Ron Paul: Crimea Secedes. So What?...

[thanatos144]

If Russia was full of Jews these isolationists would be screaming for its downfall like they do Israel.

 

[Steinlight]

Real Americans stand against the aggression towards Russia by monkey boy obama and his neo-lib/neo-cons handlers. We see them backing neo-nazis who massacre innocents in Odessa and overthrow a democratic government and we want nothing to do with it, we voice opposition because these crimes aren't in our name. We don't want a World War. Hopefully it is avoided and the US stops inciting west ukrainian neo nazis to violence against Russia and those who oppose the Kiev regime.

As a European Christian nation, Russia should be a natural ally of ours, not a boogeyman for our elites to demonize.

 

[tinydancer]

Just read that despite Putin asking the pro Russian rebels to postpone their referendum, they are going ahead with it.

I think with the bloodbath in Odessa they feel they have no choice but to separate from the goons and thugs in Kiev.

Can't say I blame them. The Right Sector killed so many innocents. They have every right to fear Kiev.

 

[Steinlight]

Just read that despite Putin asking the pro Russian rebels to postpone their referendum, they are going ahead with it.

I think with the bloodbath in Odessa they feel they have no choice but to separate from the goons and thugs in Kiev.

Can't say I blame them. The Right Sector killed so many innocents. They have every right to fear Kiev.

As a real American, I support the right of secession. Just as America was born of secession, we as Americans must be consistent and support the People's Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk right of secession and self determination.

 

[U2Edge]

You really have to keep in mind that when the USSR dissolved itself they thought there was an understanding about future NON expansions of NATO. They should have listened to Bush 41 about Ukraine, but that's a different story.
In 1999 three former Warsaw Pact countries came into NATO. They were Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Two major factors kept Russia from getting overly upset about this development. The three nations had instigated the development and put pressure on NATO to let them in and none of them bordered on Russia. A buffer zone of nations continued to separate the new NATO nations and Russia.
Things changed drastically on 29 March 2004. On that day seven new NATO nations were created and the buffer zone vanished. Romania and Bulgaria gave NATO more concentrated access to the Black Sea and Southern Ukraine, including Crimea. Estonia and Latvia put them on the northern border and Lithuania with Poland, completely surrounded the small detached Kaliningrad, a small detached region on the Baltic Sea.
Eventually two more nations were added in 2009, Albania and Croatia. A wall of NATO forces is now on the Russian border zones with only Belarus and Ukraine continuing as buffers.
Can't really make a fair or informed evaluation of the Ukraine situation without this data in the equation.

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

Russia does not have an "only reason" of concern about having NATO forces on their borders and not having a buffer zone of friendly, neutral or non armed potential enemies. There are political, economic and security issues that concern Russia and it's Federation states. They do not share your view that having a common border with NATO is a good thing.

Russia can't dictate to the countries on its borders what alliances or economic unions they are allowed to join. Every country on Russia's border is an independent sovereign state with the right to join any defensive alliance or economic union that they want to. Understand?

 

[U2Edge]

The socialists and losertarians support Putin through making up lies about the US military/CIA being the instigator of trouble in Asia, Europe, the middle east, etc.

The last time I checked, the US handed back a country to its people after removing the dictator from power...it's called Iraq. I don't recall Russia saying they are going to give back Crimea once the dust settles and they install a new puppet to control in Kyiv.

Or Georgia losing pieces of its country to a Russian invasion. Ukraine is on the verge of losing half or all of its country to Russia if Putin has the balls to do it. Belarus, Lativa, Estonia, etc are all getting nervous about the Russians.....I don't recall anyone in Europe worried about the US invading them.....please tell, psychofucks.

Do you happen to remember how many civilians the US maimed, murdered, and displaced in Iraq? How many dollars the US investor class made from a war they were too chicken-shit to fight in? Maybe you remember how many countries the US has invaded, occupied, and destabilized since 2001 on the opposite side of the planet from your shit-filled sty? Pathic losers like you never fail to project US war crimes on others.

If the US objective were to kill, maim and murder innocent civilians in Iraq, the United States could have killed everyone in the country. The United States and several other nations removed Saddam because he was a threat to the region. There were certainly innocent civilians killed, just like they were innocent civilians killed in Normandy in World War II. It does not change the fact that removing Saddam as well as removing Hitler was a necessity. The US invaded Afghanistan because it harbored and defended Al Quada and Bin Ladin and failed to turn them over. Libya was bombed because of gross human rights violations against its citizens by the government.

