As far as I know Ukraine wasn't part of NATO as of February 23rd 2022. On the other side, every Western European country (bar Austria and Switzerland) is, including the Baltic States.
Keyword here being NATO.
Last edited:
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Keyword here being NATO.
To activate NATO 5th article it’s not automatic at the end of the day political / parliamentary decisions are still required nevertheless. Same arguments that are being said now about the Ukraine will be used in the future not to do anything. Same escalatory rhetoric will be used by Russia again threatening nuclear armageddon on Paris / Berlin. The German chancellor just stated yesterday he won’t supply Ukraine with long-range missiles because he’s afraid of Russian response even after France/UK have already sent their SCALPs, do you know why? Because Germany doesn’t have the nukes. Now imagine Trump leaves NATO countries without the nuclear shield, I can bet my house most countries will back off fearing nuclear strikes when Russia begins raising stakes.
Surely the key word was European or NATO?
But the point remains. Most people thought there was simply no way it was going to happen. What @Rajma says about NATO defending NATO allies is true. It's not a given, particularly not when the potential President of the most important NATO country constantly talks about not defending Europe.
Spot on. People often forget Putin's template is very similar to the Soviet one. Expand and control. If its not a military invasion, its using the FSB and GRU to agitate and foment domestic discontent through tactics like election interference, assassinations, social media manipulation, and the support of nationalist, pro-Russia elements within various nations. In such cases, the name of the game is to destabilize from within, so they lack the democratic guile and fortitude to take action against his own actions elsewhere. He knows he can never retire from his dictatorship, so his fundamental goal is to not to die by being overthrown from within, which is why his only rational tactic is neo-imperialist attack and conquer.
Last edited:
He even doesn't understand NATO. NATO isn't some kind of Mafia organisation where US is the godfather and collects 2% of the GDP of the other members for its protection.
US foreign policy was full of mistakes. They fought many unnecessary and wrong wars indeed. However I can't remember of any war with purpose, like Putin in Ukraine, to conquer a nation and grab their land.
I don't doubt Trump knows about the significance of Taiwan.
My point was if Trump leaves Europe alone with Russia and Ukraine, it will seriously damage the transatlantic relationship for years to come.
Going against China will hurt European nations even more than sanctions against Russia. If China grabs Taiwan and the US going to war, I could see Europe will remain neutral like many of the states of the southern hemisphere.
Last edited:
Putin is more and more in the same category as Hitler also reasoning wise.
He actually defended Hitler's invasion of Poland in the interview with Tucker Carlson.
I actually would prefer, if he was a demented idiot.
Ok but this seems like a different argument. I'm saying nothing more than that it's unfair to claim that European nations are doing "significantly less" when the reality is that they are doing comparatively and collectively more. To put it differently, Alabama man saying the US is doing too much is different to saying that European nations are doing too little. He'll have to have an argument with Lockheed Leonard and Shale Oil Phil (which he'll probably lose).
Then I should've been more precise and write "Western Europe and the Baltic States" who are all part of NATO for those who wouldn't understand what I'm getting at and gladly pin me down for it. A mistake on my part and I apologize for that.
I have a hard time taking seriously posters frothing at the mouth while ranting about Russian Orcs, even if I somewhat get where they're coming from.
And no, the point doesn't remain. I don't care about the orange madman's ramblings in the circus known as the US electoral campaign. There's a massive difference between a country that is officially backed by the most powerful one(s) in the world and one that isn't. A full-fledged NATO member benefits from a level of protection that Ukraine didn't have as of February 23rd of 2022 and that's a given.
And if NATO does indeed throw one of its members under the bus, then it deserves everything coming its way. Not that I believe that it will happen, mind. Or that Russia will attack a NATO member.
EDIT: Sorry, I thought you were talking about Putin, not Trump. Yes, I agree with you.
Then you remember it wrong. Land grab isn't the only way to conquer a nation and/or make it dance to your tune. And Ukraine isn't Vietnam, or Iraq, or Afghanistan. Or South America. The list is long.
Last edited:
According to the German weekly journal die Zeit the EU under van der Leyen will use frozen Russian assets to buy weapons for the Ukraine. It's about time!
