The US and NATO have drawn up plans to defend NATO's Baltic members against Russia, latest US diplomatic cables disclosed by Wikileaks show, BBC reports.
Now, that's appalling!!! Hitler provoked by those Anglosaxon proxies of the Poles to go ahead?!?!?!
Are you suggesting the Poles were guilty for the 2nd WW, for not turning to Hitler to appease him, instead of allying with those wicked Anglosaxons (and French)?
Goebbels couldn't have put it better, I tell you...
(dekki)
-------------
But it is the truth!
Poland in its unrealistic pre-1939 borders was strongly supported by the UK,US and France and was basically a creation of the Versailles treaty.
That led the Polish leadership (Marshall Pilsudski to expell Germans on a large scale and to wage an war of agression against Russia in 1921-1922!
They did this with support from the Western powers and when chickens came home to roost in 1939 they were left alone and lost nearly 6 million citizens because of the greed and stupidity of their leadership...
As far as Hungary 1956 is concerned,it was a mocking of the poster "Joe" who is an Hungarian born American and enthusiastically roots for American wars of agression all over the world !
It was to show his hypocrisy :
Cry about "your" victims but cher when others suffer the same fate...
Being an Anglosaxon proxy has caused enormous suffering to the Polish people because it provoked Hitler to go ahead...
(CG, 8 December 2010 17:43)
Now, that's appalling!!! Hitler provoked by those Anglosaxon proxies of the Poles to go ahead?!?!?!
Are you suggesting the Poles were guilty for the 2nd WW, for not turning to Hitler to appease him, instead of allying with those wicked Anglosaxons (and French)?
Goebbels couldn't have put it better, I tell you...
I doubt you could have so easily posted such a comment in Germany today. And I have to strongly refrain here from expressing specific considerations on the mental state of people who post such sentences...
reading that Serbia saved the Soviets in 1941 (when the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement was still in force!) made my day :D
As for blood is not water - not very sure this applies to international relations. Not very sure that those sitting in Kremlin think the same. They've never thought it. Some hedgehog-lover using a multiple hedgehog-based nickname on this site could easily confirm it.
Strange enough you cheer what happened in Hungary 1956 (by the way you might have added also Prague 1968) - Russian opinion today feels slightly embarrased on those episodes (not 'ashamed' - that notion is still to come, at least in public).
Last, I'm not a Pole, neither a Finn or a Baltic - just deeply sympathize with those people who, apart from their ethnicity or religion, have managed to defend themselves from big, mighty imperial neighbours and preserve their very existence paying a high price - without developping ridiculous, small-scaled imperial attitudes as a result.
It seems like the West has forgotten its lectures of 1814 and 1945 when the Russian armies conquered the continent in no time...
Rule number one in warfare:
If you engage Russia in a war,you WILL LOOSE!
I hope the Americans try something,mainly they are of German,French,English ancestry so they know how it feels to get their butts kicked by "Ivan"...
Serbia of course will always be on the side of our pravoslavic Russian brothers,no matter the cost,blood is not water!
We saved them in 1941 when Hitler had to start his "Operation Barbarossa" on June 22 instead of May 15 because of the Belgrade putch which prooved to be fatal for this monster...
Especially Joe knows how Russian boots taste,remember 1956...
By the way, don't forget the Finns - they do openly admit their strategy: The next time, if it happens, we'll not be left alone!
(dekk, 7 December 2010 18:53)
That is what you Poles thought in 1939 thinking the British will save you...
The rest is history...
I think it would be much wiser for the Poles to try to have the best relations with Germany and Russia,both countries are stronger and more powerful than Poland so it has to know its realistic place in Europe.
Being an Anglosaxon proxy has caused enormous suffering to the Polish people because it provoked Hitler to go ahead...
Have a NATO type "cordon sanitaire" around it.
(Joe, 8 December 2010 02:46)
How do you do that when NATO is not capable of winning against a group of tribes in Afghanistan?
You know all of this reminds me of reading about Hitler’s last days in WW2 when he was moving panzer divisions and troops that had surrendered weeks earlier to the allies and his staff were afraid to tell him it was all lost.
Wiki Leaks has shown that the EU and US are living in gaga land. Are you near the border? I’m horrified that the US Central Command in Florida has not called you for advice.
It is still there to protect it from Russia of Putin. It is something very clear for most people. If Russia's boss wouldn't be Putin but somebody else, peacful and democrat than the
whole question of US presence in Europe would be completely different.
(Joe, 7 December 2010 20:58)
Sadly, American administration cleared the way for Putin - being co-players in Yeltsin's self-enrichment games. Who was guilty? Neo-conmen or neo-libsi? All of them - Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton.
But of course, neo-con is not conservative and neo-libsi is not liberal. For thousands of years both used to be called "criminal" or "thief", beginning with late 70-s they changed the names.
----
Who said that NATO has no right to be there? It is forward defence. They should and must go anywhere, where there is a potential source of future treat!!
(Joe, 7 December 2010 20:58)
And who decides where is a potential source of future treat? Not you, not me. The decision is made inside of the administration. And as such, there is absolutely no guarantee of it being correct. Do you trust any administration blindly? Think the values America was created from.
