Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
kerosene

Should Russia fear NATO expansion?

Recommended Posts

TO JDB

Quote[/b] ]

The Sovjet/Russian defense plan has always been aimed at keeping powerfull enemies away from their soil by having sattelite states(/weak states) at their own borders to have a buffer that they can afford to abandon. With all these countries joining NATO that has rendered that plan useless. You can also see that countries that used to shiver whenever Moscow growled now have the guts to stand up to them (as they now have economic powerof some sort , and connections with western european countries) like in the oil dispute and the Orange-revolution/elections/badly executed murder-plot involving poison in the Ukraine.

As well of course as Putin wanting to be the big bad Communist again, and wishing to return to the Cold War.

What you have just written is way off point to the issue at hand and certainly way of coarse to the way you see Russia's actions with NATO and West. I do not know where you get your news from but it seems from where you get it, it shows the propagander control is great there. So please do not say really what you do not understand.

I am Russian, and I will not argue here cause this topic is too big to argue at. It will only end up closing with the help of the admin.

I can explain so much to you just to make you understand that you have no knowledge of Russia's/Nato concept to the issue.

The only thing I can add which is a simple fact is; both sides NATO/WEST and RUSSIA are both worried and still feared amongst each other for military control and many other issues too creating a struggle. That is as far as I will go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not know where you get your news from but it seems from where you get it, it shows the propagander control is great there.

rofl.gif

Yea, and Russia is a heaven, especially for the freedom of press, and a flower of democracy. Thank you for this, you've maked my day dude. Remember, every eyes have its own painter, and every stick have (almost) always two ends. wink_o.gif

So you're right, this topic is too big to argue at and it should be closed. Because sooner or later it will at least gone off-topic, or it will degenerate into all kind of propagandistic growling (have already - just look at Baff1's weird imperialistic-colonial-isolationistic rant).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]Obviously you don't have a clue about Yugoslavia and what hapenned there, so stop/don't using it as some proof for the NATO 'expansion' or non-legitimate use of force or whatever. But just for your information; 'Yugoslavia' *read hegemonistic Serbia* attacked by order Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Hercegovina, all of them the (former) 'brotherhood republics', and on the end Kosovo, and the NATO bombarding of Serbia (not Yugoslavia! )

Serbia was a part of Yugoslavia. If someone bombs Serbia, they also bomb Yugoslavia. Easy.

Quote[/b] ]Stalin also almost (?) killed his father with a knife...), of which I've understood was quite paranoid itself... somehow 30-70 million people in about 10 years seems perfectly "sensible" to me.

There are loads of stories about Stalin. I doubt any of them are true. People also say he was paranoid. He might have been, but it had its reasons. It all started with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Kirov

Quote[/b] ]Yea, and Russia is a heaven, especially for the freedom of press, and a flower of democracy.

It's more subtile in the west. There's no freedom of press here either. There's freedom if you can afford it. Without freedom there's no democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]No matter the reason, if one country starts pushing more money into guns and war, other countries are forced to do it also.

Bullshit. This sounds so 80ies style, I realy cant believe someone is still stuck in this cold-war ideology. If the US spends billions and billions in their military then so be it, I couldnt care less. The threat will always be relatively low since any larger conflict would definetly break the backbone of any sensitive western economy. Russia ridicules itself right now with their silly exaggerated armament plans for the next years. Anyone knows russia cant afford it and the money would be better invested elsewhere.

I know I sound a little harsh and I dont mean to, but this topic realy anoys me, since it is obvious russia is moving backward.

Puttin is realy one of those politicians I couldnt hate more. He is pretentious, works the old-KGB style, tries to create international disharmony and most important, he seems to be anti-democratic. If you want to push russia ahead, then you have to start from the scratch. For once in history russia needs to be governed bottom up and not top down.

Many people claim not to like Putin and the rule in Russia. Some claim that it is all going backwards, some claim it is going forward.

