easy to be neutral when you are surrounded by only NATO countries haha
Let it be clear that “neutrality” just means helping to maintain the settler-colony entity occupying Palestine and capitulating to their Western siblings no-problem while not saying much publicly about the U.S. State Department list of definitely-ontologically-bad-countries-and-resistance-groups list.
Yes, this too applies to Switzerland, Andorra, Ireland, Lichtenstein, Malta, Monaco and so on.
Australia just classified Iran as terrorists because Israel told them to.i thought this was about Austria lol. Also “[Euroanglo-Zionazi] told them to” is just code for US telling them to do so. The attack was obviously a psyop that allowed headlines like “Why Iran Hit Australia” and “Revelations Iran was behind antisemitic attacks show IRGC tentacles have reached Australia” to churn out. Clear as day consent manufacturing to justify yet another imminent bombing campaign on Iran.
My bad I’m misreading the comment chain
lol np
I think neutrality just means that they won’t payroll the US military industrial complex directly. Aside from that, Austria stays together with the other nations of the Western block.
sehr gut
deleted by creator
Good for them.
deleted by creator
I feel like EU countries who are neutral are going to run into issues when the EU creates a union military.
“look at me, im austria, and i didnt got fucked last time russia invaded europe, im gonna stay out of this”
Your comment contains several historical inaccuracies and simplifications:
-
Modern Austria as a state did not exist during the Napoleonic Wars, when Russia participated in anti-French coalitions. The Austrian Empire was then an active participant in the events.
-
During World War II, Austria was annexed by Nazi Germany in 1938 (the Anschluss) and effectively became part of the German state until 1945.
-
The term “Russia invaded Europe” is an oversimplification. The Russian Empire and the USSR participated in pan-European conflicts, but usually as part of coalitions and with specific political goals.
A more accurate historical position could reflect:
- Neutral status of Austria after 1955
- Austria’s participation in pan-European institutions
- The complex history of relations between the Russian/Soviet state and European countries
I recommend avoiding simplistic interpretations of complex historical processes and interstate relations.
Also the Russian feudal empire is hardly similar to the current Russian capitalist state, which had an 70-year socialist state sandwiched in between.
theres nothing complex about it. russians came and stole everything that wasnt nailed down. everyone on lemmy can fuck their russia/china bootlicking ideologies. i dont care about your idealistic and pc history storytelling bs.
austria wants to be the next switzland, basicly a free “i dont give a fuck” card.
The phrase “Russians came and stole everything” is a harmful generalization attributing collective guilt to the entire nation.
The comment does not specify either a time frame or specific historical events, which makes an assessment impossible. The text is clearly ideological in nature, not historical, which makes it difficult to evaluate it objectively.
Relations between countries (including Russia, China, Austria, and others) are complex multidimensional processes that cannot be reduced to simplistic images of “victims” and “aggressors.”
-
Wow there’s some weird pro-Russian aggression people in this comment section.
.ml is known for this tbf I wont draw the ire of the mods here but many .ml users think that the Russian federation is analogous to the USSR in the ““fight against imperialism””
I suppose if you have no idea why, you might say the first thing that pops into your head, and I’ve learned that this is the first thing that pops into most people’s heads. But to say we’re “pro-Russian” is to exaggerate, and to say we’re confusing it with the USSR is just ridiculous. Previously.
many .ml users think that the Russian federation is analogous to the USSR
Well this is just a straight up lie, but a lot of bad faith people love to repeat it
I think that’s pretty misleading. But anyways, if you want your social media to just parrot western talking points why not stay on reddit?
Hey, I’m anti violence regardless of who is the perpetrator. I hate it when Russia invades a country and starts a war. I hate it when Israel invades a country and starts a war. And yes, I also very much hate it when the US invades a country and starts a war. I don’t care which country starts and whether it’s eastern or western or capitalist or communist. I just hate violence.
The “political compass” meme is a bourgeois oversimplification that attempts to reduce the complex, scientific analysis of class struggle to a two-dimensional graph.
It serves to obfuscate the true nature of political ideology, which is defined not by abstract “libertarian” or “authoritarian” labels, but by one’s relationship to the means of production and their stance on the dictatorship of the proletariat.
By placing Marxism-Leninism in the so-called “authoritarian left” quadrant, it slanders the revolutionary and democratic essence of the vanguard party and the necessary period of socialist construction, which is the highest form of democracy for the working class.
This framework is idealist and anti-dialectical, designed to discredit the scientific and proven path of socialist revolution by equating it with reactionary fascism.
