What measures do you think the United States should take in response to Russian expansionism in Europe?

[Ethel2]

I don't recall being with you at the NTC practicing for the invasion of Iran.

I don't recall seeing you at any of the planning meetings or when giving presentations to general staff officers.

That's because you don't see.

NATO was created first. The Warsaw Pact was created years later in 1955.

NATO would not accept Yugoslavia, Albania, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungaria, the eastern territory (later the DDR) or the Soviet Union.

NATO will not accept Russia now, because the US intends to carve up Russia just like it carved up Yugoslavia.

It was the US and Britain who forced Germany to halt war reparations to the Soviets. Instead of starting WW III, which the Soviets could have legally and justifiably done since Germany violated the treaty, the Soviets peacefully protested by blockading Berlin.

Your history books leave out the part about the US and Britain causing the Berlin Blockade.

The US/NATO aggressively deployed Jupiter IRBMs to Italy and Turkey which could hit 100s of cities in East Bloc States, including Moscow.

If the US nuked Moscow with a Jupiter IRBM, the Soviets would be unable to retaliate, because nuking Washington DC would require escalating to the use of an ICBM, and that was unthinkable, even for the Soviets.

Your history books conveniently forget to mention the Soviet deployment of IRBMs was in response/retaliation to the aggressive and hostile deployment of US/NATO Jupiter IRBMs to Italy and Turkey.

And your history books forget to mention that Kennedy blinked and caved-in and ordered the withdraw of the Jupiters in exchange for the withdraw of the SS-4 and SS-5 IRBMs from Cuba and just so we're clear on the concept, all Jupiters were withdraw from Italy and Turkey by September 1963 and the first missiles didn't leave Cuba until October 1964.


Yugoslavia.

I don't recall seeing you in Serbia or Kosovo or Metohija while NATO aircraft were bombing there.

I was no longer in the Army at the time, but I was with a Channel 4 news crew.

NATO aircraft bombed Libya.

Do you not know that the US illegally overthrew the Libyan king at the request of the Saudis?

The US put Moamar Ghaddafi in power, and then either prevented or gave Ghaddafi advance notice of 11 additional coup attempts over the years to keep Ghaddafi in power.

I knew that because I had access to classified docs but those have been declassified now although they are still heavily redacted.


Iraq.

I had a chance to go to Iraq as a US military advisor in 1984, but I was already slotted to go to Egypt for 6-weeks to train the Egyptian Army so I turned it down. I said for years US advisors gave the go ahead to use chemical weapons on Iran and then about 6 years ago those docs were declassified.

The were US chemical weapons by the way. I knew they were there for the same reason I knew there were chemical weapons in Germany. After I got back from Egypt, I had to go to Germany to straighten out the mess there. They were 2 years behind on the Honest John warhead in Greece and Turkey, and 1 year behind on the withdraw of the 8"/203 mm 0.1 kt rounds from Greece and Turkey, and almost 2 years behind on the withdraw of Nike-Hercules warheads from Germany and Italy and 18 months behind on the Pershing II deployment and behind on warhead maintenace. I delivered the last PII warhead to Neu Ulm myself on December 4, 1985 just 9 weeks behind schedule.

Got a medal for it.

Anyway, now you know why the US made a beeline to the Khamisiyah Depot. The French had chemical warheads there, too.

I only inhaled 3 tons of nerve agent and 75 burning oil wells. That was the good news your government told me because I'd swear it was 4 tons of nerve agent and 78 burning oil wells.


Against what?

It's sad that you cannot see how your government manufactures crises in order to intervene.

I won't live long enough, but damn I'd love to see all your faces when the docs are declassified and you find out all the That’s quite a rant. Not really interested in picking it apart piece by piece, though I am sure I could debunk some of it.

Quite a rant you wrote.
What invasion of Iran? Did NATO invade Iran without me looking? Shame on them.
I will say this-to keep on topic-NATO is a defensive union. It doesn’t matter if it was formed before or after the Warsaw Pact. NATO won’t accept Russia not because, as you claim (without proof btw) they want to carve up the country but because they are led by a ruthless dictator who is capable of acts like attacking Ukrain and supporting dictators who use chemical weapons on their own citizens. And btw you are deluded if you think Russia wouldn’t respond if we nuked Moscow because the use of ICBMs would be “an escalation”.

Perhaps you could name an unprovoked war of aggression started by NATO similar to the war Russia is engaged in.
NATO is a badly needed defensive union. If you think otherwise you haven’t been paying attention.

 

[Rogue Valley]

NATO will not accept Russia now, because the US intends to carve up Russia just like it carved up Yugoslavia.

Flat out BS.

 

[cpwill]

Erm, Putin doesn't care about money?

Not really. I mean, he cares, sure, because it's something that help feeds national power, but, the currency he cares about is power, specifically, Russian power. Going after the money, is, at best, an indirect threat.

 

[Peter]

Not really. I mean, he cares, sure, because it's something that help feeds national power, but, the currency he cares about is power, specifically, Russian power. Going after the money, is, at best, an indirect threat.

He'd have a tough time running the country if they can't pay anyone working for the government.
Even the most hardcore fans like being able to buy food and have a house.

 

[cpwill]

He'd have a tough time running the country if they can't pay anyone working for the government.
Even the most hardcore fans like being able to buy food and have a house.

They aren't going to lose the ability to give currency to people working for the government. That currency is simply going to buy a good deal less, and, if Putin goes through with refusing to honor Russia's debts and seizing foreign-owned property, it could easily get pretty ugly.

But, it may very well be that he's willing to trade that for restoring Russia back closer to its maximalized imperial borders. We underestimate the value people put on nationalism at our peril.

 

[slick]

Again you are blatantly chirping the Putin narrative broadcast by his propaganda network. There is no way someone like you was ever involved in drafting anything of consequence. I have seen your posts. You do not have the ability.

As for saying that the US/Nato cannot enforce a no fly zone because Ukraine is neutral you are wrong. It is a choice that was made. Nothing prevents it except for the choice of the US/Nato.

Your allegiance to Russia over America is pathetic.

So I guess where your concerned literally anything goes (except being white, male and middle aged - or Russian

 

[slick]

They aren't going to lose the ability to give currency to people working for the government. That currency is simply going to buy a good deal less, and, if Putin goes through with refusing to honor Russia's debts and seizing foreign-owned property, it could easily get pretty ugly.

But, it may very well be that he's willing to trade that for restoring Russia back closer to its maximalized imperial borders. We underestimate the value people put on nationalism at our peril.

Very Insightful. The last halfway effective senator from my state Moynihan
suggested that in 1993: Moynihan noted the remarkable blindness of
foreign policy scholars to the power of ethnonationalism in our lifetime!

It was the eternal call of Ethnonationalism after the coup that Crimea heard & answered. It continues to be & nearly always has been the world in which we live in the most powerful movement.

In the last decade shortly after the 'Kiev Maidan Coup' the Ukraine Commander
of the Ukraine Black Sea Fleet swore allegiance to Russia & his entire 6000 man fleet followed which essentially led to Crimea returning to Russian hands

 

[Ahlevah]

NATO was created first. The Warsaw Pact was created years later in 1955.

NATO was created because the USSR did not honor its obligations under the post-war agreements for a free and independent Europe but sought to impose its expansionist, totalitarian form of government upon it just as Putin is attempting to do in Ukraine currently.

Hardliners in Russia are convinced NATO and the U.S. want to destroy it, but what they really want to destroy is the sort of empire-building mentality held by wackos like Putin. What Putin has done is guarantee tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, more NATO troops will be permanently deployed to countries like Poland, the Baltics, and Romania. Good job, Vlad! In one stroke you single-handedly managed to reconstitute the Cold War, turn Russia into an international pariah, and set Russian wealth and living standards back by decades. This is not going to end well for you, pal. You’re an idiot.

 

[Ahlevah]

No country could survive under those circumstances including the US.

Look at Russia’s friends: Syria, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua. It’s like a mutual crying society of failed states.

