You must log in or register to comment.

Banea-Vaedr t1_j0m4ivr wrote

Keep this up. Soon, the Invasion of Ukraine will have been for nothing at all.


SsiSsiSsiSsi t1_j0mbxwx wrote

The main results of Russia’s genocidal rampage will be:

A push to divest from Russia and China.

European and NATO unity that hasn’t been seen for decades.

New and critical NATO members who would have never joined without Russia’s insanity on display.

Ukraine will, in the long-run, hopefully be rebuilt with significant Western aid and flourish. After all the best revenge is living well, and while Russia rots away, Ukraine will grow.


EvangelineOfSky t1_j0me3cw wrote

People have been questioning NATOs existence and reason for still being a thing, including several NATO countries ever since the USSR fell

But this war has..

Rejustified NATOs existence

Encouraged countries to divest from Russia and China

Caused NATO to grow

NATO and EU countries to focus more on interpersonal economic relations with allies and stop trying to use economic trade as their primary war deterrent

Caused NATO to look more into working with its pacific partners, Australia, Japan, New Zealand

Decimated the Russian Economy to a point it will take decades if not generations to recover

Allowed Ukraine to prove themselves on the world stage, which "not being up to NATO standards" was one of the reasons NATO said they originally rejected their application

Caused fucking Switzerland to pick a side, Switzerland!

This war is horrible, and it never should have happened.. but it's blown up in Putin's face in every conceivable way.. and while it's definitely having global economic impacts now.. when the dust finally settled and Ukraine is victorious and rebuilding begins, we are going to see a weakened Russia (and to a lesser extent China), and a stronger and united rest of the world


code_archeologist t1_j0mg7zq wrote

I am thinking that we may be seeing the initiating events that create a replacement organization for the UN.


SsiSsiSsiSsi t1_j0mgyi6 wrote

That would be very exciting, something born from the modern world rather than peri-WWII anxieties.

I mean the makeup of the Security Council is nuts, it should probably be the US, China, The EU, an SEA rep of some sort, and some sort of pan-African representation as well. Germany the UK and France all having a seat is just archaic, especially given their relative strength in modern terms.


EvangelineOfSky t1_j0n68gm wrote

Ehhh, I'd probably argue the UKs spot still makes sense.. not only are they a nuclear power with a respectable military budget, but they are in a very unique position in the global stage due to how many fairly rich countries share their constitutional head of state


drawkbox t1_j0op38r wrote

China supporting the Ukraine invasion and helped Russia with the coups in Myanmar and Sri Lanka. They should be nowhere in any discussion to be on a security council in their current form.


aister t1_j0nz53t wrote

The UN is doing wat it is meant to do: provide a space for nations to talk, deescalate and provide humanitarian aids. It is not and has never been to keep peace or to deter nations from waging wars. The reason why League of Nations, its predecessor, failed, was exactly becuz they tried to do that. And wat happened in the end? Germany stopped caring and Japan walked out, and nothing was prevented at all.

I mean, the best UN could do is to throw strong words at Russia, anything else like economic sanctions can be done and has been done by nations that want to already. The only thing left is a direct military intervention, which the US will not do anyway.


LeGoupil7 t1_j0n9jnt wrote

I’d say keep the name and stuff but the actual organizational structure definitely needs a radical overhaul on all levels.


drawkbox t1_j0ooydq wrote

Russia and China being on the security council is absurd today. That definitely needs to be changed. China wanted to be Russia's little bro and those that take the Russian deal, well let's just say history hasn't been kind to those that do when they realize it is a leverage play.


hitman2218 t1_j0mhagm wrote

One downside is you’re just transferring power and influence to smaller corrupt countries, but I guess they’d be easier to bend to our will.


[deleted] t1_j0msj27 wrote



EvangelineOfSky t1_j0mt6jd wrote

You realize Australia has been a NATO partner and defacto member since the 50s right?


cboel t1_j0mvzj3 wrote

The poster is likely Kiwi and not aware of why Russia felt it could attack and invade Ukraine.

>The memoranda, signed in Patria Hall at the Budapest Convention Center with US Ambassador Donald M. Blinken amongst others in attendance, prohibited the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States from threatening or using military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, "except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations." As a result of other agreements and the memorandum, between 1993 and 1996, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons.


EvangelineOfSky t1_j0mwc9w wrote

Technically, Russia broke that in the mid 2004s following the orange revolution

It's actually one of the things that soured Russian NATO relations


cboel t1_j0n593g wrote

I know and they have broken it more than once in Ukraine.


thethunder92 t1_j0m4eg4 wrote

Nice! There’s some progress!


ravs1973 t1_j0mdncn wrote

"Azerbaijan plans to export electricity from offshore wind farms to Europe"

Call me an old cynic but doesn't Azerbaijan have one of the world's biggest oil reserves? I do hope the supply is going to be well monitored.


captain554 t1_j0o5qjb wrote

They do. Or at least, they have oil and the capacity to export a lot of it. Apparently it pisses Iran off that Azerbaijan already supplies oil to Israel and is planning for pipelines to other places. And I believe those other places are also on Iran's poo-list.


Patsfan618 t1_j0nhzts wrote

Has Europe considered nuclear pow... wait a minute