Is NATO relevent in todays age and should Britain be a member of it?

War is the continuation of politics by other means. So long as the interests of Russia and West are not the same, we will need a military to impose our will on our enemy, if the Russians were more open to peaceful and diplomatic methods we would not have to put such a measure in place, but their increasingly autocratic and expansionist ideology tells me it would be a very bad idea to remove NATO. That quote above applies equally for Russia, what idea Putin has for Russia is interesting, i'm just not sure it involves peaceful cooperation...

True but bearing in mind Russia reserves first strike as an option would you really want to be part of an organisation that will only serve to put your nation and people in the face of an SS-18 or the like? Britain and all but the US in this case are ducks in the sight of a punt gun..
As for Putins policy realisticly its no different from ours is it? They havent gone to war as much as us in recent history and when they have its been small local wars e.g. Georgia...
As for his ideas for Russia Id say he's aiming to restore at least in part Russia to the state it was in when he was young maybe not with territory but with the power it weilded.

NATO as it stands is adequate. Hopefully one day Russia will realise our interest coincide more than they conflict, and that co-operation is better than confrontation, and they will be able to enter the alliance.

By definition they cant enter though? I must say though that their interests arent exactly against NATOs members though are they? If anything theyre very similar it just seems to remind the members of why it was founded an assertive Russia but aside from flexing a very small military muscle its not exactly anything to threat over is it ? Not to mention we're the ones provoking them in that we're pounding them with sanctions and thus basically driving a bear into a corner... Without Russia we likely wouldnt be alive today no matter what they do we do owe them everything and that fact is undeniable, no?
But whats so bad about them versus some of our 'allies' for instance Saudi who we like for selling oil for weapons is currently bombing the poor blighters in Yemen back to the stone age, theyre ruled by a tyrant and stand against everything we notionally stand for right?

I'm off to bed but I'll reply in the morning.

Russia but aside from flexing a very small military muscle its not exactly anything to threat over is it ?

Not to mention we're the ones provoking them in that we're pounding them with sanctions

Without Russia we likely wouldnt be alive today no matter what they do we do owe them everything and that fact is undeniable, no?

theyre ruled by a tyrant

Except for carving off a huge section of a sovereign neighbouring state in Ukraine, subjecting their eastern provinces to a kind of covert invasion, bullying the Baltic States with cyberattacks and regularly issuing threats against Eastern Europe.

Russia invades a sovereign neighbouring state, and when we respond with sanctions we're the ones engaging in provocation? Seems legit

(1) No we don't "owe" them, we were fighting a mutual enemy; they also wouldn't have survived without the enormous materiel aid sent to them by the West, with Lend Lease, with military aid from the UK, with the system of arctic convoys. They had manpower which we didn't; we had material advantages they did not. Together that combination was able to defeat the Nazis (though of course the Russians used that victory to extend chauvinist, oppressive regimes over all of Eastern Europe)

(2) Even if we did "owe" them morally, that doesn't mean we turn a blind eye when they engage in a kind of dangerous nationalistic irredentism and invade one of their neighbours

Yes, Russia is a ruled by a tyrant (and a bigoted, fascistic one to boot). But if they kept to themselves and didn't invade sovereign states, then they would not be suffering sanctions.

You mean the bit which isnt huge, was Russian for centuries and is populated by Russians?
It has issued no threats against them, they simply are paranoid of a Russian invasion.
Cyber attacks, lol, like the ones the US employs yes?




Prove they invaded, the states in question declared themselves sovereign ergo Russia can do what it likes diplomatically with them. But I guess thats bad compared to us invading and accupying several countries namely Afghanistan and Iraq, attacking Libya and Syria though which is tottally okay?




Rubbish without the USSR we would either have lost europe or be speaking German now and thats a fact you cant deny, true we helped them but if it wasnt for Stalingrad, Moscow and Kursk where the Soviets won and turned the tide on Hitler we would have had a hell of a time beating those forces should they have been on the western front. I do not deny that in combination we preveiled but without the Russians the war would have been played out very differently, do you think those millions of Soviet fighters died for nothing? Mate that's not only ignorant but offensive to the memory of those people who fought literally hand to hand with the Nazis. No one gave more than the USSR thats a fact. As for Stalins betrayal thats a different story altogether which we could write a thesis on so I would suggest we leave that. As for lend lease im not aware of the soviets really being a part of that, true britain was hammered by the capitalist pigs in washington and still are today but if you would enlighten me as to what the Soviets did in that bar accepting supplies to stave off defeat in the East and enable us to retake the West please say?



They havent invaded anywhere outright and you know this, i dont deny the eyebrow raising queary of Crimea but aside from that on a legal basis they are entitled to give whatever support they like to areas that declare independence. Also I think you should read a history book we are in NO position to judge what transpired there considering the wars we have been in constantly for years where Russia has played no role in illegal invasions for selfish greed that have left an entire region in anarchy... Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen etc. are all failed thanks to western intervention to 'help' the people there, deny it I beg you.