One would think that being a member of NATO should be deterrence enough for a country like Russia to start anything. That was pretty much the reason why the Baltic countries were so keen on joining. That some sort of "secret agreement" exists seems to me to be the more dubious thing. That Russia would somehow seek to use its military to dominate the region when it can control it by supplying its oil and natural gas seems to me to be a lapse in judgement on behalf of my beloved Secretary of State.
Now if this were focused on Ukraine or the Caucasus, we might have more of a reason to raise an eyebrow in surprise than stratch our heads in confusion.
This whole "Russia is the bad guy" theme is getting old..Henry Kissenger was so 70's.
You don't seem to realize that the only reason for expansion is to keep NATO alive. Not to keep Russia at bay.
I think you're missing the fact that by the next generation, Russia will be a bigger European partner. Once it learns how to play friendly, you can watch Germany cosey up to her..
It's really a shame how Russia was treated during its' recovery process.
For any naysayers of State Department policy regarding Russia, these latest cables clearly show that US's necessity for taunting Russia is the only way for NATO's survival..
Leonidas is right...so they claim their efforts have been to reset relations with Russia to improve them - yet you have yet another Clinton creating secret plans to further extend NATO military presence in a sensitive area...let me put it like this
You see a bear, but it doesn't see you, you feel threatened by its presence, yet the bear is not the least moved by yours. So rather than leaving it alone and saving yourself from a mauling, you decide to pick up a stick and go and piss it off real bad in some twisted belief that it will thus leave you be.
Thats what the US always does, rather than let the situation remain stable they go and aggrivate the living hell out of everyone.
And seriously what with this whole anti-Russia mind-set? Russian expansion? Expansion to where? Russia is the largest country in the world? What could it possibly gain from expanding more? What, more places to be invaded from? How the hell do you stop a country of Russia's magnitude from being invaded? Run a fence around it? And last time I checked was it not the West that placed the blame on the Russo-Georgia war squarely on Georgia?
You want to talk about expansionism, when will America ever stop trying to force democracy down everyones throats? democracy is as much a failure as they see Communism to be. How many more countries is America going to invade on false pretenses? Look at Iraq and Afghanistan! Need I say more? Or should I assimilate like America expects everyone to do, and accept the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians as collateral damage rather than political genocide for the purpose of monetary gain?
Wikileaks has shown the world what the US is really like, how long will you keep turning a blind eye?
The Americans wouldn't give a rats ass if Europe bears the brunt of a nuclear war,it won't hurt them and they'll look at it as opening up new markets.
(Leonidas, 7 December 2010 19:32)
-- As a Greek you shouldn't complain. It is obvious the Greeks and Greece is the weak link; Russia's proxy within NATO. There's no need to defend Greece from Russia. Your and your orthodox brothers will most probably be left alone. It seems like there's no plan to defend you.
"You must also be one of the few people who believe the US is in Europe to protect it firstly from N korea,then it was Iran and now it's Russia. "
I never ever believed that the US is in Europe to protect it from N. Korea or Iran. It is still there to protect it from Russia of Putin. It is something very clear for most people. If Russia's boss wouldn't be Putin but somebody else, peacful and democrat than the
whole question of US presence in Europe would be completely different.
"My question to you is why is America in Europe? Aren't European countries capable of defending themselves and making their own the military decisions? "
No, without the US they are not capable of defending themselves. Nothing changed in this respect in the last 50-60 years. Russia would be able to conquer them one after the other just like Germany did in the early forties. Even the small nuclear arsenal of France and UK wouldn't be a deterant versus Russia's huge arsenal. Western European countries had the financial strenghts to develop strong defence forces but being welfare states they spent too little on defence. They always thought "the US is spending much more...let them defend us".
"Or all decisions need to be funneled through the American political system and OK'd before a European country is allowed to have its own mind."
That's right. If the US by far is carrying most of the financial burden of common defence than it is most natural that the US get consulted and has a key decision role. This would be the same in any private family. Let say the parents are well-to-do and their grown-up children need help to pay their mortgages. Before the parents help out they have all the right to know how their children manage their money, why they have problems and if it is really justified to help them.
"US is also using NATO as its private army as it is now in Afghanistan a place where NATO has no right to be".
Who said that NATO has no right to be there? It is forward defence. They should and must go anywhere, where there is a potential source of future treat!!
Horror of horrors, NATO - a military alliance founded to ensure the mutual protection of its members - has finally decided to do so. The shame here is that it took so long. Russia may have overplayed its hand with the West 2009 military games played on Poland's borders, or maybe it was just its insistence on treating Nato as its primary adversary in its military plans. Whatever the stimulus, they've done the right thing.
(Amer, 7 December 2010 19:01
Amer you continue to astonish me that you are so obtuse about the fact that the past decade has clearly shown the limits of not just American power, but Nato's power as well.The US and Nato utterly failed to impose their will on Iraq and Afghanistan and in a few years the detritus of their presence will be gone and those countries will have returned to their natural trajectory of development, shaped by their geography, history and culture; three factors overwhelmingly more potent than America's gleaming killer toys.
Amer at least have the courage of your convictions, and provide a link to the Project for the Next American Century......forgive my smile; The next century is China's and the BRICS.
