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.”

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    America bad is literally the reason why countries don’t want NATO on their border. You don’t get to ignore that key point and pretend OP was arguing in bad faith.

    America invades countries to overthrow their government steal their natural resources. Lybia, Afghanistan, Iraq, even the Genocide in Gaza is made possible by NATO countries doing the weapons logistics.

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

      And yet Russia has multiple borders with NATO countries. “Your opinion” is parroting kremlin propaganda about “the nuclear end” that “will totally happen you guys” and can be summarized by “let’s give Russia everything they want, because they have nukes so they can now rule everyone”

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      What? None of that would have been different without NATO. Iraq did not even involve NATO at all

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Oof https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_88247.htm

        The participation in the invasion was also NATO participants. Same with the Genocide in Gaza right now where NATO countries are doing the military logistics to provide israel with bombs and tank shells to blow up Palestinian kids.

        Either directly or indirectly NATO is just an extension of whatever imperialist escapades we go on. And the few times people actually need it it’s utterly worthless such as Srebrenica and NATO just lets a Genocide happen without doing anything.

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          You can have independent operations by members states. If a couple of my cousins and myself go and murder someone that doesnt mean it was done by my clan. It just means some people in my clan are murderers, most alliance networks allow independent operations and actions seperate from the alliance.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            The NATO site is literally bragging about it.

            And yeah it just so happen people in the NATO allience all just keep invading countries together under false pretenses and lies of national security.

            • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              One experience is experience youre gonna brag about having it. Two most of the alliance didnt participate, the only members who did were the US, Uk, and Poland for some reason. Thats only two of the founding memebers and three members total, Australia was also there. It was a massive operation done by pretty important nations Poland is the most important NATO member in the east of Europe, the US just is the most important member, and Britain is also pretty fucken important.

              But all four of the countries involved have independent alliances with eachother seperate from NATO, yes their offensive capabilities are helped by NATO but that is only on the experience and equipment level. If NATO was actually directly involved id expect France and Germany to have been involved for example.

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Man why do I even bother Googling this bullshit. 3 members this man says. Do you just make things up and press post for fun? Not going to bother with this trolling.

                • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Because it was only 3 members doing combat, everything else contributed by say Germany was do to secondary treaties. For example staging, hospital use, and maintenance in Germany would be covered by basing treaties. Yes quite a bit of this is wrapped up with NATO as a whole, but quite a bit also isnt lots of ifs, ands, ors, and buts in the language of it all.

                  Turns out alliances and treaties can be complex and esoteric things at the best of times, we figured that out after WW1. And yes only three NATO members had participated in the 2003 invasion of Iraq and one of them (Poland) pulled out. If you bring up Australia they arent part of NATO. Iraq was an unjustified clusterfuck ya dont need to lie about it to make it sound worse.

                  Also intelligence agencies dont count, half the time intelligence is in a region its to make sure it doesnt need them.