Posted on 05/12/2022 6:36:55 AM PDT by Cronos
Russia has warned that it will have to take “military-technical” steps in response to Finland’s application to join Nato.
The foreign ministry accused the military alliance of seeking to create “another flank for the military threat to our country”.
“Helsinki should be aware of its responsibility and the consequences of such a move,” the ministry added.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said: “The expansion of Nato and the approach of the alliance to our borders does not make the world and our continent more stable and secure”.
When asked whether Finland’s accession to the military alliance would be considered a threat toward Russia, Peskov answered: “Definitely”.
Earlier on Thursday, Finnish leaders said they were in favour of joining Nato and a formal decision would be made this weekend.
Finland, which shares an 810 mile border and a difficult past with Russia, has gradually stepped up its cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a partner since Russia annexed Crimea in 2014.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
>If you don’t count them toppling a government in Georgia
That was actually America that did that
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2003/12/geor-d05.html
>and sending a couple million Syrian refugees flooding into Europe.
ISIS was a CIA creation
https://euvsdisinfo.eu/report/isis-was-created-by-deceased-us-senator-john-mccain-and-the-cia
And now Finnish neutrality is over so what’s brave Tsarina Pidor Putin going to do about it?
Because there are right now US and NATO forces 160km away from St. Petersburg and armed USAF F-22 and F-35 fighters are patrolling the Baltic with our Swedish and Finnish allies.
Those “referendums” were as legitimate as Saddam Hussein’s last election.
And look how he ended up.
L
Finland “deserves” a decent neighbor.
Finland in contrast has been a model neighbor.
Justice is on the side of Finland.
Russia has been extremely indecent, unjust, and psychotic.
Russia has the ability to completely destroy the USA, no one with any common sense doubts this. The destruction of this Republic is the goal of your paymaster George Soros, so I’m not telling you anything you don’t know. You and your fellow Ukraine bots want everyone to ignore the fact that Russia is armed to the the teeth with nuclear arms... only fools would believe that we can go to war with the Russian Federation and not suffer the direst consequences....
>Welcome to war. Cutting out enemy propaganda is SOP.
So your pro censorship? Good to hear, are you working for that new ministry of truth at homeland security?
Ah good. Induction into NATO means Russia's winning days against Finalnd are over.
>Those “referendums” were as legitimate as Saddam Hussein’s last election.
Just because you democrats cheat at elections does not mean all elections worldwide are also fake
Gas wars and refusal to return some military assets they didn’t use themselves but destroyed under the NATO threat reduction program. The persecution of Crimeans was taking place since earlier 1990s as well which was a sensitive topic for the Russian public opinion.
First, it is not a done deal. Second, Russia understands that it is not about Europe and going to create similar threats near the US borders. I have no idea why you find this situation amusing.
Nope, he is just admitting that it is not a Russian-Ukrainian war.
1) Why is there still a nato?
2) Why is the United States still honoring a treaty that the other participants refuse to live up to?
1. See what's going on in Ukraine ? To prevent that.
2. Not any more. It was mostly fixed under Trump (members pay 2% of GDP)
Oh sod off, twatwaffle.
L
What did the British (and every allied nation) do when at war in 1939-40?
They threw their local fascist sympathisers like Moseley into “detention”, banned their publications, and established censorship. So much for free speech and rule of law. War trumps everything.
In war the law is silent.
Oh I’m sorry, which nations have declared war on Russia? none, so why are they censoring Russian news unless they are trying to hide the truth?
When Russia’s Vladimir Putin demanded that the U.S. rule out Ukraine as a future member of the NATO alliance, the U.S. archly replied: NATO has an open-door policy. Any nation, including Ukraine, may apply for membership and be admitted. We’re not changing that.
In the Bucharest declaration of 2008, NATO had put Ukraine and Georgia, ever farther east in the Caucasus, on a path to membership in NATO and coverage under Article 5 of the treaty, which declares that an attack on any one member is an attack on all.
Unable to get a satisfactory answer to his demand, Putin invaded and settled the issue. Neither Ukraine nor Georgia will become members of NATO. To prevent that, Russia will go to war, as Russia did last week.
Putin did exactly what he had warned us he would do.
Whatever the character of the Russian president, now being hotly debated here in the USA, he has established his credibility.
When Putin warns that he will do something, he does it.
Thirty-six hours into this Russia-Ukraine war, potentially the worst in Europe since 1945, two questions need to be answered:
How did we get here? And where do we go from here?
