Dr Fallout
Centurion
Agreed, the military is a lot less important with these problems. I think that Putin should help Russians first, and then expand or fuck everyone over afterwards.
A video on the Brexit and why the UK should leave.
- Thread starter Erich van Loon
- Start date
- Status
Antiwarprofallout
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Are you denying that NATO and the EU have expanded into areas once under Russian Influence?
Perhaps if NATO wasn't supporting coups in countries, then supporting pro-NATO governments, this wouldn't be a issue.
Antiwarprofallout
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Putin is going to be six feet under by the time Russia is able to expand their influence effectively.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Perhaps, or perhaps not.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
It scares me but if Trump decides to gut NATO, the euro army might not be such a bad idea.
Way back when, I was essentially alone in a sea of anti-us backslapping.
Putin doesn't have the power NOW, but give him a few decades while doing nothing but kow towing to him and a resurgent Russian empire is quite the possibility.
If Putin is so nice, why the hell does he need the CSTO AKA Russian NATO? I mean the PRC are stretching their muscles too thanks to our weak ass president but not even they are ballsy like Putin.
A euro army might mean decreased American military power and influence but it would be good for Europe. For far too long, Europe has outsourced its defense to NATO, which the U.S. provides the bulk of. This meant Europe got to have the benefit of guaranteed defense while being able to focus a whole lot of extra money for social programs, that would normally be allocated to a bigger defense budget.
So in conclusion, Euro Army means decreased American influence, more pressure on the economies of European countries, and a much different outlook in euro global policy as the Europeans now have skin in the game so to speak.
Everything has its pros and cons.
Way back when, I was essentially alone in a sea of anti-us backslapping.
Putin doesn't have the power NOW, but give him a few decades while doing nothing but kow towing to him and a resurgent Russian empire is quite the possibility.
If Putin is so nice, why the hell does he need the CSTO AKA Russian NATO? I mean the PRC are stretching their muscles too thanks to our weak ass president but not even they are ballsy like Putin.
A euro army might mean decreased American military power and influence but it would be good for Europe. For far too long, Europe has outsourced its defense to NATO, which the U.S. provides the bulk of. This meant Europe got to have the benefit of guaranteed defense while being able to focus a whole lot of extra money for social programs, that would normally be allocated to a bigger defense budget.
So in conclusion, Euro Army means decreased American influence, more pressure on the economies of European countries, and a much different outlook in euro global policy as the Europeans now have skin in the game so to speak.
Everything has its pros and cons.
Throatpunch
Banned
NATO is doing sneaky shit, but you cannot just make allegations like that without evidence. If you say that one more time without any evidence I am going to stop debating with you. You need to stop making assertions with no backing because they are just hollow.
Dr Fallout
Centurion
Evidence? Hahahahaha!!!
The whole fucking point of doing 'sneaky' shit is so that there is NO evidence, or that it's really poor.
Expecting evidence from stuff like that is like expecting evidence for creationism. It's either bullshit or weak.
Antiwarprofallout
It Wandered In From the Wastes
It looks more like Putin is begging Europe to stop playing to the US's beat on attitude towards Russia, because his military is badly organized and crumbling.
CSTO was formed to keep friendly with old Soviet aligned countries.
Watch me, kiddo
Let's see, a semi-neutral country bordering another country you've been expanding against since it fell from power. Maybe you ought to topple it's government and install a friendly one via coup.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Putin begging? LOL Putin doesn't beg.
That man would like to epitomize Russian manliness if he hasn't done so already.
Is that why all the countries in the CSTO are under the Russian thumb?
Sure the U.S. wields more influence than NATO but it is nothing like the CSTO.
If we were like the CSTO, we would simply bully the UK into remaining in the EU. If we were like the CSTO, we would turn France and Germany into puppet states among others, allies in name only but really just mindless lackeys.
There is a reason that Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania wanted to join NATO, because it is dangerous to underestimate the Russian bear.
That man would like to epitomize Russian manliness if he hasn't done so already.
Is that why all the countries in the CSTO are under the Russian thumb?
Sure the U.S. wields more influence than NATO but it is nothing like the CSTO.