In another article is reported that separatists in Transnistria have called Moscow for help....
In another article is reported that separatists in Transnistria have called Moscow for help....
If he did, he would have never said these words.
Yeah the US foreign policy of the last 75 years was full of disasters and terrible mistakes.
Still it's a complete other level (at least to me) what Putin is doing in Ukraine. Conquering a free nation and include into his Russian empire.
She's strongly pushing for it, but I don't think its completely up to her.
Fits to a tee, doesn't it?
Or is it only bad when the other one does it? Not that I condone the practice, mind.
Last edited:
But...we are the good guys and do it for democracy
What western one? 99% of the time the "west" is bickering with itself, be it Nato, European Union, Nafta etc. Yet they somehow all conspire internationally and keep everything under wraps? Sure...
Correct. There’s increasingly little difference between the two, spare that Putin works through a more corporatist vertical of power. Even the interwar years that Hitler used to rise to power on the back of post WW1 grievances is eerily similar to Putin’s grievance about the end of the Soviet Union and his desire to reassert Russia into a similar role.
I somehow got sidetracked and thought that you were talking about Putin. Yeah, I agree, Trump doesn't understand NATO at all. So forget about my first reply. I'll also edit my original post.
Yeah, only to you.
You have a very narrow (and eurocentric) view of the world and apparently not the slightest clue about the scale of death, chaos and destruction the West unleashed across the world since the end of WWII for its own interests and expansion. But that's okay and you're not the only one in this thread.
Take a deep breath, you're panicking because it's suddenly happening way too close for your own comfort. It's not one of all those far away sub-countries no one gives a shit about or relates to, which had the misfortune of standing in the way of a superpower like Ukraine does right now. But fear not, for you belong to the chosen ones. The current predicament will sort itself out one way or another, without your way of life being affected for a very long time.
Also, Putin is bad and what he's currently doing is bad. Very bad.
I mean it.
That's one Godwin Award for you. Congratulations.
Yeah, he did. To gloss over and cover up for the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the Katyn massacre carried out by the Russians. Poland was considered as an enemy by the Soviet Union at the time (see Poland-Russia relations). It's utter bullshit and no one with basic history knowledge would fall for it. The problem is that not everyone has basic history knowledge, especially in the US, which was his target.
Nein, das würdest du dir nicht wünschen.
Last edited:
Always.
It is a well known fact that
Buy, destabilize or bomb the shit out of anyone who thinks otherwise.
Last edited:
So is there something to take from Putin's speech or its the same shit he always repeats?
There's something 1984 about his speeches. Not something a lot.
There's something 1984 about his speeches. Not something a lot.
Honestly, feck off with this. Godwin himself obviously never meant that literally all references to Hitler or the Nazis were invalid. Throwing around "hurr durr Godwin's Law" is the height of intellectual laziness, and doubly so when it's in response to a poster who specifically references Putin's own comments regarding Hitler and WW2. What do you do as a pastime, read the Wikipedia article on WW2 and go "one Godwin Award for you, I am very smart" after every paragraph?
Last edited:
I love you for this post.
Sweden joins NATO, yeah good, whatever.
Wish i could show more enthusiasm, but at this point, given how little the alliance cares about a battle-hardened Russia, in full war economy, running over Ukraine, i have little faith in the alliance doing much of anything when(not a matter of it) Russia goes into the baltics.
Yes yes, Ukraine isn't in NATO, but the amount of empty promises they give Ukraine, better not be what they give to actual members, cause if it is, this alliance will effectively be disbanded in a few years.
NATO should spend more time actually getting ready for Russia invading more of eastern Europe, instead of this.
Wish i could show more enthusiasm, but at this point, given how little the alliance cares about a battle-hardened Russia, in full war economy, running over Ukraine, i have little faith in the alliance doing much of anything when(not a matter of it) Russia goes into the baltics.
Yes yes, Ukraine isn't in NATO, but the amount of empty promises they give Ukraine, better not be what they give to actual members, cause if it is, this alliance will effectively be disbanded in a few years.
NATO should spend more time actually getting ready for Russia invading more of eastern Europe, instead of this.
