Back In The USSR Beatles. Hi i believe they will charge more for there Gas thoe they might if NATO rolls in. I thought it was Insane offering Sanction`s for a Country the size of Ukraine. If we rolled UN Division`s in believe he would think twice unfortunately EU Didn't want to get Involved. Still haven't took Russia out of SWIFT as some Won't Commit and should be named and Shamed ?
Sorry DD, he has to be stopped,he has virtually threatened everyone with annihilation if they dare oppose him, the Chinese have taken this as an opportunity to threaten as well, no one wants war but we all know the consequences of appeasement.
Sorry DD, he has to be stopped,he has virtually threatened everyone with annihilation if they dare oppose him, the Chinese have taken this as an opportunity to threaten as well, no one wants war but we all know the consequences of appeasement.
Like we have threatened him.
We (Nato) started this unholy mess back in 1990 when we broke our promise about not expanding Nato into the Baltic Countries on the break-up of the USSR.
He has asked for demilitarisation of Eastern Ukraine, this could have been offered as a simple solution without any loss of life. This would also have been good for Ukraine as it would have stopped the civil war that was going on already.
However, this is Putin we are talking about, a master strategist who is about one hundred times cleverer than any other Western leader. What he actually wants maybe something quite simple, he may not be prepared to reveal, his cards yet. Our simpleton leaders called his bluff, he is the last person on earth you should do that to as they have now found out.
There has been far too much anti-Russia (reds under the beds) talk going on in recent years when we had achieved an economic and political equilibrium with Russia, you prod the bear and the bear will lash out.
Western leaders do not like peace, war makes it easier to keep the serfs in their place.
And we have an idiot that fantasises he is Winston Churchill in charge of us, be prepared for us to go to war per usual.
But surely countries should hold the choice of whether they want to join NATO or to be allied to Russia, after the collapse of the USSR, I noticed there wasn't a clamour to stay allied with Russia, look at Putins rhetoric, mother Russia all countries (former USSR) are Russian, or so he believes, he is beginning to act and sound like another dictator that wanted control of Europe.
He will overun Ukraine eventually, but at what cost, lives on both sides, destroyed infrastructure and the stench of a pariah state label stuck to it, I believe most Russians don't want this, the longer Ukraine hangs on the more ruthless the Russians will become, armed civilians no doubt will be executed as terrorists or any other excuse they care to use.
Nato has had no real role since the end of the USSR. It is largely paid for by the US which sees it as a useful way of extending their power into Europe under the pretence of being part of an international alliance. No wonder Russia is getting twitchy!
America is the most aggressive country in the world by a huge margin and has been at war (with much weaker nations) for 95% of its existence. The whole American economy profits from these wars in other places, and they have, by continual provocation managed to turn Russia into the USSR again which they can defend us against.
The one thing Trump said with which I agreed entirely was that Nato should be abolished. It is now causing far more trouble than it's worth. Even an idiot gets it right occasionally.
America would be far better concentrating on its own internal social problems before it finds itself plunged into a civil war.
It's ok ... America has Area flippin 51 and Elon musk has positioned starlink to do Christ know what ...with or without Haarp, Cern and a bunch of sick megalomaniacal politicians acting like naughty rich boys
Makes me sick .... grr Bikini tryon hauls and kitten videos for the rest of the day lol
So lets get this straight if Nato never existed, what would happen now? would Putin continue to recover the old USSR maybe roll into East Germany rebuild the wall, just asking because Putin seems to think all these countries belongs to mother Russia, come on you've got to admit the guy appears to be irrational, he even looks a bit blank, and that table he sits at is definitely a Billy no mates table.
This is so scary. Putin is one of many where power has gone to his head. Meglomaniac! His threats of nuclear weapons is chilling but I hope that’s all they are scare tactics. My hope is that his own people and armed forces see that he is deranged and rise up against him, he needs to go but hopefully not be replaced by someone just as bad as him! Why can’t we all just try and live as best a life without all these damn wars! Thought the COVID virus had been a scare to humanity but no still they want to destroy this planet and I think one day one of these man made threats will do it.
This is so scary. Putin is one of many where power has gone to his head. Meglomaniac!
Are you getting mixed up with America?
America has dropped 326,000 bombs and missiles on other countries since 2001, How dare they think they can police the world with their own appalling human rights record?
Russia has quite rightly objected to the number of American military bases and exercises around its borders as well as other Nato exercises. The UK wouldn't put up with another country threatening us like that, why should Russia?
If Russia did to America a tenth of what America has done to Russia you can guarantee the Americans would have responded with force. Its all right for one but not the other?
The only "winners" are those who make a lot of money out this conflict, everybody else loses, some more than others.
Listening to the propaganda that Putin is mad is how we end up in these messes, he is a master strategist, do you really think he has not thought this through?.
Here is a map of American military exercises in 2017, note the lack of activity in Western Europe and the concentration of activity in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
So over the last few years our weather has been getting worse and worse, thought-out the World not just here, Wild Fires, Floods, Famine, Earthquakes etc etc We then have World Leader trying to get to grips with the Globe Warming, stop coal burning, plant more trees, buy electric cars etc Next comes Covid 19 millions around the World infected millions dead, we get a vaccine! Now we could be heading in to a Nuclear War wiping us out for good! Do you think God is trying to tell us something?
I think America is gagging for a nice little war in Europe, a safe distance from home, where they can pretend to defend one side from the other.
In fact they have fomented this conflict, something they do all over the world. Their whole economy depends on having wars as more than half their federal budget goes on Arms. It is a HUGE employer and they have to create sales opportunities to keep it going.
On odd occasions, such as when their victims mount an attack on them, such as the attack on NYC, they howl like stuck pigs and expect the whole world to sympathise with them.
We then have World Leader trying to get to grips with the Globe Warming, stop coal burning, plant more trees, buy electric cars etc
Its almost 100% political noise.
Transferring UK coal burning industries (ie heavy industry) to other countries who burn the coal "for us" does not reduce global coal burning. Global coal burning continues to increase.
Transferring UK wood sources abroad is also obvious nonsense, we should be growing and using our own trees instead of importing wood and wood products in massive quantities. Ticking a box to say our woodland is increasing is damaging to the environment.
Also note that most of UK wood stock is in Scotland where it grows slowest and absorbs less CO2.
After the huge strategic mistake of Europe being dependent on Russian gas, we are going headlong into depending on China for Lithium. That is why we should be looking at Hydrogen or other energy storage mediums instead of rare minerals that we do not have.
I'am still missing something here DD, has NATO invaded any countries in Europe or threatened Russia, as far as I remember NATO was organised to stop the likes of what is happening in Ukraine, the last big NATO exercise was in 1983 Lionheart a what if scenario, should Russia invade Europe, incidentally the nearest we have come to a nuclear war since the Cuban crisis.
NATO's primary function is to protect America, economically, politically and militarily, all the other members are just shirt-tail hangers.
NATO came into existence for the Korean War which involved North Korea, South Korea, USSR, China and the USA.
You can try and figure out how Korea is part of the North Atlantic whilst the Falklands aren't - whatever answer you find probably sums up everything NATO.
What triggered NATO was the failure of the Soviet Union not giving back the independence to countries liberated after WW2. Look at any pre war and post war maps, who is the land grabber?
That's the way I see it bert, they were held under Soviet rule against their wishes to protect the motherland and now Putin wants them back, he is accusing Ukraine of being neo Fascists, yet he is the one acting like Hitler landgrabbing.
What triggered NATO was the failure of the Soviet Union not giving back the independence to countries liberated after WW2. Look at any pre war and post war maps, who is the land grabber?
On that basis, shouldn't Ukraine give back land to Poland?
Its only in the last couple of years that the UK handed WW2 captured land back to Germany, I think we still have other pockets in Eastern Europe(?).
NATO was formed because of the Korean War after the Soviet Union and America gave back independence.
Putin has made the same three demands for many years, he wants a military buffer zone between NATO and Russia as was promised by NATO, instead of maintaining what buffer zone there was, NATO further encroached towards Russia against their own promise.
Russia quite rightly perceive America as a threat, nobody could say America would not take over Russia given the chance, they are a threat.
I'm not for one second justifying what Putin is doing, but the "West" has not got its hands clean in this matter, a peaceful settlement was there for the taking for years but we chose to not only refuse those terms but carried on with the NATO invasion of Eastern Europe.
NATO was established in Washington, 4th April, 1949, a precursor to NATO was the Treaty of Brussels, 17th March, 1948. The Korean War was June 25th, 1950 to July 27th, 1952. Troops in Korea fighting the North and Allies were United Nations. The United Nations were formed in 1945, initial plans go back to 1939 and 1941.
NATO was set up as a defensive organisation against the Soviet Union Warsaw Pact. It has only seen action once under the NATO Flag, I think it shot down some planes over Serbia (Jet on Jet)
Ukraine applied for entry into NATO in 2008 and was rejected, had they been allowed in, this war wouldn't be happening.
NATO was established in Washington, 4th April, 1949, a precursor to NATO was the Treaty of Brussels, 17th March, 1948.
NATO did not exist before the Korean war, the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949 is not the same thing as NATO, a treaty is not an organisation.
Originally Posted by cools
Shelling around a nuclear power site!! And you say Putin is not mad DD!!!
There were no shells fired at any nuclear plant. The cameras from the plant could only show a glow in the distance from the shelling, the building that went on fire was nowhere near the reactors.
Taking over infrastructure is the most humanitarian way for Putin to complete mission, if he wanted to blast Ukraine to smithereens he has the weaponry, so far he has only been using little more than peashooters. It does not pay Putin to be too heavy handed
Down south one of Putin's objectives is to reinstate the fresh water supply to Crimea that Ukraine has blocked since 2014 which has had a huge impact on the civilian population but no affect on Russian military operations there.