 

[Ahlevah]

Perhaps you could name an unprovoked war of aggression started by NATO similar to the war Russia is engaged in.
NATO is a badly needed defensive union. If you think otherwise you haven’t been paying attention.

This guy is so all over the map I don’t even know where to begin. For example, he mentions Yugoslavia as being dismembered by NATO, which was basically slapped together out of losing empires after WWI as a reward to Serbia for being on the winning side. NATO didn’t dismember it, history did. Even Serbia’s last major cheerleader, Montenegro, voted for independence from the union. Just ask a Slovenian or a Croat if they long for the good ol’ days of being under Belgrade’s (and by extension Moscow’s) boot and see what kind of answer you get.

 

[Ethel2]

This guy is so all over the map I don’t even know where to begin. For example, he mentions Yugoslavia as being dismembered by NATO, which was basically slapped together out of losing empires after WWI as a reward to Serbia for being on the winning side. NATO didn’t dismember it, history did. Even Serbia’s last major cheerleader, Montenegro, voted for independence from the union. Just ask a Slovenian or a Croat if they long for the good ol’ days of being under Belgrade’s (and by extension Moscow’s) boot and see what kind of answer you get.

I will give Mircea credit for 1. His service to this country (assuming it was this country he served for) and 2. What appears to be a good fund of knowledge (assuming what he has written is factual-I haven’t verified it independently).

What I disagree with is, if I am understanding him correctly, the opinion part of his posts. You can’t compare the actions of NATO to those of Russia or other countries run by despots, nor justify this unprovoked war. He also seems to be of the opinion that NATO is not a defensive alliance. That is simply not true. NATO has never began an unprovoked “special military operation” against anyone.

 

[Ahlevah]

I will give Mircea credit for 1. His service to this country (assuming it was this country he served for) and 2. What appears to be a good fund of knowledge (assuming what he has written is factual-I haven’t verified it independently).

I just gave one example where I thought he was off-base. Knowledge of history without proper context or that plays fast and loose with the truth isn’t worth much. Honestly, he sounds like a shill for Russian hardliners who think NATO was created to pick on Russia and leave it economically destitute. That will happen, but they did it to themselves.

Putin's Ukraine invasion will knock the Russian economy back 30 years: experts — CNBC

Russia’s 40-year effort to create a Western-style market economy is one more casualty of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

apple.news

 

[Ethel2]

I just gave one example where I thought he was off-base. Knowledge of history without proper context or that plays fast and loose with the truth isn’t worth much. Honestly, he sounds like a shill for Russian hardliners who think NATO was created to pick on Russia and leave it economically destitute. That will happen, but they did it to themselves.

Putin's Ukraine invasion will knock the Russian economy back 30 years: experts — CNBC

Russia’s 40-year effort to create a Western-style market economy is one more casualty of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

apple.news

Eventually this will cost Putin his office, if not his life. The track record for despots trying to invade and hold a country of unwilling citizens is awful.
It’s going to turn into a war of attrition and once enough dead Russian soldiers return home in body bags there will be a revolt-if not by the people then by the Russian security apparatus that controls the military.

 

[Ahlevah]

Eventually this will cost Putin his office, if not his life. The track record for despots trying to invade and hold a country of unwilling citizens is awful.

You know, one can only hope, but I’m not willing to bank on it. For one thing, Putin is returning Russia once again into a totalitarian state. Also, we’re calling this “Putin’s War,” but from my reading there is wide support among the Russian military and political elite for the creation of a “Eurasian” empire with Moscow at its nexus. These hardliners are convinced that an independent Ukraine poses an existential threat to Russia in the longer term, and they are firmly in control of the wheels of government, at least for the moment.

So even though we’ve been given this picture of Putin being isolated, you’ve basically got Goering, Goebbels, Bormann, Himmler, Keitel, and an entire fanatical Nazi supporting cast standing behind him.

 

[Mircea]

NATO was created because the USSR did not honor its obligations under the post-war agreements for a free and independent Europe but sought to impose its expansionist, totalitarian form of government upon it just as Putin is attempting to do in Ukraine currently.

