NATO is a Bargain for the U.S.

[PoS]

And how, in your view, has NATO done this?

One needs to understand the Russian mentality. They have been paranoid against the West since Napoleon and Hitler. The Russians don't view NATO as a defensive alliance, but rather an organization thats built to conquer them. The fact that the West has used NATO in proactive interventions from Yugoslavia and the Mid East has only strengthen their fears. So naturally, when the former satellite states of the USSR applied and got NATO membership, the Russians viewed it as a direct threat to their existence. The West's actions in Ukraine was merely the last straw. That's why the Russian people are standing firmly behind Putin.

 

[German guy]

One needs to understand the Russian mentality. They have been paranoid against the West since Napoleon and Hitler. The Russians don't view NATO as a defensive alliance, but rather an organization thats built to conquer them. The fact that the West has used NATO in proactive interventions from Yugoslavia and the Mid East has only strengthen their fears. So naturally, when the former satellite states of the USSR applied and got NATO membership, the Russians viewed it as a direct threat to their existence. The West's actions in Ukraine was merely the last straw. That's why the Russian people are standing firmly behind Putin.

So the Russians are with their mentality about at the same point where the Germans were in the 1920s: Huge post-imperial phantom pain.

Now with Putin's intervention in Ukraine and before then Georgia, and their whole "Heim ins Reich" stance of taking a grip on neighbor countries with Russian minorities, Russia is where Germany was in 1938.

To me, that looks more like proof how dangerous Russia is, and that it indeed is a genuine threat where appeasement won't work (they won't be satisfied until their have their empire back, on the cost of the freedom of many other peoples) -- rather than assuming we need to appease the neuroticism in Russia's national psyche.

 

[PoS]

So the Russians are with their mentality about at the same point where the Germans were in the 1920s: Huge post-imperial phantom pain.

Now with Putin's intervention in Ukraine and before then Georgia, and their whole "Heim ins Reich" stance of taking a grip on neighbor countries with Russian minorities, Russia is where Germany was in 1938.

To me, that looks more like proof how dangerous Russia is, and that it indeed is a genuine threat where appeasement won't work (they won't be satisfied until their have their empire back, on the cost of the freedom of many other peoples) -- rather than assuming we need to appease the neuroticism in Russia's national psyche.

No one is advocating appeasement. My point is about provocation. NATO and the West has been poking the Russian bear with a stick and its biting back. Europe needs to give Russia its respect, the only other alternative is conflict.

 

[dimensionallava]

To me, that looks more like proof how dangerous Russia is, and that it indeed is a genuine threat where appeasement won't work (they won't be satisfied until their have their empire back, on the cost of the freedom of many other peoples) -- rather than assuming we need to appease the neuroticism in Russia's national psyche.

maybe you should invade poland?

 

[German guy]

No one is advocating appeasement. My point is about provocation. NATO and the West has been poking the Russian bear with a stick and its biting back. Europe needs to give Russia its respect, the only other alternative is conflict.

What would Russia consider respectful, short of surrendering the freedom of former East Bloc countries to it?

 

[PoS]

What would Russia consider respectful, short of surrendering the freedom of former East Bloc countries to it?

Russia considers the former east bloc countries as part of their front lawn, I think it was a mistake to give those countries NATO membership. Thats one. The other mistake was to stoke nationalist, anti-Russian sentiment in those areas.

If we look at the examples in Georgia and Ukraine: in the first example, the Georgian president just decided to attack a breakaway faction without asking or consulting Putin- and that initiated a Russian response. In Ukraine, the West just arbitrarily decided to back a nationalistic government who overthrew a pro Russian president without asking the Russians about it- guess what happened? Yep, a Russian response.

The West needs to work with Russia as full partners and give them a voice when dealing with the east bloc countries instead of doing underhanded deals to weaken Russia's position. Thats the way to move forward.

 

[joG]

Russia considers the former east bloc countries as part of their front lawn, I think it was a mistake to give those countries NATO membership. Thats one. The other mistake was to stoke nationalist, anti-Russian sentiment in those areas.

If we look at the examples in Georgia and Ukraine: in the first example, the Georgian president just decided to attack a breakaway faction without asking or consulting Putin- and that initiated a Russian response. In Ukraine, the West just arbitrarily decided to back a nationalistic government who overthrew a pro Russian president without asking the Russians about it- guess what happened? Yep, a Russian response.

