The Stockport Iniesta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Aug 2008
- Messages
- 9,700
If only Russia and it's separatist faction, hadn't ignored ceasefire agreements and gone on the offensive in Ukraine in the past. Minsk protocol and Minsk 2.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
NATO
- Thread starter Rascal
- Start date
grunge
Well-Known Member
Or NATO can back off and engage in peace talks and the world can get trade back to some working degree.
Why would NATO be engaging in peace talks? NATO isn’t at war. NATO nations ) and loads more ) are supplying Ukraine and Ukrainians will be the ones to choose what to do.
The only way Putin will engage in peace talks is by it being proven he can’t win!
Bigga
Well-Known Member
Why would NATO be engaging in peace talks? NATO isn’t at war. NATO nations ) and loads more ) are supplying Ukraine and Ukrainians will be the ones to choose what to do.
The only way Putin will engage in peace talks is by it being proven he can’t win!
And yet a NATO 'ally' got involved to talk Ukraine out of peace talks, last year. I've already answered this.
You can't have it both ways if that's your view above.
Rascal
El Presidente
Thank you for your considered reply.There are some fundamental errors here in how you determine NATO as some potential sovereign force when it isn't. NATO is not a US military arm, it cannot go to war and take everyone else with it. Just for a start NATO has not intervened or entered into any conflict without a UN security resolution.
The fundamental question here is do you side with a country like Ukraine which is facing uncalled aggression or do you side with allowing Russia to unilaterally decide to invade another nation in Europe using force? NATO and world governments have decided to support Ukraine, it has nothing to do with the US.
When you talk of western imperialism you have to consider that empire building doesn't usually involve choice yet the most fundamental aspect of NATO membership is choice. Finland and Sweden are the most recent to unilaterally decide to join but that isn't to buy into US influence but rather because they quite justifiably fear Russian aggression.
Whether you're anti-war or CND is irrelevant, having those views will not prevent bad people from doing bad things as is happening in Ukraine. You cannot tell Putin to stop being naughty in the UN because he will laugh in your face and that has been Russian foreign policy since they themselves started the Ukraine war nearly 10 years ago.
This is why the possession of nuclear weapons is critical, unlike others we have the resources and technology to protect ourselves and others for the right reasons. So why wouldn't we do it? Why should we not work together to protect ourselves and our friends from harm? That's ultimately what NATO is.
I'm not sure of your views but any protest should be aimed at Russia right now and not NATO or the armed forces who right this second now are potentially risking their lives to protect you. If Russia goes any further then it will be them dying for us and our way of life (again).
Why has nobody though considered the corporate interests that drive arms sales and need NATO as a buyer of first resort. The more countries that join NATO the more sales opportunities arise and that is to the detriment of all the countries who depend on US weapons. It has all but destroyed the UKs capacity to build aircraft for instance. Every country now relies on US built aircraft, which means they make profits and we lose jobs and manufacturing knowledge.
It may not be Imperialism but it is colonisation by stealth. We have US bases on UK land because we can no longer defend ourselves and that I believe is because of NATO and its promises.
The thread itself was not aimed at the conflict in Ukraine, although I did mention it and now regret it as it has I included it in the OP, ot was meant to be more about NATO and the influence it has on countries like ours.
One of the questions I asked was
Is NATO basically an extension of capitalist power or does it make you sleep easier at night?
I worded that badly, it should have read
Is NATO basically an extension of capitalist power and are you happy with that because you can sleep easier at night? It is a question designed to ask how far people will accept capitalist ideals not a question that in anyway was about the war in the Ukraine.
grunge
Well-Known Member
And yet a NATO 'ally' got involved to talk Ukraine out of peace talks, last year. I've already answered this.
You can't have it both ways if that's your view above.
A NATO ally. So not NATO then?
Bigga
Well-Known Member
A NATO ally. So not NATO then?
Is the UK in NATO...?
Are they an 'ally' to Ukraine...?
I'll let you decide.
The Future’s Blue!
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Dec 2019
- Messages
- 10,536
- Team supported
- City
I’ve sussed it, it’s all about individual circumstance.
Never about the many, what about me.
Never about the many, what about me.
Well you know that is not going to happen.Both should have a ceasefire and talks.
That's how progress gets made.
This is just a start looking at history - Vietnam 1955-1975, Afghanistan 2001-2021, Iraq 2003-2011. Even Soviet Union-Afghanistan 1979-1989.
This will continue a long time till the costs become unbearable for majority of the populations.
Bigga
Well-Known Member
Well you know that is not going to happen.
This is just a start looking at history - Vietnam 1955-1975, Afghanistan 2001-2021, Iraq 2003-2011. Even Soviet Union-Afghanistan 1979-1989.
This will continue a long time till the costs become unbearable for majority of the populations.
And therein lies the problem, non?
People cheering on the slaughter of innocents on either side to the inevitable hand wringing about what can be done.
World leaders can demand talks to avoid further costs to the warring populations and world's population, but there are factions with invested interests to keep this going.
Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 16,709
Which one are you?Thank you for your considered reply.
Why has nobody though considered the corporate interests that drive arms sales and need NATO as a buyer of first resort. The more countries that join NATO the more sales opportunities arise and that is to the detriment of all the countries who depend on US weapons. It has all but destroyed the UKs capacity to build aircraft for instance. Every country now relies on US built aircraft, which means they make profits and we lose jobs and manufacturing knowledge.
It may not be Imperialism but it is colonisation by stealth. We have US bases on UK land because we can no longer defend ourselves and that I believe is because of NATO and its promises.
The thread itself was not aimed at the conflict in Ukraine, although I did mention it and now regret it as it has I included it in the OP, ot was meant to be more about NATO and the influence it has on countries like ours.
One of the questions I asked was
Is NATO basically an extension of capitalist power or does it make you sleep easier at night?
I worded that badly, it should have read
Is NATO basically an extension of capitalist power and are you happy with that because you can sleep easier at night? It is a question designed to ask how far people will accept capitalist ideals not a question that in anyway was about the war in the Ukraine.
Did the Soviet Union not produce vast amounts of weapons from small arms to Tanks? Not to mention exerting control over other members of the Warsaw Pact and their command economies of military industry.
NATO's first military intervention was in Bosnia in 1995 (49 years after the alliance was formed) to put a stop to genocide.