Zelensky hits out at "absurd" NATO

[FritsSikkink]

On 7/11/2023 at 9:30 PM, jvs said:

But the Ukraine is not at war,it is just a special military operation.

 

What a load of nonsense. A military operation IS war without declaring it.

[metisdead]

Posts that were in violation of the Forum Rules have been removed:

 

5. You will not use ASEAN NOW to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. Topics or posts deemed to be scaremongering, deliberately misleading or which deliberately distort information will be removed. In factual areas such as news forums and current affairs topics member content that is claimed or portrayed as a fact should be supported by a link to a relevant reputable source.

 

9. You will not post disruptive or inflammatory messages. You will respect other members and post in a civil manner. Personal attacks, insults or hate speech posted on the forum or sent by private message are not allowed.

 

10. You will not post troll messages. Trolling is the act of purposefully antagonizing forum members by posting controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking other members into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

 

13. You will not publicly comment on moderation in an open forum. You will not comment on actions taken by individual moderators or on specific or general policies and issues. You will not post a negative emoticon in response to a public notice made by a moderator. You may send a private message to a moderator to discuss individual actions or you can email support (at) aseannow.com to discuss moderation policy and account suspensions. Aggression or abuse against moderators is not tolerated and any such action will be sanctioned. There is no excuse for abuse.

[FruitPudding]

NATO should have dismantled after the war decades ago. They won. They agreed peace.

 

Instead NATO kept pushing up to Russian borders during peace times while Russia protested. They ignored Russia's concerns.

 

Well, what did they expect was going to happen? How could there ever be peace with Russia under these circumstances?

 

Tell me what would happen if a military alliance between Russia, Iran, China, North Korea etc etc started pushing closer to American soil, perhaps trying to get Cuba or Mexico to join?

 

We all know what America would do. 

 

Long story, short: Ukraine should not be allowed to join for diplomatic reasons. It's a bit late now - Ukraine should never have been considered - but it would stop WW3.

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

NATO should have dismantled after the war decades ago. They won. They agreed peace.

 

Instead NATO kept pushing up to Russian borders during peace times while Russia protested. They ignored Russia's concerns.

 

Well, what did they expect was going to happen? How could there ever be peace with Russia under these circumstances?

 

Tell me what would happen if a military alliance between Russia, Iran, China, North Korea etc etc started pushing closer to American soil, perhaps trying to get Cuba or Mexico to join?

 

We all know what America would do. 

 

Long story, short: Ukraine should not be allowed to join for diplomatic reasons. It's a bit late now - Ukraine should never have been considered - but it would stop WW3.

If Mexico, Canada or any other country in the western hemisphere wanted to join a defensive alliance with Russia land/or China then the US would think that's odd and might point out that it's unnecessary, but nothing else. 

 

Of course it's been over 100 years since the US had a serious border dispute with its neighbors. You can't say that about Russia.

[LosLobo]

9 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

NATO should have dismantled after the war decades ago. They won. They agreed peace.

 

Instead NATO kept pushing up to Russian borders during peace times while Russia protested. They ignored Russia's concerns.

 

Well, what did they expect was going to happen? How could there ever be peace with Russia under these circumstances?

 

Tell me what would happen if a military alliance between Russia, Iran, China, North Korea etc etc started pushing closer to American soil, perhaps trying to get Cuba or Mexico to join?

 

We all know what America would do. 

 

Long story, short: Ukraine should not be allowed to join for diplomatic reasons. It's a bit late now - Ukraine should never have been considered - but it would stop WW3.

I suggest that you are just blowing smoke.

 

Ukraine is a sovereign nation and is "allowed" to do whatever it wants.

 

I thought that the average fruit cake would know that at least China already has assets in Cuba.

 

Analysts: China’s Plans for Cuba May Go Beyond Spy Base (voanews.com)

[FruitPudding]

1 hour ago, LosLobo said:

I suggest that you are just blowing smoke.

 

Ukraine is a sovereign nation and is "allowed" to do whatever it wants.

 

I thought that the average fruit cake would know that at least China already has assets in Cuba.

 

Analysts: China’s Plans for Cuba May Go Beyond Spy Base (voanews.com)

Come on.