Actually there was no need to stoke anti Russian sentiment after the experience with the Russians during the 50 years of occupation. The mistake was to have neglected to allow more of them in. It was certainly also a pity that we did not do more to make the Russians feel better in the 1990s. On the other hand, the West did an enormous amount to help Russia integrate into the global community in the period before Putin changed the Russian policies to a confrontational approach. This was as much to do with the fact that Russia was of little present danger at the time. Even now it draws its importance almost solely from their destabilizing capabilities, which it is happily using quite competently at high costs to the USA, its allies and peoples in various locations like Georgia, Transnistria or Syria.

 

[PoS]

Actually there was no need to stoke anti Russian sentiment after the experience with the Russians during the 50 years of occupation. The mistake was to have neglected to allow more of them in. It was certainly also a pity that we did not do more to make the Russians feel better in the 1990s. On the other hand, the West did an enormous amount to help Russia integrate into the global community in the period before Putin changed the Russian policies to a confrontational approach. This was as much to do with the fact that Russia was of little present danger at the time. Even now it draws its importance almost solely from their destabilizing capabilities, which it is happily using quite competently at high costs to the USA, its allies and peoples in various locations like Georgia, Transnistria or Syria.

Putin is just another long line of Russian strongmen, his rise was inevitable simply because the Russians were sick of being disrespected. If the West wants more conflict then it can keep provoking Russia.

I think the Germans handled Russia very well during their reunification- they paid for the Russians to leave and supported their troop withdrawals by helping build housing for them in Russia- it gave the Russians respect. Things might have turned out differently if they just told the Russians to GTFO of their country.

 

[Jack Hays]

NATO had the nerve of accepting new members who voluntarily, on their free decision applied for joining, instead of respecting Putin's view that all countries next to Russia aren't independent, don't have the right to make decisions without consulting Russia, and are generally just Russia's backyard.

Much like the West was so hostile and aggressive towards Nazi Germany in 1938, by actually taking the position that Czechoslovakia and Poland have a right to make decisions as independent nations without submitting to Germany.

So when that's the view, sure, NATO is responsible for the new "Cold War".


Seriously, to the OP: I feel Germany could do a lot more on the field of defense. Our forces are in a pitiful state. They can barely fulfil their duty of national defense in peace time. If there was a ground war, the German army could defend a front line of maybe 20-40km only. If Russia invaded in the worst case, the German army would have to fire flares, else the advancing Russians wouldn't even find them.

I'm glad we can rely on American support and defense so far, but IMO, that's a job we should be able to do on our own. Not against America, mind you, but as partners.

I was in Berlin in 1994 when Panzerbrigade 42 marched in after the Allies had withdrawn. I still have a set of the brigade's signature beer mugs from a social event they hosted in 1996. Good luck to them and to you.

 

[Jack Hays]

One needs to understand the Russian mentality. They have been paranoid against the West since Napoleon and Hitler. The Russians don't view NATO as a defensive alliance, but rather an organization thats built to conquer them. The fact that the West has used NATO in proactive interventions from Yugoslavia and the Mid East has only strengthen their fears. So naturally, when the former satellite states of the USSR applied and got NATO membership, the Russians viewed it as a direct threat to their existence. The West's actions in Ukraine was merely the last straw. That's why the Russian people are standing firmly behind Putin.

Russian paranoia is a lazy excuse. The Russians, after all, are the ones who held their neighbors captive by force for two generations. Their own behavior is the motivation for their neighbors' precautions.

 

[joG]

Putin is just another long line of Russian strongmen, his rise was inevitable simply because the Russians were sick of being disrespected. If the West wants more conflict then it can keep provoking Russia.

I think the Germans handled Russia very well during their reunification- they paid for the Russians to leave and supported their troop withdrawals by helping build housing for them in Russia- it gave the Russians respect. Things might have turned out differently if they just told the Russians to GTFO of their country.

People have to deserve respect and Putin does not fill that bill. He is a nuisance and a potential danger and can increase the costs for international security like any thug. So one needs to be careful, what foothold one allows him. That is where some of our European friends goofed. They thought that they were playing chess and he just knocked their board over with all their complicated strategy and allies.

