Politics

[SaintPanzer]

And with regard to agreements with the Soviet Union with respect to NATO expansion, those agreements were with a now non-existent country. But the new Russia, unbridled from its pseudo-socialist doctrine, is proving just as imperialistic as its predecessor.

Actually, the only agreement made with the USSR was to not station troops in East Germany, as part of the German Unification talks in 1990. I believe we've pretty much stuck with that agreement.

The only other "agreement" was that Ukraine would return Soviet nukes to Russia, while Russia agreed to Ukrainian sovereignty.

The US specifically rejected agreements relating to NATO in 1994. But, I mean, can you blame Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, et al for wanting something to protect them from the bear? It's not like NATO was trolling for more members. The "new countries" were definitely acting in their own interests, and I can make tactical and operational arguments that allowing them in was NOT in NATO's interest. But strategically...

And I believe conversations relating to the number of "ethnic Russ" being in Ukraine leave out the minor points relating to the Holodomor. But.... details.

I'm not saying NATO has never been wrong. I do believe that "European leaders caving to US Foreign Policy" is a bit simplistic. Nations act in their interest... although sometimes, they don't understand their own interests. One can make a case for closing your own nuke plants, and replacing the delta with Russian gas. One can as easily argue it was a better interest to not shut down any nuke plants, and not import Russian gas. Which is the long term "better"? We won't solve it here, but we are presently seeing the "complications" of the former choice, and France (for example) chose the latter. Who is right?

What is clear is that the Law of Unintended Consequences is immutable.

 

[CoElkHunter]

I believe soon, we will see Sweden and Finland applying for NATO membership? I think they see the shadow of the bear bearing down on them from the north.

 

[Sabattiboy]

A commonality of inconsistent leadership direction opens the door in the USA every 4 or 8 years. Any of our allies stand to have policy flip flopped at every election. Example Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan.
Having a nice chat with an aggressor while people are being abused or killed is charming to everyone except those being abused or killed.
It may have been a movie line in Josey Wales between him and Ten Bears but when he said governments are cheapened by the double talk he was right. One general makes a deal with a group of indians that is thrown out and a new deal offered by the next. No one was made to stand by their word written or otherwise. If it is policy it can be flip flopped by whoever whenever.
A treaty or agreement unenforceable is useless as well.

 

[Vashper]

... But, I mean, can you blame Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, et al for wanting something to protect them from the bear? It's not like NATO was trolling for more members. The "new countries" were definitely acting in their own interests, ...

...

A small remark: as it is seen from the other side. You see, this argument is often expressed, and since there is no real controversy in the Western media, it is perceived by many as serious. Naturally, Russians are not a hundred dollars to be loved by everyone. But they (Russians) do not make claims against Estonia or Montenegro. They are dissatisfied with NATO and, first of all, with the United States. The admission of new members to NATO depends not on Latvia, but on the United States; it is not the armored armadas of Northern Macedonia that are moving to the Russian borders, but American missile bases. What did it look like in reality? Serious uncles in big stars sit around a round table and complain to each other: "here, San Marino stuck to us with a knife to the throat, "accept and accept." Well, what can we do? We'll have to accept it."
Well, it's funny.
And yes, we are talking about a fraternal war. A second cousin of my daughters got on the lists of the "right sector" (as an athlete, there are also sports directions there), and now he has signed up for the nationalist militia. There is a tragedy in the family, and it is unclear how it will end.

 

[oldfart009]

 

[oldfart009]

 

[oldfart009]

 

[CoElkHunter]

A commonality of inconsistent leadership direction opens the door in the USA every 4 or 8 years. Any of our allies stand to have policy flip flopped at every election. Example Jimmy Carter vs Ronald Reagan.
Having a nice chat with an aggressor while people are being abused or killed is charming to everyone except those being abused or killed.
It may have been a movie line in Josey Wales between him and Ten Bears but when he said governments are cheapened by the double talk he was right. One general makes a deal with a group of indians that is thrown out and a new deal offered by the next. No one was made to stand by their word written or otherwise. If it is policy it can be flip flopped by whoever whenever.
A treaty or agreement unenforceable is useless as well.

Unfortunately, you are absolutely correct about the "flip flop" of Presidents here and their leadership direction. It's very frustrating for us here and I'm SURE for the rest of the world. The only thing I can say, is when push comes to shove, all of the Allied Nations of the FREE World WILL come together AGAIN despite our many squabbles to CRUSH tyranny and save our countries and the freedoms we enjoy. In the coming years, WE will need each other more than any time since WW2. Live FREE or DIE!

 

[oldfart009]

 

[oldfart009]

 

[Wheels]

I was looking at a map of Ukraine on the weekend and thought that a quick push to the Dnieper river would look quite appealing to Putin in full tonto mode.

I don't know what Putin will do, but as Red Leg mentioned, modern day Ukraine seems much like the Sudetenland ninety years ago.

Modern borders do not always make sense. Wars and lines drawn in the sand by ruling entities can be overly kind to some peoples and anathema to others.

 

[CoElkHunter]

A small remark: as it is seen from the other side. You see, this argument is often expressed, and since there is no real controversy in the Western media, it is perceived by many as serious. Naturally, Russians are not a hundred dollars to be loved by everyone. But they (Russians) do not make claims against Estonia or Montenegro. They are dissatisfied with NATO and, first of all, with the United States. The admission of new members to NATO depends not on Latvia, but on the United States; it is not the armored armadas of Northern Macedonia that are moving to the Russian borders, but American missile bases. What did it look like in reality? Serious uncles in big stars sit around a round table and complain to each other: "here, San Marino stuck to us with a knife to the throat, "accept and accept." Well, what can we do? We'll have to accept it."
Well, it's funny.
And yes, we are talking about a fraternal war. A second cousin of my daughters got on the lists of the "right sector" (as an athlete, there are also sports directions there), and now he has signed up for the nationalist militia. There is a tragedy in the family, and it is unclear how it will end.

Vashper,
I really enjoy your perspective from "the other side". As with any controversy, if all parties involved are not included and allowed to express their thoughts, opinions and potential solutions, the resolution of the controversy cannot be resolved as is doomed to failure. I think the Russian people are a great and proud people! In this particular instance involving Ukraine, I don't understand Putin's thought process? Ukraine isn't a NATO member and has said (well, before now) they had no desire to become a member. And, why do many/most former USSR states believe they need to be a NATO member? Is the situation in Ukraine the answer? I don't know? Maybe they feel that history does tend to repeat itself?
CEH

 

[CoElkHunter]

I don't know what Putin will do, but as Red Leg mentioned, modern day Ukraine seems much like the Sudetenland ninety years ago.

Modern borders do not always make sense. Wars and lines drawn in the sand by ruling entities can be overly kind to some peoples and anathema to others.

Remember, it was the former USSR country Georgia first on the hit list? The excuse then was many/most Russian speaking peoples living in Georgia! How many "American" speaking countries could we invade by that rationale? LOL

 

[WAB]

Remember, it was the former USSR country Georgia first on the hit list? The excuse then was many/most Russian speaking peoples living in Georgia! How many "American" speaking countries could we invade by that rationale? LOL

Well Britain might have a greater claim to the English language! [emoji41]

 

[Dudders]

Remember, it was the former USSR country Georgia first on the hit list? The excuse then was many/most Russian speaking peoples living in Georgia! How many "American" speaking countries could we invade by that rationale? LOL

I can only think of one country that speaks American. The rest speak English but i think we gave most of them back now

 

[Wheels]

Remember, it was the former USSR country Georgia first on the hit list? The excuse then was many/most Russian speaking peoples living in Georgia! How many "American" speaking countries could we invade by that rationale? LOL

Unfortunately India is now the largest English speaking country in the world. India might decide to rule all of it.

 

[WAB]

I can only think of one country that speaks American. The rest speak English but i think we gave most of them back now

When I moved to Alabama I wasn’t sure what language they were speaking!

 

[Spooksar]

I can only think of one country that speaks American. The rest speak English but i think we gave most of them back now

And here in Canada we speak Canadian and call it English even though like the US our language has evolved from influence from Native and other dialects.

 

[CoElkHunter]

Unfortunately India is now the largest English speaking country in the world. India might decide to rule all of it.

Ha! Ha! I didn't say "English" speaking countries on purpose. "American" speaking peoples would be like the tens of thousands of US citizen "expatriates", say living in Mexico? Like Putin, maybe we could justify invading Mexico because of the "many" American speaking "peoples" living in fear from the cartels? On second thought, if we did that, Brandon would give them citizenship and every fincancial benefit under the sun and our National Debt would balloon to at least $50 TRILLION from our current $30 TRILLION! Although, the cartels probably have more weapons than Brandon left to the Taliban in Asscrackistan or many smaller NATO countries! We could seize those and sell them on the black market to recoup our investment! LOL

 

[Sabattiboy]

History is painted with humans. Humans have the same nature. Nature functions on survival of the fittest. Ideologies sometimes can not be killed because at some point a coming generation will re adopt one that failed and apply their idea of a correction or missing ingredient then run the program again. Neo Nazi, white supremist, cartels etc. As Einstein was credited with saying, trying the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
An old school friend used to say that True Communism worked. The idea of everybody having everything in common works in theory.
In the Bible book of Acts that is how the Church started out. How many days later the human side emerged in the form of Ananias and Sapphira and continued throughout the rest of the New Testament via wolves in sheep's clothing. How many historically have tried to replicate Alexader the Great and conquer it all? Is this not true today? If not a current leader, then in a coming generation? What company doesn't want to control it all? America has antitrust laws but nobody to enforce them. Same thing no matter the level, object or goal.