 

[U2Edge]

Real Americans stand against the aggression towards Russia by monkey boy obama and his neo-lib/neo-cons handlers. We see them backing neo-nazis who massacre innocents in Odessa and overthrow a democratic government and we want nothing to do with it, we voice opposition because these crimes aren't in our name. We don't want a World War. Hopefully it is avoided and the US stops inciting west ukrainian neo nazis to violence against Russia and those who oppose the Kiev regime.

As a European Christian nation, Russia should be a natural ally of ours, not a boogeyman for our elites to demonize.

The only country that is acting like Nazi Germany is Russia. They invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, just like Hitler invaded the german sections of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and annexed them into Germany.

 

[Steinlight]

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

Russia does not have an "only reason" of concern about having NATO forces on their borders and not having a buffer zone of friendly, neutral or non armed potential enemies. There are political, economic and security issues that concern Russia and it's Federation states. They do not share your view that having a common border with NATO is a good thing.

Russia can't dictate to the countries on its borders what alliances or economic unions they are allowed to join. Every country on Russia's border is an independent sovereign state with the right to join any defensive alliance or economic union that they want to. Understand?

But when the US Government dictates to other nations what alliances or economic unions they join by engineering a coup of an elected government that is acceptable? So if tomorrow Russia installed a puppet regime in Canada we should do nothing about it?

Also, take into account that much of Ukraine has historically been part of Russia for hundreds of years and that the Rus was born out of Kiev and economic and political ties of the countries. And consider the fact that the US is one by one integrating the old Warsaw Pact Nations on Russia's borders, in direct violation of an agreement that promised otherwise.
NATO?s Eastward Expansion: Did the West Break Its Promise to Moscow? | Global Research

It isn't a cut and dry issue, and at the end of the day, it is not America's fight here. We have lost too much blood and treasure in the last decade in wars that weren't in the national interest. We can't afford a conflict with Russia, and in reality they should be an ally. Patrick Buchanan has promoted this idea in the past and I think he is right on. Strategically speaking, we should be natural allies, no enemies.

 

[Steinlight]

Real Americans stand against the aggression towards Russia by monkey boy obama and his neo-lib/neo-cons handlers. We see them backing neo-nazis who massacre innocents in Odessa and overthrow a democratic government and we want nothing to do with it, we voice opposition because these crimes aren't in our name. We don't want a World War. Hopefully it is avoided and the US stops inciting west ukrainian neo nazis to violence against Russia and those who oppose the Kiev regime.

As a European Christian nation, Russia should be a natural ally of ours, not a boogeyman for our elites to demonize.

The only country that is acting like Nazi Germany is Russia. They invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, just like Hitler invaded the german sections of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and annexed them into Germany.

Russia did not invade Crimea, they had an agreement with the elected government of Ukraine to maintain a military presence in Crimea and the coup threatened their established naval presence and access to the Black Sea and Mediterranean. Along with this the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to secede from the unelected coup government.

Unfortunately, nazi, anti anti-russian and essentially anti-slavic narrative of historical revision, which is born out of Lviv province(which was de-russified by Austria Hungary and Poland) has affected central regions like the capital Kiev. Just like they were used by Nazis, and maintain that identity, the US, NATO, and EU are using them as shock troops against the anti-coup ukrainians and Russians in the East. Now on par with nazi crimes against russian and ukrainian people in world war two, these anti russian nazis are slaughtering innocents in Odessa(including pregnant women).
How Neo-Nazi Thugs Supported by Kiev Regime Killed Odessa Inhabitants. Photographic Evidence | Global Research

While the Kiev Government isn't neo-nazi at the top, and actually has many jews and those with a history in finance(to secure the IMF loan that will cripple the country), they use neo-nazi shock troops in the east to terrorize opposition.

 

[gipper]

The socialists and losertarians support Putin through making up lies about the US military/CIA being the instigator of trouble in Asia, Europe, the middle east, etc.

The last time I checked, the US handed back a country to its people after removing the dictator from power...it's called Iraq. I don't recall Russia saying they are going to give back Crimea once the dust settles and they install a new puppet to control in Kyiv.

Or Georgia losing pieces of its country to a Russian invasion. Ukraine is on the verge of losing half or all of its country to Russia if Putin has the balls to do it. Belarus, Lativa, Estonia, etc are all getting nervous about the Russians.....I don't recall anyone in Europe worried about the US invading them.....please tell, psychofucks.