If we were like the CSTO, we would simply bully the UK into remaining in the EU. If we were like the CSTO, we would turn France and Germany into puppet states among others, allies in name only but really just mindless lackeys.
There is a reason that Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania wanted to join NATO, because it is dangerous to underestimate the Russian bear.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
I admit things happened like Operation Glaudio, but I thought I put the whole conspiracy theory, 'THE U.S CREATED ISIS AND AL QAEDA TO FORMENT PERPETUAL WAR IN THE ME', to rest.
Like I told Sander, in a different and old thread, AQ used to be called Mahktab Al Kitamaht. It was a mujihadeen group formed because of the the Soviet invasion, NOT, America.
After the SU withdrawal, one of the three leaders wanted MAK to be the official, Sharia based government of Afghanistan. OBL and Al Zarqawi, wanted global jihad. They took over MAK and turned it into AQ.
To assume all muslim rebels are extremists is pretty racist actually. So yea, we armed rebel groups, we didn't topple the Libyan or Syrian regime, as the Alex Jones types would have you believe.
Like I told Sander, in a different and old thread, AQ used to be called Mahktab Al Kitamaht. It was a mujihadeen group formed because of the the Soviet invasion, NOT, America.
After the SU withdrawal, one of the three leaders wanted MAK to be the official, Sharia based government of Afghanistan. OBL and Al Zarqawi, wanted global jihad. They took over MAK and turned it into AQ.
To assume all muslim rebels are extremists is pretty racist actually. So yea, we armed rebel groups, we didn't topple the Libyan or Syrian regime, as the Alex Jones types would have you believe.
Throatpunch
Banned
Fucking shit "kiddo", cant you figure out what I am telling you, its probably true that NATOS expansionist, but at the moment you are providing literally no evidence apart from the words you are typing, no articles, nothing from a website that might be credible etc. It wont help your case to make a statement without anything to back it up.
In fact, I'll actually give you some evidence to use:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/washin...ed-a-deal-in-support-of-regime-change/5429142
Last edited:
Well, I can not talk for the Ukraine, but you should google Operation Gladio, the secret armies of the NATO and possbily videos from Daniel Ganser, a historian who published a lot of work trying to analyse the NATO and their actions in Europe for the last 40-50 years.
By the way, those things are hardly big secrets - today. It is known that both the Warsaw pact and the NATO had secret armies, so called Stay-Behind-Organisations, everywhere, in the case one side would attack and occupy teritories. Those units would leash out partisan like attacks on the enemy. At least that was the idea. There are at least some cases where said members of those organisations might have been invoveld in criminal activites. See operation Gladio.
Dude ... it's Russias fault. Common knowledge man!
Antiwarprofallout
It Wandered In From the Wastes
What the feck are you even talking about? Yeah they're Russian influenced, but they prefer Russian influence over US influence a lot more.
Obomber did bully and threaten the UK, and France and Germany are fairly puppeted.
Q: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs [“From the Shadows”], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
Brzezinski: It isn’t quite that. We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn’t believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don’t regret anything today?
Brzezinski: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [integrisme], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.
So bombing a government and supporting forces directly fighting it isn't toppling it?
AskWazzup
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
No, we joined because we hate Russians with passion. The EU and Nato shills have taken control of our government and brainwashed the people with fear mongering. Now they are hiding their nuclear weapons in our countries, already plotting the destruction of democratic Russia. These are historically Russian lands and i cringe when i see people talking about annexations and the like... What? Russia is only taking back what belongs to it, they might be a little edgy but so would you, if a huge military "alliance" would be creeping at your borders, ready to blow you up. And besides, nobody even wanted to exit the soviet block, this was all a plot by Nato and EEC, clearly the people were forced into an alliance with an evil entity that only impoverished our lives since then. The real aggressor here is nato and their shill countries in the vicinity of Russia. I'm actually impressed by Russia's patience when they have a huge nato army stationed right next to its borders, trying to start a war with various militaristic provocations.
I say let's disband the EU and Nato and give back Russia what rightfully belongs to them. Nobody (apart nato shills) wanted these fake "countries" to even exist.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
That evidence against the words of both OBL and Al Zarqawi who stated in an interview that AQ was not a creation of the U.S. at all.
Obama stated he would PREFER that the UK remain in the EU. It was an OPINION. Not like we were going to bomb the brits if they did leave.