Horror of horrors, NATO - a military alliance founded to ensure the mutual protection of its members - has finally decided to do so. The shame here is that it took so long. Russia may have overplayed its hand with the West 2009 military games played on Poland's borders, or maybe it was just its insistence on treating Nato as its primary adversary in its military plans. Whatever the stimulus, they've done the right thing.
It is very helpful that NATO and the US are vigilent and willing to defend the Baltics. Without NATO membership the Baltics would be in grave danger. Otherwise Putin, who greatly regrets the demise of the Soviet-Union would have found already a lot of excuses to "re-incorporate" those 3 small states. If not 'incorporated" yet than they would be under constant pressure like Georgia. If there would still be a common border with Hungary that country would be gravely exposed too without NATO membership. Russia still can't swallow the fact that after 300 years of constant expension she has to remain within her current borders. She will need maybe 40-50 more years to get accustumed to the fact that her type of imperialism is over.
(Joe, 7 December 2010 18:25)
You must also be one of the few people who believe the US is in Europe to protect it firstly from N korea,then it was Iran and now it's Russia.
My question to you is why is America in Europe? Aren't European countries capable of defending themselves and making their own the military decisions? Or all decisions need to be funneled through the American political system and OK'd before a European country is allowed to have its own mind.US is also using NATO as its private army as it is now in Afghanistan a place where NATO has no right to be.
The Americans wouldn't give a rats ass if Europe bears the brunt of a nuclear war,it won't hurt them and they'll look at it as opening up new markets.
"Hillary's signed cables
with drawn up classified military plans to defend eastern Europe against Russian"
Leonidas
What is wrong with that?
Leonidas you always attempt to sell Russia like one of the most peaceful countries on earth. Very few people....except people like you....would buy that or better still try to sell that idea to others.
It is very helpful that NATO and the US are vigilent and willing to defend the Baltics. Without NATO membership the Baltics would be in grave danger. Otherwise Putin, who greatly regrets the demise of the Soviet-Union would have found already a lot of excuses to "re-incorporate" those 3 small states. If not 'incorporated" yet than they would be under constant pressure like Georgia. If there would still be a common border with Hungary that country would be gravely exposed too without NATO membership. Russia still can't swallow the fact that after 300 years of constant expension she has to remain within her current borders. She will need maybe 40-50 more years to get accustumed to the fact that her type of imperialism is over.
Now, did we need Wikileaks for this?!?!?
I mean, if Switzerland has operative military defence plans against an invasion from Italy, why should Poles and Balts believe that things are settled forever and Russia will never invade them again? - the Poles had 3 bad experiences with Russia and their big Western neighbour in 150 yrs; same applies to the Baltic States, which experienced that an additional security mecanism is needed - of course they're not so keen on having their big neighbours approaching tightly over their heads - of course they'd seek to counter-balance - anyone would do the same!)
By the way, don't forget the Finns - they do openly admit their strategy: The next time, if it happens, we'll not be left alone!
No rocket science, that's how it goes - you have to think the unthinkable in order to prevent it.
Last, any hint on Russian secret cables? (not that we need them indeed to figure out how things really are).
On one hand we have Obama's declared policy of resseting relations with Russia
and on the other Hillary's signed cables
with drawn up classified military plans to defend eastern Europe against Russian according to wikileaks.
The Americans just can't help creating situations from nothing. They scream and shout and warn of a threat where none exists until subsequent moves are made which bring the threat about thus giving them the excuse to ramp up the tension and the clarion call of 'freedom' and 'democracy' and all that crap that goes by the wayside.
Do they seriously think that Russia does not know this? They know! The only people in the dark here are those who voted for their leaders in the so called western democracies.
On one hand we have Obama's declared policy of resseting relations with Russia
and on the other Hillary's signed cables
with drawn up classified military plans to defend eastern Europe against Russian according to wikileaks.
The Americans just can't help creating situations from nothing. They scream and shout and warn of a threat where none exists until subsequent moves are made which bring the threat about thus giving them the excuse to ramp up the tension and the clarion call of 'freedom' and 'democracy' and all that crap that goes by the wayside.
Do they seriously think that Russia does not know this? They know! The only people in the dark here are those who voted for their leaders in the so called western democracies.
Leonidas is right...so they claim their efforts have been to reset relations with Russia to improve them - yet you have yet another Clinton creating secret plans to further extend NATO military presence in a sensitive area...let me put it like this
You see a bear, but it doesn't see you, you feel threatened by its presence, yet the bear is not the least moved by yours. So rather than leaving it alone and saving yourself from a mauling, you decide to pick up a stick and go and piss it off real bad in some twisted belief that it will thus leave you be.
Thats what the US always does, rather than let the situation remain stable they go and aggrivate the living hell out of everyone.
And seriously what with this whole anti-Russia mind-set? Russian expansion? Expansion to where? Russia is the largest country in the world? What could it possibly gain from expanding more? What, more places to be invaded from? How the hell do you stop a country of Russia's magnitude from being invaded? Run a fence around it? And last time I checked was it not the West that placed the blame on the Russo-Georgia war squarely on Georgia?
You want to talk about expansionism, when will America ever stop trying to force democracy down everyones throats? democracy is as much a failure as they see Communism to be. How many more countries is America going to invade on false pretenses? Look at Iraq and Afghanistan! Need I say more? Or should I assimilate like America expects everyone to do, and accept the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians as collateral damage rather than political genocide for the purpose of monetary gain?
