NATO Expands further

Two hot topics for the price of one

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Sherlock Holmes

NATO Expands further

Post #1

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Well Finland and now Sweden have announced their desire and intention to apply for NATO membership.

That such a decisions is not made via a national referendum is a subversion of democracy, the consequences are potentially huge and every adult in the country should have had a voice in this.

The Western media constantly babble about Putin and Russia "want to reestablish the old Russian empire" while right under our noses the military force (dominated by the non-European USA) NATO continues its perverse growth.

There is nothing to stop any country from developing a treaty with other nations that guarantee military support if attacked, much as Poland had with Britain at the start of WW2.

It is simply not necessary to join NATO, there are other far less contentious options, all of this bodes ill IMHO.

So, should NATO continue to expand and continue to accept members from states bordering Russia?
Last edited by Sherlock Holmes on Mon May 16, 2022 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
The Barbarian
Sage
Posts: 876
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:40 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 586 times

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #31

Post by The Barbarian »

The best move in ending the genocide in Bosnia was brilliant. The U.S. merely looked the other way when other nations provided the Bosnians with heavy weapons to defend themselves. The Serbs, facing determined and newly well-equipped defenders, suddenly decided that maybe peace wouldn't be such a bad thing after all. But yes, a few bombings made the point more clearly.

Bottom line, the genocide ended, peace broke out in the Balkans, and some of the criminals who were guilty of atrocities were rounded up and punished. A good result. Serbia is better off as a free nation, no longer oppressing neighboring countries.

Sherlock Holmes

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #32

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

The Barbarian wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:09 am As the Finnish president told Putin, "You did this." Putin really has only himself to blame. His uncontrolled aggression has backfired on him. And yes, Russia is much less secure and strong than it was before he invaded Ukraine.

Erdogan's move to block Finland and Sweden is merely a ploy to get them to drop support for Kurdish groups seeking autonomy for Kurds in Turkey. At this point, Finland and Sweden are effectively in NATO, and already do joint exercises with them. There is no question that NATO countries would militarily support Sweden and/or Finland against Russian aggression.

Given the fiasco in Ukraine, it's questionable whether they'd even need help. Both nations have highly effective and well-equipped forces much larger and more powerful than those of Ukraine. And Russia is losing to Ukraine at this point. A much weaker Finland, in the 1930s, fought the Red Army to a draw. I doubt if they want a replay of that.
Russia (I mean much of the Kremlin, not simply Putin) regard NATO expansion as a grave existential threat and have stated this clearly thirty years ago and numerous times since (as have many in the West).

If they do see it that way then obviously at some point they will react to the threat, that's what one does when they feel their existence is threatened. That Ukraine has been attacked is therefore to be expected, they have been warning NATO for thirty years.

The problem we have now is that Russia has said it will deploy tactical nuclear weapons if they feel their country's existence is at stake, so yes their military performance in Ukraine has been (apparently) lackluster but they are still armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, provoking such a nation strikes me the height of folly.

So is Russia's existence at stake? I'd say most definitely, the sanctions alone are going to damage the economy and impact the population. Then we have Western geopolitics and their "divide and conquer" strategy. This is what happened to Yugoslavia, a once prosperous, peaceful state has been broken up, made weaker, its economy trashed, its population impoverished. NATO even took part in the illegal bombing of Serbia (a former WW2 ally of ours) destroying infrastructure, roads, power stations, hospitals, schools etc.

Russia (and China who's embassy was bombed "accidentally" by NATO in that campaign) watched this unfold, voiced their objections at the UN but were powerless to interfere. Russia and China know full well that NATO will act unilaterally outside of the law (UN charter) and absolutely nobody will act to stop them, NATO has destroyed any trust they might have had with Russia and have shown itself to be a bully to put it simply.

We in the west are swamped in propaganda, highly biased opinions dominate the news about all this, NATO is largely portrayed as a benevolent defensive alliance which is a blatant lie. This is how they were portrayed in 1999 and this is how they are being portrayed today to an uncritical public and by a compliant press which values business interests above truth.
Last edited by Sherlock Holmes on Thu May 19, 2022 11:31 am, edited 3 times in total.