This isn’t the political compass, though. The ML take is in the upper right, it has nothing to do with the liberal political compass.
I hate it when Russia invades a country and starts a war.
NATO Chief Admits NATO Expansion Was Key to Russian Invasion of Ukraine
So? What’s your point? I still hate when ANYONE invades a country and starts a war. Someone not signing a treaty is in my eyes nowhere near grounds enough to start a war. Heck, if Russia wanted to be closer to Ukraine so bad they could have asked them if they want to join BRICS. It’s the voluntary bit that is important to me.
The article addresses this:
Putin made one last attempt at diplomacy at the end of 2021, tabling a draft U.S.-NATO Security Agreement to forestall war. The core of the draft agreement was an end of NATO enlargement and removal of U.S. missiles near Russia. Russia’s security concerns were valid and the basis for negotiations. Yet Biden flatly rejected negotiations out of a combination of arrogance, hawkishness, and profound miscalculation. NATO maintained its position that NATO would not negotiate with Russia regarding NATO enlargement, that in effect, NATO enlargement was none of Russia’s business.
The continuing U.S. obsession with NATO enlargement is profoundly irresponsible and hypocritical. The U.S. would object—by means of war, if needed—to being encircled by Russian or Chinese military bases in the Western Hemisphere, a point the U.S. has made since the Monroe Doctrine of 1823. Yet the U.S. is blind and deaf to the legitimate security concerns of other countries.
So, yes, Putin went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to Russia’s border. Ukraine is being destroyed by U.S. arrogance, proving again Henry Kissinger’s adage that to be America’s enemy is dangerous, while to be its friend is fatal. The Ukraine War will end when the U.S. acknowledges a simple truth: NATO enlargement to Ukraine means perpetual war and Ukraine’s destruction. Ukraine’s neutrality could have avoided the war, and remains the key to peace.
As someone who claims to hate violence and war, you should pay special attention to the last sentence there. The war didn’t even need to happen in the first place and could have been avoided entirely if Ukraine had remained neutral. BRICS is not a military alliance, NATO definitely is. Furthermore, not long after the war started, a peace agreement between the two warring parties was deliberately sabotaged by Western powers. The West wanted to keep the war going:
How Britain Sabotaged Ukraine Peace
On April 16th, Foreign Affairs published an investigation, documenting in forensic detail how in May 2022 Kiev was a signature away from a peace deal with Russia “that would have ended the war and provided Ukraine with multilateral security guarantees,” which was scuppered by Western powers.
So if I read that right Britain is blamed for Ukraine not signing the deal because they said they’d still keep on supporting Ukraine if they continue the war? Seems like the influence of Britain is very much overstated here. You sent a link to an article that has a single other article as its source. From that source article I bring you this:
Still, the claim that the West forced Ukraine to back out of the talks with Russia is baseless. It suggests that Kyiv had no say in the matter. True, the West’s offers of support must have strengthened Zelensky’s resolve, and the lack of Western enthusiasm does seem to have dampened his interest in diplomacy. Ultimately, however, in his discussions with Western leaders, Zelensky did not prioritize the pursuit of diplomacy with Russia to end the war.
As far as I can find the list of Russia’s demands were far from reasonable at the time. Here are a few of them:
- Making Russian equal to Ukrainian as joint official languages;
- Giving Russia and China absolute power to decide how Ukraine is to deal with any future armed conflict in Ukraine;
- Repealing a law Ukraine passed in 2014 that makes it illegal to use Swastikas and Soviet symbols and makes it illegal to deny the holocaust;
- Strong limits on Ukraine military size and abilities. PDF by the Institute of War nonprofit research group - this information is also corroborated by the original foreign affairs source your article is summarizing, this is just a neater list to read through.
Meanwhile Russia made no concessions regarding giving back any of the land they were illegally occupying. Given the above I understand why the deal wasn’t signed at the time. I suspect all that signing that would have done is lead to a revolution in Ukraine to topple the government that signed away their county. I don’t think signing that would have avoided further bloodshed.
Case in point:
You guys should just go spread your lies on reddit like before and leave the rest of us alone. Don’t come here to astroturf please.
Another case in point:
& me disagreeing with something isnt astroturfing.
me disagreeing with something isnt astroturfing
Because that’s not what you’re actually doing here. None of your comments show you “disagreeing” with anything.
ngl, cope. I’m not a lib if thats what you’re trying to get at.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
I’m noticing some specific accounts doing it. There have to be some alts or lurkers because the downvotes don’t match the ones posting obvious lies.
