Posted on 06/07/2022 11:34:37 AM PDT by Mount Athos
NATO refuses to give Russia guarantees not to deploy nuclear weapons in Sweden and Finland if they join the alliance. This was stated by Assistant Secretary General of the alliance Camille Grand, RTS reports.
When Grand was asked about any guarantees of non-deployment of nuclear weapons in Sweden and Finland, he said that each NATO member country decides "sovereignly" on the issue of nuclear weapons. "Every state has the freedom in the nuclear sphere, and is willing to accept or not to accept weapons. It is not about setting limits", he added.
The politician was also asked whether NATO expects a "military reaction" or a "show of force" from Russia in response to the entry of Finland and Sweden into the alliance. He answered that the Russians themselves consider this not necessary, and that he doesn't think it would be justified. At the same time, the Assistant Secretary General of NATO argued that Finland and Sweden have a "defensive position of peaceful states that do not seek confrontation with Russia".
Grand also expressed his hope that the disagreements between Turkey, Sweden and Finland would be settled by the summit. "NATO has its own way of dealing with the problem of terrorism. The Turks make more political demands on Finland", he noted.
Earlier, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said that the country's position on the question of expanding NATO and joining the alliance of Sweden and Finland will not change without fulfilling Ankara's demands. According to him, for a membership in the North Atlantic bloc, countries must stop supporting terrorism, lift sanctions against Turkey, and also show allied solidarity.
The civilians didn't but the idiot comedian we appointed to lead Ukraine...yeah, he f#@ked up.... he believed the US and EU politicians they paid off when they said, "Russia is just a gas station pretending to be a country." and "Russia will never invade you with all of us supporting you. We'll be right behind you and protect you when the bear comes to the door."
I don't support Putin. Yeah, he's a murdering sociopath... but what? That surprises you that a guy that has killed Chechnyans, Geogians, Ukrainians and maimed and murdered political opponents decided to attack Ukraine? Really?
What about all the other leaders our government supports or does business with? Civilians are pawns to the leaders of the world.
I don't know about "hating the USA". I was willing to kill and die for our country. Most of my family was willing to sign up and do the same.
I don't see our country near the eastern European border. But I've been wrong before on land-nav and I also get my east and west confused when I type quickly...hahahaha
You are being disrespectful. You are using crass sarcasm and jeering as rhetorical tools. Abusive language lessens the prospects of success in polite discourse. This makes me think that you are not acting in good faith, and are not truly interested in exchanging information and sharing viewpoints.
I'm sorry if you're Ukrainian and are getting a lesson in "realpolitik". My grandfather explained it to me [...] "All the finest arguments and precise rhetoric lose to a bullet in the face and a boot on your neck". [...] Welcome to the real world pal.
I have done / said nothing to suggest that I was being overly naïve, gullible, or unrealistic. And I certainly need no lessons in Realpolitik. But I was hoping that you and I could first find some common moral ground before proceeding with a discussion about the best course of action to take.
Before deciding how to proceed (when two third-parties are in conflict), it is namely expedient to first identify who the culprit is and who the victim is.
Because once you have done that, and identified Putin as the obvious aggressor, then it suddenly becomes much easier to decide upon a course of action.
In deciding upon that course of action, one is of course free to apply principles of Realpolitik.
We are, e.g., then free to consider how best to weaken, embarrass, punish, or otherwise isolate the war criminal Putin, with a view towards ensuring that he never again gains the opportunity to invade a foreign country, incite an international crisis, and grab land. We could also discuss how best to aid and help heal a battered Ukraine. (You agree that it would be good to ensure those things, right? Ri-ight?)
At that point - i.e., once we have determined who the war criminal is - we are then free to discuss various different tactics and strategies to accomplish that goal (i.e., guaranteeing that Putin fails). In doing so, men of good will can of course have different viewpoint about how best to degrade Russian military assets, weaken Putin's international standing, etc. One person might volunteer that a sea blockade (enforced by NATO ships) would be an effective strategy. Another might appeal for more prudence and circumspection, and advise that we instead limit our involvement to the provision of arms to Ukraine. Still another man of good will might argue that economic sanctions are sufficient. And so on...
But with you, we never get to that point! Instead, you seem to want to derail the conversation long before it gets to that point. Your allusions to previous military conflicts (largely CIVIL wars) or verbal attacks against Zelenskyy's character sabotage our making any progress about WHAT TO DO.
