this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2023
1397 points (98.7% liked)
196
16822 readers
380 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Regarding the "90/1 agreement".... maybe not.
Was there a signed treaty to that effect?
https://direct.mit.edu/isec/article/40/4/7/12126/Deal-or-No-Deal-The-End-of-the-Cold-War-and-the-U
Even if we accept that such a deal existed, in what way would invading legally neutral countries (uh, again) be an appropriate response to its violation? State aren't forced to join NATO, in fact, it's pretty difficult unless NATO wants you in.
So Russia should have instead invited countries to join CSTO to offset NATO.
Unfortunately Russia can't compete, so it has to use force.