Exactly my point.

Of course the US did; the weapons (and the Marines) weren't for self-defense or "just in case." It's obvious they planned the assault on the mining site all along.

The idea that Moscow didn't know about the Jamestown raid is silly, or their arms were there "just in case." They were planning on taking more of the moon either by any means they could. Cargo from earth to the moon was not in abundant supply; everything counted.

Most of Reddit is too young to remember the Soviet Union. Soviet foreign policy was full of contradictory positions: on one front, they'd be pushing hard for disarmament, peace, cooperation, etc. while simultaneously arming and advising revolutionary groups in Asia and Africa. They'd agree to treaties then immediately violate them. From an outside POV, they couldn't be trusted.

From their POV, it all made sense: their security was the highest priority. Everything they did was for that end; everything to them was situational. Sometimes a treaty was for their benefit, sometimes not.

The West claimed they operated on "principles," whereas we know of countless events and incidents that showed that statement was false.

It seems puzzling to us that on the one hand, the Soviets are blockading the moon but still going ahead with the Soyuz-Apollo mission. From the Soviet POV, it's not. It makes sense. The situation drives decision-making, not "principles" or "consistency."