Well you may have a high percentage of people not liking the rule of Putin in other coutries both Europe and and West, but it does not really bother us Russians to who hates the rule and why.

Fortunalty, the main important thing is "the people of Russia". 90% of Russians on their free will are in favour of Putin and his rule no matter the propagander being used by other countries against Russia. So it really does not matter who dislikes his rule or how Russia works with the Russian people.

You forget a large majority of Russians too (which I believe you do not know since your statements are not balanced) have their own dislikes to what other countries do for their interest. So it becomes a struggle and will forever continue unless both WEST and RUSSIA wipes themselves out of the face of this earth with nuclear.

For countries to change Russia to their favour and like a dog on a leash is like asking snow to fall during summer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not know where you get your news from but it seems from where you get it, it shows the propagander control is great there.

rofl.gif

Yea, and Russia is a heaven, especially for the freedom of press, and a flower of democracy. Thank you for this, you've maked my day dude. Remember, every eyes have its own painter, and every stick have (almost) always two ends. wink_o.gif

So you're right, this topic is too big to argue at and it should be closed. Because sooner or later it will at least gone off-topic, or it will degenerate into all kind of propagandistic growling (have already - just look at Baff1's weird imperialistic-colonial-isolationistic rant).

Quote[/b] ]Yea, and Russia is a heaven, especially for the freedom of press, and a flower of democracy. Thank you for this, you've maked my day dude.

Actually, I try to understand your points to this and I wonder how I made your day.

You only try to put words in my mouth by writing something the other way round which was not mentioned. The simple thing is, if you do not know what you want to write about on a particular country, then do not write. Read only. Simple.

I cannot see myself talking about "for example" Brazil and its inside politics and reasoning to it, even news like CNN or BBC will not be able to help you go deep to understand it's actions because for you to get perfect information, is like solving a puzzle.

So do please read statements correctly before you write in lame terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thinked not to answer on your post, firstly because it's off-topic, and secondly because you are the one which have totally one sided view here, and because you're (intentionally? ) in the best propagandistic manner distorting the truth, in attempt to equalise and to distribute the guilt on all the sides equally for all that ordeal.

Which is a pretty disgusting doing must add.

Maybe a bit off topic. However, the bombing of Yugoslavia showed the true face of NATO. Attacking a country without UN approval. A conglomerate of military powers, whose sole purpose is to listen to the United States. Kind of like the Warsaw Pact, only packed in sugar to make it more appealing to democracy loving people everywhere.

And about the one sidedness;

whose fault was the conflict in Yugoslavia? If not of all those involved? If by claiming the Serbs are the ones who did all the wrongs, are you not being one sided yourself?

From your writing I speculate that you're from around here, and may be emotionally involved in the whole matter. However, you must realise the other side is emotionally involved as well. So, don't take this as an attack on you or anything.

The only thing here that bothers me is various children, telling us that the conflict is too recent to discuss levelheadedly.

So, enough from the Balkan wars for now from me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, it's going/gone off-topic, but what the hell ...  wink_o.gif

Serbia was a part of Yugoslavia. If someone bombs Serbia, they also bomb Yugoslavia. Easy.

No, it's not that easy, Yugoslavia (as a state) has long gone by then, only Serbs in Serbia and Bosnia, and to some degree the Montenegro's (mostly of serbian origin) have dreamed to live in some state or whatever named Yugoslavia. And if by that time you'd ask ten of those 'yugoslavs' where are the borders of that 'state', you'll get ten different answers. And the fact is that by that time nobody in the world, not even official Russia, haden't recognized it anymore as such.

Quote[/b] ]It's more subtile in the west. There's no freedom of press here either. There's freedom if you can afford it. Without freedom there's no democracy.

Never said or claimed there's (a total) press freedom on west, never been, never will be, such things are an utopia, as is a hard core democracy; it's unpossible, not with homo sapiens thou, we're to wicked for such things. But compared with the russian press (and the overall) 'freedom' ...

