The same argument can be used in favor of Russia. NATO has invaded plenty of countries under false pretenses in the past. Both Russia and NATO do not have a reputation for keeping their promises.

[–] Miaou@jlai.lu 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"plenty"

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Unironically yes, NATO members have invaded a lot of places, often in coalition with other member states.

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That's like saying Canada is responsible for something Mexico did because they're both on the same continent...

NATO is purely a defense agreement.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is more like saying the axis is known to invade nations because its member states invade nations. Okay, sure, Germany and Italy invaded the soviet union but Japan didn't, you can't say they're not a defensive alliance /s

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

The Intercept, 2021: Meet NATO, the Dangerous “Defensive” Alliance Trying to Run the World
CounterPunch, 2022: NATO is Not a Defensive Alliance
Noam Chomsky, 2023: NATO “most violent, aggressive alliance in the world”
Thomas Fazi, 2024: NATO: 75 years of war, unprovoked aggressions and state-sponsored terrorism
Jeffrey Sachs, 2024: The 2024 NATO Declaration The Deadly Strategy of Neoconservatism

[–] Count042@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tell that to Libya.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Or Belgrade/the former Yugoslavia.