Bao wrote:Personally, I hate being political here on this board.
My feelings are very mixed. And they have been for a long time. The media generalises the issue and is only reporting a fraction of what is behind this shit. Now both sides are only dealing with propaganda and a lot of lies.
So we need to try to see the issue from all sides, and listen to Europe's, The USA, Russia and Ukraine's own stories.
Fact is that all of these regions and countries share responsibility for the situation right now.
Just take a look at it from Russia's point of view...
- Nato decided already in Warsaw 2016 to move military close to the Russian borders.
- Ukraine has had a civil war just in front of Russia's borders.
- Ukraine has a US backed Nazi regime committing a cultural genocide against Russian minorities.
- Ukraine has not respected the Minsk treaty.
These are just facts, easy for anyone to confirm. But of course, there's a lot more to this story, from both sides. Ukraine has dealt with its own crisis, a civil war and has had eight years of violence and instability. They certainly don't want any further or greater war. Why the USA keeps pushing and pushing and tries to bring Russia into a corner is certainly understandable from their own point of view.
Will it escalate to a full blown war? No, I don't think so. At least if Nato and USA don't want it to escalate the crisis further.
Isn't the current aggression the obvious answer of why Nato has grown.windwalker wrote:Having served in the US military in Germany part of the NATO force in the 70s,
Never quiet understood why NATO is still there after the WARsaw pact was disbanded.Just take a look at it from Russia's point of view...
- Nato decided already in Warsaw 2016 to move military close to the Russian borders.
- Ukraine has had a civil war just in front of Russia's borders.
- Ukraine has a US backed Nazi regime committing a cultural genocide against Russian minorities.
- Ukraine has not respected the Minsk treaty.
Russia is protecting its territorial integrity, no choice in it’s reaction.
windwalker wrote:Giles wrote:It's true that, back in the 1990s, Russia was given some clear oral promises that NATO wouldn't expand into the east. And that these promises were not kept to. That's part of the story, irrespective of whether Putin has gradually mutated into a full-on dictator, or not.
.
From your perspective why did Germany not reacted sooner and more decisively along with the other countries in the region aligned with NATO against Russia.
What should Russia have done with the expansion of NATO, an organization that claims "it" as it's foe
vadaga wrote:Good talk with John Mearshimer viz. leading Ukraine to take a hardline against Russia will lead to a bad result- seems this is what is happening.
I also like Stephen Walt and some other of the neorealists.
I think that George Kennan also made some comments on NATO expansion back in 1997 to the effect that
'something of the highest importance is at stake here. And perhaps it is not too late to advance a view that, I believe, is not only mine alone but is shared by a number of others with extensive and in most instances more recent experience in Russian matters. The view, bluntly stated, is that expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold-war era.'
https://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/05/opinion/a-fateful-error.html
cloudz wrote:
Isn't the current aggression the obvious answer of why Nato has grown.
He's been building up a war machine whilst we have been sleeping at the wheel de militarising
I can understand protecting your borders, but how exactly is it threatened to justify this,
with China as your best mate, these guys are next to untouchable..
Giles wrote: The main thing I wanted to say yesterday was about the claims of "genocide", and I've said it. Nothing else I want to say in this area right now.
Isn't the current aggression the obvious answer of why Nato has grown.cloudz wrote: Russia is protecting its territorial integrity, no choice in it’s reaction.
Bolstering the security of NATO allies and partners, particularly states along Russia’s border. ... The decisions made at the 2016 Warsaw Summit to bolster NATO’s deterrence- and-defense posture, including deployment of armed battalions in Poland and the Baltic states on a rotational basis, are a step in the right direction.
Bob wrote:Do you think that the European and EU countries in that area have a right to form an alliance and aggregate their nuclear stockpiles in order to safeguard and serve as a countervailing power against the the Russian nuclear arsenal that sits on or close to their border irrespective of NATO?
Or, does Europe and EU countries not experience Russia as a threat?
The question of whether the United States should be involved in such an European alliance is another topic for discussion.
"The US would never allow China or Russia to do the same in it's sphere of influence,
when they do it's labeled as an expansion, viewed as a threat."
Replace US with Europe and the EU in the above quote.
windwalker wrote:Bob wrote:Do you think that the European and EU countries in that area have a right to form an alliance and aggregate their nuclear stockpiles in order to safeguard and
Which country is pushing the others, which country is arming the Ukraining"s.
Germany gave them helmets
The US provided them with high tech antitank missile's
The US is inexorably involved in NATO
Do you think that the West is overly paranoid about Russia and its sphere of influence?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests