• Verdorrterpunkt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    The whole world demonstrated it clearly. If it’s not in a big alliance, it needs nukes or the world will fuck the country over.

    Nice precedent set there by pacivity, or outright aggression. Good job nuclear powers, real nice (/s).

    • misk@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      If the west wants to prevent nuclear proliferation they have to defend a county that gave up nukes willingly for the promise of defense. Shortsightedness of the western powers will lead to more countries learning from Ukraine’s mistake and hurt us worse than whining of a despot could ever do. It’s not like that big alliance doesn’t have nukes either.

      • GeneralInterest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        I feel like the West is just doing the bare minimum to support Ukraine. Enough to be able to say “look we did something” but not too much, because maybe some voters won’t understand the benefits of spending their taxes on Ukraine.

      • BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        they have to defend a county that gave up nukes willingly for the promise of defense

        I agree with you, but the problem here lies with the fact that the promise was made by the same fucking country doing the invasion (Russia).

        So no promise was made by the West or NATO in any way to Ukraine. Get your facts straight.

    • Maalus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      “Big alliance” part is also untested. Who knows what would happen if Putin got Ukraine fast and moved onto the Baltics.