Do you happen to remember how many civilians the US maimed, murdered, and displaced in Iraq? How many dollars the US investor class made from a war they were too chicken-shit to fight in? Maybe you remember how many countries the US has invaded, occupied, and destabilized since 2001 on the opposite side of the planet from your shit-filled sty? Pathic losers like you never fail to project US war crimes on others.

If the US objective were to kill, maim and murder innocent civilians in Iraq, the United States could have killed everyone in the country. The United States and several other nations removed Saddam because he was a threat to the region. There were certainly innocent civilians killed, just like they were innocent civilians killed in Normandy in World War II. It does not change the fact that removing Saddam as well as removing Hitler was a necessity. The US invaded Afghanistan because it harbored and defended Al Quada and Bin Ladin and failed to turn them over. Libya was bombed because of gross human rights violations against its citizens by the government.

So, is it your opinion that all these interventions were proper?

I fail to see the logic in it.

The USA removed Saddam, when it was well known he had nothing to do with 9/11. Hence the USA invaded a sovereign nation, occupied it, killed and wounded many of its citizens merely to remove a heinous dictator...and all at an enormous cost in money and blood...and what has resulted?

Regarding WWII, we never should have been at war with Germany. It was FDR's doing because he was completely controlled by Stalin. And what resulted from WWII in Europe? The USSR enslaved half of it for decades...so lets see....we destroyed Germany because of their aggression, to benefit the even more heinous and aggressive USSR. DUMB!

Afghan was another failed intervention that has lasted for over a decade with little result, but lots of spent blood and money.

At least in Libya we did not get in a prolonged war, but our intervention has only made matters worst there.

So in conclusion, the interventions by the USA have failed miserably and at tremendous cost to the American people (to say nothing of the terrible costs inflected on the people of nations effected) ...but there were big benefits for the power elite...and that is why these interventions will continue.

WAKE THE F UP!!!

 

[georgephillip]

You really have to keep in mind that when the USSR dissolved itself they thought there was an understanding about future NON expansions of NATO. They should have listened to Bush 41 about Ukraine, but that's a different story.
In 1999 three former Warsaw Pact countries came into NATO. They were Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Two major factors kept Russia from getting overly upset about this development. The three nations had instigated the development and put pressure on NATO to let them in and none of them bordered on Russia. A buffer zone of nations continued to separate the new NATO nations and Russia.
Things changed drastically on 29 March 2004. On that day seven new NATO nations were created and the buffer zone vanished. Romania and Bulgaria gave NATO more concentrated access to the Black Sea and Southern Ukraine, including Crimea. Estonia and Latvia put them on the northern border and Lithuania with Poland, completely surrounded the small detached Kaliningrad, a small detached region on the Baltic Sea.
Eventually two more nations were added in 2009, Albania and Croatia. A wall of NATO forces is now on the Russian border zones with only Belarus and Ukraine continuing as buffers.
Can't really make a fair or informed evaluation of the Ukraine situation without this data in the equation.

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

 

[Camp]

You really have to keep in mind that when the USSR dissolved itself they thought there was an understanding about future NON expansions of NATO. They should have listened to Bush 41 about Ukraine, but that's a different story.
In 1999 three former Warsaw Pact countries came into NATO. They were Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Two major factors kept Russia from getting overly upset about this development. The three nations had instigated the development and put pressure on NATO to let them in and none of them bordered on Russia. A buffer zone of nations continued to separate the new NATO nations and Russia.
Things changed drastically on 29 March 2004. On that day seven new NATO nations were created and the buffer zone vanished. Romania and Bulgaria gave NATO more concentrated access to the Black Sea and Southern Ukraine, including Crimea. Estonia and Latvia put them on the northern border and Lithuania with Poland, completely surrounded the small detached Kaliningrad, a small detached region on the Baltic Sea.
Eventually two more nations were added in 2009, Albania and Croatia. A wall of NATO forces is now on the Russian border zones with only Belarus and Ukraine continuing as buffers.
Can't really make a fair or informed evaluation of the Ukraine situation without this data in the equation.

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

The USA invaded and raped Russia in the 20th Century?

 

[georgephillip]

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

The USA invaded and raped Russia in the 20th Century?

