Current Affairs
-
Another Russian exile in the uk found dead now.
What’s the odds for it being natural causes? -
Stopharage wrote:I’m not sure countries joining up to NATO is encroaching, if that’s what you mean?
It really is. -
This is how the Russians see things.
-
Nato bases surrounding Russia. It supports your point regarding crimea.
-
I mean, could you imagine if Mexico decided to turn towards Russia? What would the States do?
Of course it's fine if we do it, it's worthy. If one of our enemies does it, it's baaaaaad.
Laughable. -
GooberTheHat wrote:Stopharage wrote:I’m not sure countries joining up to NATO is encroaching, if that’s what you mean?
It really is.
Why? If an independent state chooses to join NATO for the perceived ‘safety in numbers’ benefits then that’s not encroaching, is it? Question of semantics I guess I understand the argument that Russia feel constrained by increased membership but encroachment legally means to invade someone’s territory. My issue is with the use of the term encroachment; I appreciate the inflammatory impact increased membership will have on Russia.
Just to clarify - I just don’t think annexing Crimea and violating international law is the same as an independent state deciding to join NATO. Fully understand why Russia did it and that we would likely do similar if roles were reversed. -
It's a messy affair, for sure (@Stoph), I mean, how do you stop a sovereign nation doing what they want (joining nato)? But that's entirely why such things as additional Nato membership shouldn't be granted so flippantly; it was very clearly stated, to keep the peace, that Nato wouldn't expand. The US has flagrantly ignored that. And let's not pretend that Nato expansion isn't annexation by the US.
-
I'm fucking gutted that me arguing sense makes it seem like I'm arguing in favour of Putin, that's not what I want. And that isn't what I hope people take away from this.
-
nick_md wrote:It's a messy affair, for sure (@Stoph), I mean, how do you stop a sovereign nation doing what they want (joining nato)? But that's entirely why such things as additional Nato membership shouldn't be granted so flippantly; it was very clearly stated, to keep the peace, that Nato wouldn't expand. The US has flagrantly ignored that. And let's not pretend that Nato expansion isn't annexation by the US.
I actually don't think it was. -
.
-
I dunno man, I just heard that when the soviet union collapsed there was an agreement that Nato wouldn't expend east. I only read that from scholars I've never met, so they could be bullshitting me.
-
It's a well known fact that quite possibly isn't true.
No dig at you mate. -
Nick, I totally understand your argument. It’s ridiculously simplistic to rail against all Russia’s actions whilst ignoring the US’ indiscretions (and our own). Case in point is how May chose to do nothing after the Litvinenko murder as she didn’t want to jeopardise UK-Russian relationships. We do the right thing when it suits us.
I don’t buy into any of the goodies and baddies rhetoric that a lot of less informed folks buy into. But the support for Assad, widespread discrimination in Russia, the huge level of corruption, assassinations overseas etc mean I have a real dislike for Putin. Much as you had concern for sounding like you are arguing in favour of Putin, I’m concerned that I might come across as blinkered; I’m fully aware of the odious regimes we’ve backed. I have to examine on global politics papers and have a fairly balanced and healthy scepticism of most countries. -
GooberTheHat wrote:
In part this was why I had an issue with the term encroachment. Probably just me taking everything too literally.
-
GooberTheHat wrote:
"These assertions were sharply challenged at the time by other observers, including former U.S. policymakers who played a direct role in the German reunification process. George H. W. Bush, Brent Scowcroft, and James A. Baker, who served as president, national security adviser, and secretary of state in 1990 respectively, all firmly denied that the topic of extending NATO membership to former Warsaw Pact countries (other than East Germany) even came up during the negotiations with Moscow on German reunification, much less that the United States made a ‘‘pledge’’ not to pursue it. "
Well that's me convinced! Good ol' George Dubya!
I can post links to Chomsky here to support my view, but tbh I think that's a bit crass, you can do your own research. Or not do your own research, wtf do I care. -
Dang, you both did posts whilst I was posting that, now I sound like a combative cunt.
-
Let's all hug and agree the world is fucked; let's hunker down and enjoy what little time we have xxxx
-
nick_md wrote:GooberTheHat wrote:
"These assertions were sharply challenged at the time by other observers, including former U.S. policymakers who played a direct role in the German reunification process. George H. W. Bush, Brent Scowcroft, and James A. Baker, who served as president, national security adviser, and secretary of state in 1990 respectively, all firmly denied that the topic of extending NATO membership to former Warsaw Pact countries (other than East Germany) even came up during the negotiations with Moscow on German reunification, much less that the United States made a ‘‘pledge’’ not to pursue it. "
Well that's me convinced! Good ol' George Dubya!
I can post links to Chomsky here to support my view, but tbh I think that's a bit crass, you can do your own research. Or not do your own research, wtf do I care.
There is a much more in depth (20 odd page) pdf at the end of the article that references declassified Russian, German and US documents. -
This isn't hugging. I said hug you fuck. There is no winner in an internet argument. I'm not gonna convince Man On The Internet he is wrong, just as you aren't.
-
Looks like Article 10 written when NATO was created allows expansion.
Article 10
The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.
@NickMD, I’m not taking your posts as combative. Ostensibly I think all 3 of us share largely the same views. -
I'm not trying to convince you, I'm just letting you know there is more to the article I linked to than just what was on that page. I know you like to do your own research, but having resources identified is a good thing, no?
-
Aye thanks both for the links and views, I'm always in favour of being challenged, that's probably why I'm so vociferous in my views (it's not a popular view that I pose); tbh I'm often in a quandary myself when it comes to West-Russia relations. It's a fucking difficult beast. I just really dislike the b&w goodies-vs-baddies stuff. If only it were that simple.
Will for sure be reading into it more, and hope you both do also; let's us all try to have an objective mind
-
nick_md wrote:Aye thanks both for the links and views, I'm always in favour of being challenged, that's probably why I'm so vociferous in my views (it's not a popular view that I pose); tbh I'm often in a quandary myself when it comes to West-Russia relations. It's a fucking difficult beast. I just really dislike the b&w goodies-vs-baddies stuff. If only it were that simple. Will for sure be reading into it more, and hope you both do also; let's us all try to have an objective mind
I'm jumping in at the end here and not sure if this is entirely relevant, but this talk of black and whitenss along with the Prof. Chompskys name coming up raising my alarm bells.
This is a man of almost pathological levels of delusion when it comes to foregin policy and western intervention.
While of course it's overly simplistic to reduce nation states to goodies vs baddies, at the same time it's equally foolish, actually more so, to assume that because we've done bad things and they've done bad things we are morally equivlant.
Western values, and to a large extent the ethics driving western foregin policy, are in objectively better than many others.
Chomsky woulod seemingly have all the worlds evils put down to american intervention.Gamgertag: JRPC
PSN: Lastability95 -
Haven't we all, at one time or another, annexed a neighbour's territory or had someone brutally murdered? Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,715
- Games1,879
- Off topic836