Actually, I try to understand your points to this and I wonder how I made your day.

You've maked my day by talking -as a russian citizen- about propaganda control on west. And additionally by telling the people not to post (speak) if they don't know/understand/whatever ,,, really democratic must say ...

@4-Eyes

Just stop it, will ya, I'll not argue about it, you relly don't know what you're talking about. Just for a taste:

Quote[/b] ]whose fault was the conflict in Yugoslavia? If not of all those involved? If by claiming the Serbs are the ones who did all the wrongs, are you not being one sided yourself?

The Serbs have attacked Slovenia (not 'JNA', this was just a hypocritical paravan for the agression/of the agressor), Serbs have attacked Croatia (not local Serb minority, without 'JNA' *read Serbs* they weren't capable to do shit, same goes for the local Serbs in Bosnia -- who gaved them all that mighty weapondry and hardware, eh, who helped them in agression? the Serbs from Serbia), Serbs attacked Bosnia ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freedom means different things to differetn people, and propaganda isn't something only our enemies are good at.

My national media is state controlled. The largest media outlet is state owned. Censorship is frequent.

My personal freedom is not derived from the political system here. It is derived from my wealth. My financial ability to live outside the systems reach.

Freedom to travel, freedom to educate myself, freedom to eat what I chose when I chose. All granted by by ability to pay. All censored, lisenced and taxed by my government but overcome by my ability to pay.

I think as long as people like you feel the way you do about Russians, as long as that propaganda inspired lack of respect is engendered..... Then Russia has everything to fear from NATO, and no Russian in his right mind could assume NATO  means them no wrong.

The population is all geared up for Russia's overthrow. All the little NATO people expecting the downtrodden and miserable Russians to come out and give us flowers as our liberating troops roll through Moscow freeing them all to live righteous and free lives as we do.

This level of propaganda is only ever found between nations intent on fighting. It's fighting talk. The prelude to war.

P.S. @4 eyes, I don't think the NATO intervention into Yugoslavia was U.S. lead. They didn't want to come and were very reluctant to do any fighting once they got there. A token force only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Serbs have attacked Slovenia (not 'JNA', this was just a hypoctitical paravan for the agression/of the agressor), Serbs have attacked Croatia (not local Serb minority, without 'JNA' *read Serbs* they weren't capable to do shit, same goes for the local Serbs in Bosnia -- who gaved them all that mighty weapondry and hardware, eh, who helped them in agression, the Srebs from Serbia), Serbs attacked Bosnia ...

Oh? I don't know what I'm talking about?

You do know that the pilot of one of the helicopters that got shot down here was a Slovene? And there were literally brothers, one in the JNA, and one in the TO.

I know a guy who's cousin was at Vukovar. He's a Bosnian. What does that tell you?

Veljko Kadijević himself is half Croat.

You're only proving your unwillingness to listen to what anyone else says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer the original question, what do you beleive Russia has to fear?

NATO isn't known for it's attack, and ask questions later stance, and I seriously doubt NATO would intervene in any Russian internal issues such as Chechnya, or use force to sway Russia in issues such as raw energy supplies to the former states of the Soviet Union. NATO knows, that's no-go territory, and it's unlikely they're going to change attitudes and think 'we can take Russia', overnight.

The mindset that NATO is hostile, is wrong. The world has changed greatly in the past 25 years. Most of it, for the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Russia is the single last country on the planet we want to fight, (although we will if we have to), and we may need their help again should the EU federalists go too mad, or should the U.S. decide that it is they who are the new unrivaled superpower in the world and keep expanding at breakneck speed.

Well, if I may say so, I think the worst enemy any country could have would be the U.S., not Russia - Russia isn't as expansionist with regards to the boundary of its influence, as the U.S.