So please: Let's first agree upon the obvious.
1. Putin's Russia is here the clear aggressor.
2. Putin's Russia has broken with the 77-year-old post-war order in Europe whereby it is forbidden to attempt to change international borders through military force. (Most of the other conflicts you allude to were outside of Europe, were internal conflicts, etc.; the one European conflict - Serbia attacking and killing Bosnians - was of course egregious, and NATO powers DID intervene on behalf of the victim, so it is quite IRRELEVANT to the issue at hand or rather actually SUPPORTS the argument for NATO INTERVENTION).
You have wasted several postings indulging in fear-mongering, thus subverting the discussion. So how about finally clearing matters up and plainly stating your opinion as to Putin's guilt, and Ukraine's innocence?
We can then conduct a productive conversation about ways and means to deal with Putin. You could then argue, e.g., that though Putin is clearly the aggressor and at fault, Russia's nuclear arsenal is too frightening and the West should therefore let him have everything he wants. That would be a legitimate - if spineless - position, but I would respect your openly admitting to it.
Regards,
Why are you stating the obvious? Is there anything in my postings suggesting that I was not already fully aware of that?
I would have thought that at least the scenario with the 3 a.m. break-in I sketched above would have made clear where I stand on the issue of "evil in the world."
Regards,
Dick Vomer: The civilians didn't but the idiot comedian we appointed to lead Ukraine...yeah, he f#@ked up.
What is the relevancy of your statement? Does Zelenskyy's having "messed up" mean that Russia's invasion is somehow less egregious, less deserving of rebuke?
We really seem to be talking past each other. Let me try an analogy.
Jack rapes Fred's daughter. Bob observes: "Yes, Jack is a monster, and Fred's daughter is innocent - But Fred is a real assh*le!"
Do you see now how irrelevant that observation is? In determining what we should do with Jack, it is entirely sufficient to demonstrate that Jack was the aggressor, and that Fred's daughter was innocent of any wrong-doing. It is entirely unnecessary - in fact, it is downright OBFUSCATING - to express any opinion about Fred's character. The point is that Jack is recognized as the threat to public safety, and that we (society at large) should deal with him, somehow.
Do you follow me?
Regards,
‘I don’t know about “hating the USA”.’
Well what am I to think when you only seem to have bad things to say about the USA and only good things to say about our enemies?
aw, that’s so ..... sweet that you care what I say....hahahahhaa
I actually don’t care what you think.
You go around and around with a very good method to form arguments and divulge little but .....Still haven’t answered my question, in all honesty, I didn’t think you would.
I’ll keep it real simple.
I’ll try it again.
Why do you think Putin invaded Ukraine?
“I actually don’t care what you think.”
Good, then don’t reply to my posts.
I've already told you: Putin's motives in breaching international law and committing the war crime of invading a peaceful country simply don't interest me / have no bearing on how we should respond. Specifically: I think that it is a waste of time - and, more importantly, a DISTRACTION and DIVERSION from the truly IMPORTANT issues on the docket - to attempt to be a "Putin Whisperer" and divine his motives.
I've already cited the analogy of the "feral urban youths" breaking into my residence at 3 a.m. (You completely ignored it!) Their possible motives (mistaken address - they thought it was a drug-house with bags of drugs and stacks of cash lying about; mistaken assumption - they thought the house-owner would be unarmed; etc.) are namely utterly irrelevant to me with regards to how I should react.
And as for "not answering questions":
I have repeatedly requested that you clarify the much more fundamental question of: Did Putin invade (without even officially declaring war) a peaceful neighbor, or not?
And I don't want to hear about Sri Lanka or Rwanda or any other guerilla wars or internal ethnic conflicts or what have you in other parts of the world! They are irrelevant!
I, too, will decry the Serbian aggression against Bosnia in the 1990s, if that's what you want - but that is not the issue here! We are, rather, discussing the unprovoked military invasion by Russia of Ukraine - which has since morphed into an obvious land-grab - beginning on Feb. 24, 2022.
Where do you stand (and why do you persist in your "little dance" to avoid taking a stance)?
