Russia fears NATO enlargement

[Bernie Sanders]

NATO invitation to Montenegro prompts Russia warning


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34981973

[patches70]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

[mrswdk]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

[Bernie Sanders]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

What promise is that? We made a promise with Russia, as to what?

Social Security benefits are still be paid out, not sure what you mean?

[waauw]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership
Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

PS: if you're going to talk about 'europe' in its totality, the EU's economy isn't "nearly as large as the US" it's larger than the US

[Bernie Sanders]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership
Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

PS: if you're going to talk about 'europe' in its totality, the EU's economy isn't "nearly as large as the US" it's larger than the US

I have no problem with European nations in NATO to increase their military might. America needs a break from being the world policeman. The problem is that many countries at or near the Russian border are in fear.

[patches70]

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership

I matters not to me who it's headed by, just so long as the US doesn't have to get embroiled in her spats.

Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

If building more nukes makes you feel safer, go for it.

PS: if you're going to talk about 'europe' in its totality, the EU's economy isn't "nearly as large as the US" it's larger than the US

I only knew for sure that the EU has a bigger population (500+ million to the US' 350+million) but I wasn't exactly sure on how big the economy is compared to the US except that it is at least comparable. Doesn't matter really, just that the EU doesn't need the US' help in defending herself anymore.

Either way, fools who go cheering NATO are all relics of an old world that has long since passed or enjoys having an unhealthy influence over Europe wherein Europe is always going to end up on the short end of the stick when the SHTF. For instance, if God forbid the US and Russia come to blows in the very near future over Syria and that whole mess, the war is going to be fought on Europe's doorstep and in Europe. That means that European cities will be the first to be reduced to smoke and ash. And all because the US has nefarious designs on a pissant country like Syria and a Tyrant like Erdogan prompts a war between powerful nations that the EU will suffer greatly for.

It is insanity.

[Bernie Sanders]

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership

I matters not to me who it's headed by, just so long as the US doesn't have to get embroiled in her spats.

Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

If building more nukes makes you feel safer, go for it.

PS: if you're going to talk about 'europe' in its totality, the EU's economy isn't "nearly as large as the US" it's larger than the US

I only knew for sure that the EU has a bigger population (500+ million to the US' 350+million) but I wasn't exactly sure on how big the economy is compared to the US except that it is at least comparable. Doesn't matter really, just that the EU doesn't need the US' help in defending herself anymore.

Either way, fools who go cheering NATO are all relics of an old world that has long since passed or enjoys having an unhealthy influence over Europe wherein Europe is always going to end up on the short end of the stick when the SHTF. For instance, if God forbid the US and Russia come to blows in the very near future over Syria and that whole mess, the war is going to be fought on Europe's doorstep and in Europe. That means that European cities will be the first to be reduced to smoke and ash. And all because the US has nefarious designs on a pissant country like Syria and a Tyrant like Erdogan prompts a war between powerful nations that the EU will suffer greatly for.

It is insanity.

Thinking any spat with Russia is going to lead to MAD, is pushing things. Russians, Chinese, Americans and Europeans love their families and knowing the results of a thermo-nuclear war would kind of ruin your picnic.

[patches70]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership
Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

PS: if you're going to talk about 'europe' in its totality, the EU's economy isn't "nearly as large as the US" it's larger than the US

I have no problem with European nations in NATO to increase their military might. America needs a break from being the world policeman. The problem is that many countries at or near the Russian border are in fear.

Haha! Hey, Waauw, are you living in fear? Bernie Sanders you are such a fear monger. Tell me, if the countries near Russia are living in fear, exactly why is that the US' concern? Hell, there are countries in Africa living in fear of each other even genociding each other and the US shrugs her shoulders.

Usually, if two nations are going to engage in mutual defense treaties, both parties should be able to bring something to the table. Exactly what can Montegro bring to the table? Oh, from their point of view, they'd love to have an alliance with the US and profitable military aid packages, but what can Montegro offer to the US that's in our interests? Not a damn thing. If the day ever comes where the US needs to rely on Montegro for protection then it's already at a point where no NATO organization is going to matter anymore.

If Montegro wants to trade goods and services, sure, great absolutely perfect. That's what nations should do, trade with each other and be amicable with each other. A mutual defense treaty? Aww hell no. There isn't a scenario that can be come up with where it matters even one iota to US national security interests who is in control of Montegro. And you cheer on the US to shackle ourselves to a treaty that if ever enacted would lead to European and American cities turned to nuclear ash over Montegro? Hell, I bet you can't even find Montegro on a map, Bernie Sanders.

[patches70]

Thinking any spat with Russia is going to lead to MAD, is pushing things. Russians, Chinese, Americans and Europeans love their families and knowing the results of a thermo-nuclear war would kind of ruin your picnic.

It doesn't have to be a nuclear war you fucking idiot. A "spat" between Russia and the US will be fought in EUROPE. It will be European cities that get bombed, it will be European civilians killed, it will be European infrastructure that is destroyed. Even if the US wins and beats Russia down, Europe will be left in ruins. And all for Turkey, or for Montegro (if fools like you have their way).

How many of you European CC members are willing to have your cities and your families killed over a fight between the US and Russia prompted by someone like Erdogan or Assad or Montegro? A show of hands, please, speak up if your willing to pay the ultimate price to protect US corporate interests in places like Syria or US economic hegemony protecting the petrodollar, or for Georgia (who wants to be in NATO as well, even though they deserved the beat down they got from Russia a few years ago).

It's quaint and all that someone like Bernie Sanders here is willing to volunteer you to be the bullet shield for the US, but for myself and rational Americans, we don't think you should be put into such a position in the first place.

[muy_thaiguy]

So a tiny little country no where near Russia will somehow ignite Russia?
Here's a map of Europe;


See Montenegro there? That tiny little area just a hope, skip, and a jump across the water from Italy? And not close to Russia? Yeah, that's what this latest posturing is about.

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership
Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

Okay, then how about those countries actually start doing so? Because the US has been asking the European countries to increase their military spending for sometime, but only the Eastern European nations have actually done so, especially in relation to Ukraine. France may actually start to after the attacks, though that remains to be seen.
http://www.sipri.org/media/pressrelease ... april-2015

But all talk, no action for years has not been very convincing.

[Bernie Sanders]

Thinking any spat with Russia is going to lead to MAD, is pushing things. Russians, Chinese, Americans and Europeans love their families and knowing the results of a thermo-nuclear war would kind of ruin your picnic.

It doesn't have to be a nuclear war you fucking idiot. A "spat" between Russia and the US will be fought in EUROPE. It will be European cities that get bombed, it will be European civilians killed, it will be European infrastructure that is destroyed. Even if the US wins and beats Russia down, Europe will be left in ruins. And all for Turkey, or for Montegro (if fools like you have their way).

How many of you European CC members are willing to have your cities and your families killed over a fight between the US and Russia prompted by someone like Erdogan or Assad or Montegro? A show of hands, please, speak up if your willing to pay the ultimate price to protect US corporate interests in places like Syria or US economic hegemony protecting the petrodollar, or for Georgia (who wants to be in NATO as well, even though they deserved the beat down they got from Russia a few years ago).

It's quaint and all that someone like Bernie Sanders here is willing to volunteer you to be the bullet shield for the US, but for myself and rational Americans, we don't think you should be put into such a position in the first place.

Fucking idiot, heh? Nice.

Russia can not fight a conventional war with NATO, they would lose the air, land and sea war.

Russia under Putin wants to recreate the Soviet Union, but Russian neighbors do not. Thus, Putin is uses it's oil and gas supplies as leverage.

Russia's economy is declining and will continue declining, due to oil prices and trade restrictions that the EU and the United States has implemented. Why, you say? Cause Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia has not been nice to it's neighbors or to it's own citizens.

NATO is needed to keep the lid on Putin's plans to restore the Soviet Union. Russia is gong to be a failed state in the future, cause of declining birth rates and the government being corrupt.

[waauw]

Why the f*ck would the US want to obligate itself to defend Montengro?

NATO is a dinosaur long past it's shelf life, time to put that dog down. Europe can defend itself, the EU has a larger population than the US and it's economy is nearly as large as the US'. Why the f*ck does the US have to defend Europe for now? If Europe can't defend herself by now then in the immortal words of Nuland- "f*ck the EU".

Hey, Bernie, you know the US made a promise to Russia, right? What's your thoughts about the US government not living up to it's promises?

If the US can break this promise, then why can't it just break any of it's other promises? Like to the social security recipients for instance?

It just goes to show that the US can't be trusted to keep it's promises.

Completely agree with you. Out with NATO and in with a grand EU-army headed by french leadership
Europe should once again become a military powerhouse to be reckoned with, first point on the agenda catch up to the US and Russia by expanding the nuclear arsenal.

Okay, then how about those countries actually start doing so? Because the US has been asking the European countries to increase their military spending for sometime, but only the Eastern European nations have actually done so, especially in relation to Ukraine. France may actually start to after the attacks, though that remains to be seen.
http://www.sipri.org/media/pressrelease ... april-2015

But all talk, no action for years has not been very convincing.

I hope that will be the case, unfortunately most of rich europe seems to be filled with pacifists. Personally I don't understand how people can fall under that spell, but hell most people are born optimists not realizing how quickly things can turn sour. The attitude is slowly changing, but europe needs some kind of great cathalyst event to shake things up(Paris doesn't seem to be enough).

I have no problem with European nations in NATO to increase their military might. America needs a break from being the world policeman. The problem is that many countries at or near the Russian border are in fear.

People feel what politicians and the media tell them to feel(the large population of sheep do anyway). Nothing new there. Fear can easily be reversed or transformed.

[GoranZ]

The problem is that many countries at or near the Russian border are in fear.

If you are living in fear it doesn't mean other are

Whats interesting, during the time of the Warsaw Pact Russia was using much of its resources on keeping and defending its allies, to the point of over-exhausting... the same thing that US is doing now.
Russians learned their lesson, its time for the US to do the same.

[tzor]

Russia can not fight a conventional war with NATO, they would lose the air, land and sea war.

It depends on how you define "war." Wars have been fought, conventionally, for thousands of years. There are many scenarios where Russia can fight and win. Sure it might take a hundred years, perhaps several hundred years. (If you want an example it took 700 years for Spain to reclaim land lost to Islamic invasions.)

Russia has already pushed its power and we cried and effectively did nothing. Russia can next strengthen ties to Iran and Syria. It can take over the Arctic. Cut off natural gas supplies to Europe. Do this little thing; do that little thing and soon they will have done a lot of little things that all add up. The resolve of the secular European Nations is weak at best.Between that and the Islamic State, Europe cannot fight a war of attrition from two fronts, especially if one of those fronts are from within.

[waauw]

Russia can not fight a conventional war with NATO, they would lose the air, land and sea war.

It depends on how you define "war." Wars have been fought, conventionally, for thousands of years. There are many scenarios where Russia can fight and win. Sure it might take a hundred years, perhaps several hundred years. (If you want an example it took 700 years for Spain to reclaim land lost to Islamic invasions.)

Russia has already pushed its power and we cried and effectively did nothing. Russia can next strengthen ties to Iran and Syria. It can take over the Arctic. Cut off natural gas supplies to Europe. Do this little thing; do that little thing and soon they will have done a lot of little things that all add up. The resolve of the secular European Nations is weak at best.Between that and the Islamic State, Europe cannot fight a war of attrition from two fronts, especially if one of those fronts are from within.

What the hell does IS have to do with this? IS is an enemy of Russia as much as it is an enemy of europe. Many IS members are Chechens, and both IS and Al Quiada are attempting to expand into islamic central asia, Russia's backyard.

In any case, europe might be lacking resources, but Russia is lacking the infrastructure to massively produce weapons. Despite the fact that europe has strongly demilitarized, we still have a far superior industry, which Russia needs to obtain crucial components and products. Where do you think Russia is importing its steel, medicine, plastics, machinery, etc. from? European industry!

Using oil and gas as an excuse for Russian superiority is ridiculous. When it comes to resources Russia needs europe just as much as europe needs Russia. At the moment the Russians simply doesn't have the expertise nor the know-how to produce many of those crucial products, nor do their asian partners.

In any case, europe and Russia should strive for tighter cooperation. I've said this before in other topics, both are ideal partners for each other if only they could set aside their historic differences.

[GoranZ]

In any case, europe and Russia should strive for tighter cooperation. I've said this before in other topics, both are ideal partners for each other if only they could set aside their historic differences.

This option will bring peace and prosperity on the European continent, and will make it strongest in the world again, and will make US presence in Europe useless. So that's US worst nightmare
Probably this idea will come true after 15-20 years from now, when US dominance in the world will decrease considerably.

P.S. Germans are pushing for EU-Russia cooperation much more then other, and they see the potentials. Nord Stream Gas Pipeline None of EU’s Business – German Media

[Serbia]

Bernie, when Hillary is nominated, will you support her? Or are you going to run as an independent?

Bollocks in 2015.

[Bernie Sanders]

Bernie, when Hillary is nominated, will you support her? Or are you going to run as an independent?

Bollocks in 2015.

Let's get through a couple of primaries first.

December 19th is the next Democratic debate. You will see a more aggressive debate on the issues.

[Serbia]

Bernie, when Hillary is nominated, will you support her? Or are you going to run as an independent?

Bollocks in 2015.

Let's get through a couple of primaries first.

December 19th is the next Democratic debate. You will see a more aggressive debate on the issues.

I'm sorry, that was a poorly phrased question.

Should the Democratic Party nominate someone other than you, will you support the nominee? And are you willing to promise not to run as an independent? Or will you take the Trump way out and not commit to your own party?

Bollocks in 2015.