And to set the record straight, Stalin wasn't in Hitler's league... I agree, Stalin was even worse. German soldiers preferred to surrender to the western allied forces rather than to the soviet forces. I suggest you inform yourself about the reasons for that. It is a fact that is only too many times forgotten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think as long as people like you feel the way you do about Russians, as long as that propaganda inspired lack of respect is engendered.....

Asuming that you mean me here I'll answer; first of all, I don't think nothing about Russia, it's not my concern, not by far, and as I said, there's propaganda and it will be propaganda on both sides, but the russian and western press freedom are currently uncomparable and uncopatible; the murder of respected russian (opositional sort of speak) journalist Politkowska is not some wicked western propaganda ...

Quote[/b] ]The population is all geared up for Russia's overthrow. All the little NATO people expecting the downtrodden and miserable Russians to come out and give us flowers as our liberating troops roll through Moscow freeing them all to live righteous and free lives as we do.

Sorry for asking and be impolite, but are you on weed or something? You should be the last person to talk like this, because you're talking of invading Ireland and not even blinking. Obviously you're still living in some 'golden' years of  Imperial Great Brittain.

Quote[/b] ]This level of propaganda is only ever found between nations intent on fighting. It's fighting talk. The prelude to war.

Right ... a peace pidgeon is talking here. icon_rolleyes.gif

Oh? I don't know what I'm talking about?

You do know that the pilot of one of the helicopters that got shot down here was a Slovene? And there were literally brothers, one in the JNA, and one in the TO.

I know a guy who's cousin was at Vukovar. He's a Bosnian. What does that tell you?

Veljko Kadijević himself is half Croat.

You're only proving your unwillingness to listen to what anyone else says

This, such isolated cases prooves abslutely nothing, this was in the very beginning of the conflict(s)/war, when in so called 'JNA' were (still) some (very very rare) members from the other nationalities, but soon the recruits were quickly replaced with the reservists from ,,, yes, Serbia. I'll not go further in details, as I said it's not worthed, but with such propaganda you can't change the fact that 'JNA' was in fact a serbian army and the Serbs the agressors. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This, such isolated cases prooves abslutely nothing, this was in the very beginning of the conflict(s)/war, when in so called 'JNA' were (still) some (very very rare) members from the other nationalities, but soon the recruits were quickly replaced with the reservists from ,,, yes, Serbia. I'll not go further in details, as I said it's not worthed, but with such propaganda you can't change the fact that 'JNA' was in fact a serbian army and the Serbs the agressors. Period.

The conflict began in 1991. The JNA dissolved in 1992. During that period, it wasn't that rare to see people of other nationalities serving. Yes, it was dominated by the serb population. Yes, they did side with the Serbs in Croatia. But as i said, it was still a federal army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BUZZARD @ Mar. 15 2007,20:14)]
Russia is the single last country on the planet we want to fight, (although we will if we have to), and we may need their help again should the EU federalists go too mad, or should the U.S. decide that it is they who are the new unrivaled superpower in the world and keep expanding at breakneck speed.

Well, if I may say so, I think the worst enemy any country could have would be the U.S., not Russia - Russia isn't as expansionist with regards to the boundary of its influence, as the U.S.

And to set the record straight, Stalin wasn't in Hitler's league... I agree, Stalin was even worse. German soldiers preferred to surrender to the western allied forces rather than to the soviet forces. I suggest you inform yourself about the reasons for that. It is a fact that is only too many times forgotten.

Yes but Russians soldiers weren't given the option to surrender by German forces, and neither were their civilians.

I don't think the French treated them too kindly either.

The reasons why Germans were more keen to surrender to us, is because they hadn't abused us in quite the same way. Had they done, they would have got the same from us.

American's and British weren't occupied by the Germans. Our people were sent to the gas chambers, raped and murdered. There was no sustematic genocides of our populations. That's why they surrendered to us.

Fear of reprisal. They knew what they had done.

The U.S. are not as scarey as the Russians. How many cities would you have to destroy before America would fold?

