NATO is a Cold War Relic
- Thread starter hvilleherb
- Start date
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it. How long after NATO is disbanded will it take before we’re dragged into another European war.
The simple fact that this sort of emotional appeal to nationalist isolationism is a danger to our national security and that of our National Allies.
The fact is the NATO Alliance is still a major factor in maintaining the PAX Americana which is responsible for the greatest era of world peace in human history.
To disregard that fact is short sighted to an extreme.
I'd like to know where this bullshit originated. Like, I get it. "The Other" Scapegoat everything, don't look at reality or our sad skillsets
and big business exploitation. But who specifically first broached the "NATO is now our enemy" notion that you get from the right these days?
Who exactly said Fuck Belgium, France, England, Netherlands, Luxemborg,Austria, Italy, Germany, Greece, Sweden and I lub me some Russia instead?
Is this a Limbaugh thing? Who thunk it first?
hvilleherb
Verified User
Stupid libs think Putin is training Russian troops to attack other countries.
well we gotta maintain the status quo. The problem is we don't. we constantly push Putin,
and then get all upset when he pushes back -the usual zero sum nonsense that has bedeviled US/Russian relations since the end of cold war 1.
It's truly frightening the ignorance. "Russia is a threat" "Russia has to be punished" while we basically ignore Chinese hegemony and expansionism at the expense of the littoral states of east Asia.
All this jingoism just forces Putin and Xi to grow a deeper partnership.
Nixon understood the benefit of playing the China card..
we're too stupid, too bent out of shape at Russian troll farms, (and we do the same anyways) to understand the geopolitics that Nixon exploited
You are apparently unaware that Estonia and Latvia are share a common border with Russia. If you are using "border states" in some other context, you certainly were not clear about it.
You consistently criticize NATO's intervention in Libya, which had valid humanitarian goals and which was supported by your hero Donald Trump, while excusing all military aggression by the Kremlin against the sovereign territory of its neighbors.
I guess I am never going to be able to expect intellectual consistency and fealty to principles from you.
I am consistently against illegal military aggression, whether it be the U.S. invasion of Iraq, or Russian military invasion of Ukraine.
Do you know what it is like to try to converse with someone who does not hold any consistent, and principled position? Yep, that's right. It is pretty much a waste of time.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Our unnecessary involvement in the first general European war is what ensured the commencement of the 2nd.
Leonthecat
Racism Watchdog
so don't bother.
Ukraine is the big border state. Belarus is safely in the Russian orbit. In terms of the Baltics-to my knowledge they have never been part of Russian culture. But I should be more exact.
Libya was casually supported by Trump. Trump had no idea of the real situation in Libya anymore then anyone else not privy to classified info. Hillary and Rice and the rest of the murderous harpies knew exactly what they were doing.
The went to war on Sid Blumenthal's info and cell phone video from Bengazi.
They assassinated Qadafi because he wouldn't resign.
they entire affair was bogus and left Libya a failed terrorist state to this day.
Your desire to equate that to an interview on Howard Stern where Trump is equivocating shows rank partisanship
on your part.
Bing anti-war is great except you forgot the part about where we forced Russia to annex Crimea for access to Sevatopol by our meddling in the maidan.
Like I said quit screwing with Russian security, and Putin will quit the need to annex.
The Russiaphobes are still trying to get Ukraine into NATO.
Hillary wanted Qadafi to be declared a military target "they" is the cabal of Rice/Powers/Hillary
Qadafi paid reparations for Lockerbie - there is real doubt Libya was behind it ( materials used in fusing if i recall) -
but no matter. Bush 43 welcomed Qadafi back into the league of nations for getting rid of his nukes.
Qadafi was in good standing as was due a UN award.
it was the NTC minions that ripped him apart.
You forgot a MAJOR fact - our tracking his convoy and the Predator drone we used to blow it up
put Qadafi on the run ( near Sirte) when he was killed.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...bed-by-drone-flown-by-pilot-in-Las-Vegas.html
Col Muammar Gaddafi’s convoy was bombed by an American Predator drone and then attacked by French jets before the deposed dictator was killed by rebel fighters, defence sources disclosed.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
I met a really nice guy from Libya last week. He has lived in England for 27 years but still has family in Benghazi. He said that law and order has been reestablished in Tripoli and is getting there in Benghazi. He hated Ghaddafi by the way and is a big supporter of Hafter. He also thinks that Libya will end up as two autonomous regions centered around Tripoli and Benghazi, the main sticking point will be how the oil revenues are divided up.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Iran was behind Lockerbie not Libya, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine planted the bomb. Khomeini ordered the bombing as revenge for the Iran Air Flight 655 downed accidentally by the USS Vincennes in an act of gross incompetence on the part of the captain. The Airbus 300 was transmitting IFF squawks in Mode III indicating it was a civilian plane but the captain and crew seemingly missed that thinking it was an Iranian F-14.
From Wiki:
Last edited:
It's 4AM..I'll look at this later today when my brain isn't oatmeal mush.. many thanks for the links/info
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
And had we not been involved in either war would have never come to our shores?
I used to buy into the revisionist history of WW1 being some sort of amoral military effort by the United States. A war where pretty much everyone shared the blame for that war equally.
I recently read Barbara Tuchman's Guns of August, and it is perfectly clear that the Germans were the aggressors, that the allies were close to collapse in 1918 prior to the arrival of American armies on the field of battle, and that a victory of Prussian militarism in western Europe probably would not have been a good thing - either for western Europeans, or for American interests.
The Treat of Versailles was punitive and unfair to the Germans, and I do not believe the United State ever actually ratified it, feeling it was to biased to the British. Even so, there is no excuse on the planet that can justify what Hitler and the Nazis did. The Russian were not even part of the Treaty of Versailles, but the citizens of the Soviet Union, the Poles, and Jewish people across Europe took the lions share of punishment from the Nazis.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Unlikely. Had we maintained our neutrality the Kaiser would have likely prevailed in 1918, which means no treaty of Versailles, which means no national anger and resentment that would lead to the rise of Hitler. It also means the Ottoman Empire would have survived, at least slightly longer. So our current position in the middle east wouldn't be what it is either.