[saxitoxin]

Russia can not fight a conventional war with NATO, they would lose the air, land and sea war.

Sorry, patches is right.

You keep swooping into these threads, beating your chest and chanting "GO TEAM! GO TEAM!" but you never provide any sorta proof for your bombastic statements that Russia is a meek saucer kitty. When asked for it, you start belting out the Star Spangled Banner and flooding the thread with gifs.

Meanwhile, we have provided numerous sources documenting how half the German Air Force can't fly, how Canada's submarines can't go underwater and its ships need to be towed into battle, how the RAF only has enough spare munitions to sustain itself at full operations for two weeks, etc.

If this were USA vs. Russia, both armies charging at each other on an open field, the U.S. would have no problem winning. But it's not. The U.S. has a tiny tripwire force in Europe. Russia will slice through the "armies" of Europe like a hot knife through butter. The war will be completely over by the time American reinforcements arrive.

In any case, europe might be lacking resources, but Russia is lacking the infrastructure to massively produce weapons. Despite the fact that europe has strongly demilitarized, we still have a far superior industry, which Russia needs to obtain crucial components and products. Where do you think Russia is importing its steel, medicine, plastics, machinery, etc. from? European industry!

Wauuw makes a sensible statement.

However, IMO, this won't matter. A Russian war against Europe won't drag on for months or years during which the Stuttgart BMW plant will be retooled to produce tanks. It will be over in about two weeks, so Europe's superior industrial infrastructure won't ever be a factor.

Russia will probably have relatively limited war objectives that don't involve any occupation of territory or the movement of ground troops west of the Oder–Neisse line. It will probably be a lightening, short-distance strike to give Europe a serious bloody nose with the goal of changing political dynamics more than anything else and the empowerment of pacifist, anti-NATO parties like Die Linke or the Green Party or a fully Corbynized Labour. The Russian Army will do the fighting for the first 10 days, institutions like the SVR and RT will fight the next 10,000.

[Bernie Sanders]

Russia can not fight a conventional war with NATO, they would lose the air, land and sea war.

Sorry, patches is right.

You keep swooping into these threads, beating your chest and chanting "GO TEAM! GO TEAM!" but you never provide any sorta proof for your bombastic statements that Russia is a meek saucer kitty. When asked for it, you start belting out the Star Spangled Banner and flooding the thread with gifs.

Meanwhile, we have provided numerous sources documenting how half the German Air Force can't fly, how Canada's submarines can't go underwater and its ships need to be towed into battle, how the RAF only has enough spare munitions to sustain itself at full operations for two weeks, etc.

If this were USA vs. Russia, both armies charging at each other on an open field, the U.S. would have no problem winning. But it's not. The U.S. has a tiny tripwire force in Europe. Russia will slice through the "armies" of Europe like a hot knife through butter. The war will be completely over by the time American reinforcements arrive.

In any case, europe might be lacking resources, but Russia is lacking the infrastructure to massively produce weapons. Despite the fact that europe has strongly demilitarized, we still have a far superior industry, which Russia needs to obtain crucial components and products. Where do you think Russia is importing its steel, medicine, plastics, machinery, etc. from? European industry!

Wauuw makes a sensible statement.

However, IMO, this won't matter. A Russian war against Europe won't drag on for months or years during which the Stuttgart BMW plant will be retooled to produce tanks. It will be over in about two weeks, so Europe's superior industrial infrastructure won't ever be a factor.

Russia will probably have relatively limited war objectives that don't involve any occupation of territory or the movement of ground troops west of the Oder–Neisse line. It will probably be a lightening, short-distance strike to give Europe a serious bloody nose with the goal of changing political dynamics more than anything else and the empowerment of pacifist, anti-NATO parties like Die Linke or the Green Party or a fully Corbynized Labour. The Russian Army will do the fighting for the first 10 days, institutions like the SVR and RT will fight the next 10,000.

Russia will slice through Europe? With what? Broken vodka bottles? Russia's armies will be cut to pieces with NATO air superiority. The German's Leopard tanks are also considered the best in the world.

The Russians have a maintenance problem, just look at the Russian air force in Syria, where half the planes are grounded due to lack of parts and/or maintenance.
http://www.presstv.com/Detail/2015/10/26/434990/Syria-Russia-Jets-Failing
But facts are not going to deter the Russian apologists here.

[Serbia]

ITT, we learn Bernie Sanders is the socialist Donald Trump.

Bollocks in 2015.

[Bernie Sanders]

ITT, we learn Bernie Sanders is the socialist Donald Trump.

Bollocks in 2015.

Serbia, if you want to start a thread on Bernie Sanders go ahead. There's way too much derailing of threads.