Posted on 07/10/2025 4:09:48 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
NATO had always desired to surround the Soviet Union, but since the Soviet Union disappeared they just turned to surrounding Russia instead. It was a blunder of epic proportion. Instead what we tried to do with China, and failed, should have been transferred to Russia, sans the mistakes we made in China.
What a load. Step away the TeeVee.
War at times is a necessary evil.
War is never a moral act.
Ukraine is NOT in NATO. We have no obligation to assist them.
The US and NATO are the world’s most powerful military and military alliance. These nations comprise 3 nuclear powers, have missile defense, and the worlds most advanced technological militaries. Ukraine being in NATO would seriously impact Russia’s security both in conventional and nuclear deterrence.
NATO has more manpower, tanks, fighters, bombers, nukes, subs, carriers, than any other military force on earth, and about (((3 TIMES the manpower))) of the Russian military alliance system and we pretend like they are going to invade us (So stupid it’s funny if people didn’t actually believe this NON-propagandistic crap). Even now with Russian partial mobilization and Russia pumping 7.1% into war, NATO has more EVERYTHING.
NATO has been used offensively in Serbia and Libya. Claiming it’s a defensive organization is factually false.
NATO Has been used in expeditionary campaigns outside of the Atlantic region (Operation Ocean Shield, protector, NATO mission Iraq) so claiming it is geographically limited is false.
No major power wants another playing on their border, the US included. Do you really think the US would allow the Chinese to build military bases in Mexico?
The US threatens the use of force (literally an invasion), when a CIVILIAN Chinese firm operates the Panama Canal (1,900 miles from our border) since we already see this as a threat to our national security!!!
Ever hear about the Cuban Missile Crisis? There are 90 miles of water between us.
Ever hear about the invasion of Grenada?
Do you understand what happened on the Solomon Islands a few years back? We threatened them if they allow the Chinese to build what are essentially civilian/military (dual use) naval ports on the Islands, which would have been extremely economically lucrative for these islands (jobs, massive Chinese investments). That’s 6,000 miles from our Southwestern border.
We are total hypocrites since we would never accept what we expect Russia to accept.
This is a situation where you have a dominant force pretending to be moral and defensive when in reality, they are offensive, expansionist, expeditionary and economically motivated.
Be very careful when you pretend God or morality is on your side: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gott_mit_uns#/media/File:WW_II_German_GOTT_MIT_UNS_Buckle_(Wehrmacht).jpg
Russia has been screaming that NATO expansion along their borders is not something they will tolerate. For at least 28 (((YEARS))) Russia has been vocal, repetitive, and consistent about their position. They see it as us breaking a promise and indeed there are arguments that can be made that support this (we just deny this even though the records are a matter of fact).
The idea that we have a moral high ground is false.
At best, we have some degree of justification (on a sliding scale), and to what degree can be debated, but this is surely NOT a black and white issue.
—
As to Germany,
This was not necessary: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/
There is absolutely no reason why Germany got tangled up in this conflict other than even in Germany you have economic interests that want to see EU and NATO expand into Ukraine. https://www.ceu.edu/article/2014-12-03/soros-explains-why-he-exerting-his-utmost-efforts-support-ukraine-during: It does not matter if on the conservative spectrum or ultra-liberal, Germany or the US, the same folks you see at the WEF and Bilderberg overwhelmingly agree that Ukraine should be in these organizations because that makes them more money.
The “morality” you’re talking about is all about political influence (EU expansion without a corresponding NATO expansion means the US losses influence), growing government (NATO is like all other government), and a bunch of rich folks that want to see their investments secured and grow (avoid policy fluctuations in trade, taxes, or nationalization), market access, cheap labor, harmonization of policies that make the movement of people, money, capital machinery, products and services easy.
But what has the war really meant for Germany:
-Loss of market share in Belarus and Russia: cars, machinery, chemicals, appliances
-Loss of freedom in decision making: no more hedging Russia and the US
-Increased threat: for German citizens and the military regards proxy conflicts, major theater war, a nuclear exchange
-Significant rise in energy costs: impacting people’s standard of living and Germany’s international competitiveness
The moral / God argument is very seldom legit. It’s a last resort argument (when there is no rational argument to be had anymore) and one that no longer requires any sort of factual/logical basis. One side is deemed bad, the other side good, and that’s it. Turn off brain. At that point you may as well join the Taliban.
