The SC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 32,233
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
first of all, even Gorbachev said NATO had not say anything about not to expand Eastward. Notice on his interview with RT's sister publication Russian Beyond, he said that was never discussedMy dear this didn't start due to Ukraine...this started more than 25 years ago. The agreement at the demise of the Berlin Wall was that nato will not expand east. Nato expanded east and the red line was Ukraine. Russia has warned for years. Also the Russian speakers in the eat were under stress. So it's not simple
Ukraine as well as any country has the right to resist. However, Russia also has the right to protect its borders so when Russia was saying no nato in Ukraine why didn't Ukraine just build its own military strong. Why was there a need to join nato.
Now Ukraine will take a 30 years to recover and 100+ years to repay its debt
M.G.: The topic of “NATO expansion” was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Not a singe Eastern European country raised the issue, not even after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist in 1991. Western leaders didn’t bring it up, either. Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces from the alliance would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement, mentioned in your question, was made in that context. Kohl and [German Vice Chancellor Hans-Dietrich] Genscher talked about it.
Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled. The agreement on a final settlement with Germany said that no new military structures would be created in the eastern part of the country; no additional troops would be deployed; no weapons of mass destruction would be placed there. It has been observed all these years. So don’t portray Gorbachev and the then-Soviet authorities as naïve people who were wrapped around the West’s finger. If there was naïveté, it was later, when the issue arose. Russia at first did not object.
The decision for the U.S. and its allies to expand NATO into the east was decisively made in 1993. I called this a big mistake from the very beginning. It was definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990. With regards to Germany, they were legally enshrined and are being observed.
Again, you can blame NATO, I blame NATO because they should either clear cut and say Ukraine will never be accepted or piss off Russia out right and accept their membership instead of these dirty dealing of dangling the issue in front of Sweden and Finland and basically make Ukraine a cautionary tale to them.
ha ha ...thats what US was doing in Afghanistan too (wedding processions too; or u forgot the "ISIS planner' that was an NGO worker they killed iwth some kids around the exit from Afghanistan via the Kabul airport? uh!!), and were were you then? exactly- nowhere. Those hospitals were hosting Ukrainian forces most likely, or its propaganda you gladly accepted, which is all your fault.
Contextually and relative to modern wars, Russia has been a benign invader of Ukraine - it has spared SO MANY civilians in so many areas from so much worse harm possible to them.
Rumor has it that there is more than 300000 being called. That is from some chatter on twitter, I have not seen blue-checkmarks discussing this, though twitter members with hundreds of thousands of followers and other Ukrainian and Ukrainian war analysts are mentioning the 300000 is the first group. That there could be more after, up to 1 million.
Ukraine needs tens of thousands more shoulder fire weapons from NATO (anti-tank, RPGs, etc) vs the new 300000 Ivans.
Need to stop the Ivans.
Russia is a mafia state, the Russian mafia and Putin run Russia as a criminal organization as some monopoly game. It is not only Putin that would use nukes to defend this fiefdom. The notoriously cutthroat Russian mafia could order Putin to nuke Europe to protect their money making enterprise known as Russia. The mafia threaten Duma members to support Putin agenda. Not to mention the Chabad who brag that they run the legit and legal part of the Russian economy.
When one of the worst global mafias are the backers of Putin - the Russian mafia - this is more difficult to take down Putin than the USSR in the 80s and 90s. Putin is eventually going to step down, though the thugs that back Putin - The Russian Mafia, The Russian Oligarchs and Chabad are not leaving Russia as their money making scheme with one of the largest militaries. Gorbachev was a kinder person than Putin, was not backed by many criminals such as Putin, when Gorbachev let the USSR collapse, that was a one moment event. Putin and criminal backers is going to be much tougher to dethrone and transition to neo-liberalism. Putin persecuted the WJC leader(s) in Russia, perhaps because it was too neo-liberal, and pro-European. The Trumpian/Putinian Chabad took its place. What Trump is, is what Chabad is. Trump openly hates the Jews of the neo-liberal movement, same as Putin with the WJC. Behind closed doors are things different.?. For there to be democratic change in Russia. Putin and the Russia mafia need to go. Chabad and the Oligarchs could morph into faux neo-libs making money. For true democracy, there needs to be no Oligarchs and Putin billionaires in Russia. A clean slate for Russia. To take down these groups - Putin and cronies, Russia mafia and cronies, Russia oligarch and cronies, etc is very difficult. The only way to do this is to expose the entire Putin facade of criminal groups in Russia. Then reject it and embrace democracy.