Wikileaks has shown the world what the US is really like, how long will you keep turning a blind eye?
It is very helpful that NATO and the US are vigilent and willing to defend the Baltics. Without NATO membership the Baltics would be in grave danger. Otherwise Putin, who greatly regrets the demise of the Soviet-Union would have found already a lot of excuses to "re-incorporate" those 3 small states. If not 'incorporated" yet than they would be under constant pressure like Georgia. If there would still be a common border with Hungary that country would be gravely exposed too without NATO membership. Russia still can't swallow the fact that after 300 years of constant expension she has to remain within her current borders. She will need maybe 40-50 more years to get accustumed to the fact that her type of imperialism is over.
(Joe, 7 December 2010 18:25)
You must also be one of the few people who believe the US is in Europe to protect it firstly from N korea,then it was Iran and now it's Russia.
My question to you is why is America in Europe? Aren't European countries capable of defending themselves and making their own the military decisions? Or all decisions need to be funneled through the American political system and OK'd before a European country is allowed to have its own mind.US is also using NATO as its private army as it is now in Afghanistan a place where NATO has no right to be.
The Americans wouldn't give a rats ass if Europe bears the brunt of a nuclear war,it won't hurt them and they'll look at it as opening up new markets.
Horror of horrors, NATO - a military alliance founded to ensure the mutual protection of its members - has finally decided to do so. The shame here is that it took so long. Russia may have overplayed its hand with the West 2009 military games played on Poland's borders, or maybe it was just its insistence on treating Nato as its primary adversary in its military plans. Whatever the stimulus, they've done the right thing.
(Amer, 7 December 2010 19:01
Amer you continue to astonish me that you are so obtuse about the fact that the past decade has clearly shown the limits of not just American power, but Nato's power as well.The US and Nato utterly failed to impose their will on Iraq and Afghanistan and in a few years the detritus of their presence will be gone and those countries will have returned to their natural trajectory of development, shaped by their geography, history and culture; three factors overwhelmingly more potent than America's gleaming killer toys.
Amer at least have the courage of your convictions, and provide a link to the Project for the Next American Century......forgive my smile; The next century is China's and the BRICS.
"Hillary's signed cables
with drawn up classified military plans to defend eastern Europe against Russian"
Leonidas
What is wrong with that?
Leonidas you always attempt to sell Russia like one of the most peaceful countries on earth. Very few people....except people like you....would buy that or better still try to sell that idea to others.
It is very helpful that NATO and the US are vigilent and willing to defend the Baltics. Without NATO membership the Baltics would be in grave danger. Otherwise Putin, who greatly regrets the demise of the Soviet-Union would have found already a lot of excuses to "re-incorporate" those 3 small states. If not 'incorporated" yet than they would be under constant pressure like Georgia. If there would still be a common border with Hungary that country would be gravely exposed too without NATO membership. Russia still can't swallow the fact that after 300 years of constant expension she has to remain within her current borders. She will need maybe 40-50 more years to get accustumed to the fact that her type of imperialism is over.
Now, did we need Wikileaks for this?!?!?
I mean, if Switzerland has operative military defence plans against an invasion from Italy, why should Poles and Balts believe that things are settled forever and Russia will never invade them again? - the Poles had 3 bad experiences with Russia and their big Western neighbour in 150 yrs; same applies to the Baltic States, which experienced that an additional security mecanism is needed - of course they're not so keen on having their big neighbours approaching tightly over their heads - of course they'd seek to counter-balance - anyone would do the same!)
By the way, don't forget the Finns - they do openly admit their strategy: The next time, if it happens, we'll not be left alone!
No rocket science, that's how it goes - you have to think the unthinkable in order to prevent it.
Last, any hint on Russian secret cables? (not that we need them indeed to figure out how things really are).
"You must also be one of the few people who believe the US is in Europe to protect it firstly from N korea,then it was Iran and now it's Russia. "
I never ever believed that the US is in Europe to protect it from N. Korea or Iran. It is still there to protect it from Russia of Putin. It is something very clear for most people. If Russia's boss wouldn't be Putin but somebody else, peacful and democrat than the
whole question of US presence in Europe would be completely different.
"My question to you is why is America in Europe? Aren't European countries capable of defending themselves and making their own the military decisions? "
No, without the US they are not capable of defending themselves. Nothing changed in this respect in the last 50-60 years. Russia would be able to conquer them one after the other just like Germany did in the early forties. Even the small nuclear arsenal of France and UK wouldn't be a deterant versus Russia's huge arsenal. Western European countries had the financial strenghts to develop strong defence forces but being welfare states they spent too little on defence. They always thought "the US is spending much more...let them defend us".
"Or all decisions need to be funneled through the American political system and OK'd before a European country is allowed to have its own mind."
That's right. If the US by far is carrying most of the financial burden of common defence than it is most natural that the US get consulted and has a key decision role. This would be the same in any private family. Let say the parents are well-to-do and their grown-up children need help to pay their mortgages. Before the parents help out they have all the right to know how their children manage their money, why they have problems and if it is really justified to help them.
"US is also using NATO as its private army as it is now in Afghanistan a place where NATO has no right to be".
