

          • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            China’s just talking about stopping Russia. Which the EU keeps saying it’s the top priority. They’re willing to spend billions to do it. China’s saying you can save all that money, totally your choice. It’s easy for me.

            Edit see we are talking about different clarity. Europe has none. China has all of it.

            • Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Do you understand why the EU considers this a top priority? Hint: it is not about Ukraine’s land or NATO/EU membership.

                • Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  No, it’s russia. The whole point of NATO is russia. russia needs to have its invincibility myth shattered and imperialist tendencies restrained (Merkel tried this with trade and failed) by learning that they wasted millions of people and gained nothing. This is a hard learned lesson by most EU countries and is the glue of the EU. If the EU loses this, the lesson is that pacifism is a losing strategy and russia will just learn that war pays, so they will regroup and return for more in a generation.

                  The US should have learned this too from Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan…and they do appear wary of starting new wars…even the neofascists.

                  China…has a lot of nationalists, but so far has focussed on trade…hasn’t started any wars…fine with he EU. Could be a good partner to fight climate change, because the US and russia will never abandon their precious fossil fuels.

                  • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    3 hours ago

                    Oh God that’s a lot of words that China doesn’t care about. If you tell China that China’s next after Russia, yeah China’s gonna help Russia. Seems obvious. Why should China care why NATO?