• @nesc@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2911 days ago

      This is one of the least informed articles I’ve ever read. Phrases like “From Moscow’s perspective, the Russians need to bolster their defenses to protect themselves from NATO expansion” is just a cherry on top. Lmao.

        • @futatorius@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          19 days ago

          If Russia hadn’t threatened Sweden and Finland, neither would have dropped neutrality and joined NATO.

      • @Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -411 days ago

        Why? That is the stance Russia has been communicating for years.

        And when countries like Germany turn around and say they want the strongest army in Europe and support the idea of spending 200 Billion yearly on defense, that is perceived as a threat.

        It is classical security dilemma.

        • @nesc@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          511 days ago

          Because they don’t care about NATO nor they fear any kind of invasion they’ve left borders with with countries in NATO empty for three years. Germany is in their right to spend however they want. r*ssia delenda est

          • @Saleh@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            011 days ago

            Again, this is the stance of Russia, as the NYT reported. Doesnt mean its true. But if the media would only report if politicians say true things, well the news would be rather short.

            • @futatorius@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              this is the stance of Russia

              This is a flimsy pretext that nobody believes, including the Russians.