Who said that NATO has no right to be there? It is forward defence. They should and must go anywhere, where there is a potential source of future treat!!
Horror of horrors, NATO - a military alliance founded to ensure the mutual protection of its members - has finally decided to do so. The shame here is that it took so long. Russia may have overplayed its hand with the West 2009 military games played on Poland's borders, or maybe it was just its insistence on treating Nato as its primary adversary in its military plans. Whatever the stimulus, they've done the right thing.
The Americans wouldn't give a rats ass if Europe bears the brunt of a nuclear war,it won't hurt them and they'll look at it as opening up new markets.
(Leonidas, 7 December 2010 19:32)
-- As a Greek you shouldn't complain. It is obvious the Greeks and Greece is the weak link; Russia's proxy within NATO. There's no need to defend Greece from Russia. Your and your orthodox brothers will most probably be left alone. It seems like there's no plan to defend you.
This whole "Russia is the bad guy" theme is getting old..Henry Kissenger was so 70's.
You don't seem to realize that the only reason for expansion is to keep NATO alive. Not to keep Russia at bay.
I think you're missing the fact that by the next generation, Russia will be a bigger European partner. Once it learns how to play friendly, you can watch Germany cosey up to her..
It's really a shame how Russia was treated during its' recovery process.
For any naysayers of State Department policy regarding Russia, these latest cables clearly show that US's necessity for taunting Russia is the only way for NATO's survival..
Have a NATO type "cordon sanitaire" around it.
(Joe, 8 December 2010 02:46)
How do you do that when NATO is not capable of winning against a group of tribes in Afghanistan?
You know all of this reminds me of reading about Hitler’s last days in WW2 when he was moving panzer divisions and troops that had surrendered weeks earlier to the allies and his staff were afraid to tell him it was all lost.
Wiki Leaks has shown that the EU and US are living in gaga land. Are you near the border? I’m horrified that the US Central Command in Florida has not called you for advice.
One would think that being a member of NATO should be deterrence enough for a country like Russia to start anything. That was pretty much the reason why the Baltic countries were so keen on joining. That some sort of "secret agreement" exists seems to me to be the more dubious thing. That Russia would somehow seek to use its military to dominate the region when it can control it by supplying its oil and natural gas seems to me to be a lapse in judgement on behalf of my beloved Secretary of State.
Now if this were focused on Ukraine or the Caucasus, we might have more of a reason to raise an eyebrow in surprise than stratch our heads in confusion.
It is still there to protect it from Russia of Putin. It is something very clear for most people. If Russia's boss wouldn't be Putin but somebody else, peacful and democrat than the
whole question of US presence in Europe would be completely different.
(Joe, 7 December 2010 20:58)
Sadly, American administration cleared the way for Putin - being co-players in Yeltsin's self-enrichment games. Who was guilty? Neo-conmen or neo-libsi? All of them - Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton.
But of course, neo-con is not conservative and neo-libsi is not liberal. For thousands of years both used to be called "criminal" or "thief", beginning with late 70-s they changed the names.
----
Who said that NATO has no right to be there? It is forward defence. They should and must go anywhere, where there is a potential source of future treat!!
(Joe, 7 December 2010 20:58)
And who decides where is a potential source of future treat? Not you, not me. The decision is made inside of the administration. And as such, there is absolutely no guarantee of it being correct. Do you trust any administration blindly? Think the values America was created from.
It seems like the West has forgotten its lectures of 1814 and 1945 when the Russian armies conquered the continent in no time...
Rule number one in warfare:
If you engage Russia in a war,you WILL LOOSE!
I hope the Americans try something,mainly they are of German,French,English ancestry so they know how it feels to get their butts kicked by "Ivan"...
Serbia of course will always be on the side of our pravoslavic Russian brothers,no matter the cost,blood is not water!
We saved them in 1941 when Hitler had to start his "Operation Barbarossa" on June 22 instead of May 15 because of the Belgrade putch which prooved to be fatal for this monster...
Especially Joe knows how Russian boots taste,remember 1956...
Now, that's appalling!!! Hitler provoked by those Anglosaxon proxies of the Poles to go ahead?!?!?!
Are you suggesting the Poles were guilty for the 2nd WW, for not turning to Hitler to appease him, instead of allying with those wicked Anglosaxons (and French)?
Goebbels couldn't have put it better, I tell you...
(dekki)
-------------
But it is the truth!
Poland in its unrealistic pre-1939 borders was strongly supported by the UK,US and France and was basically a creation of the Versailles treaty.
That led the Polish leadership (Marshall Pilsudski to expell Germans on a large scale and to wage an war of agression against Russia in 1921-1922!
They did this with support from the Western powers and when chickens came home to roost in 1939 they were left alone and lost nearly 6 million citizens because of the greed and stupidity of their leadership...
As far as Hungary 1956 is concerned,it was a mocking of the poster "Joe" who is an Hungarian born American and enthusiastically roots for American wars of agression all over the world !
It was to show his hypocrisy :
Cry about "your" victims but cher when others suffer the same fate...
By the way, don't forget the Finns - they do openly admit their strategy: The next time, if it happens, we'll not be left alone!
(dekk, 7 December 2010 18:53)
That is what you Poles thought in 1939 thinking the British will save you...