Sherlock Holmes

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #33

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

The Barbarian wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:15 am The best move in ending the genocide in Bosnia was brilliant. The U.S. merely looked the other way when other nations provided the Bosnians with heavy weapons to defend themselves. The Serbs, facing determined and newly well-equipped defenders, suddenly decided that maybe peace wouldn't be such a bad thing after all. But yes, a few bombings made the point more clearly.

Bottom line, the genocide ended, peace broke out in the Balkans, and some of the criminals who were guilty of atrocities were rounded up and punished. A good result. Serbia is better off as a free nation, no longer oppressing neighboring countries.
What sources underpin these views?

Sherlock Holmes

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #34

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

The public ignorance of the Balkans breakup is breathtaking given the volume of informative material from trustworthy sources.

The recognition of Croatia began with Germany with an initially reluctant France and UK soon giving in and joining in.

I've met very few people in my life that understand what happened to the Serb population in 1941 when Croatia also became independent (seizing territory too that historically had never been part of a Croation province).

At the time Croatia was controlled by the Fascist Ustashe, under Pavelic which had aligned itself with the Nazis and received military support from them.

What happened starting in 1941 is the stuff of nightmares, there was a holocaust in Croatia, concentration camps were built for Serbs, Jews, Roma and unlike Germany, the Ustashe even had a concentration camp just for children.

There was a religious element to this too, the Ustashe was comprised of nationalist Catholic fanatics who despised the Christian Orthodox Serb population, this was a level of hatred beyond what took place with Jews under the Nazis.

I won't recount the details of the brutality here, just to say the level of barbarity even shocked hardened SS troops (this is all on record) torture was the norm.
Ustaše activities in villages across the Dinaric Alps led to the Italians and the Germans expressing disquiet. As early as July 10, 1941, Wehrmacht General Edmund Glaise von Horstenau reported the following to the German High Command, the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (OKW):

“Our troops have to be mute witnesses of such events; it does not reflect well on their otherwise high reputation… I am frequently told that German occupation troops would finally have to intervene against Ustaše crimes. This may happen eventually. Right now, with the available forces, I could not ask for such action. Ad hoc intervention in individual cases could make the German Army look responsible for countless crimes which it could not prevent in the past”

A Gestapo report to Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler, dated February 17, 1942, stated that:

“Increased activity of the bands [of rebels] is chiefly due to atrocities carried out by Ustaše units in Croatia against the Orthodox population. The Ustaše committed their deeds in a bestial manner not only against males of conscript age, but especially against helpless old people, women and children. The number of the Orthodox that the Croats have massacred and sadistically tortured to death is about three hundred thousand”
From: Ustaše- The fascists that made the Nazi’s look like boyscouts

When Croatia began to see independence in the early 1990's there was a resurgence of this nationalism, Ustashe symbolism returned to the streets, Serbs living in Croatia were attacked or murdered, homes daubed with swastikas.

This is why Serbia attacked Croatia, Serbs living within the Croatian "border" were being killed, tortured, ethically cleansed by Croat paramilitary. Many of these Serbs (families who had lived there since before WW2 even) lived in Krajina, and these decided to declare themselves an independent state - they wanted no part of a independent Croatia, especially one which openly admired Ustashe symbols and politics. The West stood by when all this was happening.

Here's a snippet from a news report from around this time, this was shortly before the "Serbs are evil" demonization was adopted by the mainstream press:
CROATIA is unleashing a reign of terror against hundreds of elderly Serbs left behind in the formerly Serb Krajina region of the country, more than a month after its "liberation" of the territory. UN and human rights officials are reporting each day the murder or "disappearance" of at least 10 Serb civilians, some of them - in their eighties and nineties - burned alive in their own homes, while the torching of whole villages is being systematically carried out by Croatian troops.