Russians expect to lose entire cities every fight. This tactic has been the mainstay of their defence for centuries.

Plus they have a larger military than the U.S. and are much harder to spy on and infiltrate. We could take the U.S. premptively, they'd never see it coming, but the Russians have their guard up.

Not to mention that the U.S. is dependant on foriegn trade, it can be isolated or blockaded, militarily or diplomatically from much of it's resouces and wealth. Not really possible with Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The conflict began in 1991. The JNA dissolved in 1992. During that period, it wasn't that rare to see people of other nationalities serving. Yes, it was dominated by the serb population. Yes, they did side with the Serbs in Croatia. But as i said, it was still a federal army.

'JNA' dissolved long before those dates, as has the federation(Yugoslavia), the question is only who noticed it or be willing to notice it (all that dissolving of federal institutions and the fleeings of (mostly slovene and croatian) recruits from that 'federal' army.

EDIT: just stop us two with this off-topic, ok?  wink_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry for asking and be impolite,

If you were sorry, you wouldn't do it every post.

A murdered journalist?

We had a Vicar murdered yesterday.

Honestly, who cares?

I don't live in a society with freedom of the press. I never have. Russia doesn't have freedom of the press either....

And?

I've never found my freedom in a newspaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
'JNA' dissolved long before those dates, as has the federation(Yugoslavia), the question is only who noticed it or be willing to notice it (all that dissolving of federal institutions and the fleeings of (mostly slovene and croatian) recruits from that 'federal' army.

EDIT: just stop us two with this off-topic, ok?  wink_o.gif

Okay, untill it starts again  tounge2.gif

My opinion on NATO is, that it's a criminal organisation. That's that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know a lot about Russia or the U.S., or any other country, but I do know something about people. As I read this thread it seemed obvous to me, that it is NOT any country or organization to be blamed for the problems and conflicts today, the root of the problem is instead people.

People are responsible for creating and spreading hatred, racism, propaganda, paranoia, fear, jealousy, apathy, misunderstanding, and many other human qualities.

The world needs to cool down. People are quick to fight, but slow to understand and forgive. We are all brothers, there is no reason why we cannot live in peace. Except for that reason is us. Arguments only lead to more arguments, conflicts only creates more conflicts. Why do some of us fight over dirt?

I am not saying someone should not defend him/herself! Understand that conflict has been around since the beginning of the human race (and possibly earlier?) Humans seem to love violence and pursuing their selfish desires. As long as this is true, there will always be war. There are many good people in the world, in every country, but even good people can be persuaded or succumb to the power of the ill intentioned people of the world. Sometimes the ill intentioned do not even know they are doing wrong.

What does all this have to do with the thread topic(Should Russia fear NATO expansion)?

Well, here it is: Russia is a unique people, and NATO is aswell a collection of unique people. Just like water and oil, when you put the two together, they do not mix. There is nothing wrong with being unique, but when one unique people is unwilling to tolerate another unique people it creates a problem for all people. You can argue both ways; Russia should be afraid of NATO or NATO should fear Russia, it does not matter. What should matter is that we leave the earth in a better way than it was when we entered it. In time what matters now, will matter little later. We are here for such a short time. It is easy to hate another person or country or organization, it much much harder to love them for being different. Please understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

/me applauds Rumsfield's words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Russia should start to solve own problems like stop exploiting poor normal citizens (i suggest You visit major cities in Russia and then go outside them) ...

if You can keep with "bribes " to local police to pass then You must admit that Russia major problem is not laying outside at all ...

anyway as long there will be people so easily manipulated, unable to form own opinion formed upon facts from various sources then Russia will always lag behind ...

yet i guess for some people (after reading theirs posts) there is no hope (if you deny single fact once, You deny some more in future also ...) ...

EoF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Russia should start to solve own problems like stop exploiting poor normal citizens (i suggest You visit major cities in Russia and then go outside them) ...

if You can keep with "bribes " to local police to pass then You must admit that Russia major problem is not laying outside at all ...

anyway as long there will be people so easily manipulated, unable to form own opinion formed upon facts from various sources then Russia will always lag behind ...

yet i guess for some people (after reading theirs posts) there is no hope (if you deny single fact once, You deny some more in future also ...) ...

EoF

Dito. And if some country for instance wants to install the anti-rocket defensive shield, then that's not of any russian concern, end of debate.

So called influential spheres and zones are voluntarily created (by the common interests and thru the cooperation), they cannot be imposed (thru the preassure and/or by force), so what Russia is doing here is just kicking in the mist; sooner or later they would had to recognize and to accept the fact that they're (currently) not (so) desirable 'bride', at least not for the Europe, and they're solely to blame for this; amoung the other things the (negative) historical reminiscenses in some european countries on/about the Russia are still very fresh ...

@Rumsfield

wow_o.gif  Dude!

Deeeep, and there's some truth in there, but also the elements of a fairytale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia is a neoliberal country. That's why the social part of the russian society looks like it does. The difference is that people there distrust their government and everyone who has got authority (apart from Putin, who is the "good guy"), while most people in the west mostly swallow everything that's spread in media. For instance, now all of sudden, Mugabe is a dictator, last month he was a president. Or just look at when everyone believed in the "good guy" ol' cowboy Bush. Stupid people or people who don't care are a bigger threat to the west than what Russia is.

Quote[/b] ]And if some country for instance wants to install the anti-rocket defensive shield, then that's not of any russian concern, end of debate.

Yea, so if Russia wants more nukes it's of no concern to the west? Or what about Iran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gulags.

Gulags were work camps, not death camps.

People lived and died in Gulags. Not just died.

Neither were the conditions inhumane. People weren't worked to death.

This is the Soviet Union we are talking about. Workers rights and all that jive.

The kind of people you found living and working in Stalin's Gualgs, were the kind of people who ran (and supported the running of) the Death camps under the Nazi's. Camps with the sole purpose of exterminating people allied to Stalin.

It wasn't just German people who were death camp running Nazi's, Ukrainians and all the rest were too.

Laughable that anyone should attempt to compare the two.

Stalin wasn't in Hitlers league.

Those of us who have grown up in NATO countries in the Cold War should try and recognise the nature of propaganda.

Should Russia fear NATO.

Obviously it should. NATO is successfully attempting to move it's militarised border closer to Russia by accepting Eastern European members into the alliance and pursuing the War on Terror. Soviet forces have withdrawn, and instead of NATO matching this with a withdrawl of it's own, NATO has advanced.

It doesn't matter why NATO has advanced. Only it's current position is relevant. Any action can be justifiable, but it is not justification which creates threat, it is capablility.

Should Britain remain in NATO.

In WW2, our mutual defence pact with Poland sucked us into a war we weren't ready for. 100,000's died, people were bombed in their homes. The population starved for the next 20 years, our pacific empire was exchanged for American food and Japanese concentration camps.

Poland was never rescued. The whole purpose of the war a failure.

Russia and America, the two junior partners overthrew the world order and became our seniors.

The Russians in particular the new world superpower. Unrivaled in it's supremacy.

We all teamed up together, winners and losers alike, to form NATO in an attempt to restrain it.

The Ukraine is in Russia's back yard. If Ireland joined the Soviet Union, we should have invaded Ireland on the same day.

Apart from being totally disrespectful to Russia, the acedance of Ukraine into NATO provides us with a problem. A problem, quite similar to the one we faced in 1939 with Poland.

NATO is a mutual defence pact. The only possible threat to Ukraine, (not to mention NATO's reason d'etre) is Russia.

Should Russia intervene militarily with Ukraine; under NATO we would then be forced to declare war on Russia by automation.

There isn't any possible way that we could liberate Ukraine from Russia.

All that would happen is that we would be drawn into a costly if not suicidal war with Russia for no possible gain.