CSTO members obviously didn't want to join NATO because they are in the CSTO duh. I never argued otherwise. But I DID argue that they are heavily Russian influenced, more so than NATO affiliated nations in relation to the U.S.
I doubt the majority of the French and German peoples would agree with you that they are American puppet state.
A coup is usually performed with the willing involvement of both a portion of the nations population and more importantly, SUPPORTED by elements WITHIN said nations military structure. If I remember correctly, the SPRING was mostly civilians demonstrating there extreme disgust with their corrupt government.
Obama stated he would PREFER that the UK remain in the EU. It was an OPINION. Not like we were going to bomb the brits if they did leave.
CSTO members obviously didn't want to join NATO because they are in the CSTO duh. I never argued otherwise. But I DID argue that they are heavily Russian influenced, more so than NATO affiliated nations in relation to the U.S.
I doubt the majority of the French and German peoples would agree with you that they are American puppet state.
A coup is usually performed with the willing involvement of both a portion of the nations population and more importantly, SUPPORTED by elements WITHIN said nations military structure. If I remember correctly, the SPRING was mostly civilians demonstrating there extreme disgust with their corrupt government.
Hey hey hey, stop for a moment! Historical land? Sorry, but we should consider to take a step back here. Because talking about "historical claims" opens a can of worms, that will do NO ONE(!) any favour. Not Russia, not other nations. It's simply a historical fact that nations and people change, they flee, they migrate, some nations fall appart new ones are formed. That is a normal process - historically speaking. However, if you start to use that as argument though all you're doing is to serve well, nationalism and justifying expansionism. I am pretty sure that every nation, or well almost every nation, has one way or another historical claims. Particularly when you consider how often borders changed before WW2. Only today, have we a situation where the borders are actually clear and set, which is one of the reasons why there are so few conflicts between nations. If we open that kind of debate again however, we will definetly see a grow in tensions and possible conflicts. If we talk about Crimea for example, than there is no other way to say this, but Russia was on the wrong side here. But it's now done, and we have to continue anyway. Just because I understand why Russia did, doesn't mean it's correct.
I am NOT(!) saying we should completely ignore history and in particular what it means for the people. There are a lot of Russians which see the Crimea as part of old Russia for example. So the rhetoric we use matters a lot when Europe or the NATO decides to deal with Russia. Obviously nations like Belarus, Estonia, Latvia etc. fall more on the Russian side of influence, simply because those are neighbours and Russia is the biggest player. This is not different to the way how Canada and Mexico are closer to the US instead of let us say Germany or China. Those have geographical reasons. We can like that or not, but we can not ignore it! So when we approach Russians neighbours, we have to do it carefully. Just as how we would expect it when Russia would do something similar with Canada. You have always to ask your self, what would I do, in their position? If Russia was creating a military union with China, Mongolia, most of the east european states and they would ask Canada to join so they could station military units? And for some reason, Canada would join. Or Mexico? How would the US president react? How did they react in 1962 when they realized that US missiles have been on Cuba?
Those are all very complex and delicate matters that we are facing today. And it is very difficult to say who's wrong or right here. The NATO expanion is real, and propaganda exists on both sides. But Putin isn't Hitler and the NATO isn't openly seeking war with Russia. However, there are, I think, on both sides a minorty that is trying to look for agression and tension. This much is clear. Russia has to keep their natiolist make-russia-big-again! People in check, and we have to make sure that the NATO isn't gaining more military than it really needs.
Actually ... I am sorry that I have to disappoint you, since NSA and Snoweden ... a lot of Germans feel that their own government is keept on a leash by the US :/. And who could blame them ... even I think that Germany is a bit ... to devoted to US interests. This goes so far, that we have quite a lot of politicans in favour of TTIP for example. What ever if it is true or not, but a lot of people here have this feeling that is an american system forced upon Europe and Germany.
Last edited:
Illuminati Confirmed!
Banned
Who are the second class citizens in Hungary, again?
AskWazzup
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Fake countries (like the baltic ones) should not have any say in this, the world is at a tipping point and if giving them back to Russia creates better balance between the powers (and avoid nuclear war), i say let them be the sacrificial lambs. Nato has clearly gone out of control.