The rest is history...
I think it would be much wiser for the Poles to try to have the best relations with Germany and Russia,both countries are stronger and more powerful than Poland so it has to know its realistic place in Europe.
Being an Anglosaxon proxy has caused enormous suffering to the Polish people because it provoked Hitler to go ahead...
Being an Anglosaxon proxy has caused enormous suffering to the Polish people because it provoked Hitler to go ahead...
(CG, 8 December 2010 17:43)
Now, that's appalling!!! Hitler provoked by those Anglosaxon proxies of the Poles to go ahead?!?!?!
Are you suggesting the Poles were guilty for the 2nd WW, for not turning to Hitler to appease him, instead of allying with those wicked Anglosaxons (and French)?
Goebbels couldn't have put it better, I tell you...
I doubt you could have so easily posted such a comment in Germany today. And I have to strongly refrain here from expressing specific considerations on the mental state of people who post such sentences...
reading that Serbia saved the Soviets in 1941 (when the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement was still in force!) made my day :D
As for blood is not water - not very sure this applies to international relations. Not very sure that those sitting in Kremlin think the same. They've never thought it. Some hedgehog-lover using a multiple hedgehog-based nickname on this site could easily confirm it.
Strange enough you cheer what happened in Hungary 1956 (by the way you might have added also Prague 1968) - Russian opinion today feels slightly embarrased on those episodes (not 'ashamed' - that notion is still to come, at least in public).
Last, I'm not a Pole, neither a Finn or a Baltic - just deeply sympathize with those people who, apart from their ethnicity or religion, have managed to defend themselves from big, mighty imperial neighbours and preserve their very existence paying a high price - without developping ridiculous, small-scaled imperial attitudes as a result.
Horror of horrors, NATO - a military alliance founded to ensure the mutual protection of its members - has finally decided to do so. The shame here is that it took so long. Russia may have overplayed its hand with the West 2009 military games played on Poland's borders, or maybe it was just its insistence on treating Nato as its primary adversary in its military plans. Whatever the stimulus, they've done the right thing.
(Amer, 7 December 2010 19:01
Amer you continue to astonish me that you are so obtuse about the fact that the past decade has clearly shown the limits of not just American power, but Nato's power as well.The US and Nato utterly failed to impose their will on Iraq and Afghanistan and in a few years the detritus of their presence will be gone and those countries will have returned to their natural trajectory of development, shaped by their geography, history and culture; three factors overwhelmingly more potent than America's gleaming killer toys.
Amer at least have the courage of your convictions, and provide a link to the Project for the Next American Century......forgive my smile; The next century is China's and the BRICS.
The Americans wouldn't give a rats ass if Europe bears the brunt of a nuclear war,it won't hurt them and they'll look at it as opening up new markets.
(Leonidas, 7 December 2010 19:32)
-- As a Greek you shouldn't complain. It is obvious the Greeks and Greece is the weak link; Russia's proxy within NATO. There's no need to defend Greece from Russia. Your and your orthodox brothers will most probably be left alone. It seems like there's no plan to defend you.
It is very helpful that NATO and the US are vigilent and willing to defend the Baltics. Without NATO membership the Baltics would be in grave danger. Otherwise Putin, who greatly regrets the demise of the Soviet-Union would have found already a lot of excuses to "re-incorporate" those 3 small states. If not 'incorporated" yet than they would be under constant pressure like Georgia. If there would still be a common border with Hungary that country would be gravely exposed too without NATO membership. Russia still can't swallow the fact that after 300 years of constant expension she has to remain within her current borders. She will need maybe 40-50 more years to get accustumed to the fact that her type of imperialism is over.
(Joe, 7 December 2010 18:25)
You must also be one of the few people who believe the US is in Europe to protect it firstly from N korea,then it was Iran and now it's Russia.
My question to you is why is America in Europe? Aren't European countries capable of defending themselves and making their own the military decisions? Or all decisions need to be funneled through the American political system and OK'd before a European country is allowed to have its own mind.US is also using NATO as its private army as it is now in Afghanistan a place where NATO has no right to be.
The Americans wouldn't give a rats ass if Europe bears the brunt of a nuclear war,it won't hurt them and they'll look at it as opening up new markets.
"You must also be one of the few people who believe the US is in Europe to protect it firstly from N korea,then it was Iran and now it's Russia. "
I never ever believed that the US is in Europe to protect it from N. Korea or Iran. It is still there to protect it from Russia of Putin. It is something very clear for most people. If Russia's boss wouldn't be Putin but somebody else, peacful and democrat than the
whole question of US presence in Europe would be completely different.
"My question to you is why is America in Europe? Aren't European countries capable of defending themselves and making their own the military decisions? "
No, without the US they are not capable of defending themselves. Nothing changed in this respect in the last 50-60 years. Russia would be able to conquer them one after the other just like Germany did in the early forties. Even the small nuclear arsenal of France and UK wouldn't be a deterant versus Russia's huge arsenal. Western European countries had the financial strenghts to develop strong defence forces but being welfare states they spent too little on defence. They always thought "the US is spending much more...let them defend us".
"Or all decisions need to be funneled through the American political system and OK'd before a European country is allowed to have its own mind."