"The American Expeditionary Force Siberia was commanded by Major General William S. Graves and eventually totaled 7,950 officers and enlisted men. The AEF Siberia included the U.S. Army's 27th and 31st Infantry Regiments, plus large numbers of volunteers from the 13th, 62nd Infantry Regiments and 12th Infantry Regiments of the 8th Division, Graves' former division command.[2]"

American Expeditionary Force Siberia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[paulitician]

Impeach Obama and Putin. Problems solved. They have so much in common. They're both Marxist Dictator assholes. They're the problem.

 

[Camp]

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

The USA invaded and raped Russia in the 20th Century?

"The American Expeditionary Force Siberia was commanded by Major General William S. Graves and eventually totaled 7,950 officers and enlisted men. The AEF Siberia included the U.S. Army's 27th and 31st Infantry Regiments, plus large numbers of volunteers from the 13th, 62nd Infantry Regiments and 12th Infantry Regiments of the 8th Division, Graves' former division command.[2]"

American Expeditionary Force Siberia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That wasn't an invasion. We were invited in by the Russian government to help get 40000 Czech troops out of Siberia and moved by ship to the western front during WWI. Our enemy was the Red Army, the communist who were revolting against the Czar. Being invited into a country by the government for assistance is not the same as an invasion. But you knew that.

 

[U2Edge]

Russia does not have an "only reason" of concern about having NATO forces on their borders and not having a buffer zone of friendly, neutral or non armed potential enemies. There are political, economic and security issues that concern Russia and it's Federation states. They do not share your view that having a common border with NATO is a good thing.

Russia can't dictate to the countries on its borders what alliances or economic unions they are allowed to join. Every country on Russia's border is an independent sovereign state with the right to join any defensive alliance or economic union that they want to. Understand?

But when the US Government dictates to other nations what alliances or economic unions they join by engineering a coup of an elected government that is acceptable? So if tomorrow Russia installed a puppet regime in Canada we should do nothing about it?

The only one alleging that the United States engineered a coup in Kiev is Putin's Government and any Russian drones that following it. This being the government that INVADED and ANNEXED part of Ukraine's territory. YOU CAN'T ANNEX AN INDEPENDENT SOVEREIGN NATIONS TERRITORY!

If Russia tried to install a puppet regime in Canada, they would have to invade Canada somehow and NATO would automatically invoke article 5 and World War III would begin.

Also, take into account that much of Ukraine has historically been part of Russia for hundreds of years and that the Rus was born out of Kiev and economic and political ties of the countries.

Based on that I guess the United States should turn over Alaska to Russia! LOL

And consider the fact that the US is one by one integrating the old Warsaw Pact Nations on Russia's borders, in direct violation of an agreement that promised otherwise.
NATO?s Eastward Expansion: Did the West Break Its Promise to Moscow? | Global Research

There was NEVER a formal written agreement or treaty not to allow Eastern European Nations into NATO. There was a formal written agreement not to allow foreign forces to be based in Eastern European countries that joined NATO which was signed in 1997, BUT was conditional on Russia's respect for the territorial integrity of Eastern European Nations which Russia has now VIOLATED with its illegal invasion and annexation of Ukrainian territory.

It isn't a cut and dry issue, and at the end of the day, it is not America's fight here. We have lost too much blood and treasure in the last decade in wars that weren't in the national interest. We can't afford a conflict with Russia, and in reality they should be an ally. Patrick Buchanan has promoted this idea in the past and I think he is right on. Strategically speaking, we should be natural allies, no enemies

Yes, it is a cut and dry issue. No nation is allowed to illegally invade and annex another countries territory.

All of the wars fought in the past 15 years were definitely in the national interest and they were won at a fraction of the cost of many other past wars both in terms of blood and treasure. What the United States cannot afford is the abandonment of its vital security interest around the world, including allowing Russia to threaten or swallow up Eastern Europe.

Russia could be an Ally if it would not seek to invade and annex independent countries which is a threat to the entire planet and the international system.

 

[U2Edge]

Real Americans stand against the aggression towards Russia by monkey boy obama and his neo-lib/neo-cons handlers. We see them backing neo-nazis who massacre innocents in Odessa and overthrow a democratic government and we want nothing to do with it, we voice opposition because these crimes aren't in our name. We don't want a World War. Hopefully it is avoided and the US stops inciting west ukrainian neo nazis to violence against Russia and those who oppose the Kiev regime.

As a European Christian nation, Russia should be a natural ally of ours, not a boogeyman for our elites to demonize.

