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.
The only thing reasonable would've been for NATO to invite Russia and Ukraine to join in the early 1990's, which would've eliminated all prospects of conflict in Eastern Europe.
As it was both the U.S. and Russian military industrial complexes gain a lot of money and influence from perpetuating about foreign threats, which today is upheld by the disgraceful Democratic Party in the U.S. which is rapidly descending into a horror mix of corporate hawkery and cultural marxism.
Russia joined the NATO partnership for peace programme in 1994. Finland and Sweden are also a part of this.
What good did it make? Nothing. Russia started to rattle sabres.
The Russian military-industrial complex was devastated with the fall of the USSR. Not even today have they the capability of supplying a big military.
I think he has a point as well. Friend is a stretch, but I don't see a great reason why Russia needs to be treated as an enemy or even a rival. Its government is unpleasant but plenty of governments around the world are. It's not a threat to the US or American interests in any realistic way.
As it was both the U.S. and Russian military industrial complexes gain a lot of money and influence from perpetuating about foreign threats, which today is upheld by the disgraceful Democratic Party in the U.S. which is rapidly descending into a horror mix of corporate hawkery and cultural marxism.
Not that vapid phrase again. I have no clue how to argue against that phrase, but the Democrats feel they hold a better claim to American political values, rather than undermining them.
The US Democratic Party isn't any more corporate than its been in decades, arguably a bit less recently. Until Trump, the Republican Party was more concerned and more anti-Russian than the Democratic Party
Cultural marxism is not the best phrase to use. The Soviet Union was mostly left wing radicals in economic issues, they were definitely right wing on the social ones. Gay discrimination, no religious freedom, nepotism in politics, it's not what you want. I'm guessing the Republican Party would agree with quite a few of the social ideas used by the USSR
I think he has a point as well. Friend is a stretch, but I don't see a great reason why Russia needs to be treated as an enemy or even a rival. Its government is unpleasant but plenty of governments around the world are. It's not a threat to the US or American interests in any realistic way.
Some of those governments also happen to be our allies.
Seems like Sweden is getting agitated because of Russia.
There are obviously many legitimate fears for nations in close proximity to Russia.
It'd be a joke. Back in the 80's we could keep them at bay through the air force for a full week until resupplies from NATO came and allegedly we were #4 in the world after the US, Soviet and the UK, now we may well just wave the white flag on day one. There's nothing. We should work on the air force, I don't buy this ground troups thing. Modern warfare is mostly about controlling airspace.
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.
I have no clue how to argue against that phrase, but the Democrats feel they hold a better claim to American political values, rather than undermining them.