The Soviet Union wasn't beaten on the battlefield, it was beaten economically because it put to much emphasis on their military complex which it realistically couldn't keep up. It may sound cynical, but we are still not seeing Russia running over Ukraine but still having to grind out every little progress under heavy losses. Russia had to move to full war economy and neglect a lot of other economic branches, so their current economy is massively boosted by the war, but to finance that Russia needs to burn through it's reserves. NATO doesn't have to do that, they still are doing very little compared to what they could do if they decided to go full on war economy like Russia.
And even this little is enough to fully occupy the Russian army and to make them lose a lot of strategic targets. The Black Sea fleet is significantly weakened due to several losses and Ukraine effectively won back access to the western Black Sea. The Moskva is gone, which was the "carrier killer" and used to patrol in the Mediterranean as well for example, so due to this war Russia has no more strategic influence at sea in that area for example. They are also losing other important assets, like recently two A-50 AWACS planes and some fighter jets. They don't have many of the A-50 and can't replace them in the current situation.
I actually believe that the situation in the air is part of the reason why NATO isn't worrying much more than they do. It has been NATO focus for quite a long time to win air superiority and base all their operations on that. Russia isn't winning air-to-air fights, isn't penetrating or destroying Ukraine's air defense in any meaningful way and their own air defense systems obviously can quite often be destroyed even by Ukraine in the current situation. As long as NATO is confident to be able to win air superiority and then bomb everything into oblivion I expect them to stay relatively calm about Russian.
Great post. Those comebacks are even worse than just posting emojis.
Honestly, right back at you. That goes for the ones who joined the mob and cheering at your incredible moment of self-righteous outrage (@HTG, @Red in STL and @Sly and all the ones who still didn't write about how cool you are but don't personally engage).
I'm tired of you nitpicking my comments. I'm one of the fews in this fecking thread who tries to express their opinion in more than a three words sentence or a Tweet. You can disagree with me, think that I'm light-years off the mark, a pro-Putin and that's totally okay. Personal insults not so much, even if you're a mod. I've made my thoughts as clear as I could, and I am by far no Putin fan or of what he's doing to Ukraine. I've specifically called out on Putin's BS on Poland. If you ever followed my posts, especially in the conversation with @B.Munich you'd know that I didn't bring Godwin just because I got tired.
Anyways, feel free to ban me from this thread or even of this forum if you think that I'm a negative contribution to it.
Last edited:
I'm not a mod, so there's need to act like a victim. As for nitpicking, I think I've interacted with you maybe once, ever? My issue is not with your opinions, it's with how you treat the people you debate with lately. You add snarky, unnecessary comments that have nothing to do with the actual point you're making, and only serve to make whoever you're discussing with annoyed, unhappy or just confused.
You could have made your "let's not compare this to Hitler" argument without going "one Godwin Award to you", for example. What purpose did that serve?
I thought that "scout" means that you're part of Red Café's moderation. My bad.
Yeah, you've got a point. I've felt frustrated and lashed out. Truly sorry for that.
Last edited:
I've got no problem with your opinions, In fact we are definitely in agreement in the Israel VS Hamas thread. My problem is you constantly disobeying posting guidelines. Replying with emoji (which I advised not to and you insist on doing that you had to be warned by a mod), abrasive attitude towards others (even if I agree in relation to the opinion you're replying to), excessive use of sarcastic/snarky replies among others.
Learn to engage respectfully with others. This is not your personal playground where you behave the way you want. There are guidelines to adhere to. This is a community with rules which everyone should follow or else this will turn into chaos. These are difficult emotional times but we need some order here.
Well, he did refer to the fighting in Ukraine as a "war" (rather than a "special military operation"). Not sure if it is the first time he has done that? He also laughed off suggestions that Russia is planning to invade Europe after it is finished with Ukraine (he presumably does not consider the Baltics or Romania/Poland as really being 'Europe', though).
You and Nimic are right. I went overboard and apologize for that.
I appreciate that.
All settled and keep participating. Current events is my favorite forum here and all opinions are valuable. You just need to follow the rules. If you get aggravated, just take a breather.