The only country that is acting like Nazi Germany is Russia. They invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, just like Hitler invaded the german sections of Czechoslovakia in 1938 and annexed them into Germany.

Russia did not invade Crimea, they had an agreement with the elected government of Ukraine to maintain a military presence in Crimea and the coup threatened their established naval presence and access to the Black Sea and Mediterranean. Along with this the people of Crimea voted overwhelmingly to secede from the unelected coup government.

Unfortunately, nazi, anti anti-russian and essentially anti-slavic narrative of historical revision, which is born out of Lviv province(which was de-russified by Austria Hungary and Poland) has affected central regions like the capital Kiev. Just like they were used by Nazis, and maintain that identity, the US, NATO, and EU are using them as shock troops against the anti-coup ukrainians and Russians in the East. Now on par with nazi crimes against russian and ukrainian people in world war two, these anti russian nazis are slaughtering innocents in Odessa(including pregnant women).
How Neo-Nazi Thugs Supported by Kiev Regime Killed Odessa Inhabitants. Photographic Evidence | Global Research

While the Kiev Government isn't neo-nazi at the top, and actually has many jews and those with a history in finance(to secure the IMF loan that will cripple the country), they use neo-nazi shock troops in the east to terrorize opposition.

The only terrorist here are the Russians. Russia LEASED A BASE IN CRIMEA! RUSSIAN TROOPS WERE NOT ALLOWED OFF BASE TO HARRASS OR TAKE OVER UKRAINIAN GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS AND THEY WERE CERTAINLY NOT ALLOWED TO ANNEX CRIMEA OR ANY OTHER TERRITORY IN UKRAINE.

Does the fact that the United States has a base in South Korea allow the United States to annex South Korea?

None of the political events in Kiev threatened anyone in Crimea. The new government in Kiev never stated they were going to end Russia's lease of the base, but they certainly had the right to, just as any Apartment owner has a right to kick out renters at the appropriate time.

As for the referendum in Crimea, it was illegal based on the Ukrainian Constitution. The Ukrainian Constitution states that the entire country gets to vote on whether a certain province can be allowed to succeed. In addition, the referendum only allowed two choices, become independent or become apart of Russia. The people of Crimea were not given the option on the referendum to vote and stay in Ukraine. So the referendum itself is a crock of shit.

 

[U2Edge]

Do you happen to remember how many civilians the US maimed, murdered, and displaced in Iraq? How many dollars the US investor class made from a war they were too chicken-shit to fight in? Maybe you remember how many countries the US has invaded, occupied, and destabilized since 2001 on the opposite side of the planet from your shit-filled sty? Pathic losers like you never fail to project US war crimes on others.

If the US objective were to kill, maim and murder innocent civilians in Iraq, the United States could have killed everyone in the country. The United States and several other nations removed Saddam because he was a threat to the region. There were certainly innocent civilians killed, just like they were innocent civilians killed in Normandy in World War II. It does not change the fact that removing Saddam as well as removing Hitler was a necessity. The US invaded Afghanistan because it harbored and defended Al Quada and Bin Ladin and failed to turn them over. Libya was bombed because of gross human rights violations against its citizens by the government.

So, is it your opinion that all these interventions were proper?

I fail to see the logic in it.

The USA removed Saddam, when it was well known he had nothing to do with 9/11. Hence the USA invaded a sovereign nation, occupied it, killed and wounded many of its citizens merely to remove a heinous dictator...and all at an enormous cost in money and blood...and what has resulted?

!!!

911 was NEVER presented as a justification for moving ground troops into Iraq. The United States was already bombing Iraq in the year BEFORE 911 and had been for almost 10 years, each year since the 1991 Gulf War due to SADDAM's violations of multiple UN resolutions and failure to verifiably disarm of all WMD and WMD related production facilities.

The United States invaded and removed Saddam because he continued to threaten Persian Gulf Oil Supply in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and had failed to comply with UN resolutions regarding his illegal invasion, occupation and annexation of the nation state Kuwait and the failure to VERIFIABLY disarm of all WMD and WMD production related facilities. In addition, sanctions and the weapons embargo emplaced on Saddam were no longer being enforced and followed by countries that border Iraq and even members of the UN Security Council like Russia and China. That was allowing Saddam to start and rebuild his military openly which could not be allowed given SADDAM's invasion and annexation of Kuwait back in 1990. The only way to ensure that would not happen, given the erosion of sanctions and the weapons embargo, was through regime removal.

The cost of war are never low, but compared to most past wars, the cost to the United States in both Iraq and Afghanistan has been relatively light. Even with these wars, total spending on Defense has only amounted to 4.5% of GDP, less than the 6% the United States spent on defense during the peace time of the 1980s.

The result is the United States removed a serious threat to the world, at low cost compared to past major wars, and the vital oil supply of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia is now more secure than it has been at any time in the past 70 years. The world depends on that oil supply to keep energy prices low, and sustain economic growth worldwide.

Iraq today is not longer at war with its neighbors, being bombed by foreign forces, or under sanctions and embargo. Oil production in Iraq is now higher than it has ever been in its history which greatly contributes to the global economy and keeping energy prices under control.

 

[Steinlight]

Is the Jew Nuland part of the Russian Government? She said herself, they gave 5 billion to support pro-NATO pro- EU groups.

Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"

So basically what your saying is, US intervention in Ukraine overthrowing an elected government is good, and the people of Crimea voting to leave the unelected government and Russia protecting it's bases which it has a right to as per an agreement with the previously elected government is bad. Ok gotcha love the consistency there you jew loving black faggot.

Can't compare Alaska to Kiev, Kiev was where Rus was founded in 882. Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus were born from the Rus. Ukraine has historically been part of the Russian Empire. The only people who don't recognize themselves as racial and cultural brothers with the Russians are those nazis from Lviv, who were historically part of Poland and Austria Hungary and have been trying to de-russify the rest of Ukraine.

Russia never invaded Ukraine, they had a right to keep their troops in Crimea, I already linked that to you. And besides, US expanded NATO long before the Crimea issue. Get your timeline right, you neo-kahns expanded into the former Warsaw Pact as early as 1999 with Poland and in 2004 with Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia among others, you can't use "Russian Aggression" as an excuse when at that time Russia was doing nothing while the US just invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. So fuck you and your hypocrisy.

The only one swallowing up Eastern Europe is NATO and the EU Superstate. There is no american national security interest in fighting a war with Russia. Only neo-con/neo-lib idealogues and those who stand to make a profit from the conflict and its results want this war. You are just a useful puppet and fodder for ZOG.

 

[U2Edge]

You really have to keep in mind that when the USSR dissolved itself they thought there was an understanding about future NON expansions of NATO. They should have listened to Bush 41 about Ukraine, but that's a different story.
In 1999 three former Warsaw Pact countries came into NATO. They were Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic. Two major factors kept Russia from getting overly upset about this development. The three nations had instigated the development and put pressure on NATO to let them in and none of them bordered on Russia. A buffer zone of nations continued to separate the new NATO nations and Russia.
Things changed drastically on 29 March 2004. On that day seven new NATO nations were created and the buffer zone vanished. Romania and Bulgaria gave NATO more concentrated access to the Black Sea and Southern Ukraine, including Crimea. Estonia and Latvia put them on the northern border and Lithuania with Poland, completely surrounded the small detached Kaliningrad, a small detached region on the Baltic Sea.
Eventually two more nations were added in 2009, Albania and Croatia. A wall of NATO forces is now on the Russian border zones with only Belarus and Ukraine continuing as buffers.
Can't really make a fair or informed evaluation of the Ukraine situation without this data in the equation.

NATO is NOT an offensive alliance and only admits members that are politically, economically and socially stable. Bordering a NATO country is a good thing, not a bad thing, because such a country must meet certain human rights and stability requirements before becoming a member.

The only reason the Russians are concerned is that once these countries join NATO, Russia forever loses the ability to easily invade and rape these Eastern European countries like they did in the 20th century.

How many times did European and US Democracies invade and rape Russia in the 20th century? NATO lost its fictitious "defensive" purpose when the Wall fell, If you doubt that, ask the citizens of Yugoslavia and Libya about its concern for stability and human rights. Like the courts, the legislative, and executive branches of government in the "land of the free", NATO serves corporate power--one of the core definitions of fascism.

NATO came in and stopped Civil War and gross human rights abuses in Bosnia and Kosovo. Within the next 10 years, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Montenegro will all become members of the NATO Alliance.

Libya now has the first opportunity at democracy thanks to NATO in helping to remove its dictator. Of course, if you are a fan of dictatorship ala Putin and Saddam, or Qaidafi, I could see why you would not like NATO.