 

What was NATO'S original name and mission statement? I'll wait for this reply.

 

NATO was always about Russia.

 

After the war, it was agreed NATO would not expand further East past Germany because it threatened Russia's national security.

 

Of course, NATO continued to do so and therefore there could never be peace with Russia.

 

NATO should have really dismantled after the defeat of the Soviets as their mission was complete.

 

Now, Ukraine wants to join. I ain't justify Putin's actions, but what the hell did they expect? 

 

It creates unrest in the area. Ukraine should have remained diplomatic and neutral.

 

I think it would have been better if the war hadn't been started in the first place.

 

Sure, they can do what they want, but Zelensky messed up here, big time.

 

 

[FruitPudding]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

If Mexico, Canada or any other country in the western hemisphere wanted to join a defensive alliance with Russia land/or China then the US would think that's odd and might point out that it's unnecessary, but nothing else. 

Have you looked at America's war history?

 

It doesn't take much for them to go to war.

 

If an enemy military alliance was expanding throughout the world and closer and closer to America's borders, there would be war.

 

Christ, Vietnam did nothing wrong.

[Bkk Brian]

25 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Come on.

 

What was NATO'S original name and mission statement? I'll wait for this reply.

 

NATO was always about Russia.

 

After the war, it was agreed NATO would not expand further East past Germany because it threatened Russia's national security.

 

Of course, NATO continued to do so and therefore there could never be peace with Russia.

 

NATO should have really dismantled after the defeat of the Soviets as their mission was complete.

 

Now, Ukraine wants to join. I ain't justify Putin's actions, but what the hell did they expect? 

 

It creates unrest in the area. Ukraine should have remained diplomatic and neutral.

 

I think it would have been better if the war hadn't been started in the first place.

 

Sure, they can do what they want, but Zelensky messed up here, big time.

 

 

4 weeks into the invasion:

 

Zelensky: We won’t join NATO if that brings peace

 

Now read up on Putin's Peter the Great Speech

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, FruitPudding said:

Come on.

 

What was NATO'S original name and mission statement? I'll wait for this reply.

 

NATO was always about Russia.

 

After the war, it was agreed NATO would not expand further East past Germany because it threatened Russia's national security.

 

Of course, NATO continued to do so and therefore there could never be peace with Russia.

 

NATO should have really dismantled after the defeat of the Soviets as their mission was complete.

 

Now, Ukraine wants to join. I ain't justify Putin's actions, but what the hell did they expect? 

 

It creates unrest in the area. Ukraine should have remained diplomatic and neutral.

 

I think it would have been better if the war hadn't been started in the first place.

 

Sure, they can do what they want, but Zelensky messed up here, big time.

 

 

"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO, /ˈneɪtoʊ/; French: Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique nord, OTAN), also called the North Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance between 31 member states – 29 European and two North American. Established in the aftermath of World War II, the organization implemented the North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington, D.C., on 4 April 1949.^[3][4] NATO is a collective security system: its independent member states agree to defend each other against attacks by third parties."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO

 

Clearly a defensive alliance.  Neither Russia or the Soviet Union are mentioned.

 

"After the war, it was agreed NATO would not expand further East past Germany because it threatened Russia's national security."

 

No, there was never such an agreement.  Proof has been provided many times.  Stop trolling.

 

"Ukraine should have remained diplomatic and neutral."

 

How do you stay neutral when your country is invaded?

 

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, FruitPudding said:

Have you looked at America's war history?

 

It doesn't take much for them to go to war.

 

If an enemy military alliance was expanding throughout the world and closer and closer to America's borders, there would be war.

 

Christ, Vietnam did nothing wrong.

Have you looked at Russia's history of invading and occupying its neighbors?

 

A defensive military alliance is one that is not an enemy unless attacked.  As stated, the US would be puzzled by its neighbor entering such an alliance with Russia or China, but wouldn't invade them.  At least not unless attacked. 

[FruitPudding]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO, /ˈneɪtoʊ/; French: Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique nord, OTAN), also called the North Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance between 31 member states – 29 European and two North American. Established in the aftermath of World War II, the organization implemented the North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington, D.C., on 4 April 1949.^[3][4] NATO is a collective security system: its independent member states agree to defend each other against attacks by third parties."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO

 

Clearly a defensive alliance.  Neither Russia or the Soviet Union are mentioned.