When you see a little old lady on the street being mugged, you don't wonder about the mugger's personal motives (mere greed, personal animosity, race-hatred, bloodlust, etc.). Rather, you first recognize that the mugger is the aggressor, and then proceed from there.
Regards,
You replied to mine first you moron
Thank you for responding. Your answers explain a lot.
If you have no interests in the motive either real or imagined of your enemy, don’t know or care about historical perspectives in regards to this conflict/war/security operation/police action, but want everyone to join in and fight and condemn Russia, I think you’re misinformed about how the US uses it’s allies.
Where do I “stand”? I stand with the United States of America. I’m looking at the horizon and I see war coming. That’s where I stand.
I think you’re seeing in real time how I feel.
I think we should provide the Ukrainians all the logistics/weapons/training they can use without jeopardizing a single American soldier, sailor, airman or Marine.
I feel that we are seeing the first chapters of a war with Russia and possibly China.
The FACT that you have no interest in educating yourself about the nature of man, the nature and use of war, and the history of conflicts currently or in the past might be the reason you seem upset.
The reasons or causes of conflict between countries IS important. If you don’t like reading history you may have missed this from about the 5th century BC.
“the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”.
I commend you for your position and agree whole-heartedly!
As for the rest of your admonition:
1. Your constant insistence that we should try to "understand" Putin's motives smacked of a sneaky rhetorical tactic to change the subject, waste time, and derail the discussion.
2. Your repeated reference to "worry" and "fear" and the "inability to KNOW" how Putin might react likewise smacked of an attempt to indulge in fear-mongering and thus covertly advocate isolationism.
3. Your use of personal invective, sarcasm, and insulting tone likewise contributed to the overall impression that you were not arguing in good faith, but rather were attempting to demean your conversational partners and disrupt the discourse.
I would heartily recommend that you try to alter your conversational tone and stick to the issue at hand (in this case, that issue was: Who is the "bad guy" in this conflict, and thus whom should we support?).
A more-respectful tone vis-à-vis other FReepers would go a lo-ong way to enhancing polite discourse.
Regards,
That is a completely false statement! And I am NOT "upset."
I have a GREAT interest in "educating" myself etc. I simply felt that you were attempting to undermine the debate - to DISTRACT, DIVERT, and ultimately DERAIL the discussion - by persistently demanding that we first try to "understand Putin" - as though he were a patient lying on a couch and undergoing psychoanalysis.
When one country attacks another, rocket-bombs cities, invades, marches on its capital city with a 40-mile-long column of tanks, and begins holding "referendums" on whether the defeated populace "wants to join the Motherland," a sly propagandist or sock-puppet will, of course, first attempt to REFRAME the question of guilt by insisting that we instead "try to understand" the aggressor.
What you were doing came straight out of Alinsky's playbook!
Instead of simply addressing the plain question of "What should we do / what side should we choose" in the conflict, you started railing about Sri Lanka, Serbia, etc. An obvious delaying tactic!
That you began calling another poster a "moron" and indulging in childish games ("You started it!") also does not speak for your maturity.
Your overall performance in this thread certainly does NOT cast you in a positive light.
You seem to have a genuine interest in History and/or desire to discuss historical antecedents or similarities - a noble motivation, under other circumstances.
But what you were doing was akin to standing in church on a hot summer day, when another parishioner suddenly keels over, and - instead of first declaring, "Is there a doctor in the house? This person needs attention!" - insisting that everyone first listen to you lecture on History. (I rarely indulge in personal attacks, but I have a strong feeling that you feel the need to "parade around" your knowledge of History, and that that is why you have constantly tried to move the spotlight away from "What needs to be done now?" to "Let's explore Putin's possible motives!" Might it actually be that you have a slight streak of vanity in this regard?)
(Actually, the analogy of the mugger I first mentioned above is more apt, since in the case of the Ukraine, there is also the added factor that there is an obvious "bad guy" in the scenario.)
You really created the impression that you were hoping that we might, in trying to "understand" Putin, actually find some sincere motivations on Putin's part that would diminish his guilt.
You also cast aspersions on Zelinskyy's character (saying that the CIA "installed" him, that he was a "homo," etc.) - as though that were at all pertinent to the discussion. I, personally, don't care whether or not Zelinskyy is a brain-dead zombie being remote-controlled from Langley. That has NO bearing on the issue at hand! Rather, Russia (our historic enemy) is guilty - once again - of an unprovoked attack, invasion, and land-grab, and must not be allowed to "win."
