>The CIA has entered the chat.

If you are not a Ruzzian troll go to a subrredit for n eastern country and ask the people there what they think about NATO and Russia, like go to r/romania . I assure you we don't need CIA propaganda to understand the danger Russia was and is for our freedom and unfortunetly for our brothers in Moldova that got screwed hard and might get cewed more in future but the Russians.

Though I can understand if you have no idea about the history in Easter Europe and only follow the conflicts where US and their friends get involved you might have a big bias.

I live in Eastern Europe, its why I have a balanced view of the situation.

There are as many states in this region who want to ally against NATO because of its war crimes and crimes against humanity - however I wager those states are not on your radar since you clearly live inside the media bubble created for you by the literal makers of bombs to be dropped by NATO forces in future wars.

Well, why haven't they? Any country is free to form their own alliances.

Living in eastern Europe does not guarantee a balanced view of the situation, though. Russia is a very large part of eastern Europe, and balanced views of the situation will get you thrown in prison.

Never heard of the CIS?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_of_Independent_St...

You were talking about countries not on my radar. Why would do think Russia is not on my radar right now?

The thing is, even within the CIS, Russia is the biggest threat to CIS members, not NATO. That's why Georgia left after it was invaded by Russia.

And this is the big problem with Russia: Russia has always invaded its allies. It also invaded Czechoslovakia and Hungary when they were Russian allies. There's no value in allying with Russia, whereas NATO members don't get invaded.

These countries should be on your radar.

A CIS aligned with the EU would be a superpower even China couldn't match. Imagine that ..

Lol, the only reason CIS is relevant is because of Russias nukes. Their combined GDP is a paltry $1.828 trillion which is below that of each Italy, France and Germany.

And the EU would be open to that if the CIS countries (especially Russia) were democratic, had rule of law, and respected human and civil rights. 20 years ago there was even talk of Russia possibly joining NATO, until Putin made it clear that he wanted special treatment.

It's dictatorships and countries governed by corruption instead of rule of law that will always make the EU jump into bed with the US. If Russia and China want to weaken the relationship between the EU and US, they should embrace democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of information (no censorship) and respect human rights. Once that happens, the EU can afford to be critical of the US' many, many flaws.

I’d question whether American disfunctional democracy (sure you can vote, it just doesn’t make any difference) and terrible human rights record (denying human rights thanks to religious extremists, world’s highest percentage of population in jails, common and unpunished police murders) are really that much better compared to China.

They are. They are far, far from perfect, and very wrong in as lot of terrible ways. The US certainly doesn't have the moral high ground they often love to claim, but they're still much better than China or Russia on issues of democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, etc. A large minority of the US is working hard to change that, but they're not there yet.

I’d say mentioning China and Russia together in the same sentence already shows a massive bias. The only common thing they have is they are both hated by US.

I think that statement shows massive bias. There are massive differences between the two countries, but neither are beacons of freedom and human rights.

China has no elections at all, Russia has elections, but they're not remotely fair; any credible opposition tends to have "accidents". In both countries, criticism of the leader will be punished, though in different ways.

Neither has freedom of speech or a free press. It's much more structural in China, but in Russia you can still go to prison for years simply for calling the war a war. Any attempt at independent media gets harassed in various ways.

The main difference is in corruption and rule of law: Russia is pretty much entirely a mafia state now. Any assets you have are easily stolen by someone with better connections. Any of those rich oligarchs (who generally got wealthy through corruption and connections) who speaks out against Putin, is likely to lose what they have. In China, investments are safer, because China wants to attract business. And China does make real effort to fight corruption.

China's oppression of the Uyghurs is well documented, and is a process to destroy Uyghurs as a people: a form of genocide. I don't think Russia is doing anything remotely like that domestically, but both Putin and Russian state media do argue in various ways for genocide against Ukrainians.

China is a dictatorship through rule of law; they officially deny people their rights, but at least you know what to expect. Russia is a dictatorship through extreme corruption; you might nominally have rights, but you're likely to get an "accident" if you try to exercise those rights.

Russia is (obviously) far more aggressive and expansionist. China is more interested in soft power, expanding their economy, and influencing other countries through their economic expansion; much more in line with how the EU works, for example.

But no matter how you turn it, both really hate modern liberal values like democracy, free speech, free press, and don't care much for human and civil rights.