If you read the stories in the media today it makes reference to Stanlow Dock workers refusing to offload Russian oil whilst stating that Tranmere Oil Terminal has still been offloading Russian oil. The Russian Oil coming into the Mersey doesn't go to Stanlow, they offload at Tranmere, smaller tankers may still offload at Eastham.
"NATO came into existence for the Korean War which involved North Korea, South Korea, USSR, China and the USA"
"NATO was formed because of the Korean War after the Soviet Union and America gave back independence"
"NATO did not exist before the Korean war, the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949 is not the same thing as NATO, a treaty is not an organisation"
Make your mind up DD.
I fail to see any contradiction ....
After 1945 North Korea was occupied by the USSR and South Korea was occupied by America
In 1948 North and South Korea were made independent sovereign nations.
In 1950 the Korean War started with support for the North by the USSR and China to invade the South, support for the South primarily coming from America (then later the UN).
NATO was created by the Americans during the Korean War because America saw a weakness in how Europe responded and they wanted to integrate the European military into the American defence and attacks against the USSR. The Korean war ended before they they got NATO fully operational but had the war lasted longer American plans were to use a nuclear attack sanctioned and enabled by NATO as it was unlikely to be sanctioned by the UN.
Its contradictory and historically incorrect, the formation of NATO precedes the start of the Korean War and every historical literature and documentation I have ever read over many years only ever suggested it was formed for the defence of Europe, owing to the activity by the Soviet Union in Europe.
NATO had no inkling the Korean War was about to happen, it came as a complete surprise to the Americans and the majority of the world, In 1948/49 the Americans sent all the troops home leaving only about 400 advisers. The South Korean defence forces were in military terms lightly armed. They were due for rearmament in 1950/51. The communist forces took advantage of this and made their surprise attack in June 1950.
Quotes, "NATO came into existence for the Korean War which involved North Korea, South Korea, USSR, China and the USA"
"NATO was formed because of the Korean War after the Soviet Union and America gave back independence"
NATO was formed for the defence of Europe and formed prior to Korea.
As for the use of the Atomic Bomb, no idea and probably never will have any evidence it was going to be used for sure, I've never known a conflict involving the USA were those with American bias claim they are going to use the nuclear armaments.
My view on EX's post, NATO is needed more than ever, This bloke Putin is more dangerous than the old Soviet Union ever was, at least the old USSR had a committee, the Polit Bureau who advised the leader and himself consulted them. Putin being a dictator has a free hand, all opposition he's got rid of, very dangerous.
The treaty required a council which was not NATO, it was the North Atlantic Council , the council underwent changes in 1950 and 1951 to split off the the organisation to become known as NATO. Most history books repeatedly use the term NATO members when they mean NAT members or NAC members.
The treaty makes no reference to any separate organisation, it is for different nations to co-operate together via the Council.
The first chairman of the North Atlantic Council was Dean Acheson from 1949 to 1950, he was Secretary of State for the USA, he was never employed by NATO nor had a NATO title.
The first NATO secretary was Baron Hastings Ismay in 1952 - who also uses the term NATO loosely in his 1954 book, the book indicates that the integrated organisation (ie NATO) came about in early 1951 after the 6th meeting of the Council.
The North Atlantic Military Committee were partly responsible for setting up aspects of NATO and had discussed it from late 1949 (as a minute title, not an entity) but I can find no evidence that there were personnel assigned to NATO or employed by NATO until later.
The North Atlantic Military Committee later became the NATO Military Committee, I thought this happened in 1955 but it appears to be much later(?). however again, many books etc use the term NATO Military Committee all the way back to 1949 - the simple proof against this is the minutes of their meetings until at least 1969 were titled "North Atlantic Military Committee".
The first Chairman of the North Atlantic Militarily Committee was Omar Bradley in 1949, his title at the time was not "NATO Military Committee in Chiefs-of-Staff Session" as claimed retrospectively, he never had NATO title.
If you can find any documents that were contemporary at the time that say otherwise I would be more than interested to see them, the NATO archive is full of stuff but difficult to plough through.
The Americans vehemently didn't wan't to become part of integrated structure with any other nation.
Why did they change their mind?
Because during the Korea war they wanted the option to use an atomic bomb against Korea and China, however if they dropped the bomb it would have brought the USSR into direct conflict with America. They realised that if NATO was formed then it would bring in Europe to help deal with the USSR. They also expanded the Treaty to bring in more European countries.
I doubt none of the above having read much of it over the years. Its inception with or without the "O" was not for the Korean War as you indicated in a previous post, because of the Korean War, of course restructuring took place which is common were treaties are concerned and are overtaken by events. Initially with or without the "O" it was for the defence of Europe. I see this as a light hearted forum not a university debating society, I have no wish to trawl through University libraries, Government papers or National Archives again, it only scares the children.
![[Linked Image]](https://nationalvanguard.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/us-military-bases-europe-map-recent-u-s-military-events-in-europe1.jpg)