How did we get to where Russia — believing its back is against a wall and the United States, by moving NATO ever closer, put it there — reached a point where it chose war with Ukraine rather than accepting the fate and future it believes the West has in store for Mother Russia?
Consider. Between 1989 and 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev let the Berlin Wall be pulled down, Germany be reunited and all the “captive nations” of Eastern Europe go free.
Having collapsed the Soviet empire, Gorbachev allowed the Soviet Union to dissolve itself into 15 independent nations. Communism was allowed to expire as the ruling ideology of Russia, the land where Leninism and Bolshevism first took root in 1917.
Gorbachev called off the Cold War in Europe by removing all of the causes on Moscow’s side of the historic divide.
Putin, a former KGB colonel, came to power in 1999 after the disastrous decadelong rule of Boris Yeltsin, who ran Russia into the ground.
In that year, 1999, Putin watched as America conducted a 78-day bombing campaign on Serbia, the Balkan nation that had historically been a protectorate of Mother Russia.
That year, also, three former Warsaw Pact nations, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, were brought into NATO.
Against whom were these countries to be protected by U.S. arms and the NATO alliance, the question was fairly asked.
The question seemed to be answered fully in 2004, when Slovenia, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Romania and Bulgaria were admitted into NATO, a grouping that included three former republics of the USSR itself, as well as three more former Warsaw Pact nations.
Then, in 2008, came the Bucharest declaration that put Georgia and Ukraine, both bordering on Russia, on a path to NATO membership.
Georgia, the same year, attacked its seceded province of South Ossetia, where Russian troops were acting as peacekeepers, killing some.
This triggered a Putin counterattack through the Roki Tunnel in North Ossetia that liberated South Ossetia and moved into Georgia all the way to Gori, the birthplace of Stalin. George W. Bush, who had pledged “to end tyranny in our world,” did nothing. After briefly occupying part of Georgia, the Russians departed but stayed as protectors of the South Ossetians.
The U.S. establishment has declared this to have been a Russian war of aggression, but an EU investigation blamed Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili for starting the war.
In 2014, a democratically elected pro-Russian president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, was overthrown in Kyiv and replaced by a pro-Western regime. Rather than lose Sevastopol, Russia’s historic naval base in Crimea, Putin seized the peninsula and declared it Russian territory.
Teddy Roosevelt stole Panama with similar remorse.
Which brings us to today.
Whatever we may think of Putin, he is no Stalin. He has not murdered millions or created a gulag archipelago.
Nor is he “irrational,” as some pundits rail. He does not want a war with us, which would be worse than ruinous to us both.
Putin is a Russian nationalist, patriot, traditionalist and a cold and ruthless realist looking out to preserve Russia as the great and respected power it once was and he believes it can be again.
But it cannot be that if NATO expansion does not stop or if its sister state of Ukraine becomes part of a military alliance whose proudest boast is that it won the Cold War against the nation Putin has served all his life.
President Joe Biden almost hourly promises, “We are not going to war in Ukraine.” Why would he then not readily rule out NATO membership for Ukraine, which would require us to do something Biden himself says we Americans, for our own survival, should never do: go to war with Russia?
I think you are wrong, and suspect that the internet is the primary correlation. Considering the starting point for attitudes about Russia. Most of the adult population in the U.S. was raised in an era where the Soviets were considered by all conservatives, and by all but the America-hating left, as the Evil Empire. They openly oppressed and invaded nations like Hungary and Czechoslovakia who attempted to assert any degree of independence. They told us we were the great evil capitalists in the world, and that they would "bury" us.
That's why the 1980 Miracle on Ice was about more than just hockey. It's why we all sided with the oppressed nations of Eastern Europe against the Russians, and why we all cheered when the Wall came down.
That's what our default national attitudes were towards Russia before all this began. We were all predisposed to think of them as the bad guys of Eastern Europe because...they were. So that's the natural starting point for this war. That's where I come from, and I don't watch TV news either.
As far as I can tell, a great deal of the support for Russia/opposition to Ukraine comes from the whole "Great Reset" idea. And I think that mindset very likely much comes from those who have spent a great deal of time on the internet, reading various blogs, articles, theories, etc..
I think you'd be hard pressed to find many people who oppose helping Ukraine/think Ukraine is bad/support Russia that don't get most of their information from the internet. But I think plenty of people who support Ukraine do so without watching much TV at all.
There is no war?
Officially, no. In practice - let us not play pretend.
It is rather a “phony peace” let us say.
He’s gonna invade Finland? Again? That went real well last time, didn’t it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.