Augustus
…
Why is it not that simple? If enough people vote for a particular party then you can leave EU
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Scholz: Russian energy ban would mean European recession
- Thread starter ajay0
- Start date
Why is it not that simple? If enough people vote for a particular party then you can leave EU
As I said, it is only about the euro.
Quitting the eurozone...not the EU.
ajay0
Well-Known Member
Should promises be falsified if the person it is given to is out of power or wealth or luck. That would be opportunism, and not honorable conduct .
U.S.S.R invaded Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Georgia, Azerbaijan but it dissolved as a political entity in 1990.
In fact , Stalin was Georgian while Brezhnev was Ukraininan, responsible for the invasion of
Czechoslovakia.
Chechnya is an internal crisis of Russia while Georgia and Ukraine were the only neighboring countries invaded by Russia due to security concerns after they expressed willingness to join Nato.
Also , the U.S has also invaded neighboring Mexico, while its invasion attempts in neighboring Canada, Cuba , and in Korea, Vietnam and recently afghanistan ended in defeat. Its invasion of Iraq after much financial and military costs, spawned isis which regressed Iraq to the medieval ages, and hence there is an ongoing war there.
American invasions and occupations of Haiti and Dominican republic also came at heavy political costs .
Russia invaded neighboring countries while the U.S. invaded and interfered in countries in south america, asia, africa for its corporate interests. No one is innocent.
Nukes in Ukraine and Georgia can ensure lower response times and better chance of pre-emptive strikes by U.S on Russia, especially Moscow.
Does Russia have nukes near Washington , Paris and London in the same close range !!
When the Soviets installed nukes and missiles in Cuba for strikes in the U.S., the U.S went to the extent of war to get rid off them from Cuba. The Soviets showed restraint and removed them.
When Russia seeks the same, U.S.-Nato refused to back off similarly. This has been referred to by many as sign of U.S.-Nato double standards and lack of restraint on their part.
But the U.S.-Nato wants Russia to be submissive to secure its energy and mineral resource interests for resource-starved Europe, and dominate it. Problem is that Russia has nukes and missiles .
Augustus
…
If you force a nation to honour every non-binding statement made by any elected official in perpetuity you end democracy.
Do you think Biden should have have to build a wall just because Trump said he would?
So no promise made to the USSR is binding, is it? It stopped existing
Again you are committing the fallacy of seeing everything as being about the USA and Russia.
The issue is the agency of Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, etc.
There are no nukes in any of the new NATO members, let alone non-NATO members.
Yes. It has nukes closer to London, Paris and Berlin than they do to Moscow. So what is your point?
It has nukes very close indeed to Warsaw, Talinn, Vilnius and other NATO capital cities.
Unlike NATO, it has also threatened to nuke them in recent years.
Typical conspiracy theory BS. Every war, same nonsense is spouted uncritically by those who refuse to learn from the last war when they said the same thing and were completely wrong there too.
Easiest way to get resources is just to buy them like they have been doing for decades and let them take which ever small countries they want.
The war in Ukraine has led to them reducing energy imports and aiming to cut them completely. It led to companies like BP and Shell taking massive losses to withdraw from Russian operations.
None of this makes sense in getting access to resources. If they wanted that make a deal. You get your Russian Imperial expansion, we get cheap oil and gas. Problem solved.
ajay0
Well-Known Member
This was a promise given to Russia and Gorbachev on the future of Russia -nato relations, to ensure peace.
Why did they have to make such promises , if they couldn't fulfil it. They should have stated this to Gorby on the spot then. The issue is that they lied and failed to deliver on the promise, no matter how much euphemistically you try to coat the failed promises.
This will harm their credibility in the rest of the world as well.
The promise was made to Gorbachev and Russia.
Thats what you would like to believe ! But beliefs are not facts.
Where are they ! Have the russians installed nukes in cuba again !
Why all the wars in the middle-east by the U.S. and allies if not to secure energy supplies !
Russia's vast resources are needed by the west, and breaking promises to extend nato all the way to Russian borders, is a way to ensure energy and resource supplies security. A submissive Russia can ensure more pressure on china too.
Yes, these are my theories, because I cant figure out why U.S.-Nato wants to risk total nuclear annihilation by extending to Russia's borders.
Yes, extended nato would also be a good market for the military-industrial complex's goods. But still it is very stupid. I believe there are some outside players playing some moves here.
Endless money forms the sinews of war, and poverty stricken Russia is not in any condition for imperial expansion. Its soldiers have not been paid their salaries for months, and its equipment is not in good condition too, as shown by the way the invasion is not going as per what one would have expected from the russians.
Many russians have immigrated to other countries due to poor conditions at home, and there has been a substantial brain drain.
Under Putin, there has been some economic recovery, and they have risen in prosperity to some extent. Putin seemed interested in his country's economic recovery from poverty, upgrading the ageing infrastructure ,and ensuring inner stability due to the Chechen crisis, and was not at all interested in any invasions whatsoever. Much of the troops were not paid salaries for many months due to the economic situation, and I recall reading an article years back of a russian soldier saying that a soldier in russia is seen as a loser due to his economic impoverishment.
Security issues related to the encroaching U.S.-Nato alliance is what compelled Putin to invade neighbors Georgia and Ukraine when they stated inclination to join NATO.
His finances dictate that he is not in a position to launch invasions of eastern europe, and only desperation because of U.S-Nato advancing to its very borders has prompted Putin for an invasion.
Augustus
…
Gorby wasn't President of Russia. He was president of the USSR and he was trying to prevent Russian independence.
He was forced out of office by those who wanted to break up the Soviet Union.
How was a promise given to Gorby about a country he was trying to prevent gaining independence?
You don't think the break up of the USSR is legitimate reason to reevaluate relations with the USSR and its successor states?
You just making things up to support your prejudices isn't a fact either. Where are they then?
You don't think that Russia would be screaming to high heaven and telling the world precisely where these nukes were secretly deployed if this were indeed the case? You can't just hide them in the back of a taxi.
Note: Poland just specifically asked for them, why would they do this if they already have them?
Jesus wept. You seem not to understand geography. They are in Europe
You do understand that London and Paris are in Europe don't you? Most NATO capitals are in Europe. Russia is in Europe too. They are on Russian soil, but closer to NATO capitals than NATO nukes are to Moscow.
Here is a map of Europe, the red marker is where Russia has nukes. Look at the distances to Berlin, Warsaw, London, Paris, etc.
Now, tell me where the secret NATO nukes are and why these are more of a threat to Moscow than the Russian ones are to NATO.
[Note: even if you put some hypothetical nukes in Ukraine, they still would pose no more of a threat to Moscow than current Russian nukes do the NATO capitals.]
By your logic, NATO should be trying to get its nukes closer to Moscow and is acting with tremendous restraint by not responding to the Russian nuclear threat
How did these wars lead to securing energy supplies?
They were buying the oil before the wars, and the wars made this harder and reduced supplies.
Jesus wept you are gullible.
They have been annexing or threatening to annex parts of neighbouring countries for decades, fighting in Syria and Russian government has literally been arguing against Ukraine's right to exist.
It just invaded Ukraine with 200,000 troops and you are saying it has no condition for imperial expansion?
Saint Vlad the peaceful
JIMMY12345
Active Member
Realize as a Chemist you might (just slightly) distrust Ms Merkel and her Professor husband (both Physicists).It was not only Japan . Chernobyl and the East European reactors were falling apart.She felt that with advances in Wind and solar these were destined to provide a credible and cheaper alternative,This debate on this of course still continues.
The danger is both Russia and the West will resort to printing money.The Germans are well versed in the danger of this.How much safe debt and borrowing can countries resort to before it all goes South.It will need strong leaders to lead people into leaner times.
After that certain dragons have quit, Russia reopens Nord stream. God bless Putin
Key Russia-Europe gas pipeline reopens but outlook unclear
Key Russia-Europe gas pipeline reopens but outlook unclear