That's right. If the US by far is carrying most of the financial burden of common defence than it is most natural that the US get consulted and has a key decision role. This would be the same in any private family. Let say the parents are well-to-do and their grown-up children need help to pay their mortgages. Before the parents help out they have all the right to know how their children manage their money, why they have problems and if it is really justified to help them.
"US is also using NATO as its private army as it is now in Afghanistan a place where NATO has no right to be".
Who said that NATO has no right to be there? It is forward defence. They should and must go anywhere, where there is a potential source of future treat!!
On one hand we have Obama's declared policy of resseting relations with Russia
and on the other Hillary's signed cables
with drawn up classified military plans to defend eastern Europe against Russian according to wikileaks.
The Americans just can't help creating situations from nothing. They scream and shout and warn of a threat where none exists until subsequent moves are made which bring the threat about thus giving them the excuse to ramp up the tension and the clarion call of 'freedom' and 'democracy' and all that crap that goes by the wayside.
Do they seriously think that Russia does not know this? They know! The only people in the dark here are those who voted for their leaders in the so called western democracies.
"Hillary's signed cables
with drawn up classified military plans to defend eastern Europe against Russian"
Leonidas
What is wrong with that?
Leonidas you always attempt to sell Russia like one of the most peaceful countries on earth. Very few people....except people like you....would buy that or better still try to sell that idea to others.
It is very helpful that NATO and the US are vigilent and willing to defend the Baltics. Without NATO membership the Baltics would be in grave danger. Otherwise Putin, who greatly regrets the demise of the Soviet-Union would have found already a lot of excuses to "re-incorporate" those 3 small states. If not 'incorporated" yet than they would be under constant pressure like Georgia. If there would still be a common border with Hungary that country would be gravely exposed too without NATO membership. Russia still can't swallow the fact that after 300 years of constant expension she has to remain within her current borders. She will need maybe 40-50 more years to get accustumed to the fact that her type of imperialism is over.
Horror of horrors, NATO - a military alliance founded to ensure the mutual protection of its members - has finally decided to do so. The shame here is that it took so long. Russia may have overplayed its hand with the West 2009 military games played on Poland's borders, or maybe it was just its insistence on treating Nato as its primary adversary in its military plans. Whatever the stimulus, they've done the right thing.
Leonidas is right...so they claim their efforts have been to reset relations with Russia to improve them - yet you have yet another Clinton creating secret plans to further extend NATO military presence in a sensitive area...let me put it like this
You see a bear, but it doesn't see you, you feel threatened by its presence, yet the bear is not the least moved by yours. So rather than leaving it alone and saving yourself from a mauling, you decide to pick up a stick and go and piss it off real bad in some twisted belief that it will thus leave you be.
Thats what the US always does, rather than let the situation remain stable they go and aggrivate the living hell out of everyone.
And seriously what with this whole anti-Russia mind-set? Russian expansion? Expansion to where? Russia is the largest country in the world? What could it possibly gain from expanding more? What, more places to be invaded from? How the hell do you stop a country of Russia's magnitude from being invaded? Run a fence around it? And last time I checked was it not the West that placed the blame on the Russo-Georgia war squarely on Georgia?
You want to talk about expansionism, when will America ever stop trying to force democracy down everyones throats? democracy is as much a failure as they see Communism to be. How many more countries is America going to invade on false pretenses? Look at Iraq and Afghanistan! Need I say more? Or should I assimilate like America expects everyone to do, and accept the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians as collateral damage rather than political genocide for the purpose of monetary gain?
Wikileaks has shown the world what the US is really like, how long will you keep turning a blind eye?
Now, did we need Wikileaks for this?!?!?
I mean, if Switzerland has operative military defence plans against an invasion from Italy, why should Poles and Balts believe that things are settled forever and Russia will never invade them again? - the Poles had 3 bad experiences with Russia and their big Western neighbour in 150 yrs; same applies to the Baltic States, which experienced that an additional security mecanism is needed - of course they're not so keen on having their big neighbours approaching tightly over their heads - of course they'd seek to counter-balance - anyone would do the same!)
By the way, don't forget the Finns - they do openly admit their strategy: The next time, if it happens, we'll not be left alone!
No rocket science, that's how it goes - you have to think the unthinkable in order to prevent it.
Last, any hint on Russian secret cables? (not that we need them indeed to figure out how things really are).
This whole "Russia is the bad guy" theme is getting old..Henry Kissenger was so 70's.
You don't seem to realize that the only reason for expansion is to keep NATO alive. Not to keep Russia at bay.
I think you're missing the fact that by the next generation, Russia will be a bigger European partner. Once it learns how to play friendly, you can watch Germany cosey up to her..
It's really a shame how Russia was treated during its' recovery process.
For any naysayers of State Department policy regarding Russia, these latest cables clearly show that US's necessity for taunting Russia is the only way for NATO's survival..
One would think that being a member of NATO should be deterrence enough for a country like Russia to start anything. That was pretty much the reason why the Baltic countries were so keen on joining. That some sort of "secret agreement" exists seems to me to be the more dubious thing. That Russia would somehow seek to use its military to dominate the region when it can control it by supplying its oil and natural gas seems to me to be a lapse in judgement on behalf of my beloved Secretary of State.