 

[JANFU]

NATO should be disbanded. Either that, or we allow Russia to join. We can't have both and we must have at least one of those.

Not disbanded, but Russia under a different Govt should be in NATO. Russia fears China, aside from trade and such, they want China to be included in any future nuclear weapons treaties. China has extended their economic reach into the Stans, diversifying their energy suppliers.

Note- the like button was not working right for me- hit like - did not take- then hit it again- removed it - hit it again - then liked- I am explaining any confusion over your post, which I partially agree with.
US needs NATO, and the EU needs the US.

 

[JANFU]

Those of us who dont pay only get 10 looks a month. I burned one for this thread. The piece starts from the premise that we are a superpower which is going to stay a super power, so everything that comes after is deeply flawed. We also need to talk about what the point of having a huge spread far and wide military machine is when the political leadership that runs it is as incompetent as it clearly is, with our massive debts, and when the US people who are going to have to pay for this miliary some day ( more so our kids and grandkids) are either against the project or have not had a say in the project.

Use CC cleaner, free version, if your anti virus has a cleaner, use that as well, usually found under additional tools, it is on my Kaspersky.. Takes you past the 10 limit.

 

[PoS]

Russian paranoia is a lazy excuse. The Russians, after all, are the ones who held their neighbors captive by force for two generations. Their own behavior is the motivation for their neighbors' precautions.

I dont disagree at all. But what are you gonna do? Russia is like your 300 pound six foot six inch drunken uncle who won't go away. You can either fight him or make him part of the process.

 

[Tigerace117]

Russian paranoia is a lazy excuse. The Russians, after all, are the ones who held their neighbors captive by force for two generations. Their own behavior is the motivation for their neighbors' precautions.

To be fair, during World War Two Russia was absolutely devastated, while mainland America basically got away without a scratch. (I'm not counting the random Japanese air raids which did approximately zero damage to the West Coast; Pearl Harbor isn't mainland America)

It makes since that they wouldn't want it to happen again.

During the Cold War, if, say, Mexico had tried to break away and become communist do you really think we wouldn't have done anything about it?

Just playing devil's advocate honestly

 

[Jack Hays]

I dont disagree at all. But what are you gonna do? Russia is like your 300 pound six foot six inch drunken uncle who won't go away. You can either fight him or make him part of the process.

Or constrain him until he sobers up.

 

[Jack Hays]

To be fair, during World War Two Russia was absolutely devastated, while mainland America basically got away without a scratch. (I'm not counting the random Japanese air raids which did approximately zero damage to the West Coast; Pearl Harbor isn't mainland America)

It makes since that they wouldn't want it to happen again.

During the Cold War, if, say, Mexico had tried to break away and become communist do you really think we wouldn't have done anything about it?

Just playing devil's advocate honestly

We would have tried what we tried in Cuba.

 

[Tigerace117]

We would have tried what we tried in Cuba.

Ah---but isn't that holding the country captive by force?

Once again, playing devil's advocate

 

[PoS]

Or constrain him until he sobers up.

An uncle who happens to have a huge conventional army and has got nukes? Brilliant strategy, Jack. :doh

 

[Higgins86]

Pull the USA money out of the NATO and see how long the Euro's last.

The US wont do that because they like their European bases, gives them a longer reach.

 

[Jack Hays]

Ah---but isn't that holding the country captive by force?

Once again, playing devil's advocate

No. Holding captive by force would have been sending in the army to occupy territory, as we did when we annexed the (then) northern half of Mexico in 1848. And as the Soviets did in east Europe.

 

[Jack Hays]

An uncle who happens to have a huge conventional army and has got nukes? Brilliant strategy, Jack. :doh

It worked from 1945 to 1989. It can work again.

 

[PoS]

It worked from 1945 to 1989. It can work again.

So youre perfectly happy with another cold war? OK well thats you, Jack. :roll:

 

[Jack Hays]

So youre perfectly happy with another cold war? OK well thats you, Jack. :roll:

It's already upon us.

 

[Tigerace117]

No. Holding captive by force would have been sending in the army to occupy territory, as we did when we annexed the (then) northern half of Mexico in 1848. And as the Soviets did in east Europe.

But we would have held lands by force, both during the invasion and more likely than not to combat communist terror groups