Nato members have pledged their support for an “irreversible path” to future membership for Ukraine, as well as more aid.

While a formal timeline for it to join the military alliance was not agreed at a summit in Washington DC, the military alliance’s 32 members said they had “unwavering” support for Ukraine’s war effort.

Nato has also announced further integration with Ukraine’s military and members have committed €40bn ($43.3bn, £33.7bn) in aid in the next year, including F-16 fighter jets and air defence support.

The bloc’s Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said: “Support to Ukraine is not charity - it is in our own security interest.”

      • dwalin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Even if thats true (spoiler, it isnt) there have been plenty of free, internationally recognized (not just by the west), elections since them.

      • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The CIA paid a million people to stand out in the could for months on end? Whoa, where do they keep all these actors?

          • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m not doing your work for you tankie. Quote the part of the article that supports your thesis.

            You all do this same thing, throw a book at someone and when they refuse to bow to your demand to waste their time you declare victory.

            • hark@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              First you intentionally make the dumbest interpretation of how a situation can occur, then when I post an article that shows exactly how something like this goes down, you call me a name, refuse to read, and revel in your ignorance. A simple article is not a book. Operations to subvert politics in a country take many years, even decades, and the article talks about US operations to interfere in the politics of Ukraine. Do you think you can make the connection between that and what happened around a decade after that article was written or is this too difficult for you?

              • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                No you threw a link at me and expecting me to strain out whatever point you were trying to make. And you still won’t do the simple act of concisely presenting whatever you think proves you right. Instead you caterwaul for two paragraphs worth of text.

                It’s probably because you’re trying to walk me to your point of view and the article really doesn’t contain the definitive proof you think it does.

                All you ML propaganda tactics are predicated on deception which you justify by saying it’s for the revolution.

                Your praxis does not work in the information age where anyone can fact check your biased premise.

                And yes I’m well aware that western governments foment decent artificially. That doesn’t prove anything about the euromadien protests. We all know if there were some ML uprising you would not accept the idea that it was BS because western govs do velvet revolutions. Before you say that doesn’t happen Lenin him fucking self was smuggled out of Europe by Anglo bourgeoisie to overthrow the Czar.

                • hark@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  In the time it took you to write that nonsense whiny post, you could’ve just read the article. I explained it to you anyway, in a post shorter than the one you typed, but you melted down anyway.

        • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          How did the US feel when Cuba allowed russia to put weapons there? Let me answer the question; Kennedy threatened complete war and the destsruction of the world. Should the Soviets have put weapons in Cuba?

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Cool, you didnt answer the question. The problem is that if you actually think about it for a second you will realize how this whole thing was directly caused by NATO/American interference. I am not infavor of countries invading but its not the “UNPROVOKED!!” bullshit line they keep repeating. This war was completely avoidable.

        • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          The care because they believe it is a direct move of aggression and endangers their people. Why did the US care during the Cuban missile crisis?

      • Damage@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        They should feel that they lost the cold war and their kleptocracy isn’t conductive to expanding their already reduced sphere of influence, so they better make peace with the fact.

        • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Since they dont feel this and feel directly threatened, why should NATO/America keep pushing it till war?

          • Damage@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            'cause they can. There’s no good guys in international politics, you can check out an history book to confirm that.

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              So are you going to be the one sent overseas to die in a country that most people dont care anything about?

                • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  You are claiming that they can do what they want, but that is backed by boots on the ground. Is that going to be you, or are you going to force my children to fight your wars?

                  • Damage@slrpnk.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    I don’t see how it’s necessary to explain what is there for everyone to see: they got Ukrainians fighting for them (well, and themselves as well), then if that’s not enough, the closest NATO countries will probably get into it.