Now if this were focused on Ukraine or the Caucasus, we might have more of a reason to raise an eyebrow in surprise than stratch our heads in confusion.
reading that Serbia saved the Soviets in 1941 (when the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement was still in force!) made my day :D
As for blood is not water - not very sure this applies to international relations. Not very sure that those sitting in Kremlin think the same. They've never thought it. Some hedgehog-lover using a multiple hedgehog-based nickname on this site could easily confirm it.
Strange enough you cheer what happened in Hungary 1956 (by the way you might have added also Prague 1968) - Russian opinion today feels slightly embarrased on those episodes (not 'ashamed' - that notion is still to come, at least in public).
Last, I'm not a Pole, neither a Finn or a Baltic - just deeply sympathize with those people who, apart from their ethnicity or religion, have managed to defend themselves from big, mighty imperial neighbours and preserve their very existence paying a high price - without developping ridiculous, small-scaled imperial attitudes as a result.
Have a NATO type "cordon sanitaire" around it.
(Joe, 8 December 2010 02:46)
How do you do that when NATO is not capable of winning against a group of tribes in Afghanistan?
You know all of this reminds me of reading about Hitler’s last days in WW2 when he was moving panzer divisions and troops that had surrendered weeks earlier to the allies and his staff were afraid to tell him it was all lost.
Wiki Leaks has shown that the EU and US are living in gaga land. Are you near the border? I’m horrified that the US Central Command in Florida has not called you for advice.
It seems like the West has forgotten its lectures of 1814 and 1945 when the Russian armies conquered the continent in no time...
Rule number one in warfare:
If you engage Russia in a war,you WILL LOOSE!
I hope the Americans try something,mainly they are of German,French,English ancestry so they know how it feels to get their butts kicked by "Ivan"...
Serbia of course will always be on the side of our pravoslavic Russian brothers,no matter the cost,blood is not water!
We saved them in 1941 when Hitler had to start his "Operation Barbarossa" on June 22 instead of May 15 because of the Belgrade putch which prooved to be fatal for this monster...
Especially Joe knows how Russian boots taste,remember 1956...
By the way, don't forget the Finns - they do openly admit their strategy: The next time, if it happens, we'll not be left alone!
(dekk, 7 December 2010 18:53)
That is what you Poles thought in 1939 thinking the British will save you...
The rest is history...
I think it would be much wiser for the Poles to try to have the best relations with Germany and Russia,both countries are stronger and more powerful than Poland so it has to know its realistic place in Europe.
Being an Anglosaxon proxy has caused enormous suffering to the Polish people because it provoked Hitler to go ahead...
Now, that's appalling!!! Hitler provoked by those Anglosaxon proxies of the Poles to go ahead?!?!?!
Are you suggesting the Poles were guilty for the 2nd WW, for not turning to Hitler to appease him, instead of allying with those wicked Anglosaxons (and French)?
Goebbels couldn't have put it better, I tell you...
(dekki)
-------------
But it is the truth!
Poland in its unrealistic pre-1939 borders was strongly supported by the UK,US and France and was basically a creation of the Versailles treaty.
That led the Polish leadership (Marshall Pilsudski to expell Germans on a large scale and to wage an war of agression against Russia in 1921-1922!
They did this with support from the Western powers and when chickens came home to roost in 1939 they were left alone and lost nearly 6 million citizens because of the greed and stupidity of their leadership...
As far as Hungary 1956 is concerned,it was a mocking of the poster "Joe" who is an Hungarian born American and enthusiastically roots for American wars of agression all over the world !
It was to show his hypocrisy :
Cry about "your" victims but cher when others suffer the same fate...
It is still there to protect it from Russia of Putin. It is something very clear for most people. If Russia's boss wouldn't be Putin but somebody else, peacful and democrat than the
whole question of US presence in Europe would be completely different.
(Joe, 7 December 2010 20:58)
Sadly, American administration cleared the way for Putin - being co-players in Yeltsin's self-enrichment games. Who was guilty? Neo-conmen or neo-libsi? All of them - Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton.
But of course, neo-con is not conservative and neo-libsi is not liberal. For thousands of years both used to be called "criminal" or "thief", beginning with late 70-s they changed the names.
----
Who said that NATO has no right to be there? It is forward defence. They should and must go anywhere, where there is a potential source of future treat!!
(Joe, 7 December 2010 20:58)
And who decides where is a potential source of future treat? Not you, not me. The decision is made inside of the administration. And as such, there is absolutely no guarantee of it being correct. Do you trust any administration blindly? Think the values America was created from.
Being an Anglosaxon proxy has caused enormous suffering to the Polish people because it provoked Hitler to go ahead...
(CG, 8 December 2010 17:43)
Now, that's appalling!!! Hitler provoked by those Anglosaxon proxies of the Poles to go ahead?!?!?!
Are you suggesting the Poles were guilty for the 2nd WW, for not turning to Hitler to appease him, instead of allying with those wicked Anglosaxons (and French)?
Goebbels couldn't have put it better, I tell you...
I doubt you could have so easily posted such a comment in Germany today. And I have to strongly refrain here from expressing specific considerations on the mental state of people who post such sentences...
IMAGE SOURCE
21 Komentari
Sortiraj po: