NATO - Russia relations: NATO Facts verse Russian Falsehoods

##Attention Please##

The thread is about relations between Russia and NATO. It is not about the location of the thread or about how to irritate one another.

Please stay on-topic or don't post at all.

Do not reply to this post.

Thank you kindly.

NATO facts vs Russian falsehoods?! Lol, thanks i needed the chuckle.

This OP is a perfect example of revisionism. Wording is everything when you seek to manipulate, that's why there's lawyers, to protect the guilty and screw the poor.

Just like the OP title. Why not Russian claims and NATO response? Perhaps a little more objectivity?

ITT: A lot of idiots who espouse history and yet they themselves seem to forget it.

This site has gone way down hill.

On Topic: There is a lot of speculation going on here, but we do not know any of the facts. Not a single one of us are "in the know", and even a lot of the popular sources used by members here cant be trusted same as the MSM. As the OP said these are Russian claims and NATO responses, and just because you hate this or that doesn't make them any less true.

originally posted by: SurrenderingAmerica
How's that Sweden "Russian Sub Hunt" working out?


. . . Have they found anything yet?


Just more manufactured Nato PR stunts. Like I've been saying, there's NO WAR!

According to a former Sweden Journalist of mine he says that the sub hunt was nothing then a stunt. Wasted tax payers about 2 million Euro. Don't forget they kept spreading the news in the entire month of October. They were nothing then replaying a scene from this film.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: spy66

The resolutions posted were in response to Russian accusations against NATO.

Again Ukraine has asked to join NATO. Why would NATO not speak to Ukraine? NATO spoke to them when Yanukovych was President and Ukraine was exploring joining NATO. Pro Russians didn't seem to have an issue with it at that time so whats the issue now?

NATO are not just speaking to Ukraine. NATO and its members are physically helping and politically supporting the Ukraine fraction/government who is in a conflict With the other Ukrainian side, The pro-Russian side.

The real conflict is between the Ukraine government and the pro-Russian side of the Ukrainian population; in Ukraine.

Prior to the conflict, Ukraine was not even a real Democracy. NATO members have since at least 2005 been aiding Ukraine to a political change towards a Democracy. Ukraine have since 2003? had a firm seat in NATO, but without being a NATO member. To my knowledge this has not been a big issue for Russia, because Russia also had a firm seat in NATO at the same time.

But then Things started to go wrong, and the Ukrainians started to argue amongst themselves and NATO and Russia happened to be suddenly in a dirct conflict With eachother. Somewhere along the line both NATO/EU, UN and Russia have broken their resolution agreements.

At this stage in the conflict neither NATO or the Russians are bing defencive in this conflict. That is not according to NATO resolutions. >This means that the NATO members are in a conflict With its own resolution. Russia is not a NATO members, Russia only had a political and diplomatic seat in NATO. Russia was kicked out and lost its seat, The Ukraine remained With still having a seat in NATO. That is a agressive move by NATO and it is not in line With the NATO resolution.

originally posted by: Rosinitiate
NATO facts vs Russian falsehoods?! Lol, thanks i needed the chuckle.

This OP is a perfect example of revisionism. Wording is everything when you seek to manipulate, that's why there's lawyers, to protect the guilty and screw the poor.

Just like the OP title. Why not Russian claims and NATO response? Perhaps a little more objectivity?

Its one of the reasons I asked for the other side.

a reply to: spy66

Ukraine is not a NATO member... It turned down full membership back in either 2008 or 2010 I forget which.. It was rejected by Yanukovych at Russia's insistence.

Russia has stated Ukraine is to be a non aligned nation. I guess my question would be where does Russia get the authority to direct Ukraine's foreign policy?

a reply to: Xcathdra

While this thread is about Russian claims vs. NATO facts, there is another trend that I and others have observed. NATO members not trusting other NATO members. That alone tells Putin that NATO could be nothing more than a paper tiger.

www.businessinsider.com...

Since the onset of Putin’s aggression against Ukraine, those fears have multiplied and there are now many in Warsaw who wonder if Obama would really honor Article 5 in a crisis.

Yesterday I spoke with a top Polish MoD official, a man of sober and strongly pro-American views whom I've known for years. Referring to this week’s needless White House crisis with Israel, another American ally who has doubts about the current administration, he noted, “I didn't need the Beltway media to tell me who the real chickens--- is.”

"They really have no idea what they are doing,” he opined about Obama and his national security staff, “and we know it. You have no idea how many promises we've been given, even by the President himself, but there’s never any follow-up, it’s all talk. He thinks he’s on Oprah.”

When I asked if he thought America would come to Poland’s aid in a crisis, he said laconically, “I’d flip a coin.”

In a similar vein, a senior Polish intelligence official, another veteran of long collaboration with Washington, DC, expressed his skepticism to me.

“Is it 1939 again? I don’t know,” he explained, “but I think Obama isn't even a Chamberlain,” citing the British prime minister who left Poland in the lurch at the beginning of World War Two.

I think Russia is capitalizing on this divide.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: spy66

Ukraine is not a NATO member... It turned down full membership back in either 2008 or 2010 I forget which.. I was rejected by Yanukovych at Russia's insistence.

Russia has stated Ukraine is to be a non aligned nation. I guess my question would be where does Russia get the authority to direct Ukraine's foreign policy?

Correct Ukraine is not a NATO member. Neither is Russia. But both Ukraine and Russia had political and diplomatic seats within NATO. Russia was kicked out, But Ukraine were still allowed to have a political and diplomatic seat With the NATO members.

Right here all the NATO members are being agressive towards Russia. Kicking out Russia from having a political and diplomatic seat within NATO while Ukraine still gets to have a seat is a Direct agression towards Russia. This is against NATOs own resolution.

You have read the resolution?

Russia has stated Ukraine is to be a non aligned nation. I guess my question would be where does Russia get the authority to direct Ukraine's foreign policy?

The real case is that the Ukrainaian Cabinet has asked the country’s parliament to consider dropping the country’s non-aligned status and seek membership of NATO.

This is not illigal, The Ukraine can apply for NATO membership. But the Ukraine should not be allowed to have a seat within NATO since it for one is not a NATO member, and can not become a NATO member do to its inernal conflict. And it is also a agreesive act towards Russia by letting Ukraine have a seat within NATO without being a NATO member. And at the same time kicking out Russia's political and diplomatic seat within NATO.

Shock Breaking News:

Two sides in an argument make stuff up about each other.....

Nothing new or surprising here really.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I just have a question for you on top of all this.

To whom do the NATO resolutions apply to. - To NATO members or Russia?

There's games on both sides but at the end of the day Russia has been protecting itself while the US/NATO has been expanding.

Pick a side if you want but the demonization of Russia is pure propaganda. They haven't really done much of anything besides try to maintain the integrity of their security and economy. America has been acting in imperialist fashion for a long time now.

www.globalresearch.ca...

This article explains American imperialism fairly well. In essence the economic form is far better than the military form these days. We were engaging in economic imperialism in Ukraine as well as CIA style manipulation of elections and public opinion.

Poroshenko himself is a blatant American puppet.

"As it turns out, the evidence that Poroshenko is in the pocket of the U.S. State Department has been available all this time, you just had to know where to find it. In a classified diplomatic cable from 2006 released by Wikileaks.org, U.S. officials refer to Poroshenko as "Our Ukraine (OU) insider Petro Poroshenko"."

Russia took Crimea since they knew Poroshenko was going to open it up to America. He met with Clinton during her stint as Secretary of State to discuss the matter.


scgnews.com...

I suggest you leave behind the front page of the Google search which is filled with Western propaganda. If you look past the propaganda and ignore your American exception a list brainwashing it's pretty clear we're going for world domination. Russia and it's allies Iran and Syria are all that stand in the way. That's why we're so interested in toppling Assad. If Syria falls it's WW3 for sure. Russia will have no choice.

In my opinion the while situation is depressing. Russia is no angel by any means. I would be tortured or killed if I was Russian rather than American. So don't accuse me of either hating America or worshipping Russia. At the end of the day though Russia and its few allies are the only force defending our freedom. Americans forgot that they have to work and fight to keep their freedom. We got too complacent and comfortable. Now we are at the point where Russia is defending the world from enslavement by the bankers. The founding fathers are sobbing.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You are correct, it is not illegal to spend billions of dollars on propaganda in other countries. Money buys evey election, and propaganda takes money.

This is what Russia is accusing the US of, and the CIA have been caught RED HANDED so many times it's amazing that you or anyone has anything positive to say about the governments that control NATO and the USA.

The CIA might single handedly be guilty of creating and arming every active cell of terrorism in the entire world. And you are here to continue to push pro NWO propaganda.

Russia is merely claiming the CIA and US government are undermining every nation in the world who stands opposed to thier ideology of a NWO.

Isn't it Bush who said everyone who didn't believe in his version of the NWO was a terrorist? Wasn't the same BUSH in some role within the CIA? What does the CIA do?

The CIA devides nations making them easier to control. A devided nation cannot stand against trillionaires with unlimited funding for propaganda. This includes a devided and distracted US populace that remains virtually clueless.

Propaganda works, most Americans believe we are the good guys.

On a religious note the the prophecy of Daniel agrees with Mr. Putin's version of history. And so do I.

a reply to: sacgamer25

Propaganda works, most Americans believe we are the good guys.

The US aint the only People who think they are the good guys. You have Norway, Denmark, Germany, Canada, The UK, France, Holland, Spain, Italy, Finland, Poland and Latvia basically every NATO member. The media from these nations are also the once who work the hardest to put Russia as thee main agressor.

Have you ever wondered why NATO members never asked Russia if they would like to become a NATO member, after the Cold war?

originally posted by: spy66
Have you ever wondered why NATO members never asked Russia if they would like to become a NATO member, after the Cold war?

NATO did invite Russia to join. Russia demanded special exemptions no other NATO nation got so NATO refused.

In 1991 Russia and NATO signed an agreement - Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council
in 1994 Russia joined NATO's Partner for Peace program.
In 2002 Russia and NATO formed Russia-NATO Council.
Dmitry Rogozin holds the office of the Russian envoy to NATO.
in 2014 NATO suspended all activities dealing with Russia.

a reply to: Xcathdra

What exemptions? Considering NATO is owned by the US and was created to fight Russia I can't blame them. Can you explain the exemptions so I can make an informed comment on whether Russia was reasonable or not?