Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: bitt
The last Russian troops left Poland and Lithuania in 1993, and did not leave Germany, Estonia and Latvia until 1994.

NATO didn't seek to expand: the former Warsaw Pact states clamored to get in after two centuries (on and off) of Russian occupation and brutalization. Paris, Berlin and Washington dragged their feet about their admission. Poland was not admitted until 1999.

NATO also did not intervene when Lukashenko gained power in 1994. The West also did nothing during Russia's brutal suppression of Chechnya, respecting Russia's internationally recognized borders. The only questionable case was the war over Kosovo, simply because Kosovo was internationally recognized as part of Serbia.

In the 2000s NATO effectively disarmed, substantially reducing the size of it's militaries. Putin's responses were to violate the INF treat, the Conventional Forces Europe treaty, the invasion of Georgia and the 2014 invasion of Ukraine.

The author also claimed that the US intervened in the Middle East in the 2000s simply out of misguided "nation building." This is of course nonsense, as the Afghanistan invasion was undertaken precisely because Afghanistan was a co-belligerent with al-Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks and the Iraq War was started because Hussain was firing on US aircraft, not respecting the UN inspection regime and still threatening Kuwait, all of which were violations of the Gulf War cease fire. The transformation of these conflicts into "nation building" was the misbegotten offspring of Bush's goody-two-shoes Methodism, which led him to grossly increase the objectives and costs of the wars while he simultaneously sought to reduce the US effort to achieve those objectives. This approach was, of course, doomed to failure from the moment upon which it was decided.

17 posted on 07/11/2024 11:50:52 AM PDT by pierrem15 ("Massacrez-les, car le seigneur connait les siens" )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: pierrem15
The transformation of these conflicts into "nation building" was the misbegotten offspring of Bush's goody-two-shoes Methodism, which led him to grossly increase the objectives and costs of the wars while he simultaneously sought to reduce the US effort to achieve those objectives. This approach was, of course, doomed to failure from the moment upon which it was decided.

W should have been more like his father. Take out Saddam. But hand it over to the Ba'athist Army and leave in 6 months after the invasion.

That's what Bush 41 would have done he he had to invade Iraq in 2003.

18 posted on 07/11/2024 11:54:57 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: pierrem15

This is foolish garbage. By 1993 NATO had run out of mission and the military agreement should have ended. Expanding NATO is how the NATO bureaucracy sustained itself. Survival of NATO required new members. So it expanded, willy nilly.


23 posted on 07/11/2024 2:56:16 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson