View Full Version : NATO expansion: Confrontation or Consensus?

03-04-2004, 20:14
As NATO warplanes come ever closer to Russia, it appears that, instead of scaling down its presence (in the light of the disappearance of the Warsaw Pact) NATO is, pursuing, at least in Russian eyes, an expansionist policy. If NATO was really interested in co-operation and consensus then Russians would have no reason to fear. But NATO decided to unilaterally bomb Yugoslava, killing 10,000 people, totally ignoring Russian objections. It is seeking to push Russia out of the Caucusus and has a very tolerant attitude towards Chechen terrorism (shades of Cold War support for Islamic insurgents in Afghanistan?), policies that are definitely not motivated by consensus but hegemony

03-04-2004, 20:35
Perhaps it`s a conspiracy ??? :D I mean, pretty soon, they may go all the way up to where the Warsaw Pact was not so long ago.... ;-))))

04-04-2004, 19:44
That includes Moscow itself I take it???

05-04-2004, 01:29
The presence of Nato for the last 50 years has also kept the peace and saved us all from another world war, communist domination and probable nuclear annihilation.
Not a bad record.

05-04-2004, 01:41
Oh, I dunno, let`s just have the Warsaw Pact on its`own, Trebor. :) Quincy, the Cold War is o v e r ............ we used to have a poster coming here regularly several years ago doing "Anti-com`nist" baiting stuff. It got rather booooooring. I`ll throw in some links about the NKVD if you like to balance things up, but... pot/kettle, kettle/pot........... shhhhhhhheeeeeeeesh. :)

05-04-2004, 03:37
Originally posted by trebor
The presence of Nato for the last 50 years has also kept the peace and saved us all from another world war, communist domination and probable nuclear annihilation.
Not a bad record.

Trebor I am talking about the present and the future not the past. In case you didn't notice, the Warsaw pact doesn't exist any more

05-04-2004, 03:51
"As NATO warplanes come ever closer to Russia"..... yep, NATO`s really going to bomb Russia or invade Russian airspace. Which is what your post implies. NATO - the blue and white bogeyman, is aiding and abetting terrorism, wantonly killing 10,000 civilians and hemming Russia (a nuclear power with a huge standing army) in...... Quincy, come *off* it.

05-04-2004, 04:57
you were critising NATO i was merely defending it.
One day Russia might also join.
Not untill those crusty old commie generals have all past into oblivion of course!

05-04-2004, 09:26
The 1st sign of NATO's crisis was when the consumers of the defense (not its providers) began joining this organization.

05-04-2004, 09:57
Good point, Serge

05-04-2004, 10:02
Maybe you need to bet OVER your cold-war mindset about NATO. AND forget the ridiculous "slavic brothers" thing with the Serbs. Next you are going to try to tell me that Milosevic was a nice, civilized leader, right? NATO poses absolutely not threat to Russia whatsoever, unless Russia were to decide to invade one of its members. Forget it. Get over it. Cold war: OVER.

As to the point of NATO's continued existence? Hmmmmm....

05-04-2004, 12:41

Russian TV profiles military base in Armenia

Channel One TV, Moscow
3 Apr 04

[Presenter] Here is a report by our special correspondent, Roman
Babayan, at the 102nd Russian base in Armenia.

[Correspondent] A small Armenian village a few kilometres from the
Turkish border. As the crow flies, it is no more than six kilometres
from here to the first Turkish border posts. You will now see how the
officers and soldiers prepare to put a battery of the Kub
anti-aircraft missile system and the well-known S-300 launcher on
combat duty. [Passage omitted]

The S-300 missile system was deployed on Armenian territory nearly two
years ago. If aircraft of the Turkish air force previously appeared on
the state border with Armenia systematically, then after the S-300
units appeared here the number of their overflights dropped
sharply. [Passage omitted]

Turkey is a member of NATO and, according to the Russian military, has
kept a major aviation group on the border with Armenia for many years
- nearly 300 aircraft, including AWACS reconnaissance aircraft and
regiments of fighter aviation. But in spite of this, the command of
the Russian base is convinced that, if the need arises, just an S-300
battery and MiG-29 aircraft from the aviation group which is based at
the military airfield near Yerevan will be sufficient to repulse any

Why is NATO (via Turkey) threatening Armenia? :rolleyes:

05-04-2004, 13:36
Ummm, why are YOU relying on Channel One for your news? Honestly, quincy, you might as well go join LDPR or Rodina right now....

05-04-2004, 14:40
But Sevan I am not in Russia and don't know about the relative merits of the TV Channels but Turkey has been blockading Armenia since 1992 and refuses to establish diplomatic relations with that country (excuse: the dispute over the right to self determination in the Armenian majority territory of Nagorny Karabakh). Turkey can only threaten and blockade with a nod from NATO in Brussels

05-04-2004, 14:57
I'm sorry, I was not aware of this blockade that you speak of and I'm too lazy to read up on it (needless to say, I don't believe a word of your ORT quote). :)

Nonetheless, I think that your comments about NATO ignoring Russia's objections about Serbia are a bit misguided. Russia's objections were guided, I think, by populism and fretting that Chechnya might be next on NATO's list (which is ridiculous). Just what I think.