The Backstory to the Russia-Ukraine Confrontation: The U.S. and NATO Encirclement of Russia

Very SILLY comments but reality bites those with a cavalier attitude towards this when your son or daughter are in a war such as the one that may be drummed up here or other areas of the world.

I would suggest we read the comments I POSTED of the foreign affairs expert

…”the United States has relentlessly pursued a strategy of encircling Russia, just as it has with other perceived enemies like China and Iran. [Background here, here and here.] It has brought 12 countries in central Europe, all of them formerly allied with Moscow, into the NATO alliance. US military power is now directly on Russia’s borders. “I think it is the beginning of a new cold war,” warned George Kennan, the renowned diplomat and Russia-watcher, as NATO began expanding eastward. “I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely, and it will affect their policies.”


AS I POSTED, its not about Russia is good or bad it’s about PREVENTING A WAR!

reply to post by JiggyPotamus

re "We could talk about the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, but even in those instances we are not dealing with expansionist policies or anything".

I rather disagree, that is exactly what the Operation Iraqi Liberation is, sweetheart deals for the Oilgarchs (hey I made up a word!). Exxon and Shell have interests off Crimea, and Chevron has them in the black Sea off western Ukraine. Ukraine? Oil and put them back into sefdom, this time to the IMF. Afghanistan? $1T in minerals plus pipelines. The Great Game redux.

Observations:
Immediate PTB goal: displace Russia as energy supplier to Europe and use the tensions to raise the price. The Western Oil and military companies will do well. Plus if not a hot war really, we can try out some cool toys.
Long-term PTB goal: defeat and domination of Russia
Cold War definition of a tactical nuclear weapon: One that lands in Germany

Willtell

Intelligent people understand that perspective is everything. This forum is about “WWIII" and I hope how to prevent it. I don’t think we are dealing with what country is the best or who is the richest or what alliance is the better. The point is that the so called wonderful western NATO alliance is seemingly always the one in modern times getting the world in wars all over the globe.

And If I remember correctly it was Russia that not only was probably the reason the German empire was defeated in WWII but they had millions of casualties to their citizens not the US.

We're dealing with the fragile situation where powerful groups ganging up on one particular group can cause WWIII.

Were dealing with what President Eisenhower warned against…that is the military industrial complex that is a self perpetuating war machine that doesn’t foster peace in the world but its opposite…war.

Today, the world is more stable and peaceful than it has ever been. There are less conflicts going on today than there were 20, 30, 40, etc years ago. Now, NATO acts as a very heavy counterweight to interventionism. I think that NATO itself actually hedges against would be attackers. NATO and the US are what is keeping peace in places like South Korea...its what kept the peace during the cold war with the USSR. You could argue that it PREVENTED another world war during the cold war.

Today it appears that the world is not very peaceful. And in truth, you'll never have a true peaceful utopia. However, the way we report on conflict zones around the world makes it appear that there are a lot of conflicts going on. We can talk about US adventurism into places like Iraq, and Afghanistan...we can even throw in smaller ones like Libya, Kosovo, and bombings in Pakistan, Yemen and Omen. These are conflict zones...but really, the US and NATO have only really been involved in two different countries.

I think we can all agree that while Saddam used to be our SOB, he needed to go. He was an evil brutal dictator and clearly did not make the world a better place. Did we need to go in and take him out? That answer will always undoubtedly be subjective. Was it for oil? Was it for humanitarian reasons? Was it for national interests? Did Iraq have nukes? What if Iraq did have nukes and hid them? What if they were collaborating with Syria to build them? What if Syria hid Iraqs WMDs? We can only really speculate at this point. There was a lot of bad info and disinfo going on. But there are people in the intelligence community to this day that believe Iraq did have nukes, and that they hid them somewhere else (in some other country) the second it looked like a US invasion was imminent.

Now, Afghanistan? After 911, we had to go in there. It was a staging ground for Al Qaeda. Where we messed up IMO is we tried to build an entire nation that was still stuck 2000 years in the past. We wasted a lot of money and good men and women so some camel and goat herders could experience the 21st century. Clearly this was a huge mistake. We should have went in, took the bad guys out, and got out. But, I do believe going in to Afghanistan was the initial right move for the US.

reply to post by rock427




What country did Russia invade where 1 million of its citizens are now dead?

And the stability of that country may be lost for years to come.

Where is the stability for Iraqi children?

Willtell
reply to post by MrSpad

 

Of course if we were being surrounded by countries that were making military packs with Russia we wouldn’t be worried, right?

If Russia was going around making military alliances with Panama, Canada, Mexico, and central and South America we would just say good luck and not worry about our security interest, right?
Sure we would and the moon is made of green cheese.

This makes the exact opposite point that you wish to make. Canada, Mexico and the rest of Central and South America did not go running to Russia for military alliance because they are not worried about the US invading and/or taking their territory. Russia would love to have those treaties and would take them in a heartbeat. The exact opposite of what has happened in Europe. And now Russias own actions will drive even more nations into NATO. The US and NATO do not even have to try because Russia is doing all the work for them. Imagine if the US really decided to it wanted to see Russia in trouble. You would find a bunch US financed, Chinese made top of the line weapons being sent into Russia southerne states via the Arab League.

reply to post by Willtell


indeed....

Russia is bitching because the US set up a puppet government the way they wanted to. How inconsiderate of the US.

If only Russia was able to exert its influence on lesser nations without other people trying to do the same exact thing.

So the solution would be for the US to back off and for Russia to be the one to control lesser nations. I am sure the Ukraine would just love that.

That is the only alternative. Its either Russia or the US who pull the strings in the Ukraine. That is the state of the world today, and everyone is to blame.

Now that we are done with the blame game, how about everyone realizes that Russia is just a Russian USA.....and Europe is a European USA...ect...everyone is just like the US in its guilt and blame. Human.

They would do it like us in a heart beat. in fact history shows us that everyone has at one point in time and human nature shows us that they would do it again.

So no. We worked for the top dog spot and that means we defend OUR interests. Deal with it. When its Russia or China doing less than nice things to the world so as to maintain its power, we will deal with it, or write these knee-jerk mouthpieces.

Willtell
reply to post by rock427

 

What country did Russia invade where 1 million of its citizens are now dead?

Intellectual dishonesty is alive and well in this post... There was never 1 million deaths in Iraq as a result of the war. At most there was 135,000 actual recorded deaths from that war...a much smaller figure than your often refuted 1 million claim... You people need to come up with new talking points. This is getting ridiculous.

www.iraqbodycount.org...

And the stability of that country may be lost for years to come.
Where is the stability for Iraqi children?

Compared to where it has been, Iraq is relatively stable today. Its GDP is growing at an incredible rate, and the country is more prosperous now than it has been in decades! On top of that, it is a functioning democracy that has a significantly brighter future than it did 15 years ago. Please go.

reply to post by rock427


Your responses dont seem to make much sense, you say the world is more stable? Guess your basement may be, but if you keep up with current events, theres worldwide economical problems, 2 proxi-profit wars (afghan & iraq)going on, and if we are to trust most people here WW3 incoming. I suggest you take a look at some history books, and let go off the kool aid, the US has never been a peacekeeper, just so you are free from that fallacy.

reply to post by rock427


So, only 135,000 dead....to get one bad guy....acceptable losses huh?

I would not be the least bit surprised if the "fall of the USSR" was not some clever chess moved played out by the Russians to lure America into a false sense of security to allow them to hang themselves as they clearly have. Overextending throughout the world, losing every war they engage in, crippling their own economy/military. I find it laughable that people in this country believe we have the greatest military. They always cite the whole we spend more money militarily then the top other countries combined while conveniently forgetting that we do not actually know where that money goes, remember rumsfeld admitting 2.2 trillion just vanished the day before 9/11.

I think this is all about BRICS, I would love to see a poll asked to see how many americans know about this?! It is going to burn as the truth comes out and we have nothing left to do but realize that due to our incompetency, willingness to blindly follow, we have been out played. It is time for some hard lessons my fellow Americans!

WW3 will not start until Israel and it's newest state, the USA, have finished off what they started in the middle east. The havn't got the military capability to fight on that many fronts.

The middle east problem has to be sorted out before they start on Europe.

Only when Israel feels safe will it allow the USA to concentrate it's efforts on the continent of Europe.

It's like Napoleon at Waterloo.

It was better to keep the two armys of Britain and the Prussians apart and fight each one seperately, while they had the advantage, then let them join up.

They'll finish business in the middle east, then with Israels blessing, concentrate on Europe.

Not sure of anyone has realised but Europe boarders Russia

And so does the US

Can anyone point out where NATO bases are located in china the arctic circle and the Middle East?

If the people favour western values in Ukraine then so be it

andy1972
WW3 will not start until Israel and it's newest state, the USA, have finished off what they started in the middle east. The havn't got the military capability to fight on that many fronts.

Which fronts would they be?

Put it this way Russia hasn't got the capabilities if NATO hasn't considering its 20 times larger

And what have they started in the Middle East or are you confusing the us and Israel with the Shiite and Sunni rivalry and confusing it with Israel ?

Yusomad
reply to post by rock427

 

Your responses dont seem to make much sense, you say the world is more stable? Guess your basement may be, but if you keep up with current events, theres worldwide economical problems, 2 proxi-profit wars (afghan & iraq)going on, and if we are to trust most people here WW3 incoming. I suggest you take a look at some history books, and let go off the kool aid, the US has never been a peacekeeper, just so you are free from that fallacy.

The US has probably contributed a 1000 times more troops than Russia or China ever has on peacekeeping missions

Hell even Ukraine has more troops on peace keeping duties than Russia

Says it all ...

reply to post by SLAYER69


Size of Russia is impressive I'll grant you that, but just like Canada these guys are empty space. Population of 140 mil just doesn't fill Russia up.

The main thing are military bases, how many does US have VS how many Russia. That speaks to who has encircled whom.

tadaman
reply to post by Willtell

 

indeed....

Russia is bitching because the US set up a puppet government the way they wanted to. How inconsiderate of the US..

edit on 3 15 2014 by tadaman because: (no reason given)

While I agreed on other things we need to get this BS conspiracy that the US in anyway responsible for installing a puppet regime in Kiev

The majority of Ukraine supports closer ties to the EU, the current government was installed by the people and the exiled presidents government who run him out of town

You just can't buy or influence that amount of overwhelming support nor brainwash them, the people know they will be happier adopting western values and closer ties to the west and it's that simple

It's all just pathetic for the OP to come out with crap like this while Russia Denys invading a country for force it own rule over people

reply to post by rock427


How is it that if you are gay in Russia you are second class.

Use google and take a look at gay clubs and bars in Russia, they even offer gay TOUR across Russia. But if you are an NGO financed by US to promote homosexuality, you can't do it.

Too bad

Asktheanimals
I think Russia views China as a far greater threat than anything the West can muster.

I agree on most things you wrote, this above ^ is wrong though.

Their relationship is at point never before seen in history, and that is because of US, the fear of USA.

MrSpad
That those nations are rushed to meet NATOs standards so that they could joing is no suprise. That Macedonia, Montenegro, Georgia and Bosnia have all been making major push to get in is also no supprise.

Catch a plane to these countries you mentioned and you will see, they have puppet governments, none of their people actually want NATO or like U.S.A.

Except Georgia.

rock427

Willtell
reply to post by rock427

 

What country did Russia invade where 1 million of its citizens are now dead?

Intellectual dishonesty is alive and well in this post...

There was never 1 million deaths in Iraq as a result of the war. At most there was 135,000 actual recorded deaths from that war...a much smaller figure than your often refuted 1 million claim... You people need to come up with new talking points. This is getting ridiculous.

Well said

Tbh it's not getting ridiculous it's getting pathetic and desperate

The point you raised are important to squash the conspiracy BS coming out of Moscow and Beijing

But we should also point out that at least 80% of the death toll is directly credited to waring factions within Iraq such as the Sunnis and Shiite Muslims reaching for control in the aftermath

We have similar skirmishes all over the Middle East which can be directly linked to Syria with its minority Shiite government ruling a 90% Sunni country

Unfortunately Russia is aiding training and funding Assad minority government but the Saudis and Qatari pockets run deeper not to mention the determination of the Sunni rebels

Amazes me how people ignore facts and say the US is killing everybody all over the world it's like run away stupidity,if a dog farted killing a baby in Iran the CIA are behind it some how to these idiots it's just pathetic and desperation