One shocking UN report - which only became available this weekend - records the massacre of six elderly men and women in the village of Komic two weeks ago, three of them burned alive by armed Croats; a middle-aged man in the same village was shot and his body burned in his house. Yesterday I saw the brains of an 80-year-old woman lying in the driver's seat of her family's car in the village of Babici shortly after relief workers had taken away her body; she had been shot three days earlier - less than a week after UN officers had visited her home to give her food.
Serbia naturally came to the aid of Krajina, there was no talk of humanitarian intervention to thwart the Croatian fanatics, no, the goal was to break up Yugoslavia and only Serbia was trying to thwart that goal - a Western geopolitical goal - ergo, Serbia must receive no sympathy under any circumstances and the press obeyed.

NATO of course (you remember them, the defensive alliance) sided with Croatia and bombed Serbs living in Krajina, nothing could be allowed to stop the ultimate goal of destroying Yugoslavia - divide and conquer!

The sadness is that it was Serbs who were later called "Nazis" in the press and described as the aggressor, I saw photographs of homes daubed with Swastikas' and attributed to "Serb fascists" a perversion of truth that could be matched only by claims that Jews might one day daub enemy homes with swastikas, the press lie all the time and an uncritical public lap it all up as they build their cozy "goody vs baddy" worldview.

Serbia and its people were our allies in WW2, they bravely refused to align the country with the Nazis in WW2 and were therefore bombed by them, these are the people we bombed in 1999 to their utter dismay.

Here are some sources you might find interesting:

Ustashe.

Meet The Ustaše, The Brutal Nazi Allies Even Hitler Couldn’t Control

Top 10 facts about the Ustase Genocide

The Jasenovac camp - US Holocaust Museum

Memory Loss: The Campaign to Whitewash Croatia’s WWII Children’s Camps

Imagine if Germany tried to occupy Israel and we saw the swastika return in Jerusalem street parades and hanging from Windows, would you not expect Jews to resist and fight back? Of course you would, well by the same token the Serb resistance to a resurgence of Croation nataionalism and violence in the 1990s must be seen in the same light.

The press though won't shine that light for you, you'll need your own light and a good supply of batteries, you'll need to shine that light in places that the press don't too.

NATO is a tool of Western geopolitics nothing more, it is aggressive heavily armed force that is destined to bring more war to Europe, perhaps even further.

User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #35

Post by Diogenes »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:43 am NATO acted without UN authorization same as Russia has. Of course the criminals will seek to justify their crimes, that's what NATO did and what Russia are doing.

NATO lied, Jamie Shea lied, Tony Blair lied just as Putin has lied, if you care to research what I'm saying you'll see I'm not making this up, not defending Russia, I'm stating facts easily verified facts.
You ARE defending Russia. You keep harping on the absence of a UN resolution, ignoring the fact that as a P5 member Russia has veto power over ANY resolution, enabling them to prevent the adoption of any substantive UN resolution, regardless of the level of international support for that resolution.

Then you go on to suggest Russia can do whatever it wants because of its paranoia and threats to use nuclear weapons. The world community condemns Russia and rightly so. There is little question that Russia is committing war crimes with this invasion, but you suggest the bully should be allowed to do whatever because it IS a bully with a big stick. Russia's centuries long paranoia about encirclement does not justify its war crimes and its invasion of sovereign nations.

Your position mirrors that of Neville Chamberlain re: Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938.
The settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine [shows paper to crowd]. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you: " ... We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again".
....
My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

Sherlock Holmes

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #36

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

Diogenes wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 12:57 pm
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 10:43 am NATO acted without UN authorization same as Russia has. Of course the criminals will seek to justify their crimes, that's what NATO did and what Russia are doing.

NATO lied, Jamie Shea lied, Tony Blair lied just as Putin has lied, if you care to research what I'm saying you'll see I'm not making this up, not defending Russia, I'm stating facts easily verified facts.
You ARE defending Russia. You keep harping on the absence of a UN resolution, ignoring the fact that as a P5 member Russia has veto power over ANY resolution, enabling them to prevent the adoption of any substantive UN resolution, regardless of the level of international support for that resolution.

Then you go on to suggest Russia can do whatever it wants because of its paranoia and threats to use nuclear weapons. The world community condemns Russia and rightly so. There is little question that Russia is committing war crimes with this invasion, but you suggest the bully should be allowed to do whatever because it IS a bully with a big stick. Russia's centuries long paranoia about encirclement does not justify its war crimes and its invasion of sovereign nations.