There is no morality here, just a bad gamble (we bet the Russian would acquiesce since the cost of physically stopping us would be too high) which our media sells really hard because it was an economic interest our and your big corporations and oligarchs wanted. These same corporations and oligarchs either outright own, or exercise massive influence on the MSM (Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN...). Biden is a Democrat and the MSM (~85%), Hollywood, and social media (nearly a monopoly and Zuckerberg is a big time Democrat) have a powerful pro-Democrat / anti-Republican bias.
The Western media is always highly skeptical of war when a Republican is in office like G. Bush even now Trump bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities. Think about this, very little spent, little to no casualties, done in a single night. A military campaign dealing with a threat we CAN DEFINE/ARTICULATE and the US MSM immediately threw doubt on the effectiveness, necessity etc. of this Iran bombing. But when a Democrat bombs anything, or gets us tangled up in a war, they are foaming at the mouth may it be Ukraine (Biden), Serbia (Clinton), Somalia 1993 (Clinton), Libya (Obama), Syria (Obama)...
Der Spiegel should just come out and say the truth, “Linke Kriege sind gute Kriege.”
This is a war that should have never happened - period. They just try to sell it really hard.
But when the war did start, Germany should have considered not joining some alliance-based war frenzy like in WWI, even if this means NATO is dead because of it.
It is in our long-term geopolitical interest that Putin fail, and fail big-time.
Russia has been screaming that NATO expansion along their borders is not something they will tolerate.
Looks like Putin tolerated Finland joining, thus effectively doubling NATO's border with Russia, just fine!
And with Sweden's accession, the Baltic Sea is now effectively a NATO lake!
I think you underestimate Putin's ability to "tolerate" things he doesn't like! - and I will never condone granting Russia a "veto right" concerning NATO's internal affairs. Whom we allow to accede is an internal affair.
Do you really think the US would allow the Chinese to build military bases in Mexico?
Absurd hypothetical! I don't seriously consider absurd hypotheticals.
This is a situation where you have a dominant force pretending to be moral and defensive when in reality, they are offensive, expansionist, expeditionary and economically motivated.
Putin launched a bloody war that has been going on for almost as long as the Soviet Union's fight against the Nazi Germany. Putin is annexing vast swathes of territory and declaring it "Russian." Putin is fire-bombing civilian neighborhoods. Putin is denying the very concept of Ukrainian sovereignty. Any cease-fire that might be brokered will, necessarily, be only an opportunity for Putin to wait a while and then launch another aggressive, imperialistic war.
Putin is uniquely immoral. Any comparison of NATO's past actions with Putin's barbaric marauding is laughable.
The moral / God argument is very seldom legit. It’s a last resort argument [...]
On the contrary: The moral argument is the first argument which should be invoked when America announces a "call to arms" (or anything under that threshold, like granting military aid to another, beleaguered nation). The idea of going to war (or providing military aid to another country) for commercial reasons - as you suggest (market share, energy costs, etc.) - is despicable.
Regards,
It’s not an absurd argument and I have 4 other examples that actually did happen. The US would warn Mexico and then begin a process of rapid escalation until culminating in war to stop this, as we did in Cuba, Grenada, and similar situations in Panama and Solomon Islands. No, the US would not tolerate this.
Every nation takes an interest in things that are “internal” or “sovereign” issues of another state which impacts them. If Ethiopia turns the water off, of course there will be war with Egypt, even if that water is flowing though “sovereign” Ethiopia and it’s an “internal” issue for Ethiopia.
https://www.dw.com/en/could-egypt-and-ethiopias-tensions-escalate-into-a-war/a-70211192
Rhetoric is no argument: sovereign, internal.
NATO expansion of Finland is something which some have wanted a long time, the timing was right to push for this since public support would favor this, whereas historically Finland wanted a more neutral or non-provocative position. However, you bring up a very good point. What NATO did shows how they operate, exploit every situation to the maximum and expand whenever possible. NATO never was sincere in their intentions with Russia.
