Teantis

Teantis t1_j6gpgxl wrote

Nato cannot 'revisit' anyone's membership status. There's no mechanism for booting countries from the alliance. There's some really tenuous legal reasoning the other states could unanimously declare one of the member states in material breach of the treaty and repudiate it, but there's a) zero precedent for it and b) really unlikely to ever get unanimous consent from everyone as quite a few countries would be concerned it could be used on them in the future.

To get turkiye out of NATO the us and it's main allies would likely have to make life so uncomfortable for them that they withdraw themselves. Like when you wanna break up with your partner and just act like an ass till they break up with you.

2

Teantis t1_j5j35pw wrote

Most countries that produce state of the art arms when you buy modern weapons systems require you to ask permission before you resell them. For security concerns, protection of tech etc etc. Hell the US was making a fuss about turkiye even buying SAM systems from Russia and booted them from the F-35 program for that, and is actually thinking about blocking even f-16 sales to turkiye.

5

Teantis t1_iut71bx wrote

Initially, only because they were using the language of the western allies to leverage them into not acting. All the ones you cited were before any of the allies joined the war. Beyond those initial gains it was their actual motivation of pure conquest, Barbarossa and onward they dropped all pretense.

Japan kept up their Asian co prosperity sphere messaging throughout.

2

Teantis t1_iusj9pk wrote

Being treated as liberators wasn't used as a 'justification' because the allied side didn't need a justification, they were fighting a defensive war to begin with. It was the Japanese who actually used the liberators line saying they were throwing out the western colonizers to create an Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. The Nazis, of course, used next to no justification. Their whole ethos was based on having the will to take what you want.

7

Teantis t1_iuhbmld wrote

Israel and SA were way more than ok with Soleimani being killed and not because he was just a shiite. he was one of the most critical Iranian leaders in terms of organizing their actions beyond Iran's borders and Iran is both Israel and SA's number one regional rival. He was widely cited before his death as Iran's architect of its regional power

SA and Israel considered assassinating him way before the US did: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/11/world/middleeast/saudi-iran-assassinations-mohammed-bin-salman.html

3

Teantis t1_iudvsvf wrote

Westinghouse basically helped the Marcos family steal a fucktin of money building a 'nuclear power plant' in the Philippines in the 80s that never ever came close to being operational but still cost a fucktin if money.

From an academic article in 1994 ten years after the plant was rsted as unsafe without ever operating:

> The construction of the Philippine's first nuclear power plant by Westinghouse has come to symbolize the corruption and cronyism of the Marcos' years. The plant has created so much controversy that it has yet to operate, in a country that desperately needs electrical power.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/25072530

Edit: fuckton but apparently autocorrect likes fucktin

5