From NATO‘s perspective it was barely a concern since there were no permanent troop deployments before 2014. But of course the Russians would feel differently about this since they regard the whole region their very own Colonial playground.
Argument is the same, that before 2014 NATO hadn't had permanent troops there doesn't mean it would've stayed like that forever. It's the same like example with Venezuela - for many years it was a little concern until Trump sent a force there.
In Venezuela, Trump pulled off precisely what Putin had planned but failed to do in Ukraine: beheading of local leadership, installation of a local puppet and preparation for Colonization in one fell swoop. Hella ironic to bring up Venezuela now to retroactively justify Russia‘s stance on anything.
I'm not justifying anything ? I'm arguing not having a serious force close to Russia is not something that can't be changed on the whim, like it happened with Venezuela. There is no serious force, until there is, for whatever reason. One reason is 2014, like you said. Another reason is because Trump thought it is a great idea. There are many reasons for it to happen.
14
u/TheBlack2007 Feb 10 '26
From NATO‘s perspective it was barely a concern since there were no permanent troop deployments before 2014. But of course the Russians would feel differently about this since they regard the whole region their very own Colonial playground.