Most forums have like 90% viewers, 9% lurkers who only vote, 1% posters, so its probably the lurkers
Austria is doing the right thing. I hope America leaves/dissolves NATO soon so that we can make peace with Russia.
Pretty sure if the US leaves NATO, they’ll find a way to bring Ukraine in.
If the US left NATO it would cease to exist. It’s a protection racket, and one without a real threat at that. It was always intended as a red scare tactic (operation gladio for example) and to isolate the USSR, which no longer exists, by expanding US military influence across Europe. NATO has never been about european defense and it would be a solution in search of a cause without the US.
If us left Nato it would cease to exist yes. But let’s be clear that America has benefitted from Nato as well with European troops helping American troops. As well as helping with logistics. America has even invoked article 5 after september 11, and Nato countries complied.
Yes exactly my point, thank you for clarifying
Saving this comment to see if/when that happens and Russia finds another excuse, your viewpoint has changed.
I think I realized something. Only America has such a massive military budget that they need to find excuses to use it. They don’t care about the costs in money, material, people, diplomacy, or reputation.
Combine that behavior with the projectionism and fear that underpin the white empire, and people like you just assume Russia is always looking for an excuse to use its military.
What you don’t seem to understand is that no country other than the US is looking for the excuses for war. They are dangerous, they are expensive, they kill people who could be working or trading or researching, they stretch your national defenses and leave you vulnerable, they cost you diplomatic relationships even when you’re in the right, and they direct economic output towards a black hole of wealth destruction instead of towards wealth creation and public benefit.
Only the US, with its absolutely massive military budget is OK with that.
Russia doesn’t want war. It does not benefit from being sanctioned, from shrinking its diplomatic support, from reducing its political influence, from losing able-bodied citizens. In the Russian calculus, this particular act must have been so important it would be willing to take these risks.
And no, it’s not for a land grab like you empire-brained fools keep saying. Russia doesn’t have sufficient population to hold, control, and exploit a country as large as Ukraine let alone any more of Europe. The only way it can gain wealth from other nations is through alignment with the leadership of those nations, and launching a war is a sure fire way to ensure that even if they installed an aligned leader that the people would be anti-Russian for a long time, destroying years of opportunities to benefit from a Russian puppet regime.
Stop imagining every country has the same behavioral profile as the psychotic sociopathic West and start understanding that, like it or not, Russia, China, Iran, Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, etc are motivated first and foremost by keeping their countries whole, safe, healthy, self-determined, and prosperous.
Maybe it’s just me, but it doesn’t even look like America needs an excuse to use its military budget.
To me, it looks like Americans have been dumping money into their military because of cultural reasons. Fear, but also a sense of superiority and “America should be the best in everything.”
Looking at the near $1 trillion American yearly military budget and how many conflicts the military actually engages in, and we can see how much a return Americans are getting on their investment.
The US dumps money into “defense” because it is under a dictatorship of capital and it just so happens that selling weapons is an extremely effective way of converting public tax dollars into private capital. The US profits from endless violence, plain and simple. “American exceptionalism” i.e. chauvinism is just how they sell it to the people at large in order to appear democratic.
Don’t forget that the combined US domestic police budgets (ignoring prisons) is something like the 3rd largest military budget in the world and now the Immigration and Customs Enforcement budget is on par with that.
The US isn’t building that much violent force because of culture. They do it because they are constantly deploying violence for their own benefits and gains.
Which stands in stark contrast to literally every other nation with the exception of the former Western European colonial powers.
The US isn’t building that much violent force because of culture.
OK but,
They do it because they are constantly deploying violence for their own benefits and gains.
That just sounds like American culture to me
My viewpoint has been like that since 2019. Death to nato. Peace with russia. Its still possible. European countries have been smuggling nato soldiers into the ukraine war, and russia gets rid of them for us. If this continues, most of nato’s biggest proponents will be dead.
Sadly only the naive or idealist enough will die. Those responsible for thar war will still seat in the comfy seats in Washington, Berlin, Brussels, Paris, London, etc. and plan yet another massacre to maintain the crumbling western imperialism.
You can only make peace if the other side (Russia) stops fighting too.
Russia can make peace today. Withdraw all troops out of Ukraine. Bring their soldiers home. They have no intention to do this.
Russia has won the war, as a result they will make peace on their terms. That’s how war work in case you weren’t aware.
Withdrawing doesn’t bring peace, destroying the white house brings peace.