Even though we claim no NATO expansion into Ukraine was never promised and we claim we want peace, and Russia started the war, this is how we dealt with Russia and our efforts to create a lasting peace: Angela Merkel said in 2022 in an interview with Die Zeit, that the Minsk agreement had been “an attempt to give Ukraine time”; Reuters reported that Ukraine used this time to strengthen its armed forces.
There is little moral argument, and NOTHING regards national security for our side. Russia is hardly the aggressor we present them as considering NATO East Expansion or the ethnic Russian issue in Eastern Ukraine we also conveniently ignore.
This is a case of “might makes right” and we are the mighty one.
We have the upper hand in EVERY respect may that be military manpower, nukes, quantity of military hardware, quality of military hardware, population, economic volume, news media, social media, technology, manufacturing base, intel service...
This is a simple case of us wanting to FORCE OUR WILL on the Russians and they surprisingly to us, pushed back.
I say and hope surprisingly, since the alternative is horrible. The alternative, and a theory I tend to believe, is that we wanted this war. We intentionally pushed things to a point where we knew a war would ensue. A war between Russia and a heavily militarized Ukraine means Russia gets bogged down and has to divert resources from their frontier nations to the Ukrainian theater of operation, and that indeed was the case early on: Wagner (basically Russia’s foreign legion), some of the air force, most of their special forces were pulled away from their frontier.
Russia will be left making a hard choice and their military posture in nations we have been trying to take for years (Syria, Libya, Venezuela) will weaken.
But it gets better. Ukraine does all the bleeding, while the Euro’s flip half of the bill!
This is a very nasty scenario, purely Machiavellian, and of course nothing anyone can prove right now (unless an insider were to come forward), but it does appear like a very probable theory based on what happened and when things happened. This amounted to waiving a red flag before the Russians and yelling “Olay”: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukrainian-president-zelenskiy-holding-talks-with-biden-adviser-says-2021-12-09/ No one can be so stupid and think the Russians will go along with this! The Russians blocked NATO expanding into the Republic of Geogia by force in 2008. They made it very clear post 2004 that what happened in the Baltic states will not happen again.
Irony: You have people today claim God is on our side, when Russia has 71% of its population identify as Christian and in the US 62%. You don’t have LGBTQIA in Russia, it’s not cool there. Abortions are FAR more restricted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Russia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBTQ_rights_in_Russia
Part of the problem is that when talking about Russia (a lower share of their GDP under governments control before the war, i.e. a freer economy than the US) is that you’re fighting Cold War cliche’s.
Russians are still atheist communists to many people in the West (that has been beat into their heads); their women wear a headscarf and have a big mole on the end of their nose.
Facts don’t really matter here. You’re really just dealing with a hatred for Russians, usually based on some historically obsolete image or some historical perceived injustice (whatever - get over it). It would be no different than hating all Germans today because one still sees them as Nazi’s or blames them for what happened in WWII. Obviously, Germany today is politically, socially a different nation and those responsible are all dead at this point. Hating Germany or the Germans for WWII is equally idiotic with the cliche’s people peddle in this forum about the Russians.
The Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact are gone.
The atheist / Communist era is over.
Want to see something funny? Russia percent GDP controlled by government ~35% (that’s NOW, in a war!). Germany 48%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_government_spending_as_percentage_of_GDP Where are the “means of production” controlled more by the state?
This war in Ukraine is overwhelmingly our doing. It was unnecessary, preventable, predictable, and it will also (IMHO) end in a predictable manner. I believe that while Russia is far weaker than us in every respect, we underestimated them. This war and our need for NATO East expansion was surely NOT motivated by some threat or security need on our side (we enjoy the upper hand). How you want to shove some moral calling into all of that is perplexing.
We would never DARE build bases in Taiwan.
We would never DARE offer bringing Taiwan into any of our Pacific security agreements which we have with S. Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and the UK.
Why is that?
Might makes right.
China is powerful economically and militarily.
