Turn on thread page Beta

nato - assembling biggest troop buildup since cold war watch

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Drawing the line ever closer to the Russian border.
    Rightfully so.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    Rightfully so.
    That wasn't what was agreed during the negotiations over German reunification.

    And, in any case, if the West continues to push eastward into the Russian sphere, don't be surprised when Putin draws his own line and annexes more of Eastern Europe.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    That wasn't what was agreed during the negotiations over German reunification.

    And, in any case, if the West continues to push eastward into the Russian sphere, don't be surprised when Putin draws his own line and annexes more of Eastern Europe.
    Well these Eastern European countries wanted to join NATO because of Russian aggression.
    That is a pretty pathetic excuse from you... You're basically saying " NATO is expanding so we should invade Estonia"
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    That wasn't what was agreed during the negotiations over German reunification.

    And, in any case, if the West continues to push eastward into the Russian sphere, don't be surprised when Putin draws his own line and annexes more of Eastern Europe.
    Is the West pushing, or are the remains of the East reaching out?

    The more prudent action on Russia's behalf would be to try to understand why those countries have requested NATO assistance in the first place, no...?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    Well these Eastern European countries wanted to join NATO because of Russian aggression.
    Explain to me how the Russian federation acted aggressively toward the former Warsaw Pact countries after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and up until they joined NATO.

    That is a pretty pathetic excuse from you... You're basically saying " NATO is expanding so we should invade Estonia"
    You seem to be pretty ignorant about the German reunification agreement: one of the conditions states that NATO would not expand east of the newly reunified German state.

    If you take your rose-tinted Western glasses off for a mere minute and view the European continent from a Russian perspective, it is quite clear that NATO has moved increasingly closer toward Russia, moving into the Eurasian Steppe, setting up missile defence systems -which they claim were installed against Iran, a state without nuclear weapons, let alone ballistic missiles that can reach Europe - and is thus in violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty.

    I suppose the West is allowed to violate international law because Putin is bad, right?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Name:  9cb65e4592cf908a12f21e2baf861e8a.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  12.9 KB
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Explain to me how the Russian federation acted aggressively toward the former Warsaw Pact countries after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and up until they joined NATO.



    You seem to be pretty ignorant about the German reunification agreement: one of the conditions states that NATO would not expand east of the newly reunified German state.

    If you take your rose-tinted Western glasses off for a mere minute and view the European continent from a Russian perspective, it is quite clear that NATO has moved increasingly closer toward Russia, moving into the Eurasian Steppe, setting up missile defence systems -which they claim were installed against Iran, a state without nuclear weapons, let alone ballistic missiles that can reach Europe - and is thus in violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty.

    I suppose the West is allowed to violate international law because Putin is bad, right?
    I am well aware of the treaty, but these countries specifically requested to join NATO to distance themselves from Russia and embrace the EU. I have no problem with that. Putin is a horrible man, no doubt, and AEGIS systems are necessary at this point. All the world powers break international law - all the time.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Is the West pushing, or are the remains of the East reaching out?

    The more prudent action on Russia's behalf would be to try to understand why those countries have requested NATO assistance in the first place, no...?
    Naturally, a bit of both. I find it interesting that as the EU enlargement process got under way in Central and Eastern Europe, it coincided with NATO enlargement. Which begs the question: did Western elites offer the aforementioned areas a 'accession to both organisations or go **** yourself' deal.

    My point was that under the German reunification deal the West agreed to stop NATO enlargement east of the newly unified German state. But, unsurprisingly, the agreement was ignored because, at the time, Russia was in no shape to respond to NATO enlargement, and Western planners saw an opportunity to absorb all of Central Europe, and as much as possible of Eastern Europe into its organisation.

    The tension in Eastern Europe we have today is a direct consequence of NATO enlargement encroaching into the Russian sphere, the violation of the INF treaty, and meddling in Ukraine (see Euromaidan).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    I am well aware of the treaty, but these countries specifically requested to join NATO to distance themselves from Russia and embrace the EU. I have no problem with that.
    And, in doing so, the West created unnecessary tension between itself and Russia. Instead of viewing the Soviet Union's successor state as a potential partner, it was always going to be a foe; and instead of violating the agreement by absorbing Central Europe into NATO, and leaving a neutral zone from the Baltics, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, and Bulgaria, it couldn't help itself.

    If anyone is to blame for the idiotic arms race and renewed Cold War it is the West - and in particular the neocons and military industrial complex who gave the world the disasters in Iraq and Libya.

    Putin is a horrible man, no doubt
    That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    Is he worse than Obama, Hillary or Bush, or their European poodles? Iraq; Libya; Guantanamo; War on Drugs; 90% of drone strikes do not kill their intended target(s); unconditional support for Israel; cosy relationship with Saudi Arabia; support for the Saudis turning Yemenis into flying mincemeat while playing the human rights card in Aleppo; largest arms exporter in the world; the fact that the US has become an oligarchy... I could go on.

    Putin is by no means a saint, but I don't think you fully understand the complexity of running a country like Russia, and, in comparison to the leaders/politicians and examples I've just given you, if he is undoubtedly a horrible man, what does that make them?



    AEGIS systems are necessary at this point.
    Elaborate.

    All the world powers break international law - all the time.
    The United States set the precedent by expanding NATO, violating the INF treaty, invading Iraq, vetoing resolution after resolution threatening Israel at the UNSC, et cetera. Why should China and Russia abide by international law when the US couldn't care less?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stalin)
    And, in doing so, the West created unnecessary tension between itself and Russia. Instead of viewing the Soviet Union's successor state as a potential partner, it was always going to be a foe; and instead of violating the agreement by absorbing Central Europe into NATO, and leaving a neutral zone from the Baltics, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, and Bulgaria, it couldn't help itself.

    If anyone is to blame for the idiotic arms race and renewed Cold War it is the West - and in particular the neocons and military industrial complex who gave the world the disasters in Iraq and Libya.



    That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

    Is he worse than Obama, Hillary or Bush, or their European poodles? Iraq; Libya; Guantanamo; War on Drugs; 90% of drone strikes do not kill their intended target(s); unconditional support for Israel; cosy relationship with Saudi Arabia; support for the Saudis turning Yemenis into flying mincemeat while playing the human rights card in Aleppo; largest arms exporter in the world; the fact that the US has become an oligarchy... I could go on.

    Putin is by no means a saint, but I don't think you fully understand the complexity of running a country like Russia, and, in comparison to the leaders/politicians and examples I've just given you, if he is undoubtedly a horrible man, what does that make them?





    Elaborate.



    The United States set the precedent by expanding NATO, violating the INF treaty, invading Iraq, vetoing resolution after resolution threatening Israel at the UNSC, et cetera. Why should China and Russia abide by international law when the US couldn't care less?
    Ok, first of all. The Russian system isn't even a democracy. Only Putin or one of his cronies can wih their "elections" - absolute sham.
    You also seem to see Russia as a peace loving country, and make it out that they are somehow victims.
    This "unnecessary tension" you speak of is an inevitability when you have two powers like these. There will always be disagreements between the two.

    There's a lot of evidence on Putin, everything from bribery to homophobia - he's been accused of it all. Whether it's rigging elections or oppressing gays, he's done it. 90% of drone strikes don't hit their intended target? Sounds like RT/Sputnik propaganda to me...
    I'll admit the US's faults all day, but it's still better than Russia!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by User1212)
    Name:  9cb65e4592cf908a12f21e2baf861e8a.jpg
Views: 26
Size:  12.9 KB
    Haha, not exactly but close enough.


    (Original post by cbreef)
    Ok, first of all. The Russian system isn't even a democracy. Only Putin or one of his cronies can wih their "elections" - absolute sham.
    You also seem to see Russia as a peace loving country, and make it out that they are somehow victims.
    This "unnecessary tension" you speak of is an inevitability when you have two powers like these. There will always be disagreements between the two.

    There's a lot of evidence on Putin, everything from bribery to homophobia - he's been accused of it all. Whether it's rigging elections or oppressing gays, he's done it. 90% of drone strikes don't hit their intended target? Sounds like RT/Sputnik propaganda to me...
    I'll admit the US's faults all day, but it's still better than Russia!
    Huh, reminds me of another 'democracy' I know.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    Ok, first of all. The Russian system isn't even a democracy. Only Putin or one of his cronies can wih their "elections" - absolute sham.
    I don't see your point.

    The United States' system isn't a democracy either - it's an oligarchy.

    You also seem to see Russia as a peace loving country, and make it out that they are somehow victims.

    This "unnecessary tension" you speak of is an inevitability when you have two powers like these. There will always be disagreements between the two.
    I don't disagree that there will be disagreements between the great powers, what I find ridiculous is the unnecessary tension created by the West in order to militarise Eastern Europe and paint the Russians as permanent foes of the 'free world' when both sides actually have a lot in common.

    Considerably more in common than, say, the West and Saudi Arabia, for example.

    There's a lot of evidence on Putin, everything from bribery to homophobia - he's been accused of it all. Whether it's rigging elections or oppressing gays, he's done it.
    I challenge you to name a current leader of a great power / middle power who hasn't accepted bribes, whether they come in the form of campaign donations from banks, the military industrial complex, and/or foreign governments - or in the form of an old school brown envelope.

    I don't support Putin's anti-homosexual laws, but in a country where the majority of people are intolerant toward homosexuality, I understand why he gave the people what they wanted - it's politics, plain and simple.

    However, bribes and an anti-homosexual stance is nothing in comparison with completely destabilising the Middle East and creating the environment for groups like ISIS/Al Nusra to exploit; having 60,000+ people dead in Mexico and doing nothing about the idiotic drug laws and stance on the 'War on Drugs' in the US; torturing people who have yet to appear in court in Black Sites/Guantanamo; et cetera.

    90% of drone strikes don't hit their intended target? Sounds like RT/Sputnik propaganda to me...
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ikes-kill-1147

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b028dd7ea6c4ff

    http://www.ibtimes.com/nearly-90-tho...h-span-2142183

    I'll admit the US's faults all day, but it's still better than Russia!
    What does 'better' mean?

    A better place to live? Yes.

    A better political system? I don't see the difference between the two.

    A better actor in the world? Nice troll attempt.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Stalin)
    Naturally, a bit of both. I find it interesting that as the EU enlargement process got under way in Central and Eastern Europe, it coincided with NATO enlargement. Which begs the question: did Western elites offer the aforementioned areas a 'accession to both organisations or go **** yourself' deal.

    My point was that under the German reunification deal the West agreed to stop NATO enlargement east of the newly unified German state. But, unsurprisingly, the agreement was ignored because, at the time, Russia was in no shape to respond to NATO enlargement, and Western planners saw an opportunity to absorb all of Central Europe, and as much as possible of Eastern Europe into its organisation.

    The tension in Eastern Europe we have today is a direct consequence of NATO enlargement encroaching into the Russian sphere, the violation of the INF treaty, and meddling in Ukraine (see Euromaidan).
    Can you actually source firm evidence that was what NATO was promising? Because the history on NATO'S promise not to expand is incredibly contentious and seems to be a case of both sides walking away with very different ideas of what was agreed.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Live your normal life. Nothing to worry about. Wars and deaths are basically part of World civilization.:-)

    Name:  1477607765033.jpg
Views: 34
Size:  23.2 KB

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Can you actually source firm evidence that was what NATO was promising? Because the history on NATO'S promise not to expand is incredibly contentious and seems to be a case of both sides walking away with very different ideas of what was agreed.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/...2/ISEC_a_00236
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Name:  1477623176586.png
Views: 28
Size:  471.0 KBAttachment 590250590252
    Attached Images
     
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Russian aggression LOL

    Even what happened in Ukraine, most Westerners are completely ignorant of what went down. It was a violent coup that overthrew a Democratically elected leader who would have lost the next election anyway. They put in a load of anti-Russian ultra-nationalists, some with neo-nazi like views.

    They still don't know who shot those protesters.....

    They're really just mad about Russia ruining the Zionist agenda in the Middle East. The West and some Arab governments supports people who should be labelled terrorists, but are not when they further their agenda...

    Russia is in Syria after being invited there by Syria's government. We are supporting the real terrorists.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Study Helper
    (Original post by IsWhatItIs)
    Russian aggression LOL

    Even what happened in Ukraine, most Westerners are completely ignorant of what went down. It was a violent coup that overthrew a Democratically elected leader who would have lost the next election anyway. They put in a load of anti-Russian ultra-nationalists, some with neo-nazi like views.

    They still don't know who shot those protesters.....

    They're really just mad about Russia ruining the Zionist agenda in the Middle East. The West and some Arab governments supports people who should be labelled terrorists, but are not when they further their agenda...

    Russia is in Syria after being invited there by Syria's government. We are supporting the real terrorists.

    ........according to RT - the guardian of truth and unbiased reporting. ROFLMAO

    Amazon does a nice deal in tin-foil hats and Iodine tablets.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    The thing is that whilst the west views russia as aggressive and expansionist; the russians view the west in exactly the same way. It was the west that decided to go in in libya.You can hardly blame putin if he didn't want the same thing to happen in syria.It is the west that is constantly vilifying russia in the media.Banning them from the paralympics because of drugs cheats for example.Russian athletes were definitely not the only ones doping and yet it was them that got banned.The west has been keeping up the mantra that assad must go for like 5 years now.Its been making out that he is basically satan incarnate.But America and Britain are more than happy to cosy up to the saudis who are just as bad as assad.The saudis also support and sponsor terrorism.They are on the UN human rights council and our flag was lowered when their king died.The ruler of bahrein was another leader famous for alleged human rights abuses yet he was invited for tea with the queen! The west likes to pretend it has the moral high ground; that its the good guys and russia are the bad guys.The truth is that nothing is black and white, its just shades of grey.N either country has the moral high ground.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Given the Russian actions in Georgia, Ukraine and Syria i can only say.. about damn time.

    A direct conflict between Russia and the west will never occur but if Russia starts a proxy war, we should have the means to win it.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 30, 2016
The home of Results and Clearing

1,723

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.