Replies

It’s rather humorous to see you address the expansion of
NATO. Evidently you think NATO sends its people out daily
to distribute door hangers to various nations, imploring
them to join.

It just couldn’t be that these people have never trusted
Russia after the fall of the USSR. They weren’t able to
notice that the leaders of the USSR transitioned with the
government to Russia. New name, same ruthless people...

They weren’t able to notice that the leader of the brutal
KGB had become president. They weren’t able to notice that
Russia’s elections best resemble our 2020 election, but
theirs have since the 1920s. Putin has been there for
eighteen years, and there’s not a hint that he is going to
be replaced anytime soon, unless he goes toes up.

They just weren’t capable of thinking for themselves and
coming to the conclusion they would be safer if they had
an organization behind them, that would help them if they
were besieged by Russia.

Then when they sent a formal request to join NATO, why it
was NATO’s fault. That evil NATO was behind it all. It
would have been far better for these nations to all align
with Russia.

As for the Ukraine it applied to join NATO in 2004. It was
turned down by this same organization you blame for everyone
else joining. In 2004, they said they would revisit the
decision on the Ukraine, but until earlier this year, I
don’t believe they did. That’s eighteen years. Boy that
NATO is sure desperate to add more nations huh.

The Ukraine applied at least once more this year, and
perhaps twice if what I read recently was true that implied
Levensky had tried again.

So far, that mean old organization that has plotted against
Russia for decades, hasn’t let the Ukraine join.

Now however, after Russia invading the Ukraine, the mean
old Finland and that other nation that never takes sides,
have finally decided they have no choice but to join NATO
themselves.

Damn that NATO. Poor Finland and Sweden. Boy have they
been hoodwinked.

Sincere, respectful reply, one long-time freeper to another.

I know you truly, sincerely, believe what you write. As do I.

Many gullible, good-hearted, loving, trusting, gullible dupes (like I used to be, an old Cold Warrior), feel the same way you feel now.

Please look at this, again, then reply to me.

Were the 200,000 DEAD IRAQI CIVILIANS just "collateral damage" to you?

"THEY WERE WORTH IT, MCGEE, IT WAS WAR!"

Were our bombs somehow, "Holy Bombs," because Americans were convinced that 1. Saddam was also behind 9-11 (total lie) and 2. Iraq had WMDs (also a total lie, to stampede us into war.)

I'm not just posting some insulting reflexive reply to you.

Do you really not care about the 200,000 dead Iraqis, or the tens of thousands of dead and maimed American soldiers, ALL KILLED OVER LIES?

"BUT THIS TIME IT'S DIFFERENT! THIS TIME THEY ARE TELLING US THE TRUTH! I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT!!!"

(DO you EVER feel a twinge, that you are being played for a good-hearted, gullible fool? Saying that as a former good-hearted, gullible fool.)

I remember just before the first Gulf War I played the Iraqi side in a board game representation of that war. The American stealth fighters and bombers destroyed my primitive air force quickly and the ground combat had similar results.

From the US point of view, the 1991 conflict may have been necessary after Iraq invaded Kuwait. Although in 2003 I thought the second invasion of Iraq was also needed, now I believe that Papa Bush was wise to stop where he did, and that GWB got the US and other countries stuck in the proverbial Tar Babies of Iraq and Afghanistan. I believe I was wrong in 2003.

I certainly do not deny the sacrifices and courage of the US forces, but I believe they were poorly led. I believe that at least some of our top military and civilian leaders today are much worse.