I think you're being a little harsh on that front, this is just my opinion and having many Russian friends to quote from, I would say Putin has done wonders for Russia, true there have been great costs for it in personal freedoms but Russia is far better off since he gained power and it is widely believed within the international community that shoul he suddenly, lets say die, Russia could well implode. To govern such a vast country with such issues is a tremendous task and he has navigated it in a manner that i would say is probably the best that could be expected without leaving it like it was in the 90's... in tatters with missing WMDs, no pay for workers and soldiers, no economy etc.
No that is utter **** and you know it, they have not invaded anyone, if they had you'd know it. They have bar the U.S. and possibly PLA the most effective army in the world, simply giving weapons to people they support doesnt qualify as an invasion and even if they did send forth their army it would be no different than Iraq, The elected government of Ukraine was deposed and replaced undemocratically with Fascists and idiots. The Crimea [aside from being Russian for eons] did elect to become part of the federation again and the break away states are entitled to do so, if they dont want to be part of Ukraine then thats their choice they arent the ones shelling and firing rocket volleys into cities as much as the Ukrainian army. The sanctions are nothing but western hypocritical rubbish aimed at Russia, namely because we've been doing this and far worse for decades and on their doorstep, how would the Americans like it if the Russians started bombing Mexico like they did to Serbia for instance?

Main point here is that whats being said by western governments is hypocritical at best and downright warmongering otherwise, We have no business in that part of the world as the Russians have none in South and Central America, do you deny this? Placing ABMs and staging military exercises on their doorstep is something they cant ignore and are well within their rights to push back at. That is simple diplomatic conduct, you dont piss off the superpower next door!?

Also how is Putin a bigoted fascist, I reserve my views on him but i'd like to know why you think this.

NATO is key to our collective defense, at least in the UK. While there may be doubt as to whether the US would honour it's word in the Baltics, it certainly would were the UK attacked (not only that but US polls show massive support should UK be attacked so the people would demand it).

I have absolutely no issue with sanctioning Russia and would given the chance use this opportunity to rearm considerably. Russia in their actions in Georgia and Ukraine have proven themselves enemies of the west and while the west has won most of Ukraine, there is most definitely a skirmish coming. Russia will not stop attempting expansion and the west will not tolerate Russia's prodding action forever.

Personally I'd be happy to see NATO dissapear and a serious effort made to fold the Russian Federation into the international and western community.

They are an advanced nation and a valuable one to be on good terms with whilst ostracizing them will not only be backing one of 3 super powers into a corner [bad move] but leaving the nation open to shall we say issues...

Russia is a mighty nation but to date it has only ever been able to be led by a strong leader I cant see some tit like Cameron for example being able to actually command such a nation and we wouldnt want to see Russia implode after Putin would we?

By definition they cant enter though? I must say though that their interests arent exactly against NATOs members though are they? If anything theyre very similar it just seems to remind the members of why it was founded an assertive Russia but aside from flexing a very small military muscle its not exactly anything to threat over is it ? Not to mention we're the ones provoking them in that we're pounding them with sanctions and thus basically driving a bear into a corner... Without Russia we likely wouldnt be alive today no matter what they do we do owe them everything and that fact is undeniable, no?
But whats so bad about them versus some of our 'allies' for instance Saudi who we like for selling oil for weapons is currently bombing the poor blighters in Yemen back to the stone age, theyre ruled by a tyrant and stand against everything we notionally stand for right?

Well it is said NATO existed to ''to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down'' Russia will never join it, but it would make the international North a lot stronger.

I hope that Russian actions in Ukraine cease, and through favourable trade and defence agreements we can put an end to this 'cool war'. Sanctioning them is right considering their actions. But the Russian's have a 'laager mentality', to borrow a South African expression, in that any expansion near their borders and any international isolation just increases their resolve into a country that feels surrounded and more willing to do irrational things. If they weren't so difficult to interpret we could have understood that Ukraine was a red-line for them, but even then to deny closer relations between the West and Ukraine at their own violation would be against our very principles. .

I wouldn't say we owe the Russians everything. The Soviets; including Azerbaijanis, Georgians, Armenians, Uzbeks, Turkmen, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Russians and others collectively paid great deal defeating the Nazis, but we also played our part.

I don't like our alliance with the Saudis, the sooner it is over the better. I agree in that we have nothing in common with them, it is a relationship of convenience.

Aha oh yes, The Russians hate the EU let alone NATO and considering NATO is purely a military organisation aimed at them well... :P

I respect the rationale you have there, i mean i personally disagree as i view it as Russia not having done anything wrong [only in so far as we've been doing it for years] but it was obvious that going into their sphere of influence and indeed front yard was going to really aggravate them and im surprised that any leader is surprised about what happened.. I stand by though technically speaking and legally they are entitled to do what theyre doing. Crimea well if we ignore any talk of riggged elections etc. that was perfectly fine and the break away states in the east declared themselves sovereign and asked Russia for aid which due to the first they can give, not to mention we've been doing that in the middle east, Asia, africa and well everywhere for years... Russia hasn't outright invaded anywhere in the conventional sense has it? If it had we would know as Ukraine would be a part of the federation :L

Oh of course i mean we stould against the Nazi war machine on our own for two years before the USSR was forced in and the USA decided to come in but if the USSR hadn't its a fact that retaking Europe would have been a lot harder if not impossible since it was Russia that put the Nazis on the back foot after all right?