It is NOT that Russia is a threat and powerful that we act the way we do.
Rather, because they are perceived as weak that we break promises, withdraw from agreements, encroach into their allied and aligned frontier nations (Iraq, Venezuela, Syria, Libya), or want to expand our military alliance system to their border AFTER we sponsor a coup and install our government in that country.
We are a shark, and we smelled blood.
Moral? Hardly-
As to Putin,
He is very predictable and has shown a high degree of restraint, as well as reason over emotion, more so than many Western leaders. Has he dropped some bombshells in speeches to select audiences, but his policies (actual decisions made) are extremely pragmatic and even show a Russian version of “realpolitik.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik
You for example present a stark departure from this idea even though it is a traditional German political approach. You express an ideological approach, ignoring the consequences, not measuring the pros and cons to the various courses of action.
The West also has Chancellors as in Germany that stick around for 16 years (Merkel and Kohl). In a parliamentary system those things happen.
We also have former heads of the CIA become a President (George H Bush) as well...
When we talk about Putin having been in office a long time or being a KGB officer, so what?
We just conveniently use these faux arguments because they “sound” condemning in some way but don’t apply the same reasoning on ourselves.
As to the “madman” talk, it’s just a way to shut down all discussion since talking to a madman is pointless.
All of these are faux arguments, as is the term “propaganda,” or “war of aggression,” or “unprovoked,” or “surprise attack.” These are unsolicited qualifying remarks, intended to invoke feelings, but are not arguments.
If you want to hear the pinnacle of Western double standards to the point where it is comedic:
https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2023/jun/18/understanting-the-scourge-that-is-vladimir-putin-letters
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371782977_Measuring_the_Mental_Functioning_of_Putin_Trump_and_Zelenskyy
https://www.news.com.au/world/new-report-blaims-putins-erratic-behaviour-on-mental-illness/video/64da7cd2d35e6a2ead3e99ac87ab9628
As Biden was getting lost at the White House and can’t find his way off the stage, forgets the names of his staff members, mumbles, stumbles, falls up the stairs repeatedly, as he does the one-legged lift to let a fart rip before a British royal: https://nypost.com/2021/11/07/camilla-parker-bowles-keeps-talking-about-biden-fart-at-cop26/ we write articles about Putin’s mental health. Biden stares blank in the camera for an extended time, and our experts and news talk about Putin being crazy, not functioning properly mentally. Biden poops himself at the Vatican and is seen leaving wearing different pants than he went in with, and of course our fact checkers say it’s “unconfirmed” and we reprint articles from 2015 about Putin having Aspergers. LOL
Ask yourself this as you watch this video, why would Biden refuse long interviews, avoid free question and answer periods that aren’t scripted? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYfByTcY49k
Sadly, Putin is very pragmatic, he walks a huge path around us because he knows who the big kid on the playground is, and it’s the West that has been pushing and pushing to the point where we have a war today.
Ditto your admonition about my using "loaded" modifiers like "unprovoked attack." I understand your objection, and myself loathe the unreflected overuse of such modifiers, but in the case at hand, I feel that it has already been amply demonstrated that Putin, on Feb. 24, 2022, could have instead simply woken up and telephoned his Chief of Staff and told him to cancel the invasion, and no one today would be debating his not having launched an imperialistic war of aggression against Ukraine.He is very predictable and has shown a high degree of restraint, as well as reason over emotion, more so than many Western leaders. Has he dropped some bombshells in speeches to select audiences, but his policies (actual decisions made) are extremely pragmatic and even show a Russian version of “realpolitik.”
No one on Planet Earth would have predicted, on Jan. 24, 2022, that - a month later - Putin would launch a massive invasion against Ukraine, attempt to conquer vast swathes of Ukrainian territory, and then get bogged down in a protracted, largely unsuccessful military debacle that would leave roughly a million people dead through the direct effects of combat. No one would have predicted that approx. 34% of Russia's cruise missile-capable medium-range bombers would be destroyed on the ground. No one would have predicted the decimation of Russia's Black Sea fleet.
Not even Putin could have predicted, "I'm going to do something now that will directly result in the accession of the last two die-hard hold-outs - perennially neutral Sweden and Finland - to NATO, thus more than doubling NATO's border with Russia and transforming the Baltic Sea into a NATO lake."
So if not even Putin can predict Putin...?
Regards,
What NATO did shows how they operate, exploit every situation to the maximum and expand whenever possible.Sweden and Finland voluntarily acceded to NATO! They requested admission! Unlike Russia, which chooses instead to beat its neighbors into submission, NATO is a free and voluntary organization. Conflating that with Russia's outright imperialism is insincere.
You’re really just dealing with a hatred for Russians, usually based on some historically obsolete image or some historical perceived injustice (whatever - get over it). It would be no different than hating all Germans today because one still sees them as Nazi’s or blames them for what happened in WWII. Obviously, Germany today is politically, socially a different nation and those responsible are all dead at this point. Hating Germany or the Germans for WWII is equally idiotic with the cliche’s people peddle in this forum about the Russians.Now you really are being condescending, since you apparently think that I - who have spent my entire adult life in Germany, am married to a Russian, and have traveled extensively in Russia and Ukraine - would need "lecturing" on this.
The Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact are gone. The atheist / Communist era is over.Yeah, and in 1932, Imperial Germany was gone, the Kaiser was gone, the hated and decadent Weimar era was over, and good times were ahead!
/mordant sarcasm
Regards,
Imagine if the Treaty of Versailles hadn’t put a boot on the Germans neck and rubbed their noses in what wasn’t even really a defeat (the Germans had a coup of the Kaiser and the folks that came to power brokered a horrible deal for Germany, but Germany was far-far from being defeated in WWI). Do you really think Adolf would have come to power? Self fulfilling prophecies...
Putin acts in Russia’s best self interest and that includes their national security. We have all but driven this dog into a corner, yelled at him, whipped him, and now call it aggressive when he comes out trying to bite us.
Syria is a Russian formal ally since 1970. We bombed that place and then invaded it in 2014.
Libya is aligned (trade partner) with Russia. We bombed them and supported militias to over throw Qaddafi in 2011. Our ambassador that was killed there was involved in arming local militias through the Intel side (CIA) that hides behind all US state department activities.
Venezuela is aligned with Russia, a trade partner and we do everything we can to destabilize that country and sponsored a coup there 2020. Barely mentioned in our MSM, we embarrassingly got caught, so we can’t even play the “deny game” like we do in Ukraine: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gideon_(2020)#/media/File%3AOperaci%C3%B3n_Gede%C3%B3n_2020_-_SEBIN_capture.png
Iraq was Russian aligned until 2003, i.e. a trade partner. We invaded them under false pretences (WMD) and occupy them to this day using Iraqi militias we pay, mercenaries, and a shadow military we employ around the world which our MSM refuses to write about. Do you realize we have been formally asked to leave 6 or 7 times (by every president they have had), we have been there for 22 years and something like 3% of the population wants us there?
What do you think all these nations share/have in common? Oil and gas.
And then you want to talk about Russian “imperialism?”
Who is the one doing the attacking and invading, who is the one expanding, and occupying? We are. The score since 1994 is about 5:1 as in numer of nations bombed (US vs. Russia) so I really would not use that argument if I were you.
That’s not the Russians, that’s us: https://youtu.be/ug2468hDl6E?si=etf1eXODtlOmsxLe
And no, Ukraine did not ask for a coup, Syria didn’t want us to bomb them, Iraq doesn’t want us occupying them, Libya is not a better and safer place today now that we got rid of Quaddaffi, Iraq isn’t better off with us there...
If you want to use words like “imperialism” or “colonialism” all you need to know is that near all US major oil execs were meeting in Libya and had meetings with the US ambassador there before he was killed, in fact our wounded were in part flown out on private jets from these execs. If you want to know what this is all about: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20241231-us-troops-continue-illegal-occupation-of-syrian-oil-fields-warns-minister/. One of the first things we did was seize the oil fields. Of course to protect them, or to prevent ISIS from selling the oil. LOL
You realize we bombed and invaded a formal Russian ally, where they have naval and air bases when we went into Syria? How would we react if someone invaded Kuwait, not even a formal ally before 1991, just someone aligned with us and where we do a lot of business? Oh, wait...
Russia knows who the big kid on the playground is. We have been pushing them around for years and Ukraine is simply the point where we directly threaten Russia’s national security and they have to take action. That is why I do not believe this was a policy failure, but intentional. I can’t prove that though, pure conjecture on my part.
Again, by pitting Ukraine against Russia, we weaken Russia on the world stage and make it easier for us to take over places we have been trying to tear under our control for years.
Russia will have to make hard choices and divert Intel, special forces, logistics, in the beginning even much of their Wagner forces (their foreign legion) to Ukraine, making it easier for us to seize these areas. But better yet, Ukraine does all the bleeding and the Europeans pay for half of this! But who stands to benefit?
Do you really think the Russian’s blew up their own pipeline they were making money with like some here pretend is the case? Now you have the craziest ideas about what caused it or who was responsible out there, and of course our media that censors vigorously for mis and dis information, in forums like this were some talk about “propaganda” every other word do not filter any of it. Real simple questions you need to ask yourself:
1. Who has physical access to that area? There were NATO exercises shortly prior to this event in that area?
2. Who has the capability (no it’s not that simple)?
3. Who stands to benefit?
https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream
When you talk about imperialism, you need to realize something, this is not the US of 1980. The Cold War ended and we were the only remaining super power.
China had not entered the stage. We have an Atlantic and Pacific which still do provide some protection.
We are not only the biggest military power, we are also an industrial, technological, resource powerhouse with a large population.
We have a vast population, resources and some industry we can tap into at a low cost and utilize in our conflicts, and we do this regularly. Ukraine today has a lot of mercenaries from Columbia, Brazil, a few from Mexico... And guess who is in all reality paying for them, through Ukraine?
Our policy makers learned that we can use military force to quickly and easily get our way and with relative impunity. Look at Ukraine today! We’re not bleeding, we’re not getting bombed, we don’t have terror attacks in the US... For most Americans this is some abstract concept, they have no real skin in the game, except for maybe 1% of the population (military, Intel etc).
We have become extremely quick and our threshold to use force has dropped to where it’s nearly non-existent. This is Lindsey Graham advocating doing drone and missile strikes, using operators in Mexico, against their will, which is called an attack and invasion! https://youtu.be/UD4kFxyHALo?si=56MEblb_MvFtww-N
Mexico, our neighbor and NAFTA member!
Post Cold War things began to change, but post 9-11 things really took a turn for the bad, and while we forget the the 27 countries we have bombed (many multiple bombing campaigns example Iraq, Iran) since WWII, we are quick to talk about Russian aggression, imperialism, etc.
Sweden and Finland were already part of the Western block where the US fills the leadership role (Hegemon).
There have been forces that wanted NATO expansion there even before, but now is the time to make a move. Russia is weak (I mean a super huge threat that will roll through the Fulda Gap any second / 🙄), and popular opinion will support it. Before, there was an emphasis on maintaining some semblance of neutrality and not provoking Russia.
Do you think Syria is better off today, what about Libya, Iraq? Do you think Saudi Arabia is a shining example of human rights and democracy? What about Morocco, Jordan...?
https://www.ndr.de/fernsehen/sendungen/panorama/aktuell/Auch-ueberarbeitete-Maut-unvereinbar-mit-EU-Recht,masri102.html. Menschenrechte oder Souveränität?
Want to know a funny story? When we kidnapped some of these folks and sent them to Romania to be “interviewed,” we actually used folks that once worked for the Ceaușescu government, as in Securitate.
Call a spade a spade. Pretending this is about democracy, human rights, some nations sovereignty or best of all those claiming God is on our side, is just absurd feel good nonsense.
This is about hard cold economics, we are strong, Russia is seen as weak (I believe we underestimated them), so we’re just going to do what we want.
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.
.jpg){kind=link}
#/media/File%3AOperaci%C3%B3n_Gede%C3%B3n_2020_-_SEBIN_capture.png){kind=link}