It is in America's interest that we and our allies do everything we can to ensure that Putin fails.
(That is, at least, the "first approximation" for immediately taking action and dealing with this emergency. Once that has been established, I would be delighted to discuss with you historical parallels and possible motives in a separate thread.)
I agree, however, that directly involving U.S. forces would be premature and an instance of "overkill."
I apologize if I have offended you - and it is always a dangerous thing to personally criticize another FReeper. I realize that I may thus appear rather condescending; it can't be helped in this instance. Your overall "showing" in this thread led me to strongly believe that you might be a Russian sock-puppet or such; I am now instead inclined to believe that you are simply too undisciplined in rhetoric and too quick to resort to childish tactics (like name-calling). I got a strong "vibe" of underlying hostility in many of your postings.
Please try to "clean up your act!" I think that you might have a lot to contribute to Free Republic!
Regards,
These are just a few examples of the snide tone that has colored many of your postings. Some of your statements really do border on ad hominem.
In my eyes, this is disrespectful. Further, it certainly does not serve to promote the free and open exchange of ideas in the spirit of determining the truth.
It does nothing to further the dialog, examine the issues, or strengthen the overall good will that should exist amongst gentlemanly conservatives like ourselves.
I realize that some of the personal comments / criticisms in my previous posting with respect to the style and content of your statements might have been better saved for a private message; I ask for your forbearance in that regard.
Regards,
whew! I’ve changed my mind. You’ve convinced me.
We should mobilize with 82nd, 101st , 1st Mountain and a couple of MEUs to a forward pre-positioning area. Move our naval assets to stations in the North Atlantic, Med and Arctic Sea. Place our subs, land based silos and European nuclear weapons on alert with Biden and the football moved to the “Nightwatch” E-4B National Airborne Operations Center.
Go into Moscow with joint operation of SEALs, SAS, and CIA’s Special Operations group to snatch Putin. Take him to Brussels and try him at the Hague for “war crimes”.
Then make every Russian soldier move immediately back to the Pre-1990 borders of Ukraine, return Crimea and pay restitution in perpetuity from any oil and natural gas they produce for the next 100 years.
you and Boogieman need to communicate better on calling me a Putin lover or russian sock puppet. I’d recommend testing using “SNAP” on a VPN and share files with “Signal” or “Spider Oak”. That way nobody can tell you “two” guys use the same syntax in writing....
In your posting #72, you said:
I think we should provide the Ukrainians all the logistics/weapons/training they can use without jeopardizing a single American soldier, sailor, airman or Marine.
In my posting #73, I responded, saying that I whole-heartedly agreed.
I thus thought that we had laid that issue to rest. But in fact, you seem to want to continue quarreling!
I never said anything about dropping paratroopers into the Kremlin!
To imply that I did is deceitful and malicious!
You are further disqualifying yourself as a serious conversational partner, Dick Vomer.
you and Boogieman need to communicate better on calling me a Putin lover or russian sock puppet. [...] That way nobody can tell you “two” guys use the same syntax in writing.
You disappoint me. You seemed initially to have some genuine interest in conducting a friendly conversation. Now, you are indulging in pure ad hominem, totally irrelevant to the topic at hand.
But thank you for drawing my attention to Boogieman. He must be an intelligent and educated fellow!
Regards,
I was being sarcastic. It’s one of my best qualities.
I love the pretentious tone and the faux outrage over my opinion.
As far as a “serious conversation partner”.,,,Nah, I’m not serious.
I just love getting trolls to twist themselves up in knots. Especially pseudo intellectual fops spouting about things they know little about but letting their emotions dictate their behavior like a teenage girl.
Here ya go. Ukraine trusted our intel, the President, the senators, military leaders and congressmen they paid off with protection money but didn’t get protected.
As for my family and friends dying to protect Ukraine…..”not my circus, not my monkeys. “
You don’t want to hear about the past behavior or concern yourself with motives….. ok by me.
If you have relatives in Ukraine have them ask the Poles how dependable western allies are when foreign armies invade and were promised protection and military aid.
You really know how to sweet-talk your fellow FReepers.
Thanks for letting us other board members know who you really are!
Bye, troll!
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.