No, that is not why.

Churchill gave away Eastern Europe at the Potsdam Conference.

Churchill and his cronies were still stuck in the 19th Century mentality of Balance of Power and Spheres of Influence, which are both failed international relations theories even though Realism, Conservatism and Liberalism had been prevalent for a few decades.

By the way, NATO and Warsaw Pact are examples of collective security which is one of the tenets of Liberalism, and many senior officers and non-commissioned officers around the world are foreign policy Liberals, which is not the same thing as being politically Liberal. The majority of Conservatives are Liberal with respect to foreign policy.

I know your textbooks say the Russians blockaded Berlin, but some odd reason they don't start the story from the beginning, which is that the US and Britain forced Germany to stop war reparation payments owed under international law and the treaty between Germany and Russia.

That is just cause for starting WW III, but the Russians chose to peaceably blockade Berlin in protest.

That means the US caused the crisis it, um, "heroically" (snicker) overcame.

Not to be outdone, the US and Brits then blocked the ascension of all East Bloc currencies so that they could not be traded on the global market.

Imagine if Germany and Russia conspired to keep US Dollars from trading on the global market.

Your textbooks say Russia put missiles in Cuba, but oddly your textbooks don't mention that Eisenhower initially authorized the deployment of Jupiter missiles to Italy and Turkey, then halted it because the US threw a hissy-fit after Castro legally and lawfully seized all US assets for non-payment of taxes and treaty violations, and then Eisenhower repeatedly warned Kennedy to go ahead with the Jupiter deployment until Castro had been dealt with but the arrogant Kennedy did anyway and the deployment of SS-4 and SS-5 IRBMs in Cuba was in direct response to the hostile aggressive deployment of Jupiters to Italy and Turkey.

Your textbooks also forget to mention the US lost the Cuba Missile Crisis which should be named the Kennedy Political Crisis since that historically more accurate.

Hardliners in Russia are convinced NATO and the U.S. want to destroy it, ....

The US does.

I get that you weren't there, so you have no knowledge of US Geo-Political Strategy and weren't involved in formulating the doctrines and policies related to it.

This handy-dandy map will help you understand how wrong you are:

The red is everything the US/NATO control so far and the orange is the end-game of US Geo-Political Strategy.

Note how the US/NATO created false pretexts to carve up Yugoslavia and illegally overthrow the governments in Libya and Tunisia.

That was part of the plan to drive Russia out of the Mediterranean and pen it up in the Black Sea because it is critical that Russia have no way to defend itself and Russian ships being able to port in the Adriatic or in Tunisia or Libya, or to have forward operating bases in Yugoslavia, Libya or Tunisia would make it difficult for the US/NATO to continue its hostile aggression.

Syria is the only sticking point, and while the port in Syria is of no value, forward operating bases for Russian fighters and bombers would thwart US/NATO aggression.

That's why Russia took Crimea. It needs the ports for Russian surface groups and SAM sites to blast US/NATO aircraft out of the sky on their way from Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey to enforce the future No-Fly Zone over Russia.

That is why the Bush Administration illegally overthrew the Ukrainian government in 2004.

US control of Ukraine is absolutely critical to enforce the No-Fly Zone over Russia.

If Belarus and Ukraine are neutral, then the US/NATO are hamstrung and their goal of carving up Russia will fail.

The so-called "sudden" withdraw of the US from Afghanistan is most likely the causal factor for action in Ukraine.

The US-created Iranian nuclear angle is a spectacular fail because nobody in the right mind is buying it, so there's no way for the US to use "Iranian nukes" as a pretext to invade Iran.

But, now....I'd look for a false flag incident in the next 5-6 years where the US accuses Iran and the Taliban of working together as a pretext for invading Iran.

It's important for Russia to act now to keep Ukraine neutral and delay the pending false flag attack and subsequent US invasion of Iran.

 

[Mircea]

but what they really want to destroy is the sort of empire-building mentality held by wackos like Putin.

The US is the only Empire at play here.