 

"After the war, it was agreed NATO would not expand further East past Germany because it threatened Russia's national security."

 

No, there was never such an agreement.  Proof has been provided many times.  Stop trolling.

 

"Ukraine should have remained diplomatic and neutral."

 

How do you stay neutral when your country is invaded?

 

 

Here is some light reading for you, that isn't Wikipedia, ????

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

 

NATO'S entire existence was to combat the Soviets. It was clear in their original mission statement.

 

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ????

[expat_4_life]

15 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Here is some light reading for you, that isn't Wikipedia, ????

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

 

NATO'S entire existence was to combat the Soviets. It was clear in their original mission statement.

 

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ????

It's also worth noting the date of the article, 2017, before the current conflict in Ukraine (since 2022 anyway). "Not one inch forward"  was a deal that was made, pretty clear if one reads this article.

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Here is some light reading for you, that isn't Wikipedia, ????

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

 

NATO'S entire existence was to combat the Soviets. It was clear in their original mission statement.

 

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ????

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ????

 

There's a reason for that. He wanted special treatment. Putin wanted Russia to join Nato but did not want his country to have to go through the usual application process and stand in line “with a lot of countries that don’t matter”

[heybruce]

58 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

Here is some light reading for you, that isn't Wikipedia, ????

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

 

NATO'S entire existence was to combat the Soviets. It was clear in their original mission statement.

 

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ????

Still making stuff up.

 

Where in your link is any claim you've made been supported?

 

Why don't you provide the original mission statement you claim states that NATO exists to combat the Soviets?

 

What evidence do you have that Russia tried to join NATO, and why is it relevant to the war in Ukraine?

[heybruce]

42 minutes ago, expat_4_life said:

It's also worth noting the date of the article, 2017, before the current conflict in Ukraine (since 2022 anyway). "Not one inch forward"  was a deal that was made, pretty clear if one reads this article.

Really?  Where is that made clear?

[heybruce]

48 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

 

Then why did you mention that America would not invade unless attacked? Clearly false, as I was pointing out.

Your original post painted an inaccurate whataboutism speculation about Russia and China seeking military alliances with neighbors of the US.  I pointed out that the US would be puzzled by any neighbor seeking to join such an alliance, but would not seek to prevent it unless it was an offensive, vs defensive, alliance.  And you clearly have not proven anything.

[expat_4_life]

17 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Really?  Where is that made clear?

Turning to German unification, Baker assures Gorbachev that “neither the president nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understand the importance for the USSR and Europe of guarantees that “not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.”

[FruitPudding]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Did you know Russia even tried to join NATO later, but were rejected? ????

 

 

There's a reason for that. He wanted special treatment. Putin wanted Russia to join Nato but did not want his country to have to go through the usual application process and stand in line “with a lot of countries that don’t matter”

To be fair, I can see his point.

 

NATO was formed because of the Soviet Union. It was formed specifically to combat Russia. That's why NATO came into existence. It was literally: USSR vs NATO

 

Then Russia wants to join and actually be allies and part of the group that was established to fight the Soviet Union. Pretty historical moment.

 

But they were like, "Naw, you can wait in line behind Kyrgyzstan," or something ????

 

 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

5 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

To be fair, I can see his point.

 

NATO was formed because of the Soviet Union. It was formed specifically to combat Russia. That's why NATO came into existence. It was literally: USSR vs NATO

 

Then Russia wants to join and actually be allies and part of the group that was established to fight the Soviet Union. Pretty historical moment.

 

But they were like, "Naw, you can wait in line behind Kyrgyzstan," or something ????

 

 

 

 

There's no reason why he could not have applied via the usual application process, that's what its there for and no country has been exempt. But then his word is about as credible as his statement that he had no intention of invading Ukraine, few days later, invasion.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, expat_4_life said:

Turning to German unification, Baker assures Gorbachev that “neither the president nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place,” and that the Americans understand the importance for the USSR and Europe of guarantees that “not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.”

They were discussing NATO expansion into the former East Germany.  Even Gorbachev made it clear that they weren't talking about NATO expansion outside of Germany.

 

"Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”"  https://www.brookings.edu/articles/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/

 

[heybruce]

13 minutes ago, FruitPudding said:

To be fair, I can see his point.

 

NATO was formed because of the Soviet Union. It was formed specifically to combat Russia. That's why NATO came into existence. It was literally: USSR vs NATO

 

Then Russia wants to join and actually be allies and part of the group that was established to fight the Soviet Union. Pretty historical moment.

 

But they were like, "Naw, you can wait in line behind Kyrgyzstan," or something ????

You still have not provided any evidence that NATO explicitly and exclusively exists to defend against the Soviet Union.

 

That may be what you think of NATO, but NATO doesn't exist to meet your expectations.

[FruitPudding]

31 minutes ago, heybruce said:

You still have not provided any evidence that NATO explicitly and exclusively exists to defend against the Soviet Union.

 

That may be what you think of NATO, but NATO doesn't exist to meet your expectations.

"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several Western European nations to provide collective security against the Soviet Union."

 

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/nato#:~:text=The North Atlantic Treaty Organization,security against the Soviet Union.&text=NATO was the first peacetime,outside of the Western Hemisphere.

 

Rather than dismantling after the fall of the Soviet Union - like they logically should have - they repurposed and redefined their objectives (while still expanding as far east as they could despite Russia protesting it was a threat to their national security until ultimately it led to Russia invading Ukraine).

 

Really, all of this could have been avoided with some diplomacy, but the West has never tried to be friends with Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union.

 

Oh well...

 

 

 

[FruitPudding]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

A defensive military alliance is one that is not an enemy unless attacked.  

NATO bombed areas full of civilians in numerous conflicts across the Middle East.

[metisdead]

Some off topic posts contravening our Community Standards have been removed.

[heybruce]

11 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

"The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several Western European nations to provide collective security against the Soviet Union."

 

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/nato#:~:text=The North Atlantic Treaty Organization,security against the Soviet Union.&text=NATO was the first peacetime,outside of the Western Hemisphere.

 

Rather than dismantling after the fall of the Soviet Union - like they logically should have - they repurposed and redefined their objectives (while still expanding as far east as they could despite Russia protesting it was a threat to their national security until ultimately it led to Russia invading Ukraine).

 

Really, all of this could have been avoided with some diplomacy, but the West has never tried to be friends with Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union.

 

Oh well...

At the time NATO was formed the USSR was perceived as the greatest security threat to the member nations.  However all of the founding documents I've seen refer to a general security agreement without specifically mentioning the USSR.  Security threats did not disappear after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, so there was an incentive to keep the organization intact.

 

Every President from Clinton to Trump has attempted some form of diplomatic reset in the relations with Russia.  Russia was only interested in resets that helped it economically without restricting its bullying of it neighbors.

[heybruce]

11 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

NATO bombed areas full of civilians in numerous conflicts across the Middle East.

In which of these conflict was NATO involved that did not start with an attack on a NATO member?

[heybruce]

13 hours ago, FruitPudding said:

NATO bombed areas full of civilians in numerous conflicts across the Middle East.

After thinking it over I realized I my above reply was to an off-topic deflection.  Please disregard it, and I apologize for feeding the troll.

[FruitPudding]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

In which of these conflict was NATO involved that did not start with an attack on a NATO member?

Which NATO members did any middle eastern nation attack?

 

They were involved in Iraq, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Libya, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc etc

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, FruitPudding said:

Which NATO members did any middle eastern nation attack?

 

They were involved in Iraq, Bosnia, Serbia, Kosovo, Libya, Afghanistan, Somalia, etc etc

NATO members, acting independently of NATO, took part in these conflicts.  That's not the same as NATO taking action.

 

Now stop deflecting and try to focus on the topic, the timeline for Ukraine joining NATO.

[FruitPudding]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

NATO members, acting independently of NATO, took part in these conflicts.  That's not the same as NATO taking action.

False.

 

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

 

Now stop deflecting and try to focus on the topic, the timeline for Ukraine joining NATO.

You asked me asked me. I answered.