What's new
  • ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

War

RobFromTX

Well-known member
i'm glad you brought this up!

"No further NATO expansion toward Russia's border."

this was predicated upon Russia behaving themselves and not threatening the ex-soviet states, which they have done repeatedly since the agreement was made.

Q: What was to be the function of those newly independent countries?
A: A buffer between NATO and Russia.

they joined NATO because they were threatened. and perhaps they didn't like the idea of being used as a "buffer". meaning any future conflict would be conducted on their territories.

i'm sure you'll agree that, in retrospect, it all played out quite well for these ex-soviet states. for now, surely, having seen what putler's intent is, NATO is the only thing protecting them from a dictator.

NATO is a mutual protection society, not an aggressive foe. no NATO member state has ever threatened to invade Russia. it is not an "existential threat to Russia", instead it is a barrier to Russian aggression.

putler wants to "manage" the financial affairs of the former Soviet states to benefit Russia. to make them dependent on Russia for survival and therefore more likely to cooperate with Russian goals.

look no further than Belarus for an example. they are virtual economic slaves to Russia. most of the ex-soviet states are now turning their backs on Russia, with good reasons. even the non-NATO republics like Kazakhstan are aligning with the West.

Nato was expanding towards their border long before Putin came to power. Russia was behaving just fine until he came around
 

Blue Rhino

Well-known member
Q: What was Gorbachev promised in return for the dissolution of the Soviet Union?
A: No further NATO expansion toward Russia's border.
Bullshit. He was promised nothing in that regard. In fact Gorbachev himself denied he was promised anything. Why do you feel the need to tell fundamental falsehoods?
Q: What was to be the function of those newly independent countries?
To be free, independent countries.
A: A buffer between NATO and Russia.
Nope. That's just your imagination.
What does this arrangement look like today? Why?
Because many former Soviet Bloc countries want abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with Russia.
Is NATO trying to take over Europe? Is Putin?
NATO members weren't forced to join NATO. They joined entirely of their own volition. No force was used, no bombs were dropped, no civilians were intentionally targeted in a pathetic attempt to force acceptance.
If you're trying to suggest some kind of immoral equivalency between NATO and Bedpan, try again.
 

Microbeman

The Logical Gardener
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Q: What was Gorbachev promised in return for the dissolution of the Soviet Union?
A: No further NATO expansion toward Russia's border.
Q Is this true? A: Many sources say no
Q: What was to be the function of those newly independent countries?
A: A buffer between NATO and Russia.
Q: Did they need a function beside being freed?
What does this arrangement look like today? Why?

Is NATO trying to take over Europe? Is Putin?
Has NATO ever attacked offensively?
 

Microbeman

The Logical Gardener
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Bullshit. He was promised nothing in that regard. In fact Gorbachev himself denied he was promised anything. Why do you feel the need to tell fundamental falsehoods?

To be free, independent countries.

Nope. That's just your imagination.

Because many former Soviet Bloc countries want abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with Russia.

NATO members weren't forced to join NATO. They joined entirely of their own volition. No force was used, no bombs were dropped, no civilians were intentionally targeted in a pathetic attempt to force acceptance.
If you're trying to suggest some kind of immoral equivalency between NATO and Bedpan, try again.
Beat me to it.
 

Blue Rhino

Well-known member
I wonder how Sloppy Joe and his cronies would react if Canada formed an alliance with Russia on our borders :unsure:
No worries there. The Trudeau govt is too busy sucking Chinese dick right now.

I think a more likely scenario would be the US occupying Canada to use it as a buffer against Russian aggression.
 

RobFromTX

Well-known member
No worries there. The Trudeau govt is too busy sucking Chinese dick right now.

I think a more likely scenario would be the US occupying Canada to use it as a buffer against Russian aggression.

Canada will be the last country left with any natural resources. i guess i could see that happening
 

greyfader

Well-known member
Nato was expanding towards their border long before Putin came to power. Russia was behaving just fine until he came around
perhaps they had a crystal ball! it doesn't take a genius to recognize the true nature of Russia. from the moment the soviet union broke up, there were active and vociferous elements in Russian society who were adamantly opposed to the break-up and were making noises about reversing it. like vladolf putler.

he was active in the early days after the breakup as well as many others and their sentiments were well known.

Russia was moving toward confrontation with the West almost as soon as the breakup occurred.

here is a book review on this subject;


to be sure, both sides were responsible for this, the growth of NATO.

if you like, we can go into the individual histories of the ex-soviet states to see where they changed their minds about NATO and why. pick a country.
 

Blue Rhino

Well-known member
Oh cool, and now against ALL international conventions, Russia is using the Zap nuclear power plant as a training ground. These are not the actions of a sane, rational govt and military. These are NOT the actions of liberators.
On top of that, the bulk of the Russian conscripts are non-ethnic Russians. The meat assaults are Putin's way of doing a little ethnic cleansing of Russia while using "Ukro-nazis" as his rationale for invading Ukraine in the first place. Bedpan has been conscripting migrants, and non-ethnic Russians from the far east at a much greater rate than within the more heavily populated White Russia. One could reasonably state that Putin is a "Russo-nazi."
 

Microbeman

The Logical Gardener
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Uuuuuugggghhhh....

Interesting read. Of course I was consuming news back then. There were so many meetings, including Clinton and Yeltsin.

 

RobFromTX

Well-known member
Interesting read. Of course I was consuming news back then. There were so many meetings, including Clinton and Yeltsin.


And Yeltsin was a good leader. A boozehound but much less corrupt than todays climate. Harvard Law School isnt known for their impartiality
 
Top