Read and weep the words of your own government:

The costs of not implementing this strategy are clear. Failure to meet our defense objectives will result in decreasing U.S. global influence, eroding cohesion among allies and partners, and reduced access to markets that will contribute to a decline in our prosperity and standard of living.

[emphasis mine]

https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Do...gy-Summary.pdf

That's why the US Empire wants to carve up Russia.

 

[Ethel2]

No, that is not why.

Churchill gave away Eastern Europe at the Potsdam Conference.

Churchill and his cronies were still stuck in the 19th Century mentality of Balance of Power and Spheres of Influence, which are both failed international relations theories even though Realism, Conservatism and Liberalism had been prevalent for a few decades.

By the way, NATO and Warsaw Pact are examples of collective security which is one of the tenets of Liberalism, and many senior officers and non-commissioned officers around the world are foreign policy Liberals, which is not the same thing as being politically Liberal. The majority of Conservatives are Liberal with respect to foreign policy.

I know your textbooks say the Russians blockaded Berlin, but some odd reason they don't start the story from the beginning, which is that the US and Britain forced Germany to stop war reparation payments owed under international law and the treaty between Germany and Russia.

That is just cause for starting WW III, but the Russians chose to peaceably blockade Berlin in protest.

That means the US caused the crisis it, um, "heroically" (snicker) overcame.

Not to be outdone, the US and Brits then blocked the ascension of all East Bloc currencies so that they could not be traded on the global market.

Imagine if Germany and Russia conspired to keep US Dollars from trading on the global market.

Your textbooks say Russia put missiles in Cuba, but oddly your textbooks don't mention that Eisenhower initially authorized the deployment of Jupiter missiles to Italy and Turkey, then halted it because the US threw a hissy-fit after Castro legally and lawfully seized all US assets for non-payment of taxes and treaty violations, and then Eisenhower repeatedly warned Kennedy to go ahead with the Jupiter deployment until Castro had been dealt with but the arrogant Kennedy did anyway and the deployment of SS-4 and SS-5 IRBMs in Cuba was in direct response to the hostile aggressive deployment of Jupiters to Italy and Turkey.

Your textbooks also forget to mention the US lost the Cuba Missile Crisis which should be named the Kennedy Political Crisis since that historically more accurate.




The US does.

I get that you weren't there, so you have no knowledge of US Geo-Political Strategy and weren't involved in formulating the doctrines and policies related to it.

This handy-dandy map will help you understand how wrong you are:

View attachment 67381017

The red is everything the US/NATO control so far and the orange is the end-game of US Geo-Political Strategy.

Note how the US/NATO created false pretexts to carve up Yugoslavia and illegally overthrow the governments in Libya and Tunisia.

That was part of the plan to drive Russia out of the Mediterranean and pen it up in the Black Sea because it is critical that Russia have no way to defend itself and Russian ships being able to port in the Adriatic or in Tunisia or Libya, or to have forward operating bases in Yugoslavia, Libya or Tunisia would make it difficult for the US/NATO to continue its hostile aggression.

Syria is the only sticking point, and while the port in Syria is of no value, forward operating bases for Russian fighters and bombers would thwart US/NATO aggression.

That's why Russia took Crimea. It needs the ports for Russian surface groups and SAM sites to blast US/NATO aircraft out of the sky on their way from Romania, Bulgaria and Turkey to enforce the future No-Fly Zone over Russia.

That is why the Bush Administration illegally overthrew the Ukrainian government in 2004.

US control of Ukraine is absolutely critical to enforce the No-Fly Zone over Russia.

If Belarus and Ukraine are neutral, then the US/NATO are hamstrung and their goal of carving up Russia will fail.

And so forth…

You t really should try to be more concise. I doubt anyone here wants to respond to a book, let alone your highly opinionated take on recent history.
That said I think your opinion about the US wanting to invade Iran and NATO somehow wanting to carve up Russia into little edible bites isn’t even worth debating. Do you really think Putin (or whoever is in charge of Russia at the time) is going to allow that without initiating doomsday? It would yield the same result as if the Thug of Russia attacked the US. The end. Nuclear weapons suck but they do ensure mutual destruction if one side gets too far out of line.
You refer consistently to “our history books”. What country are you located in-where is your allegiance?
Regardless, I am really not interested in your take of recent history. I am not buying much of it.

 

[Ethel2]

The US is the only Empire at play here.

Read and weep the words of your own government:

The costs of not implementing this strategy are clear. Failure to meet our defense objectives will result in decreasing U.S. global influence, eroding cohesion among allies and partners, and reduced access to markets that will contribute to a decline in our prosperity and standard of living.

[emphasis mine]

https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Do...gy-Summary.pdf

That's why the US Empire wants to carve up Russia.

If the US wanted to “carve up” a nation it should be China. Russia presents as much of a threat to us as a knat on a moose, economically speaking.

 

[Lord of Planar]

If the US wanted to “carve up” a nation it should be China. Russia presents as much of a threat to us as a knat on a moose, economically speaking.

Too bad we have become as corrupt and can no longer lead by example.

 

[Ethel2]

I am not going to debunk all of Mirceas rant. I am quite sure he wasn’t involved in any formulation of US policy. His posts sound more like a disgruntled foreigner expressing his opinion of the US and NATO. While neither the US nor NATO is free from mistakes I don’t see them bombing the shit out of a country that poses no threat to them-targeting civilians-women and children, hospitals, apartment buildings etc. Putin is a bully and a thug who envisions putting together the glory years of the Soviet Union. He won’t succeed. He can’t even win in Ukraine.
Then there is this quote:
“That is why the Bush Administration illegally overthrew the Ukrainian government in 2004.”.
If the Ukrainian people were so desirous of being subjugated by the Russian thug why are they resisting so fiercely? They want FREEDOM! Once you taste freedom you aren’t inclined to surrender it.

 

[Ethel2]

Too bad we have become as corrupt and can no longer lead by example.

Hey-the US is far from perfect. There likely isn’t a major country on the planet that has no corruption and can “lead by example “. We have our problems here to be sure. We are no role model. I don’t think any nation is.
But I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Hey-the US is far from perfect. There likely isn’t a major country on the planet that has no corruption and can “lead by example “. We have our problems here to be sure. We are no role model. I don’t think any nation is.
But I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else.

Well, we most certainly cannot lead by example by going backwards and interfering with other sovereign nations like the left insists of doing.

 

[Ethel2]

Well, we most certainly cannot lead by example by going backwards and interfering with other sovereign nations like the left insists of doing.

As I wrote, there isn’t a country on the planet that is free of corruption. ALL the major powers “interfere” with the politics of other countries. Just as is the case with humans serving as role models every one of us is imperfect.
There are no perfect human role models. There are no perfect nations as role models either. It’s not the partisan issue you would prefer to believe. Both Republican and Democrat Presidents have interfered in the internal politics of other countries.
Trying to blame “the left” for our failure to be the role model you falsely think we should be is disingenuous.

 

[Ahlevah]

The US is the only Empire at play here.

Okay, the U.S. is not an empire. If it were, it would own the planet instead of working to create free and independent states, as it did with its mortal rivals of the Second World War, the Axis powers of Germany, Italy, and Japan. The fact is we removed our military governors and left these states to follow free and independent paths, with free peoples to elect free governments. The Russians did not.

Read and weep the words of your own government:

The costs of not implementing this strategy are clear. Failure to meet our defense objectives will result in decreasing U.S. global influence, eroding cohesion among allies and partners, and reduced access to markets that will contribute to a decline in our prosperity and standard of living.

[emphasis mine]

https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Do...gy-Summary.pdf

That's why the US Empire wants to carve up Russia.

Honestly, I don’t see anything nefarious in that quote. I certainly don’t see a promise to carve up Russia. But I would hope, for example, that our government would strive to increase our influence and access to resources. It would be irresponsible if it didn’t.

 

[Ahlevah]

No, that is not why.

Yeah, that is why. NATO was created to counter communist expansion across Europe. The United States didn’t fight a world war to rid Europe of Hitler just to hand it to Stalin.