Jump to content

Reagan: You won, the Wall is gone


Recommended Posts

You've got to translate: he calls that standing up to aggressive, brutal tyrants. Why wouldn't you just shut down your eyes and brain and pretend they don't exist (works for him)? Problem solved, instantly.

Imagine how great that would have worked in the 1940s, with virtually unchallenged, Hitler taking Britain and USSR (without massive assistance a done deal but he wouldn't remember) and then - going all Gandhi or helping his eastern buddy to take Pacific islands one by one? Easy to guess but he wouldn't.

Imagine letting Putin have his wish a year back - where would he turn next? NATO is "fixing the world" of course, but wait till Putin takes half of Europe and gangs up with China, Iran and North Korea. Would be so much fun "fixing your problems" see? Btw, keep nodding Michael, so smart of you.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/31/2023 at 6:20 AM, myata said:

Imagine letting Putin have his wish a year back - where would he turn next? NATO is "fixing the world" of course, but wait till Putin takes half of Europe and gangs up with China, Iran and North Korea. Would be so much fun "fixing your problems" see? Btw, keep nodding Michael, so smart of you.

Excuse me but...

When did Putin "wish" to take half a Europe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

When did Putin "wish" to take half a Europe?

You forgot. Just barely a year ago, before the fiasco in Ukraine, Putin told NATO to pull back from the Eastern Europe. And when and if Russia's neighbors are weak and defenseless, what happens to them, like all of those? Never noticed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, myata said:

You forgot. Just barely a year ago, before the fiasco in Ukraine, Putin told NATO to pull back from the Eastern Europe. And when and if Russia's neighbors are weak and defenseless, what happens to them, like all of those? Never noticed?

Pull back from Eastern Europe...in which language does that mean...'we are going to invade'?

NATO was never supposed to expand to Eastern Europe...according to the Russians. And while I'm quite sure that's not completely accurate, I'm equally quite sure what we hear and read from our side, is also not completely accurate.

That's called "critical thinking". You should try it.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Pull back from Eastern Europe...in which language does that mean...'we are going to invade'?

In Putin's of course. In Russia's. Happens all the time but you forgot. Putin was on a quest to "liberate" all "Russian-speaking" people wherever they happen to be. Interested to translate that into human language?

10 hours ago, Nationalist said:

NATO was never supposed to expand to Eastern Europe...

Can't stop repeating Putin's talking points? Living next door to a violent psycho with a mile-long record of invasions and abuse, you "never supposed to call the police". Right, take the psycho's (a fact of reality) word for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, myata said:

In Putin's of course. In Russia's. Happens all the time but you forgot. Putin was on a quest to "liberate" all "Russian-speaking" people wherever they happen to be. Interested to translate that into human language?

Can't stop repeating Putin's talking points? Living next door to a violent psycho with a mile-long record of invasions and abuse, you "never supposed to call the police". Right, take the psycho's (a fact of reality) word for that.

I live in Toronto. So I do live "next door to a violent psycho with a mile-long record of invasions and abuse".

You're making things up now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

So I do live "next door to a violent psycho with a mile-long record of invasions and abuse".

Again, you forget. A short memory syndrome. Same kind of arguments were made before. Not our business. I live in Toronto. Next Hitler gangs up with a few baddies, takes Europe and China, develops nukes and all of a sudden it all looks very different. Toronto isn't a ticket to eternal bliss and nirvana anymore. In a snap, bang. Memory is such a funny thing.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, myata said:

Again, you forget. A short memory syndrome. Same kind of arguments were made before. Not our business. I live in Toronto. Next Hitler gangs up with a few baddies, takes Europe and China, develops nukes and all of a sudden it all looks very different. In a snap, bang. Memory is such a funny thing.

Lying is such a funny thing too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Lying is such a funny thing too

You must know some about it. And to who would you be trying to explain it, look I'm here in a faraway nothing minding my own business, not meaning anything to anyone? To Hitler? To Putin? Xi? With two tanks that can be started, maybe and the States mining their own business as instructed? Let's see how that works out, wanna try?