The lesson from WW2 for the British, is not to enter into too many alliances. WW2 was a chain reaction.

If Ukraine joins NATO, the British must leave it. Russia is the single last country on the planet we want to fight, (although we will if we have to), and we may need their help again should the EU federalists go too mad, or should the U.S. decide that it is they who are the new unrivaled superpower in the world and keep expanding at breakneck speed.

This is an interesting post because it combines valid points with a load of old cobblers.

Its very typical to say Stalin wasnt "as bad" as Hitler because he killed anyone who opposed him indescrimitley rather than along racial lines, which to me as well as most western people, just seems "worse" in someway, even though logically its the same.

Some people were eorked or starved to death in Gulags, Stalin deported most of the population of Chechnya to Siberia. He wasnt a nice or good man, he was a psychotic paranoid monster, but without him and the sacrifice of millions of russians we would have lost WW2.

Your points on the the Ukraine are good though, given the way america reacts to Hugo Chavez its funny how people on here can act like Russia should just be OK with a NATO that rolls right up to its border but excludes it from membership.

The whole purpose of WW2 was a failure? Wrong.

The purpose was to preserve soverignty and democracy of European states and in the long run even the former Warsaw pact states have gotten it.

We didnt lose our superpower status because of WW2, we lost it because of economics, the U.S has a huge population base and natuarl resources that dwarf britains, we couldnt hold onto our empire because colonalism was crumbling all over the world.

This is typically whiny Daliy Mail talk. - We'll need Russias help if the "EU federalists go to mad?" stuff like that is why the anti EU lobby arent taken seriously, there is a serious debate worth having, but in the UK its buried under nationalistic nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EoF

Dito. And if some country for instance wants to install the anti-rocket defensive shield, then that's not of any russian concern, end of debate.

So called influential spheres and zones are voluntarily created (by the common interests and thru the cooperation), they cannot be imposed (thru the preassure and/or by force), so what Russia is doing here is just kicking in the mist; sooner or later they would had to recognize and to accept the fact that they're (currently) not (so) desirable 'bride'...

Well actually, If the IMF and the Worldbank hadnt insisted that free market reforms and privatisation be implemented as fast as possible and before monopoly laws were created amongst many, many other mistakes pushed on them by the west Russia would be in much better shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yea, so if Russia wants more nukes it's of no concern to the west?

Exsactly. What's up to you if your next door neighbour buy a gun, do you complain and look at them thru the lowered forhead every time they do this? Must they ask you for a permission?

Quote[/b] ]Or what about Iran?

Exsactly the same. It is their soverene right do develop the nuclear technology. And as long as USA have a single nuclear rocket they have no right to salt the others minds. Maybe such policy doesen't seems wise (Iran by no means can be trusted) , but such are the (common sense) facts. And beside of this, I was informed thru 'the rotten western propaganda' that Russia has begun some 'business' with them ...

Well actually, If the IMF and the Worldbank hadnt insisted that free  market reforms and privatisation be implemented as fast as possible and before monopoly laws were created amongst many, many other mistakes pushed on them by the west Russia would be in much better shape.

Well it's not that simple; as I said, there're some negative historical reminiscenses about Russia in Europe (Warsaw Pact for instance - nothing but a Russian Imperium), also there're some differences which will be hard to overcome or overpass in the future, if ever, like cultural differences, different mentality, different religion even ...

EDIT TO PREVENT A DOUBLE POST:

Off-topic, but still ...

... he (Stalin -- added by karantan) was a psychotic paranoid monster, but without him and the sacrifice of millions of russians we would have lost WW2.

Wrong. If there were not General Zukov the russians would not only lost the war, but be totally crushed or even wiped out. Stalin in first weeks of Nazi invasion in lifeless dispair and totally depressed hidden himself in his daca in Crimea, and has disconnected himself from all the contact with the outside world, thinking that all is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×