Fake countries? Either a nation exists or it doesn't. There is no such thing as a "fake country". That's idiocy, sorry. Nations like Estonia, Belarus etc. have governments and borders. Maybe their governments might be corrupt and who knows what other issues. But fake is the wrong choice of word here and as I said, it serves only one purpose. To create tension, fear and fuel agressions. But that's not the Europe or world I would like to see, nor do I think that it will do us any good in the long run.
Again, as I said, historical gives play a large role today in the mind of the people. And we can and should not ignore them. However, making those the basis of claims, leads us to situations as we saw them on the Balkan during the 1990s. Is that what you want? I hope not. If there is a nation where 30 or 40% of the population are Russians and the rest are people with different roots, than it is a lot more important to aim for a preacefull coexistence instead of division. I doubt that common people, be it in Belarus, Estonia or Ukraine REALLY look forward to wars and conflicts. What ever if they are Russians or part of other nationalities. Those things never end very well. As we have seen it countless times in the past - ethnic cleansing, concentration camps, genocides you name it.
Sadly, neither Russia nor the NATO/Europe has done a whole lot here to improve the situation for the common people, but just fueling nationlistic groups - on all sides, and creating tensions and fear. However, when you're playing with fire, you can't act surprised when it starts to burn uncontrollably.
To be fair, I used Hungary as example here, they are definetly not the only one treating those people like second class citizens. In Serbia, or well the Balkan in general, those people have to deal with a lot of racism. And yes I know what I am talking about because I have very ugly examples in my own family, where my uncle gave his daughter a choice. Don't marry a gyps, or kill your self, while placing a knive on the kitchen table. That was the point where she decides it's probably for the best to run away. That night she packed her stuff and escaped without anyone noticing. The next moring I remember her mother burning all of the stuff she left behind. So yeah ... there is that.
I could also go and mention the way how Islam is seen in estern europe in general, particularly Poland, which has very close ties to catholicism, but that's a story for another topic.
There is also a very real and ugly way how homosexuality is treated in eastern europe and the balkan. And anti-semitism isn't uncommon either. It is a very sad reality that eastern europe and the balkan have always been very open to treating minorities like shit, that you can see a lot of racism and antisemitism. This was also true under Communist rule. And it is in my opinion definetly a problem that gets very often ignored today.
Again, as I said, historical gives play a large role today in the mind of the people. And we can and should not ignore them. However, making those the basis of claims, leads us to situations as we saw them on the Balkan during the 1990s. Is that what you want? I hope not. If there is a nation where 30 or 40% of the population are Russians and the rest are people with different roots, than it is a lot more important to aim for a preacefull coexistence instead of division. I doubt that common people, be it in Belarus, Estonia or Ukraine REALLY look forward to wars and conflicts. What ever if they are Russians or part of other nationalities. Those things never end very well. As we have seen it countless times in the past - ethnic cleansing, concentration camps, genocides you name it.
Sadly, neither Russia nor the NATO/Europe has done a whole lot here to improve the situation for the common people, but just fueling nationlistic groups - on all sides, and creating tensions and fear. However, when you're playing with fire, you can't act surprised when it starts to burn uncontrollably.
To be fair, I used Hungary as example here, they are definetly not the only one treating those people like second class citizens. In Serbia, or well the Balkan in general, those people have to deal with a lot of racism. And yes I know what I am talking about because I have very ugly examples in my own family, where my uncle gave his daughter a choice. Don't marry a gyps, or kill your self, while placing a knive on the kitchen table. That was the point where she decides it's probably for the best to run away. That night she packed her stuff and escaped without anyone noticing. The next moring I remember her mother burning all of the stuff she left behind. So yeah ... there is that.
I could also go and mention the way how Islam is seen in estern europe in general, particularly Poland, which has very close ties to catholicism, but that's a story for another topic.
There is also a very real and ugly way how homosexuality is treated in eastern europe and the balkan. And anti-semitism isn't uncommon either. It is a very sad reality that eastern europe and the balkan have always been very open to treating minorities like shit, that you can see a lot of racism and antisemitism. This was also true under Communist rule. And it is in my opinion definetly a problem that gets very often ignored today.
Last edited:
- Status