Nuclear submarines and regional security.

[jstar]

There is no way a single European country can maintain an independent (and neutral) position in today’s world. Not in economic nor in a military perspective; they are too small to make a fist and just won’t survive.

Saying that they can is similar to the populism used by ultra right and ultra left political parties for which it is rather easy since they carry no responsibility.

Also, there is no European army (yet) and in the Ukrainian war I’m convinced that ‘belonging’ to NATO has kept some countries in Eastern Europe out of the war.

 

[R Cameron]

Instead the US turned it into an OFFENSIVE organisation, that went put its nose in place they had zero reason to be (Afghanistan is an example).

I can agree that NATO should not have put its name on the offensive actions, and yet practically speaking it changed nothing. Those offensives still would have been carried out by the prime participants even if there was no NATO label on it, so effectively NATO created no additional harm in those cases.

However, on the defensive side, NATO has absolutely benefited regional stability and been a net positive for peace and free democracy in a way that can not be achieved without a broad mutual protection treaty.

 

[jstar]

I saw some big busses driving around Satrio and Sudirman with Prabowo’s face on them (nice just before lunch).

There seems to be a conference taking place now with as participants the ministries of defense of the ASEAN countries.

 

[Dave70]

However, on the defensive side, NATO has absolutely benefited regional stability and been a net positive for peace and free democracy in a way that can not be achieved without a broad mutual protection treaty.

NATO is still having cold war mentality (ever since the break-up of the USSR more than 30 years ago).

 

[Balifrog]

However, on the defensive side, NATO has absolutely benefited regional stability and been a net positive for peace and free democracy in a way that can not be achieved without a broad mutual protection treaty.

Nato expansion is the main reason of the Ukraine war !
Politicians had warned about this since 20 years.
Read "The Grand Chessboard" by Brezinski.

 

[harryopal1]

At the same time Putin has overtly been clear that he wants Russia to be great again by incorporating now independent countries which had been part of the USSR. The USA has obviously been pushing Nato to serve its own notions of national interests but these forever shifting sands of European borders have been part of the history of Europe as far back as you can trace. It has always been the nature of large powers to "secure" themselves by either invading or coercing smaller, neighbouring countries.

 

[R Cameron]

Nato expansion is the main reason of the Ukraine war !

"Nato expansion"? Nato hasn't gained territory by conquest, the same can't be said for Russia.

Nato hasn't changed any borders or taken any land, simply more sovereign nations realize how volatile and treacherous Russia is and sought to join a mutual protection treaty. It is absurd to deny vulnerable states from joining a defensive pact because their abuser is making threats. Like telling a woman she shouldn't call the police on her abusive husband because it might increase the abuse.

Politicians had warned about this since 20 years.

Russia's response being predictable does not make it right.

 

[harryopal1]

I

"Nato expansion"? Nato hasn't gained territory by conquest, the same can't be said for Russia.

All borders have stayed the same, simply more sovereign nations realize how volatile and treacherous Russia is and sought to join a mutual protection treaty. Limiting vulnerable states from joining a defensive pact is absurd.


Russia's response being predictable does not make it right.

I agree and much the same applies to the madness of war across the centuries. As for the Wagnerian group and atrocities this was to be expected with violent criminals recruited to be able to kill without blinking. The latest reports of Wagner men killing of prisoners of war and callous murder of trapped civilians will doubtless cultivate a desire for revenge by Ukrainians.

 

[serious_fun]

...a desire for revenge by Ukrainians.

If there are any Ukrainians remaining. Zelensky already has his plans for Fink and company to come in (return?) to the traditional homeland of the Khazars. Lots of prime agricultural land in Ukraine!

Assuming, of course, that the Ukrainians don't seek revenge against those who are hell bent on fighting to the last Ukrainian! (Watch out Kagan/Nuland/et al.)

Hunter Biden will be alright; Burisma has offices in Cyprus.

 

[Dave70]

At the same time Putin has overtly been clear that he wants Russia to be great again by incorporating now independent countries which had been part of the USSR.

Can you cite your source? All in the Western media is Putin saying this or that, often times putting his words out of context and distorting them. Most of the time, there is no direct quotation. For instance, what does he mean with "incorporating"? Is it absorbing the former Soviet republics, or getting them on board in an alliance?

 

[harryopal1]

Can you cite your source? All in the Western media is Putin saying this or that, often times putting his words out of context and distorting them. Most of the time, there is no direct quotation. For instance, what does he mean with "incorporating"? Is it absorbing the former Soviet republics, or getting them on board in an alliance?

Well, I don't speak Russian and have not personally heard Putin on this theme. However, there have been frequent references to this aspiration of "making Russia great again". I suspect you will insist this is all western propaganda and part of a CIA smear campaign. I don't doubt that there are elements of anti Russian sentiment inherent in much coverage of Russian affairs but my overall impression is as earlier stated.

Here are a few links referencing this history.

March 22nd, 2018 | Vol. 191, No. 12 | U.S.

time.com

Canceling the West, Putin Aims to “Make Russia Great Again” - Public Seminar

Under the circumstances, it’s no wonder that anti-Western sentiments seem to be on the rise in Russia.

publicseminar.org

'Make Russia great again': why Putin is a man on a mission | Maynooth University

'Make Russia great again': why Putin is a man on a mission The latest military build-up of Kremlin forces near Ukraine's border is part of Putin's plan to restore historical Russia, writes Oleg Chupryna, PhD scholar in the Department of Sociology Amid the ongoing fears about possible Russia's...

www.maynoothuniversity.ie

 

[harryopal1]

I daresay many Forum readers will have noted how quickly Dave70 has jumped to defend
China against any form of criticism. So why would he now defend Putin? I suspect this is because the Chinese see realpolitik advantages in supporting Russia. As is indicated in this piece of analysis as to why Xi Jinping supports Putin.

Why Xi Jinping is still Vladimir Putin’s best friend

Their bromance began with vodka and sandwiches a decade ago. Now China’s president is visiting Putin after a year of war.

www.politico.eu

That said, in anticipation of Dave70 immediately responding with his correct line, I have no wish to waste time trying to discuss Dave's arguments as there is no debate just his stamping on anything that is critical of China and its interests.

 

[Dave70]

Like telling a woman she shouldn't call the police on her abusive husband because it might increase the abuse.

It's more like a love triangle between the woman (Ukraine), her lover (NATO), and the husband (Russia).

 

[R Cameron]

It's more like a love triangle between the woman (Ukraine), her lover (NATO), and the husband (Russia).

More like an Ex (Russia) that keeps breaking in, slapping her (Ukraine) around, and insisting they should be together again. All the while she's frantically texting her 100kg, UFC champion, gun-carrying boyfriend saying, "He's back again, please hurry over and help me!"

 

[Dave70]

I daresay many Forum readers will have noted how quickly Dave70 has jumped to defend
China against any form of criticism. So why would he now defend Putin? I suspect this is because the Chinese see realpolitik advantages in supporting Russia. As is indicated in this piece of analysis as to why Xi Jinping supports Putin.

Why Xi Jinping is still Vladimir Putin’s best friend

Their bromance began with vodka and sandwiches a decade ago. Now China’s president is visiting Putin after a year of war.

www.politico.eu

That said, in anticipation of Dave70 immediately responding with his correct line, I have no wish to waste time trying to discuss Dave's arguments as there is no debate just his stamping on anything that is critical of China and its interests.

I will respond to your post, if I want to. You don't have to respond to my post, if you don't want.

I'm pro-China and pro-Russia. And you're anti-China and anti-Russia. We cannot possibly get along.

It's just incredible to remember you as an ex-journalist who ignored my comments about presstitutes. But foremost, I'll remember you as someone who has Chinese friends but hate Chinese.

 

[harryopal1]

I will respond to your post, if I want to. You don't have to respond to my post, if you don't want.

I'm pro-China and pro-Russia. And you're anti-China and anti-Russia. We cannot possibly get along.

It's just incredible to remember you as an ex-journalist who ignored my comments about presstitutes. But foremost, I'll remember you as someone who has Chinese friends but hate Chinese.

I am neither anti China or anti Russia. I am interested in contemporary and historical developments. The assertion that I am, ".... someone who has Chinese friends but hate Chinese." is as offensive as it is absurd. How would I manage to have "... Chinese friends but hate Chinese."? Incidentally I have recently taken a lease with a Chinese owner.

Sorry I responded to the baited trap.

 

[R Cameron]

Can you cite your source? All in the Western media is Putin saying this or that, often times putting his words out of context and distorting them. Most of the time, there is no direct quotation. For instance, what does he mean with "incorporating"? Is it absorbing the former Soviet republics, or getting them on board in an alliance?

I don't understand Russian, but considering this 2021 English language essay from Putin is directly supplied by the Kremlin, I will assume it is an accurate enough translation: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181
Plenty to pick through there, but the conclusion I find most interesting:

I am confident that true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia. Our spiritual, human and civilizational ties formed for centuries and have their origins in the same sources, they have been hardened by common trials, achievements and victories. Our kinship has been transmitted from generation to generation. It is in the hearts and the memory of people living in modern Russia and Ukraine, in the blood ties that unite millions of our families. Together we have always been and will be many times stronger and more successful. For we are one people.

Today, these words may be perceived by some people with hostility. They can be interpreted in many possible ways. Yet, many people will hear me. And I will say one thing – Russia has never been and will never be ”anti-Ukraine“.

He believes that "true sovereignty of Ukraine is possible only in partnership with Russia", then the very last line concludes with, "And what Ukraine will be – it is up to its citizens to decide." Clearly that last line is hogwash, because when Ukraine clearly decided, Russia tried to overrun their entire country and replace it's government.

Then, in the middle of last year, well into the broader invasion, here is an example of Putin's statements. I can only assume it's an accurate translation, but there does not appear to be any important missing context when he says, "Well, it seems it has also fallen to us to take back and strengthen (territories)."

 

[Dave70]

Well, I don't speak Russian and have not personally heard Putin on this theme.

Gotcha!

However, there have been frequent references to this aspiration of "making Russia great again".

What's wrong with "making Russia great again"?

Hey, did Trump copied that with "Make America Great Again"?

 

[Dave70]

I am neither anti China or anti Russia. I am interested in contemporary and historical developments. The assertion that I am, ".... someone who has Chinese friends but hate Chinese." is as offensive as it is absurd. How would I manage to have "... Chinese friends but hate Chinese."? Incidentally I have recently taken a lease with a Chinese owner.

Sorry I responded to the baited trap.

That's why I said "I'll remember you".

Incidentally, I know of someone who deals with the Chinese but hates the Chinese, he is racist at heart. But of course, he hides it because he needs the business. He is saying all this to me as we are the same color but didn't know that I'm quite sympathetic to the Chinese (not racist at all).

 

[john madden]

Gotcha!



What's wrong with "making Russia great again"?

Hey, did Trump copied that with "Make America great again"?

Gotcha? Peurile.