Archived copy is here: https://archive.is/DqZ6m
The article says this:
“Immediately withdraw from NATO’s integrated command and then, in stages, from the organization itself. Reject the tribute demanded by the United States of 5% of GDP devoted to defense spending,” read France Unbowed’s 222-page program.
However, France under Mélenchon would still provide assistance to European Union countries under EU treaties, the document added
Is Melenchon right? Is it better for the EU to be the organisation of mutual defence guarantees for Europe, rather than NATO?
leaving NATO is probably a good idea, the US has displayed how unserious it is and can no longer be trusted BUT a better EU solution aligned with Canada etal should be in place first.
but the Ukraine stance is beyond understanding, if France was invaded would they want help from others ? there is no diplomatic solution to a bully, if he takes your lunch money and insists on more, sure ask him to stop but that won’t work and he will need a punch in the nose.
Why he have to be a tankie, I’m very left wing and a pacifist but that doesn’t mean don’t defend yourself, quite the opposite and boots on the ground is the only solution to show Europe is serious about it’s own safety, EU troops along the Belarusian border to free up Ukrainian troopps and show solidarity.
That alternative can be… NATO. If the US flakes out and doesn’t support a conflict like an invasion from Russia, the remaining countries can handle it under the existing structure. That also leaves it in place if the US straightens their shit out
There’s alot of potential for the US to betray NATO by sharing intelligence and Troop positions/movements with Russia
42.7 already exists
The Ukraine bombing and torturing its own citizens doesn’t sit well with those of us that aren’t right wingers. We generally feel torturing and killing civilians is bad.
Uh hi, it’s Russia that is bombing Ukraine.
You even use the imperialist term “The Ukraine” That Russia wants you to use.
And in what universe is your beloved Russia anything but right wing? It’s an oligarchy worse than the US.
“The Ukraine” is just a linguistic quirk of English because we say “The US” and “The UK” and “The UAE” and “The USSR”. If Ukraine started with any other letters than “Uk” it never would have been a thing. People injecting a bunch of meaning into it ala “that implies Ukraine is just a region not a country” are just wrong.
I didn’t mention Russia. Definitely not worse than the US, though. The US is by far the worst of settlers. Hell, all of Russia’s allies are leftists. The red scare has been mighty effective.
You don’t have to mention them for it to be obvious who you’re worshipping.
Worshipping? That’s a little extreme. I’d like the violence to end. The west’s support for the Ukrainian Nazi’s should make it pretty clear for everyone. Liberals aren’t even pretending to be leftish anymore.
Ukraine was a pawn, NATO knew russia would invade, they signed a border treaty in 2003 because russia does not want american military bases on it’s border.
Thank god for academics like jeffrey sachs, he wrote on this…:https://www.jeffsachs.org/newspaper-articles/nato-chief-admits-expansion-behind-russian-invasion
Zelensky was dumb enough to break the treaty and believe that NATO would commit to their cause, instead russia simply honored the treaty by dissolving ukraine’s border…
@Garfunkel @Hanrahan
I do agree with Sachs in his general view of US hegemony, in Ukraine & elsewhere, but his apparent justification for Russia invading Ukraine has no basis whatsoever imo. If anything, Russia’s belligerence has simply legitimised the Russophobia behind the increased membership of NATO (which has not posed, and constitutionally could not pose, any military danger to Russia).
The increased membership of NATO is something that does not seem true to my eyes, Pierre Degaulle and Miterrand are both pushing for an exit of NATO and entry to BRICS because as I said prior, nato is responsible for dozens of undemocratic regime changes. Most of the global south (which constitues 6.2 billion or about 82-86% of the human population) has been disadvantaged because of these “crusades in the spirit of democracy” (Iran and venezuela being the recent ones, but chile, mexico, indonesia, south africa, etc). Something that also relates to this is the departure of germany from Ostpolitik and the re-emergence of the russia-germany relationship which in my opinion can either be attributed to christian nationalist capital through the western world at the moment or resentment of the german populations due to the loss of both world wars and accords made subsequently (like the treaty of versailles) which disadvantaged germany in the long term.
Yes, Zelenskyy broke the treaty by invading Crimea in 2014 when he was still a comedian 🤡
Political battles and wars do not start this abruptly, thinking that anyone on the world stage would tolerate Putin waking up and taking over Crimea on a whim is either a misconception on your end or misplaced sarcasm. Crimea was invaded by russia due to the impeachement of the Viktor Yanukovych, which was illegal and overwhelmingly proven to be linked to US action. Furthermore, Russia had a naval base on the black sea that would have been reclaimed by the united states if the support of ukraine shifted to Nato following the impeachment of Yanukovych. It was a strategic necessity and a means of incentivizing ukraine to reconnect with Russia as an ally rather than attempt to side with NATO.
Russia had retreated back into it’s borders in 2014 and just like with Finland and Austria, it respected surrounding nations borders as long as they did not engage in Nato expansionism.But to add one last point, Europeans are insane to the rest of the world when they think it rational to prefer the united states to Russia… Who between Russia and the US participated in 70+ assassination attempts of foreign politicians, undermined global peace and countries’ senses of agency and ruined Serbia, Afghanistan, Georgia, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Venezuela? The last thing Russia needs is a regime change…
As far as ukrainian journalists spoke of it, was politically motivated since Yanukovych was on good terms with Putin and part of the senate wanted to westernize if they had US backing to engage martially with Russia. Instead the US gave a solid year of military support and cut it s costs when came the time.
@Garfunkel @boonhet
“Crimea was invaded by russia due to the impeachement of the Viktor Yanukovych” - Russia is not Ukraine’s policeman.
“It was […] a means of incentivizing ukraine to reconnect with Russia as an ally” - OK so you’re a bot, right? You invade countries & murder their citizens because you want them as an “ally”! :blobamused:
Nay professor, not a bot, although maybe the more bot-like party between us is the one who internalizes political narratives without taking time to understand the pragmatic nature of these stories as seen from life inside of a western society. To hate Russia because Russia is evil is to be an absolute moron who fails to understand that power is a zero-sum game and your opponent is still very bitter about the fall of the USSR.
But if one wishes to say… “use their heads”, maybe then we can understand that these stories are compelling because of self-interest and perception of ethnic superiority. But to get back to the commies and why you think they re evil, an invasion of a country to rescue a naval base from russia s perspective is a no-brainer especially if we remember the fight for control of afghanistan and east asia (from the 80s to 2010s) and the importance of access to the black sea. Russia had no desire to invade Crimea as long as it remained in diplomatic good terms with Ukraine, which it did for decades, shit took off when 'merican freedom came to rescue those poor opressed ukrainians, and the US fucked off when it saw that Russia committed to the war.
But yeah about the ally part, yep. That s how nato has been doing it, ask the libyans maybe?
France is militarily the most powerful country in Western Europe. If they’re getting attacked, none of their neighbours’ help will amount to much.
I don’t know why you were downvoted, this is right. France doesn’t have a “no first strike” policy. If we are attacked we will take down the ennemies with us anyway
The downvoting was for the shortsighted self centric perspective. Yes, France can take down the other side, but is that a preferable outcome to rather staying together in Europe and preventing that scenario to begin with in the first place?