I can't see how he'd ever consider another invasion given how badly this one has gone, even though you are probably right in that he considers those countries part of Russia. The narrative around the war now is Russia is "winning" but it really lost as soon as the invasion failed so spectacularly, the fear factor their military had is completely gone and the majority of their elite and regular soldiers are reported to have been lost (the same issue Ukraine now has). Plus, NATO members have now essentially been planning for 2 years and watching/assessing Russia in everything it does, the big problems in supply chains are being addressed, there is more joint training, more money pouring into defence across Europe. It has come at the expense of Ukraine, no doubt, but it's likely invaluable for NATO.
One thing is for certain. Europe will continue to be under pressure as long as Putin is in power.
A recent history of Russian election interference.
God I hate Putin, the absolute madman.
I agree with all of this, but one senses that the future continued existence of Ukraine (and possibly NATO) depends quite heavily on what happens in the US in November.
Will do.
The Ukraine and Gaza Wars took a toll on me, and made me way too abrasive to engage any discussion with a dispassionate mind.
Last edited:
I can't work out if Trump would be better or worse on NATO - isn't his whole spiel there are to many members not spending enough and piggybacking on the countries that commit more of their GDP to spending? Obviously the way he communicates this is ridiculous (encouraging Russia to attack underpaying countries) but maybe that is what it will take to actually get to the levels agreed. It's kind of telling when you look at who is spending and who is not, it's the countries who are closest to Russia who are above/well above the 2% pledge and countries like Belgium, Portugal, Spain, Italy who, let's face it, are not at any risk of invasion who are slacking.
https://www.forces.net/news/world/nato-which-countries-pay-their-share-defence
For Ukraine specifically though Trump would likely be a disaster, that I agree on, he seems likely to slash or completely cut funding given they are not a NATO member.
Former aides/advisers to trump (who admittedly probably now have an axe to grind eg John Bolton) say that Trump's pronouncements on NATO are not strategic posturing to persuade the member states to pay up a minimum of 2% of GDP, but rather a reflection of Trump's genuinely held belief that NATO is essentially a load of rubbish and the US needs to pull out of it. Given the ever closer embrace of Putin/Russia by the right in the US, I fear that a Trump victory in November would more likely than not lead to the demise of both Ukraine (Europe cannot prop them up alone) and NATO. Even if Trump did not directly pull the US out of NATO, I'd expect him to publicly erode the bedrock principle of the organisation (collective security) to such an extent that nobody would have confidence in it any more (is a Trump-lead US really going to start a shooting war with a Putin-led Russia if the latter invades the Baltic states, just because they are NATO members? I think not).
Being German I'm indeed no expert of American foreign policies. I read Perkins the economic hitman, so I know some of the strategies applied. These were mostly secretive US operations, thus little is known about them in Europe. Germany mostly stayed on sidelines, just giving money (e.g. Iraq war).
I don't defend these ruthless operations to gain control over foreign countries by installing or supporting corrupt and criminal governments or leaders. The US is still paying the price for their wrong policies today. I'm with you so far.
It's fair to compare US wars in Iraq, Afghanistan with Russian operations in Syria or Afghanistan.
Still what's going on in Ukraine is on a different level. Of course you are free to disagree.
If you are German too, I suppose you are in line with Sarah Wagenknecht who always argues the US did the same in Iraq. She is partly right. Both wars were wrong and against international law. Still I see a huge difference. The US never wanted to conquer Iraq and extinguish the country. They never fought a war against the civilian population purposely killing tenthousands. They never committed or encouraged war crimes Russia is doing in a daily base in Ukraine.
You are wrong here. I left Germany and Europe back in 1998 living in Thailand and now the Philippines. Thus, I'm as far away as possible.
Again you are wrong. Living only a stone throw from Clark airbase I might be affected very soon when China thinks they grab Taiwan, if the West isn't committed to prevent Russia from extinguishing the Ukraine.
Isn't such distortion of facts the sign of a madmen? I'm honestly worried when Trump is elected, as he is pretty similar to Putin in twisting facts and spout his own distorted version of events.
I admit I even didn't know about Godwin Award.
Anyway it wasn't my but Putin's analogy.
It's especially ironic because Putin is defending the Uber Nazi Adolf Hitler to justify his invasion of Ukraine, which on the other hand he justified to free the country from Nazi rule.