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, myata said:

You must know some about it. And to who would you be trying to explain it, look I'm here in a faraway nothing minding my own business, not meaning anything to anyone? To Hitler? To Putin? Xi? With two tanks that can be started, maybe and the States mining their own business as instructed? Let's see how that works out, wanna try?

Yes. I've been saying all along, this is none of our business. We need to stay the hell out of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Try living in reality.

Yes this is the reality that you folks forget. Easy. Yes there were people like you back then and they said the same things, probably literally, and here's the take: these several decades of relative calm and prosperity we in the West experienced, happened only because those people, like you did not prevail back then. It all could have been very different now.

But the memory is short. Would you roll it again, let's see what happens!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, myata said:

Yes this is the reality that you folks forget. Easy. Yes there were people like you back then and they said the same things, probably literally, and here's the take: these several decades of relative calm and prosperity we in the West experienced, happened only because those people, like you did not prevail back then. It all could have been very different now.

But the memory is short. Would you roll it again, let's see what happens!

You sure work hard to candy coat crap. But it's just candy coated crap.

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/1/2023 at 2:47 PM, Nationalist said:

NATO was never supposed to expand to Eastern Europe...

actually, the the 1949 Washington Treaty clearly states a mandate to expand east as necessary

NATO Article 10 ;

The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_17120.htm

Edited by Dougie93
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/1/2023 at 2:47 PM, Nationalist said:

. . . according to the Russians.

Russian claims are completely ahistorical nonsense

the Warsaw Pact then the Soviet Union itself : collapsed of its own accord

NATO had nothing to do with it

NATO was in fact caught completely off guard by it

the Supreme Soviet met under the presiding General Secretary Gorbachev

and that Soviet then voted itself out of existence

nobody forced them to do that, they are the ones who voted to bring themselves down

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Contrarian said:
  • The 1949 Washington Treaty, which established NATO, does not contain any mandate to expand eastward. Its primary purpose was to provide collective defense against external threats to the member countries.
  • Correct Here -> Article 10 of the Treaty outlines the process for other European countries to join NATO, but this requires unanimous agreement among the existing members and is based on the principles of the Treaty and the potential new member's ability to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area.
  • While NATO has expanded its membership to include several Eastern European countries since the end of the Cold War, this was done through the process outlined in Article 10 and with the unanimous agreement of existing members. It was not a result of any mandate to expand eastward in the original Treaty.

the Cold War was waged to liberate Eastern Europe from the Soviets

the Soviets were the evil empire, we were out to destroy that empire and liberate the Warsaw Pact members

nobody ever promised the Soviets nor the Russians that we would not expand into their "buffer zone"

quite the opposite, that was the whole point of the war, that was the mission

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

My position is that the expansion of NATO was not imposed on any country,

then you are debating with a strawman

because I never said that any country was forced to join NATO

I simply pointed out that Article 10 was a mandate to expand NATO to any European country deemed worthy

since the vast majority of those countries were to the east of the Inner German Border

that was an inherent mandate written into the 1949 treaty, to expand east as that expansion became viable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Contrarian said:

I understand your point about Article 10 being a mandate for NATO expansion

you'll note that Article 10 also states that NATO can ally itself with any non NATO member it chooses to

without that country having to join NATO

so the mandate to defend Ukraine is also within the mandate of Article 10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

 nobody wants to live under the KGB, even if in 2023, they wear Armani suits. 

we are the good guys, the KGB are the bad guys, as it always was

I don't why you think that I am on the side of Mister Ivan

I served in the Cold War with NATO against the Soviets

I was an ideological soldier, I joined specifically to defend the free world from Soviet Bolshevism

invited to do by President Reagan & Prime Minister Thatcher

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Contrarian said:

Correct, in the case of Ukraine, while NATO could theoretically ally itself with Ukraine to defend against Russian aggression, such a move could escalate the conflict and potentially lead to a nuclear disaster.

Therefore, while NATO is committed to the defence of its members and the promotion of stability and security in Europe, it must also exercise caution and restraint in order to prevent further escalation of conflict.

It's all a big chess game.

NATO is showing too much caution & restraint

NATO is allowing itself to be leveraged by Russian nuclear blackmail

that is actually the path to a nuclear disaster

the safer path would be Peace Through Strength

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • paradox34 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...