Your position mirrors that of Neville Chamberlain re: Hitler's invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938.
The settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace. This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine [shows paper to crowd]. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you: " ... We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German Naval Agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again".
....
My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. Go home and get a nice quiet sleep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_for_our_time
There are several inaccuracies in what you say.

I have never suggested "Russia can do whatever it wants because of its paranoia and threats to use nuclear weapons" nor "the bully should be allowed to do whatever because it IS a bully with a big stick".

My arguments are not defending Russia at all, I've been focusing on NATO and the threat it poses. You cannot discuss what Russia is doing in some kind of vacuum. NATO is a part of this, it is a growing threat to any state that is not a member which Includes Russia.

Anyway I won't repeat myself, I've quoted many sources in the West that share this view, we must agree to disagree I think.

User avatar
Diogenes
Guru
Posts: 1304
Joined: Sun May 24, 2020 12:53 pm
Location: Washington
Has thanked: 862 times
Been thanked: 1265 times

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #37

Post by Diogenes »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 12:18 pm The public ignorance of the Balkans breakup is breathtaking . . . .
Before WW1 there was no Yugoslavia.

Image
It was put together artificially despite it's composition of hostile states and ethnic groups. It would have dissolved sooner, but was held together by a tyrant backed by the USSR, the war criminal, Slobodan Milošević.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_ ... 1evi%C4%87
"The country was melded together after World War I from six major Slavic groups and its post-communism breakup has largely followed ethnic lines."
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/sto ... d=19148459
Last edited by Diogenes on Thu May 19, 2022 2:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
___________________________________

Before You Embark On A Journey Of Revenge, Dig Two Graves

— Confucius

Sherlock Holmes

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #38

Post by Sherlock Holmes »

[Replying to Diogenes in post #37]

Dismantling Yugoslavia; Colonizing Bosnia
Michel Chossudovsky is professor of economics, University of Ottawa. An earlier version of this paper was presented at 'The Other Face of the European Project, Alternative Forum to the European Summit, Madrid, 1995.
Excerpt
Lost in the barrage of images and self-serving analyses are the economic and social causes of the conflict. The deep- seated economic crisis which preceded the civil war is long forgotten. The strategic interests of Germany and the US in laying the groundwork for the disintegration of Yugoslavia go unmentioned, as does the role of external creditors and international financial institutions. In the eyes of the global media, Western powers bear no responsibility for the impoverishment and destruction of a nation of 24 million people.

But through their domination of the global financial system, the Western powers, in pursuit of national and collective strategic interests, helped bring the Yugoslav economy to its knees and stirred its simmering ethnic and social conflicts. Now it is the turn of Yugoslavia's war-ravaged successor states to feel the tender mercies of the international financial community.

As the world focuses on troop movements and cease-fires, the international financial institutions are busily collecting former Yugoslavia's external debt from its remnant states, while transforming the Balkans into a safehaven for free enterprise. With a Bosnian peace settlement holding under NATO guns, the West has unveiled a "reconstruction" program that strips that brutalized country of sovereignty to a degree not seen in Europe since the end of World War II. It consists largely of making Bosnia a divided territory under NATO military occupation and Western administration.
Also note:
Yugoslavia's implosion was partially due to US machinations. Despite Belgrade's non-alignment and its extensive trading relations with the European Community and the US, the Reagan administration targeted the Yugoslav economy in a "Secret Sensitive" 1984 National Security Decision Directive (NSDD 133), "Us Policy towards Yugoslavia." A censored version declassified in 1990 elaborated on NSDD 64 on Eastern Europe, issued in 1982. The latter advocated "expanded efforts to promote a 'quiet revolution' to overthrow Communist governments and parties," while reintegrating the countries of Eastern Europe into a market-oriented economy (12).
This is one of many sources I used to underpin what I have said about Yugoslavia.

User avatar
The Barbarian
Sage
Posts: 876
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:40 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 586 times

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #39

Post by The Barbarian »

As the Finnish president told Putin, "You did this." Putin really has only himself to blame. His uncontrolled aggression has backfired on him. And yes, Russia is much less secure and strong than it was before he invaded Ukraine.

Erdogan's move to block Finland and Sweden is merely a ploy to get them to drop support for Kurdish groups seeking autonomy for Kurds in Turkey. At this point, Finland and Sweden are effectively in NATO, and already do joint exercises with them. There is no question that NATO countries would militarily support Sweden and/or Finland against Russian aggression.

Given the fiasco in Ukraine, it's questionable whether they'd even need help. Both nations have highly effective and well-equipped forces much larger and more powerful than those of Ukraine. And Russia is losing to Ukraine at this point. A much weaker Finland, in the 1930s, fought the Red Army to a draw. I doubt if they want a replay of that.
[/quote]
Sherlock Holmes wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:27 am Russia (I mean much of the Kremlin, not simply Putin) regard NATO expansion as a grave existential threat and have stated this clearly thirty years ago and numerous times since (as have many in the West).
Pretty much the way Hitler viewed Czechoslovakia as an "existential threat." So Putin invaded a peaceful neighboring country, and did the one thing that pretty much guaranteed that Sweden and Finland would joing NATO. Not such a bright move. He seems to have started believing his own press releases.
If they do see it that way then obviously at some point they will react to the threat, that's what one does when they feel their existence is threatened. That Ukraine has been attacked is therefore to be expected, they have been warning NATO for thirty years.
Ukraine did not ask to join NATO, nor did NATO invite them. Putin is seeking to rebuild the Soviet empire. And it blew up in his face. NATO had no part in that.
The problem we have now is that Russia has said it will deploy tactical nuclear weapons if they feel their country's existence is at stake, so yes their military performance in Ukraine has been (apparently) lackluster but they are still armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, provoking such a nation strikes me the height of folly.
The folly would be to ignore his aggression. Do you honestly think that he would be satisfied with Ukraine? Was he satisfied with previous acts of aggression? No, appeasement will do exactly what it did when Neville Chamberlain announced that appeasement of Hitler would bring "peace in our time."
So is Russia's existence at stake? I'd say most definitely, the sanctions alone are going to damage the economy and impact the population. Then we have Western geopolitics and their "divide and conquer" strategy.
The Soviet Empire broke up from within. We had nothing to do with it.
This is what happened to Yugoslavia, a once prosperous, peaceful state
Except for a bit of "ethnic cleansing" here and there, um?
has been broken up, made weaker, its economy trashed, its population impoverished.
The standard of living in all those states is considerably above that of Russia, so I'm thinking you're wrong.

NATO even took part in the illegal bombing of Serbia (a former WW2 ally of ours) destroying infrastructure, roads, power stations, hospitals, schools etc.
We in the west are swamped in propaganda, highly biased opinions dominate the news about all this, NATO is largely portrayed as a benevolent defensive alliance which is a blatant lie.
And the last time that NATO attacked a country that didn't attack another nation was...? On the other hand, Putin invaded a sovereign nation that had in no way attacked Russia. His stated goal was to destroy Ukraine's independence and return it to Russian control.

User avatar
The Barbarian
Sage
Posts: 876
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:40 pm
Has thanked: 204 times
Been thanked: 586 times

Re: NATO Expands further

Post #40

Post by The Barbarian »

Sherlock Holmes wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:28 am
The Barbarian wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 11:15 am The best move in ending the genocide in Bosnia was brilliant. The U.S. merely looked the other way when other nations provided the Bosnians with heavy weapons to defend themselves. The Serbs, facing determined and newly well-equipped defenders, suddenly decided that maybe peace wouldn't be such a bad thing after all. But yes, a few bombings made the point more clearly.

Bottom line, the genocide ended, peace broke out in the Balkans, and some of the criminals who were guilty of atrocities were rounded up and punished. A good result. Serbia is better off as a free nation, no longer oppressing neighboring countries.
What sources underpin these views?
Clinton Secretly OKed Iran's Arms Shipments to Bosnia
http://tech.mit.edu/V116/N17/clinton.17w.html

How the Bosnian War ended:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/deci ... nia-ended/

Serbian economic progress:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Serbia

Post Reply