And sure, the US has a flawed democracy and has had its share of civil and human rights violations, some of which have still not been prosecuted (Guantanamo Bay), but at least nominally they do care about those issues, many of the people care about those issues, and demand improvement on those issues. Admittedly, there's also a very vocal minority that seems to prefer turning the US into an authoritarian dictatorship (more likely Russian-style and China-style), but they're a minority and they failed at their coup.

Like I said, the US is far from perfect, but if the EU needs an ally, the US is still the only real choice. The EU should probably learn to stand on its own feet and become more independent from the US, but it should not be naive about Russia and China (which it absolutely has been).

>China has no elections at all

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_China

>China's oppression of the Uyghurs is well documented, and is a process to destroy Uyghurs as a people

It’s easy to demonstrate it’s not true: Uighurs, like other minorities, have certain privileges, like teaching kids their own language, or not being subject to one child policy. The oppression is a way to combat terrorism; essentially China is fighting the same problem US did, but in a more humanitarian fashion instead of bombing and droning.

Have you noticed that just from your description above Russia is much closer to US than to China? From unfair elections, to systemic oppression of racial minorities, to invading other countries.

Have you actually read that link? You're right, there are elections, but only at the local level. There's only a single party, and the national government interferes in local elections.

What China does well, though, is to get capable people in positions of power. I guess that's partially because the people don't get a direct say. Someone like Trump would never have been able to rise to power there.

> Uighurs, like other minorities, have certain privileges, like teaching kids their own language, or not being subject to one child policy.

And also to forced sterilisation and forced labour, I guess. You can read more about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide

> Have you noticed that just from your description above Russia is much closer to US than to China? From unfair elections, to systemic oppression of racial minorities, to invading other countries.

Oh, absolutely. Like I said, the US has more than its fair share of problems. These need to be addressed. But it's not a dictatorship yet, and while there are people who want to end US democracy, there are also a lot of people who want to strengthen it and address its problems. But it's absolutely true that under Trump, the US moved to become closer to Putin and more like Russia. And that is not a good direction to be moving in.

>You're right, there are elections, but only at the local level.

It's called "indirect elections", and is also used in US for presidential elections.

>There's only a single party

Which is fundamentally different from a two party system, right? :->

>And also to forced sterilisation and forced labour

Which also happen in American prisons.

See, here's the problem: I know precisely what you're trying to say, I used to believe it myself. But then I realised that this belief simply isn't backed by facts.

Americans have a chance to change stuff by voting for change , in Russia or China you need to wait for a revolution. Maybe is hard to change stuff in US but you should ask people that live in regimes where one guy is president for life and thinks he is the father of the nation and smartest person in the world if it was ever possible to change something or have the leader admit he is wrong or unwanted and leave.

You do realize that in China they also vote for changes? That’s why the country is changing so fast, as opposed to stagnating like Russia or US. China doesn’t have a president for life, this guy needs to have support or he’ll be voted out.

But this is kind of besides the point. What matters is what “real life” looks like. Are Chinese scared to call an ambulance, because it would bankrupt them? Are random black people being shot on the street?

Putin is also not a president for life in theory, there are "fair elections". As far as I know China elections are the same, same as we had in Romania during Communist party, the same dude always wins the elections, the ones that criticize him got deported or got killed, we had a comedian that made a joke about the president speech problems and he got poisoned so I understand how single party countries work, I am not from US so the black lives matters what about trolling does not work for me.

But for sure Russians should look at China and think something like "WTF we are not like China and we are a dump like North Korea, if Putin screws us at least if we got some better level of living".

Not sure if you are from China, I don't care about who is president there or to impose my country values on your culture, I was just explaining the big dangers of one party one man political system, there is corruption, misreporting, backstabbing, paranoia that eventually screws the population over. If the Chinese people decide freely to support the current political system(one party, no freedom of thinking and expression) then I respect their choice.

Also I don't know as much about China, Russia is here our neighbor so I know more about them, their politics, their mentality and their history so correct me if I got any factual thing wrong.

Here's a random fact about China: remember the Tienanmen massacre (which is being taught about in Chinese schools, btw)? The prime minister at that time spent the rest of his life in house arrest. (You might compare this to Kent State. Nobody got punished there.) But it shows that "the same dude" can be replaced when he screws up. Those aren't fake elections; they actually work.

It looks like that guy was just the fall guy, we had similar election in communist Romania, only 1 party , the president always won, the people with different ideas got sent to prison or suffered "accidents". Is your president term limited or he can be candidate forever?

Let me tell you a joke/story from communist Romania, at a farm a pig gives birth to 2 piglets, the engineer there thinks "shit, this is bad only 2, the local communist party guy will replace me so he writes in the papers 4 piglets and submits the report, his superior seens 4 piblets and thinks is bad and he updats the report to 6, the reports is sent up and up until it reaches Ceausescu - the Romanian for life president, father of the nation and smartest dude in the country in his opinion , he reads the report and sees 12 piglets, so he decides "send 2 to export and 10 will be used to feed out people" . We were super poor, there was not enough food, fuel and stuff ... with the democarcy we get corrupted politicians that we change them and a president can at most stay for 8 years, on top of that ex prime ministers, politicians were put in prison for corruption eventually so things started to work.

China is doing good economically in present but I saying there is a danger of things going wrong if the leadership is not refreshed and some dude ass gets glued to the chair, like why would only 1 dude can be president, can't be that he is the only competent person.

Thanks for chatting, because of the language difference and distance there is not much we can know about China, but remember in this case Ukraine is my neighbor and Russia also was and kind of is our neighbor too (I had to learn Russian in school too) so we the people in East Europe we know and understand things better , there is no CIA or US media that influenced our opinion and for sure "What about USA" arguments won't work on Europeans or especially Easter Europeans. So if you don't trust american media I can provide you links to local papers and maybe Google translate can help you read them, we have many policial parties so there is no excuse that some group controls all the media, and for sure we have our idiots that would prefer not to upset Putin because there are scared of what the mad man will do.

I guess that would be Serbia. But it is a bit pointless to have an alliance with one country.

Belarus also, but they are de facto Russian vassal state at this point.

You live in Serbia? Does Russia has a claim on parts of your territory ?

I am old enough that I have heard direct reports from people that fought in the war and meet the Russian soldiers and people that lived under communist regime , so GTFO with your shity claim that who does not agree with you is an idiot that media corupted his mind not to live Russia.

Let me tell you, I don't love USA and I don't like the shit they done in Afganista,Iraq , I don't like what they did with the nuclear bombs in Japan, I don't like what they are doing with Assange but the fact is Russia is a bigger danger for my country and we were begging to enter NATO not because of love for USA but because we are fucking scared of Russia, and we are scared of them because we know not from media but from our direct experience what they are capable of.

Ok be specific which states?

Deflection.

Neighbours of Russia want to join NATO to prevent Russia invading them. And for good reason. No "mysterious" CIA-manipulation needed.

Not all media is owned by weapon manufacturers. There's tons of independent media here, unlike in Russia, where the government dictates what the media are allowed to say. They can't call the war a war, for example. That is propaganda. The West allows all viewpoints, including the Russian one. It's just that the Russian propaganda doesn't stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

Also, Iraq was not a NATO war. It was just the US and UK, and many NATO members opposed it. I would certainly still like to see the US war crimes in Iraq prosecuted. But that does not in any way justify the Russian invasion or war crimes. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Again, you are just deflecting, trying to distract from the core: The neighbours of Russia do not want to be invaded by Russia, so they join NATO.

It could as easily be stated that nations join NATO in order to participate in NATO's war crimes, and share its war treasures. For the same reason that immigrants come to USA - because that's not where the bombs are falling.

Both statements are valid, and have just as much evidence supporting them.

...So now the Finns are joining NATO to participate in NATO war-crimes?

I did once have to sit through a Finn slaughtering a karaoke version of "Sweet Caroline", but I would hardly consider it a war-crime.

Do you deny that NATO is committing war crimes and crimes against humanity on states its member-politicians have 'declared inferior'? Finland is just as capable of xenophobia as any other NATO member.

What does that have to do with the core claim that NATO protects Russian neighbours?

NATO can be a vile alliance of war criminals, AND an alliance that protects Russian neighbours against invasion.

I'm sorry but what a weak reasoning. Why do eastern european countries join NATO, why does Finland joint? Because they want to raze the middle east and have xenophobia with Russians?

