Tapa, Estonia In a pine forest two hours from Estonia’s border with Russia, preparation for war is under way. British, French, American and Estonian soldiers are rehearsing what Nato would do if Vladimir Putin invaded. They’ve brought Challenger II tanks, an F-16 fighter jet and Himars artillery systems – some of the best equipment the
Ask any shitlib what Russia would gain from invading NATO countries, or what China would gain from invading Taiwan. I bet they'll struggle to explain it any other way than something to the effect of "Putin/Xi is evil"
I seriously want to hear what arguments they have which don't boil down to "brainwashed country follows evil dictator into senseless war"
That is their only argument. Putin wants "world domination" because he's evil. Of course, if you point out he has never ever mentioned this to anyone, either in private or in public, and has frequently tried diplomacy with the west, the libs just insist he's "lying" or "trying to trick people"
It's amazing how libs manage to be magical mind readers of a person they've never met on the other side of the world.
From what i see the one argument often repeated is straight up taken from polandball memes, that is landgrab for no other reason. Land is good. Some of them even call it "clay".
Russia literally being the largest country in the world with a low population density is sacrificing people to do a land grab. Liberal logic at its finest.
That's a discomforting thought, because I suspect certain more jingoistic elements in Russian ruling class and government might start thinking that. Problem is - it won't be them dying, it'll be proletariat. And you know. Nukes.
im no linguist, and the difference in meaning is a small one but from context i think the word you might want is discomfiting. Discomforting is more of a physical feeling generally.
Like i said you're not wrong, but do have a look at the difference if you're curious and a word nerd like i am.
I am confused about the context of this, but I'm going to try to use "thump" whenever anyone would use any other impacty word. Thump Wrench. Thump Font. Count out the seconds from thump.
How else will they justify mass austerity needed to ramp up military budgets. People running NATO are absolutely ecstatic right now because they finally have their favorite bogey man back. After USSR fell, they had to keep finding ways to justify their existence. Now they have big bad Russia that's making Europeans tremble in fear. They can justify any amount of cutting of social safety net to fund their military programs at this point.
NATO is a means for resource extraction to the west not the end in itself. I keep seeing people mention NATO in the context of weapons sales and MIC only but it's much more than that. That's why they are so devoted to it. Western domination means Folgers makes more money on coffee than do the actual coffee growers, dole makes more money on bananas than the actual farmers, so on so forth. The military thing is just one small piece.
Yeah absolutely, it is a pillar of neocolonial power. When countries refuse to subjugate themselves to the west, then NATO military is used as a beating stick to make them comply.
In a way, it is inevitable. NATO tries to agitate Russia into invading its neighbors to justify military spending and keep their citizens under the fascist illusion of an evil Russian threat.
If anything, when they act like a Russian invasion of Estonia is inevitable, what they're really doing is admitting that's a future confrontation they want to force, like Georgia and Ukraine.
I am morbidly amused by the title. Because it is phrased to imply that a "Russian invasion" is an inevitable reality and only a matter of time
At this point it's looking more and more like they'd actually win if they tried. NATO is just that incompetent.
Not that they would invade, they'd gain nothing from it and have no reason to do it.
Ask any shitlib what Russia would gain from invading NATO countries, or what China would gain from invading Taiwan. I bet they'll struggle to explain it any other way than something to the effect of "Putin/Xi is evil"
I seriously want to hear what arguments they have which don't boil down to "brainwashed country follows evil dictator into senseless war"
That is their only argument. Putin wants "world domination" because he's evil. Of course, if you point out he has never ever mentioned this to anyone, either in private or in public, and has frequently tried diplomacy with the west, the libs just insist he's "lying" or "trying to trick people"
It's amazing how libs manage to be magical mind readers of a person they've never met on the other side of the world.
From what i see the one argument often repeated is straight up taken from polandball memes, that is landgrab for no other reason. Land is good. Some of them even call it "clay".
Russia literally being the largest country in the world with a low population density is sacrificing people to do a land grab. Liberal logic at its finest.
Lol exactly my thoughts.
I would've said their brains got molten by too much Hearts of Iron 4, but this land grab argument is way more prevalent than that game
The irony is so glaring, it drives me insane when I hear people argue like this and others just agree with not a flicker of doubt or self-reflection
That's a discomforting thought, because I suspect certain more jingoistic elements in Russian ruling class and government might start thinking that. Problem is - it won't be them dying, it'll be proletariat. And you know. Nukes.
im no linguist, and the difference in meaning is a small one but from context i think the word you might want is discomfiting. Discomforting is more of a physical feeling generally.
Like i said you're not wrong, but do have a look at the difference if you're curious and a word nerd like i am.
discomfit vs discomfort
Thanks! I'm ESL, so meaning sometimes gets lost in translation. Happy to learn new term, always
English is a fuck. I had to explain to my esl mum the difference between affect and effect
I'm a native speaker and I use "impact" because I'm too dumb to remember.
I am confused about the context of this, but I'm going to try to use "thump" whenever anyone would use any other impacty word. Thump Wrench. Thump Font. Count out the seconds from thump.
How else will they justify mass austerity needed to ramp up military budgets. People running NATO are absolutely ecstatic right now because they finally have their favorite bogey man back. After USSR fell, they had to keep finding ways to justify their existence. Now they have big bad Russia that's making Europeans tremble in fear. They can justify any amount of cutting of social safety net to fund their military programs at this point.
NATO is a means for resource extraction to the west not the end in itself. I keep seeing people mention NATO in the context of weapons sales and MIC only but it's much more than that. That's why they are so devoted to it. Western domination means Folgers makes more money on coffee than do the actual coffee growers, dole makes more money on bananas than the actual farmers, so on so forth. The military thing is just one small piece.
Yeah absolutely, it is a pillar of neocolonial power. When countries refuse to subjugate themselves to the west, then NATO military is used as a beating stick to make them comply.
In a way, it is inevitable. NATO tries to agitate Russia into invading its neighbors to justify military spending and keep their citizens under the fascist illusion of an evil Russian threat.
If anything, when they act like a Russian invasion of Estonia is inevitable, what they're really doing is admitting that's a future confrontation they want to force, like Georgia and Ukraine.