Turkey has formally asked to join the BRICS group of emerging-market nations as it seeks to bolster its global influence and forge new ties beyond its traditional Western allies, according to people familiar with the matter.
because it’s the russian equivalent to nato? the us also wouldn’t be allowed to join brics, if that helps de-confuse you.
It’s the Russian equivalent, you say, except the power dynamic is entirely different and CSTO isn’t expanding. Interesting.
please provide a definition for imperialism that doesn’t include what russia’s doing in ukraine now
Export of Industrial and Financial Capital to exploited Countries to super-exploit for super-profits, like an international Capitalistic relation. You know, the standard definition Leftists follow.
says the one who’s just been continuously stating without expounding that nato is a collection of spooky imperialist powers
I have explained how and why, your refusal to read is no longer my problem.
i think it’s pretty clear you don’t have much of an argument here, given that this started as “nato is a protection racket” and across 6 replies you’ve provided absolutely nothing to support that statement past whinging
Quite the contrary, your selective reading and blinders mean you can’t be reached with words.
alright you get one more, then i kind of need to stop wasting my time with you unless you get more entertaining quickly
it’s the Russian equivalent, you say, except the power dynamic is entirely different and CSTO isn’t expanding. Interesting.
because nobody wants to join the alliance run by the country most likely to invade you? “russia is too disliked for their alliance to be popular” or “russia is too incompetent to run an effective alliance” is an incredible argument
why don’t we ask azerbaijan and armenia how their membership is going if you’re confused as to why csto is unpopular?
Export of Industrial and Financial Capital to exploited Countries to super-exploit for super-profits, like an international Capitalistic relation.
ohhhhhhh so you mean like sending in pmcs to countries in africa? or setting up debt traps for countries in africa?
I have explained how and why, your refusal to read is no longer my problem.
Quite the contrary, your selective reading and blinders mean you can’t be reached with words.
literally nothing you’ve said has justified nato behaving in an imperialist way, other than your definition of imperialism, which includes russia and china, so good job
to paraphrase you, “membership expansion isn’t imperialism”, which is the only thing you’ve been arguing over, which is wild when the thing you’re meant to be justifying is that “nato is a protection racket”.
i don’t think you know what a protection racket is
It’s the Russian equivalent, you say, except the power dynamic is entirely different and CSTO isn’t expanding. Interesting.
Export of Industrial and Financial Capital to exploited Countries to super-exploit for super-profits, like an international Capitalistic relation. You know, the standard definition Leftists follow.
I have explained how and why, your refusal to read is no longer my problem.
Quite the contrary, your selective reading and blinders mean you can’t be reached with words.
alright you get one more, then i kind of need to stop wasting my time with you unless you get more entertaining quickly
because nobody wants to join the alliance run by the country most likely to invade you? “russia is too disliked for their alliance to be popular” or “russia is too incompetent to run an effective alliance” is an incredible argument
why don’t we ask azerbaijan and armenia how their membership is going if you’re confused as to why csto is unpopular?
ohhhhhhh so you mean like sending in pmcs to countries in africa? or setting up debt traps for countries in africa?
literally nothing you’ve said has justified nato behaving in an imperialist way, other than your definition of imperialism, which includes russia and china, so good job
to paraphrase you, “membership expansion isn’t imperialism”, which is the only thing you’ve been arguing over, which is wild when the thing you’re meant to be justifying is that “nato is a protection racket”.
i don’t think you know what a protection racket is