Rethinking the EU and NATO

Yes, a mannered and mild form of Russian aggression, different than the American form of bomb and occupy type. I am disgusted that I, as an American, admit that my nation acts in horrible forceful ways to secure it's agenda. Without it's military force, would anyone in the world really think that America is right in it's beliefs? I think not. Again, even as an American, we should be humbled, just so that we can judge right from wrong again. Please God, may we elect a president that can restore America to what it once was. And please, no more Clintons - that would be our total ruin.

"-A resurgent Russia is aggressively re-asserting its role in the world"

Phew - as far as I know the Russians have deployed a handful of troops in the immediate vicinity of their borders (ie Abhazia etc) and a few plane loads of medicines have made it to Kosovo.... they also enjoy *debating* issues in diplomatic forums and selling their oil full price - that's the extent of Russia's "agression" in "the world"....

Amazing - what adjectives would you assign to America's foreign policy then?

If Russia is "agressive" then, to use proportionate language, America must be a "mad, fascist, war mongering, lunatic empire".....

Please, a little less hyperbole.

I think that at the moment the primary role of NATO is as a tool in the US foreign policy. In exchange for some support it gets countries to support its foreign policies by sending troops to Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. The main reason for countries to become member is that in the present world it is better to have the US as a friend than as an enemy. But all together NATO has a very narrow reason of existence.

I agree with "papajohn"....
Please God - NO More Clintons, --- that would be the ruin not only of US but the entire World.....and McCain can do it again in the Retirement Village.
Thank God the Russians are keeping some balance on things.

Dear Mr Montgomery,
Appart from the factors pushing EU and NATO into the wilderness that you describe,there is another one and a very serious one indeed: The Americam uniletarism! As the European countries are getting more inclined to share part of their soveregnity within EU, no such willingnes is shown by the US, atleast during the Bush administration. If EU countries feel they could not influence any US decisions, they will be willing to trust the US to a lesser extend. Even more that applies to individuals. EU has gone far beyond being union of states. It is union of people. NATO shows no such signs. No one in the US even dares to imagine freedom of movement of people, goods and idias across the Atlantic. Worse, The US refuses to recognise the status of the EU citizenship, and continues to apply different visa rules to different EU countries! Will this policies be radically changed by the next administration? Not likely, to the needed extend. In a world where democracy appears to be shrinking, the democratic peoples should unite, but as experience showed, they do that better on personal, not on govermnent level. If more Europeans are inclined to think: "U.S. does not mean us", the future of the Transatlantic alience is bound to liik cloudy.

Commentator, please read more carefully :-) The adjactive for Russia was "resurgent." The word "aggressive" refers to the way Russia "Re-asserts its role in the world." I think it's fair to say. so. "Aggressive" does not necessarily mean anything violent, think of an "agressive sales campaign." The author was hinting at the pro-active manner, characteristic for Moscow's latest involvement in international affairs. Peace :-)

I have asked this a few times before...and there was never an explanation.

what could be the reason for B92 to publish Mr. Montgomery´s strange thoughts on a regular basis...?

how about interviews with real politicians, person on duty in the region, local experts...

but why always this one singel person???

Commentator, please read more carefully :-) The adjactive for Russia was "resurgent." The word "aggressive" refers to the way Russia "Re-asserts its role in the world." I think it's fair to say. so. "Aggressive" does not necessarily mean anything violent, think of an "agressive sales campaign." The author was hinting at the pro-active manner, characteristic for Moscow's latest involvement in international affairs. Peace :-)

"-A resurgent Russia is aggressively re-asserting its role in the world"

Phew - as far as I know the Russians have deployed a handful of troops in the immediate vicinity of their borders (ie Abhazia etc) and a few plane loads of medicines have made it to Kosovo.... they also enjoy *debating* issues in diplomatic forums and selling their oil full price - that's the extent of Russia's "agression" in "the world"....

Amazing - what adjectives would you assign to America's foreign policy then?

If Russia is "agressive" then, to use proportionate language, America must be a "mad, fascist, war mongering, lunatic empire".....

Please, a little less hyperbole.

Yes, a mannered and mild form of Russian aggression, different than the American form of bomb and occupy type. I am disgusted that I, as an American, admit that my nation acts in horrible forceful ways to secure it's agenda. Without it's military force, would anyone in the world really think that America is right in it's beliefs? I think not. Again, even as an American, we should be humbled, just so that we can judge right from wrong again. Please God, may we elect a president that can restore America to what it once was. And please, no more Clintons - that would be our total ruin.

I think that at the moment the primary role of NATO is as a tool in the US foreign policy. In exchange for some support it gets countries to support its foreign policies by sending troops to Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. The main reason for countries to become member is that in the present world it is better to have the US as a friend than as an enemy. But all together NATO has a very narrow reason of existence.

I agree with "papajohn"....
Please God - NO More Clintons, --- that would be the ruin not only of US but the entire World.....and McCain can do it again in the Retirement Village.
Thank God the Russians are keeping some balance on things.

Dear Mr Montgomery,
Appart from the factors pushing EU and NATO into the wilderness that you describe,there is another one and a very serious one indeed: The Americam uniletarism! As the European countries are getting more inclined to share part of their soveregnity within EU, no such willingnes is shown by the US, atleast during the Bush administration. If EU countries feel they could not influence any US decisions, they will be willing to trust the US to a lesser extend. Even more that applies to individuals. EU has gone far beyond being union of states. It is union of people. NATO shows no such signs. No one in the US even dares to imagine freedom of movement of people, goods and idias across the Atlantic. Worse, The US refuses to recognise the status of the EU citizenship, and continues to apply different visa rules to different EU countries! Will this policies be radically changed by the next administration? Not likely, to the needed extend. In a world where democracy appears to be shrinking, the democratic peoples should unite, but as experience showed, they do that better on personal, not on govermnent level. If more Europeans are inclined to think: "U.S. does not mean us", the future of the Transatlantic alience is bound to liik cloudy.

I have asked this a few times before...and there was never an explanation.

what could be the reason for B92 to publish Mr. Montgomery´s strange thoughts on a regular basis...?

how about interviews with real politicians, person on duty in the region, local experts...

but why always this one singel person???