| >NATO still exists in the first place because Russia keeps on existentially threatening the rest of Europe Russia was on reasonably good terms with Europe for at least 2 decades. And during that time NATO decided it needed purpose so it decided, among other things, that it needed to destroy Libya. The same westerners who are being whipped into a white hot rage about Ukraine collectively shrugged their shoulders about that. For some inexplicable reason NATO fucking up Libya made Putin paranoid and unwilling to accept the potential for military expansion of this offensive alliance to the most vulnerable sections of the Russian border. I cant think why. >With the horrendous things Russia is currently doing to Ukraine, it's no wonder Europeans want pushback on Russian encroachment Of course they do. Everybody getting caught in this crossfire of western imperialism vs. russian imperialism is scared shitless. >And unlike Russian encroachment, NATO "encroachment" is voluntary. Hardly. Libya didnt ask to be torn to shreds. |
That happened in 2011. Ukraine and Georgia attempted to join NATO as early as 2008 (and other former Eastern Bloc states did join previously), motivated by (among many other things) Russian interference in Ukraine's 2004 elections and Russia's participation in the Georgian Civil War.
Needless to say, blaming NATO's intervention in Libya for Russian interventionism throughout the multiple decades preceding it is about as bass-ackwards of an understanding of causality as trying to assert that wet sidewalks cause rain to happen.