1. The point made by Apo was about legitimacy, not morality. — Olivier5
A few posters here have rightly pointed out that morality applies to individuals, not to institutions, so to speak of the morality of NATO is making a category error. One needs to morally indict presidents, generals and the likes but not a country or an alliance of countries. These entities need to be assessed against their stated goals, which does not to my knowledge include the boy scout pledge, or any other moral creed in their case. — Olivier5
In this case, there's nothing voluntary about it, so you don't actually have a point. — Olivier5
Because NATO was never meant to be a moral agent, but an effective military alliance. — Olivier5
1. The point made by Apo was about legitimacy, not morality.
— Olivier5
People tend to use the terms interchangeably and he seemed to want to make a moral argument. — Benkei
So the SS were fine as far as you're concerned. — Isaac
He was not, from what I can tell. But maybe he will clarify what he was trying to say. — Olivier5
What's there to "clarify"??? — Apollodorus
If you unlawfully (or unjustly) kill someone, you'll rightly get jailed for murder. If you do it purely in self-defense, or in defense of others, you'll get acquitted or (depending on the circumstances) even praised for doing it. — Apollodorus
For your info, NATO is an alliance, composed of several signatory nations. — Olivier5
So you think some administrative units are evil? — Olivier5
Are we at the "defending the SS" stage of discourse? — Streetlight
Ukrainians and their allies are worthy of praise, since Ukraine is acting in self defense. — Olivier5
The zones of influence assigned to each government shall be as follows: The English zone: The Cossack territories, the territory of the Caucasus, Armenia, Georgia, Kurdistan. The French zone: Bessarabia, the Ukraine, the Crimea … ‘
When the Soviet Union was collapsing in late 1991, Dick [Cheney] wanted to see the dismantlement not only of the Soviet Union and the Russian empire but of Russia itself, so it could never again be a threat to the rest of the world
The collective west wants to divide our society... to provoke civil confrontation in Russia and to use its fifth column to strive to achieve its aim. And there is one aim - the destruction of Russia
(p. 157) Moving so quickly after the collapse of the Soviet Union to incorporate so many of its formerly subjugated states into NATO was a mistake. Trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO was truly overreaching. The roots of the Russian Empire trace back to Kiev in the ninth century, so that was an especially monumental provocation. So NATO expansion was a political act, not a carefully considered military commitment, thus undermining (p. 158) the purpose of the alliance and recklessly ignoring what the Russians considered their own vital national interests. During the Cold War, to avoid military conflict between us, we had to take Soviet interests into account. When Russia was weak in the 1900s and beyond, we did not take Russian interests seriously. We did a poor job of seeing the world from their point of view, and of managing the relationship for the long term. All that said, I was now President Bush’s secretary of defense, and I dutifully supported the effort to bring Georgia and Ukraine into NATO. (p. 159) I made a difficult situation with Russia worse by signing off – the day after I was sworn in as secretary in December 2006 – on a recommendation to the president that the United States locate ten long-range missile defense interceptors in Poland and an associated radar installation in the Czech Republic. The Russians saw the proposed deployments as putting their nuclear deterrent at risk and as a further step in the “encirclement” of their country ….
1. Note that I said "purely in self-defense". If other motives are involved, then it isn't unqualified self-defense.
2. You haven't established that it is unqualified self-defense. — Apollodorus
to take what rightfully belongs to Russia, e.g. Crimea, then their "self-defense" is necessarily qualified by their intention to take something that doesn't belong to them. So, it very much does matter. — Apollodorus
And, as US foreign-policy makers like defense secretary Robert Gates have admitted to having played a hand in causing the conflict, — Apollodorus
Who Crimea belongs to is open to debate. — Olivier5
A large number of weapons sent to Ukraine will eventually fall into the hands of criminals in Europe and beyond, the director general of Interpol said on Wednesday (June 1st), urging states to take an interest in tracing these weapons.
“The wide availability of weapons during the current conflict will lead to the proliferation of illicit weapons in the post-conflict phase," German Jürgen Stock told the Anglo-American Press Association in Paris, where he had visited from Lyon, Interpol's headquarters. "Criminals are already focusing on this right now," he continued, seeing in the European Union "a likely destination for these weapons, because the prices of these firearms on the black market are significantly higher in Europe, especially in the Scandinavian countries."
Putin's high- school teacher couldn't remember Vlad, he was such a colorless and unexceptional pupil. — Wayfarer
The United States and its European allies share most of the responsibility for the crisis. The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West. – Why the Ukraine Crisis is the West’s Fault
There is no question that Vladimir Putin started the war and is responsible for how it is being waged. But why he did so is another matter. The mainstream view in the West is that he is an irrational, out-of-touch aggressor bent on creating a greater Russia in the mould of the former Soviet Union. Thus, he alone bears full responsibility for the Ukraine crisis.
But that story is wrong. The West, and especially America, is principally responsible for the crisis which began in February 2014. It has now turned into a war that not only threatens to destroy Ukraine, but also has the potential to escalate into a nuclear war between Russia and NATO.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.