No, they join NATO because it provides security against Russia, a neighbour they fear. And they have plenty of reasons for such fear.

> Finland is just as capable of xenophobia as any other NATO member.

Yup. And with you as the xeno, that's no wonder.

> states its member-politicians have 'declared inferior'?

Wut? Which politicians?

Do you have a single fact to back up your accusation of CIA meddling with NATO membership?

The truth is, that countries want to join NATO so that Russia does not invade them. That's the sole reason.

Thats the propaganda/PR reason, readily parroted throughout a mainstream media that is literally owned by the people selling bombs to NATO.

You might want to start your journey of enlightenment here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio#Operations_in...

Do you have a single fact to back up your accusation of CIA meddling with NATO membership? Your link does not prove that.

Also, you have not provided any sources on the dismissal of reasons for joining NATO. Please do link to them if you have any evidence.

As is, it looks like you're parroting anti-NATO propaganda - it seems you're acting in bad faith. Are you paid for by the Russians?

The existence of GLADIO is all the evidence one needs. Its purpose is to ensure any and all impediments to the expansion of NATO are removed.

The "Ma' Russians!" claim is not worth responding to, but I'm an Australian, have lived for decades in the US and in Eastern Europe, and I no longer play the nationalist game. I've been following the Wests' war crimes and crimes against humanity since 9/11, which has led me to the conclusion that yes indeed, we are the bad guys for starting World War 3 in 2003 with the illegal invasion of Iraq.

Nice try though.

That does not prove your accusation that CIA was meddling in countries that willingly asked to join NATO because they did not want to get invaded by Russia.

Also, you're mischaracterizing the purpose of Operation Gladio.

Gladio is literally an organization whose purpose is to ensure the targeted states join NATO or, at least, remain aligned with NATO intentions.

States join NATO in order to participate in NATO's war crimes and crimes against humanity, and to be a part of the refactoring of the sovereign states of the world that NATO is engaged in. It is literally the #1 usurper of sovereign democracy.

Do you have any sources for your current claims? What you're saying in the first paragraph goes against what you linked earlier.

I mean, you've got a lot of studying to do if you're only just now learning about Gladio:

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Operation_Gladio

See also:

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/9446...

This is literally a copy of the Wikipedia article you listed earlier and it does not support your accusations.

Do you have any sources that support any of your other claims?

You didn't read it, obviously. Why don't you go and inform yourself about Gladio and what the CIA have been up to in this regard, and then we can discuss things further - you don't seem to know much about it at all. Gladio is really just the tip of the iceberg - you can certainly find more details in the Wikileaks dumps. Just search for "victoria nuland" and check out the first 5 documents ..

I actually read the Wikipedia article you provided, including most relevant references. (for the context, I'm from Russia, and @stoltzmann's accusations of shilling certainly go against the spirit of this forum, they are made in bad faith as well, so I downvoted them).

The statements made in the article is that the CIA worked with their relevant counterparts (direct financing is unconfirmed) to establish a network of stay-behind organizations in Western Europe, that was supposed to resist the potential Warsaw Pact invasion. It peaked in late 60s at the height of the Cold War, has been substantially cut down since 70s and finally dismantled in 1990, being deemed harmful as the weapon caches it made were often plundered by criminals and domestic terrorists. Details differ from country to country but it was similar in principle everywhere.

That organization seems very typical for the Cold War, but I absolutely don't see how it supports your claim that CIA instigated the post-Cold War NATO expansion with this operation, could you please point me at the specific part?

Compare Iraq and Ukraine as countries. Are they remotely comparable as aggressors under international law? Recall both USSR and former SFRY sold weapons by the boatload to Iraq.

> The CIA has entered the chat.

Please leave lazy, youtube-comments-style memes out of HN.

The CIA does not leave any room for voluntary decisions to join NATO.

It actively engages in repressive counter-measures against any politician that calls for NATO war crimes to be investigated.

It has a long, sordid history of defeating sovereign democracies that do not toe the NATO line:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio#Operations_in...

When it looks like Finland and Sweden are going to join NATO soon, you say it is because of CIA manipulation?

I assume you do not recognize the polls in for example Finland, which indicates ~22% support for joining NATO before the Russian invasion of Ukraine - to ~75% now (only 12% against)? This is all CIA manipulation?