Hacker News Reader

Comment by andretti1977 | Hacker News Reader

andretti1977

I really don't understand one thing: is there a single american who still think this has been done to liberate a country from a dictator in the name of freedom? Seriously? This has been done for economical and power interests and USA is the most destabilizing power in the world and a source of war and desperation and death: they supports israel to get political power in middle east, they invaded countries as done in Iraq, they push Nato to the border of Russia and provoke war (not to say Putin had right to invade Ukraine but what would have done usa if mexico Canada or Cuba had russian weapons and support? Oh yes, we knew about Cuba). And the president Trump: he’s just a ridicolous bully like the ones you can find at high schools.

Please US citizens, grow up. There had been a time when you were admired and respected, now your country is killing the world.

View on HN

> they push Nato to the border of Russia

No, former Soviet satellite states begged and pleaded for NATO membership. And their immediate Western neighbors advocates for it.

They didn't do that because the US asked them to. They were motivated by other concerns.

The US does bad things, yes, but the death toll is nothing like Stalin or Mao.

And the US don't tend to stick around occupying a country for half a decade.

I wouldn't dare to justify this. But it's not the same as Russia or China.

I’m not saying former soviet countries lived better under soviet imposition, but no one can be so naive to think US did that to help and free people.

When a mobster comes to you and free you from your previous mobster, it’s not because he is a good man and wants you to live freely: he does it to impose you his will and power exactly as US have always done.

I live in one of the former soviet republics. We begged to join NATO because we experienced the joy of living under 50 years of russian occupation

I have already said that living under soviet would have been worst but that is not the point.

The point is: usa is acting not in the falsey mith of global freedom but only in the name of extending its power and influence.

In Venezuela they didn’t combat narcotraffic otherwise I must expect Italy (my country) invasion since we are the home of one of the greatest cancer in history: mafia.

Don’t drink the lie USA are fighting for freedom otherwise a lot of human lives will be sacrificed uselessly

I am only responding to the retarded take that NATO was forced on us.

For some reason I can’t reply to your next comment on nato forced on your country.

When I’m implying that nato has been pushed to former soviet countries I’m referring to the influence done by US to support different governments. In Ukraine revolution in 2014 has been greatly supported by US.

I’m in no way saying China, Russia or whatever country is acting better, I’m just saying nobody can be so naive to not understand that there is no ideal of freedom involved in any US action but only political/power interests.

I’m curious to see which freedom-related justification will be used for the future annexation of Greenland

How is NATO a mobster? It's a collection of countries that band together to protect each other.

The Ukraine invasion is what happens when you don't have that kind of support.

This is a very strange case of false equivalence. You might not like the US but that doesn't impact on the basic idea of NATO.

Nato is an extension of usa in the sense that even if it is a group of nations, in reality, it’s under usa command and influence since usa is its “major shareholder”.

The US provides a large amount of the military force so it has a lot of influence but you're missing the point: it is a mutual protection agreement. Each country agrees to protect the other against attacks. This would be the case even without the US. It is not under US command since it a cooperative organization that elects its own leader and everything it does is though mutual agreement.

But you didn't answer my question: how is NATO a mobster? Because the US is involved? Even if one accepts your anti-US view in this regard, how does that make the other countries in NATO mobsters? Guilt by association? Other NATO countries have shown to be quite independent from the US in recent history.

You misread my comment: when I referred to mobster I was talking about the US “liberating” other countries and not to NATO.

So this is the response to your question.

Anyhow NATO is still under US great influence so in a way or another is acting as an extension of US.

There is nothing bad in joining a coalition but please don’t tell me NATO is not acting as a branch of US when exercising US influence.

Now go back to the point: US liberated Venezuela, yes for sure and it didn’t do for oil or other political interests and it won’t force it’s interests upon those of Venezuelans nor it will put people in command that are neutral and are not puppets in the hands of the US…come on how can you believe the bullshit of war to export democracy and freedom, how?

I responded to your comment as written, you're adding more to it in this reply or importing earlier of your comments. I still disagree with your characterization of NATO.

The US invasion of Venezuela illegal under both US and international and just plain wrong.

I don't support it and never said I did, go through my comment history and check if you want to.

As the parent comment said, the Warsaw Pact countries pleaded to join. Even Russia wanted to join at one point. America did it for its own reasons? Good, they win and we win.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com