[Ma8ee]

This is exactly one of the Russian talking points. "You see, we might have invaded a few neighbour countries with the intention of annexing the territories, but look at NATO, they are equally bad because they invaded Iraq." (NATO didn't invade Iraq, the US did with the help of UK, Poland, and Australia)

I can't take someone (like Mearsheimer) who warns that Germany again is likely to try to invade Europe even a little bit serious. He clearly knows nothing about contemporary German politics, culture, or how well they are doing manufacturing and trading.

[mistermann]

> but look at NATO, they are equally bad because they invaded Iraq." (NATO didn't invade Iraq, the US did with the help of UK, Poland, and Australia)

Where did you get the "are equally bad" part from?

> He clearly...

"Clearly", eh? Well, let's wait to see how you do with the question.

[Ma8ee]

I got it from:

> This is a facade. The talking point the NATO/US/west uses, while they violate every such rule when they see fit.

Which expresses that exact sentiment

[mistermann]

Which specific text contains "equally bad" objectively/deterministically?

[cies]

> This is exactly one of the Russian talking points.

Calling something a "Russian talking point" does not make it less true. Russia would not have invaded if (combination of factors): Ukraine did not have ethnic Russians that were being oppressed (see the Odessa union house massacre), Ukraine did not want to go NATO, Ukraine was not a safe haven of anti-Russia fascists (see the enormous statue for Bandera in Lvov -- bizarre how that's allowed in an "EU ally"). Minks agreements were "just to give Ukraine time to build military" said Merkel (a guarantor of the agreement). Russia was cheated by the west, and behaves accordingly, if you ask me.

> who warns that Germany again is likely to try to invade Europe

Lol. Where did he say that?

[ethbr1]

> Russia would not have invaded if [...]

> Ukraine did not have ethnic Russians that were being oppressed (see the Odessa union house massacre)

This has ceased being a valid casus belli in the developed world since 1945.

Annexation of a neighboring state's territory isn't justified by purported ethnic persecution.

Not least, because it's historically been the most common manufactured lie to justify war.

> Ukraine did not want to go NATO

Since when does Russia get a say in other sovereign countries' decisions?

Last I checked at the UN, Russia (and China) were big supporters of countries' ability to do whatever they wanted within their own borders (external complaints be damned).

> Ukraine was not a safe haven of anti-Russia fascists

> anti-Russia

Hard to forget the 4 million Ukrainians the USSR purposefully killed during the Holodomor. [0]

When a country does something to an ethnic group that ranks with the Holocaust, it shouldn't be surprised when people are anti-it.

>> fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition [1]

> exalts nation and often race above the individual

How's the glorification of Russkiy Mir going? Or the vilification of non-Russian ethnic minorities?

> stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader

How long has Putin been president or prime minister?

> severe economic and social regimentation

How many state-owned enterprises are there in Russia?

And what inalienable freedom of speech and association rights do Russian citizen have?

> forcible suppression of opposition

How many opposition candidates ran in the last election?

If Russia is looking for fascism, it might want to start with a mirror.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism