Is NATO done?

Post Reply New Topic

That's actually only one of the two missions of the North Atlantic Treaty, the second was to tamp down nationalism in member countries: WWII, a war of nationalism, had just concluded and joint military endeavors were seen as way to keep those elements in check. Also of note, nowhere in the North Atlantic Treaty does it mention Soviets, Russians, or Communism, it refers to 'external forces/attacks/actors', which is more than just a technicality: the U.S. invoked article 5 to get NATO involved in the Afghanistan War back in 2002, so it's still relevant, and the U.S. is the most recent beneficiary of that clause (in fact until 2012, we were the only country that ever invoked it).

I'm very German on both sides of my family, and I very much feel a great deal of pride in Germany's history and accomplishments since they had entered into history two thousand years ago. But I'm hardly sympathetic with Hitler and his Nazis, who had led their own country, and the rest of the world, into an inferno, and murdered innocent millions.

Kraichgauer, why the sly attempts, on your part, to change the subject, not answer direct questions, and generally avoid the real issues here? What about my "own country" (i.e. Australia)? What has that got to do with anything? Everything I told you about the impact of World War 2 on the USSR is correct: they lost approx. 27 million lives in the struggle against Nazi Germany. Why are you trying to ignore and downplay that?

I have "sympathy" for Russia because it deserves my sympathy. Australia (and Britain and the U.S.) do not. It's that simple.

There is a huge difference between a non-aggression pact and an alliance. A non-aggression pact is simply an agreement between the nations concerned that they will not do anything to undermine the security and territorial integrity of the other signatories. An alliance involves the active participation in the defense of a member nation that comes under attack by those who are allied to that nation (ex. the Germans had a formal alliance with Italy, and they assisted them in North Africa because of this). No, I don't need to "learn a little history": I already know a lot about it.



You think what you list here is truly "diverse"?! Russia has more ethnic minority groups than any other country on the planet! Something like over 100 (I admit I can't list them all here and now; I would have to look it up). Here's a tabulated list from Wikipedia that I just now had a look at.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_groups_in_Russia



This is nothing but slanderous nonsense. If you would actually do a little research, and actually examine your prejudices, you might find out that what you have written here is utterly false. Make an effort to learn about Russian history, before you decide to parrot the kind of garbage that one might hear from some of your more disreputable "news" outlets.

George Bush Snr. was the actual head of the C.I.A. at one point in time, and then he became the President. What, exactly, is your point? That if you once belonged to an intelligence agency like the K.G.B. that you are therefore ineligible to become the leader of the nation?

Apparently not enough, there were two sides, Allies and Axis, you're either on team A or team B, not even this Swiss got to play neutral in that one. And it still doesn't explain the mysterious 'buffer zone' you're talking about. Unless you mean Poland, and Romania, or any of the other states the Russians dominated after WWII. Here's a map of 1939 Europe, show me where it's noted Russia buffer zone:
https://www.google.com/search?q=pre+wwi ... TZ4pDTKXyM:


See that's the thing, we just call them Asians in our census, just like we classify all Native Americans as one ethnic group. I guarantee you we have every single one of the groups the Russians have plus a multitude of others. Sorry we're not anal retentive enough to list them out by clan, but we're so diverse it would be a ridiculous effort to do so.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ ... ted_States

If you look at the bottom, they only include the top 15 because we have too many ethnic groups to include, sorry russia's so monocultured it's easy to list them in a spreadsheet.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... orical_GDP

Notice on that chart the Soviets were the 2nd largest economy in 1985, a decade later and beyond Russia is nowhere to be found...hmm, wonder were all that economy went, oh yeah probably the half of Europe they dominated and stole from. But you're right, I'm wrong, the Soviets were all s**ts and giggles for Eastern Europe, that's why they begged and pleaded for Russia not to break up the Soviet Union, I distinctly remember the Eastern Germans frantically trying to replace the bricks on the Berlin wall as the Soviet Union fell because they were so depressed Russia was leaving...

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E ... t_protocol
That's the non-aggression pact, notice the secret protocols that came to light after Germany's defeat: dividing Eastern Europe between the two nations. But that's right, it was only a non-aggression pact...a non-aggression pact that inferred the two states would divide Eastern Europe, parts neither controlled at the time, but seriously it wasn't an alliance for war, it was just a non-aggression pact between the two nations, seriously just a non-aggression pact, totally and don't worry the check's in the mail.

About Russia and the Baltic coast: Russia will always want control over it for obvious geopolitical reasons, and people in the Baltic states know it too well. The only access Russia has to the Baltic sea is through Kaliningrad, which is shut in by Lithuania and Poland. Not a happy situation for the Russians.

I figure that one of the reasons Trump was elected at all was for the US to become more inward-looking. Culturally, the US is losing its historical ties with Europe. We are becoming more and more different. This was a process that was accelerated politically by George W. Bush, when he used NATO to help him attack Iraq illegally. Afghanistan was another matter, but the only people who believed Iraq was harboring weapons of mass destruction were Americans. People don't enjoy being coerced into war, particularly when they know it's unjust. The Iraq war created a deep split because the rest of NATO realized that the US viewed them as subordinate. I suspect that military budgets have been kept low partly because the other member states don't trust the political judgment of the US administration.

I don't think Angela Merkel's comments about not relying on the US were just about Trump asking NATO to meet their budget requirements. I think it is also about her seeing Trump as fundamentally unreliable, and about a lack of common goals. Trump does not seem committed to democracy, and wuite franskly, a lot of his followers don't seem to be either.

Also, I see some definitions of socialism that I don't agree with. I had a look at the Wikipedia page on Socialism, and it seems to confuse Socialism with Social Democracy. There is no requirement in Socialism for a democratically elected government. I often have a hard time understanding why a lot of Americans talk about European states being Socialist. As far as I know, those regimes fell right after the Berlin Wall.

"Stole"?! Yet another baseless accusation! What, precisely, did they steal? Oh, that's right - apparently at the end of World War 2, according to those no-doubt unbiased sources in the West (like the U.S. Government, and perhaps General Patton as well), those dastardly "Russkies" carted off everything they could from the Eastern Sector of Germany, and this loot - according to you - was sufficient to keep them going until 1985! Wow, what a load of s**t! Do correct me if I'm wrong, but this IS what you had in mind when you said "stole" wasn't it? No? Was it the supposed "oppression" post-war? I guess you don't know that not only is Russia the most ethnically diverse nation in existence, but it was even more so when it was the Soviet Union and, what's more, they have now (and had even more back then) an overabundance of natural resources. Everything from timber, to oil, to diamonds, to gas, titanium, gold, nickel, lead, uranium - hell, just about everything you can think of they have! Yet, you claim they owed their wealth to the Eastern half of Europe. The Warsaw Pact existed as a deterrent to N.A.T.O., having been formed in 1955 (1949 for N.A.T.O.), and without which the USSR would have been far more insecure (we're now living with the result of the end of the Warsaw Pact - chaos and war around the globe, the encirclement of Russia by hostile forces, terrorism, and a whole host of other problems).

The USSR was second until 1985 and not after that precisely because of the supremely idiotic "reforms" of that imbecilic twit Mikhail Gorbachev and his pathetic attempts to mimic the West with his "glasnost" and "perestroika" programmes. Yes, that turned out really well didn't it.

The other links you provide do not call into question any of the claims I made. The first one just sends me to a whole list of maps of Europe (under Google images if I recall correctly), with no commentary, and nothing else.

Is this the very best you can do?

The "only" access? Have you ever heard of St. Petersberg, which used to be called Leningrad? It's only Russia's second largest city, and it is a port city on the BALTIC! What about Kronshtadt? That's Russia's oldest naval base, and it too is on the Baltic.

Wow, the sheer ignorance I am encountering here regarding all things Russian is truly, utterly astounding!

Last edited by Lintar on 10 Jun 2017, 9:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I have a hard time understanding this as well, because what those countries in Europe now have isn't at all socialism. I guess they must think that if there is a health safety net provided for the citizens by the government, something that United Statesians are completely unfamiliar with, then that must be "socialism". After all, they call this "socialised medicine", demonstrating in one fell swoop their ignorance of the word "socialised" and what governments are actually for in the first place (i.e. looking after its citizens, rather than the greedy interests of rapacious corporations).

I'm sorry. I don't know what is happening with my brain. I am having memory problems, and this is the most idiotic thing I've said to date. It's like I'll function normally, and everyone thinks I'm ok, including my husband, and then suddenly I forget the existence of St. Petersburg. I think I'll stay out of PPR for a while.

Sorry, I didn't know you had memory issues. I just saw the statement, knew it was wrong, and responded. I have a tendency to do that (a lot).

Just remembered I wanted to get back to you on this: Don't worry, I know it was stupid and I don't particularly feel bad about it as it is just one example of a bigger problem. I know PPR gets rough at times, and it doesn't bother me when I know I was wrong and it was all very spontaneous. Seriously, you weren't mean.

The only response to your lack of evidence is: If you hate the West so much move out of Australia. Have a nice day, comrade.

My "lack of evidence"? To what? Your patently false claims about Russia/the USSR? In effect you cannot address the issues I raised here, this being the reason for the juvenile "comrade" comment. Well yes, "have a nice day" in the alternative reality you apparently inhabit.