Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except for Estonia, Lativa and Lithuania, any former USSR countries should not join NATO.
Easy to say when you live in a country NOT next to Russia, and are not getting bombed to death by its army.
The reason why the Baltic countires applied to EU and NATO right after the break of USSR is to avoid the possiblity of getting bombed to death by Russias army.
The fact that Ukraine WAS closely associated by Russia historically, and had no early intensions of joining the EU and NATO after the fall of USSR led to what is happening now.
Any former USSR country, and heck any country next to Russia would be idiots not to try to join NATO, just look at Turkey for example. They new what craziness Russia would do.
Easy to say when you live in a country NOT next to Russia, and are not getting bombed to death by its army.
The reason why the Baltic countires applied to EU and NATO right after the break of USSR is to avoid the possiblity of getting bombed to death by Russias army.
The fact that Ukraine WAS closely associated by Russia historically, and had no early intensions of joining the EU and NATO after the fall of USSR led to what is happening now.
Any former USSR country, and heck any country next to Russia would be idiots not to try to join NATO, just look at Turkey for example. They new what craziness Russia would do.
Yes, it's true that it wasn't the west who forced these countries into NATO. It is telling that all the countries around Russia strongly hate them and don't even consider them to be part of the human race. There is a good reason for this.
Russia has a long history of brutalizing its smaller and weaker neighbors, and the countries around Russia understandably sought to get any protection they could against a resurgent Russia brutalizing them again. They inflicted unspeakable atrocities on all the countries around them in the 45 years that they occupied them, and nobody in those countries will soon forget that.
Russia operates from the assumption that they should be able to control the countries around them and crush whatever aspirations they might have for themselves. That is an 18th century mentality. Russia hasn't really changed in 300 years. They are just doing what they have always done. But the world has changed and this behavior is no longer acceptable.
All this war on Ukraine is basically because Ukraine wanted to engage in MORE business with European Countries. Decades after the break up of USSR, Ukraine sees that Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have developed economies and are doing way better than Ukraine was doing. The younger generation understood that Ukraine was going nowhere partnering with Russia and got fed up with the corruption and stagnant economy.
They protested against their Pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych and he was ousted. This was the sign theat the people of Ukraine wanted greater connection to the EU. Sensing this Putin sent troops to Donbass region and invaded Crimea. By doing so eliminates any chance that Ukraine can join NATO, because one of the rules of applying to NATO is that your country cannot currently have any civil conflit.
So you are willing to get pulverized for 1 millions of Estonians because allegedly they make a few pesos more than Ukrainians and their Russian population is seduced by higher pay checks to cause trouble (yet they still cause trouble once in a while)? Where is logic in that? Estonia has 5th column and it has plenty of ties to Russian/Soviet Empires. You are willing to stand up to the mighty Botox Vlad and risk it all if average income is $(insert here) and functional democracy meet your standards (whatever that means). That is some serious stand up comedian stuff.
Btw, Finland has far fewer ties to the Muscovite/Russian/Soviet Empire than Estonia has, it has higher income than Estonia and it does not have 5th Russian column to boot. Where is your neutrality logic here?
Who'd be getting "pulverized?" Putin's "mighty army" has been proven to be a joke... NATO would mince them, and Pootie Pie knows it.
Who'd be getting "pulverized?" Putin's "mighty army" has been proven to be a joke... NATO would mince them, and Pootie Pie knows it.
Honestly NATO has been proven a joke too. A sad, fearful, inefficient joke. NATO refused communication with Ukrainians in the first days of the invasion, they thought Vlad won so they need to lay low and not to provoke. If I were an Estonian I would not bet my farm on article 5.
Honestly NATO has been proven a joke too. A sad, fearful, inefficient joke. NATO refused communication with Ukrainians in the first days of the invasion, they thought Vlad won so they need to lay low and not to provoke. If I were an Estonian I would not bet my farm on article 5.
It came out in the NY Times today, that NATO countries in Europe didn't believe Biden, when, weeks in advance, he shared with them intelligence saying, that Russia was going to start a war against Ukraine. They thought the intelligence was wrong, or "Moscow" was bluffing, and that it would never happen. When they woke up later to a war being waged in their midst, they were beyond shocked. As if they hadn't been warned.
Though that was the view from Germany. I'd love to know what the Baltic States were thinking, as the days passed, and Russia began military exercises on its side of the Ukraine border., and the threats continued. Don't Western media and American media have any reporters in those countries? Why haven't we heard their perspective?
We know how Sweden and Finland reacted. They're starting to discuss the possibility of eventual NATO membership. The Kremlin's tactic to avoid encirclement by starting a war, while also violating Sweden and Finland's airspace from time to time, appears to be backfiring and resulting in more encirclement.
How could Ukraine have done that when they were part of the Soviet Union until 1991?
I talking about post 1991. George W Bush did announce in 2008 that strongly supported Ukraine part of NATO. BTW there are also millions of Ukrainians that did not want to be part of NATO, especially the Eastern Ukraine as Eastern Ukraine has been a large majority Russian speaker population. Even Ukraine cities, except for the ones close to the Polish border were majority Russian speakers. Also the Russian language for many generations was an everyday language for so many people of Ukraine and after the Ukrainian revolution 10 years ago, Ukrainian language became the sole and only official language of Ukraine. With that it surely divided the country.
It would be like Canada if English was the sole language of Canada including Quebec. If it was so then there be likely a much bigger movement within Quebec to break away from Canada, BTW Quebecers a pro Independence party of Quebec was voted by a huge majority in Quebec 30 years ago. If Canada did not give the Quebecers their requests, then the situation would have likely got worse then.
BTW when USA became independent from England 250 years ago, England did give the French speaking Canadians concessions restoring the power of the Roman Catholic Church and permitting use of the French civil code, which is still in place today. They had to do that so the French Canadians would still stay loyal to the Crown. https://minorityrights.org/minorities/french-canadians/
Switzerland has 4 official languages which are German, French, Italian, and Romansh. ... German, French, and Italian maintain equal status as official languages. Despite that they managed to not be part of WW1 or WW2. The people there live in peace and no major tensions either.
South Africa recognises 11 official languages,
Ukraine to survive should make Russian as an official language on par with Ukrainian.
Yes, it's true that it wasn't the west who forced these countries into NATO. It is telling that all the countries around Russia strongly hate them and don't even consider them to be part of the human race. There is a good reason for this.
Russia has a long history of brutalizing its smaller and weaker neighbors, and the countries around Russia understandably sought to get any protection they could against a resurgent Russia brutalizing them again. They inflicted unspeakable atrocities on all the countries around them in the 45 years that they occupied them, and nobody in those countries will soon forget that.
Russia operates from the assumption that they should be able to control the countries around them and crush whatever aspirations they might have for themselves. That is an 18th century mentality. Russia hasn't really changed in 300 years. They are just doing what they have always done. But the world has changed and this behavior is no longer acceptable.
Finally someone who gets it. Thanks for your succinct and cogent explanation.
"Pootie Pie"! That's the best one I've heard so far.
Pootie Pie's Porky Pies (Lies).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
