'You're moving closer to Russia and blame Russians for being close to NATO'

[senheiser]

17.10.2014

Journalists grill Chuck Hagel's recent claims that Russia is on the doorstep of NATO during the daily State Department briefing.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Russia is on the door step of NATO, and NATO is on the door step of Russia. Perhaps a geography and political relations lesson is in order.

 

[SRBM2]

Russia is on the door step of NATO, and NATO is on the door step of Russia. Perhaps a geography and political relations lesson is in order.

Who expanded towards who?

Only one Aggressor is at doorstep he shouldn't be.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Who expanded towards who?

Only one Aggressor is at doorstep he shouldn't be.

Both are equally culpable. The Russians expanded their presence with several acquisitions of territory. NATO accepted membership bids from concerned nations, nations that Russia scared into the embrace of NATO. NATO isn't expanding and it hasn't since Albania and Croatia were accepted in 2009, but Russia has been expanding and just this year made an expansion. That NATO has forces stationed in nations close to Russia is a refection of those nations interests, concerns about Russia and the fact that the eastern European nations also have military's and if they are NATO members than as a consequence of them maintaining a military Russia is going to have troops near it.

 

[BDforever]

Both are equally culpable. The Russians expanded their presence with several acquisitions of territory. NATO accepted membership bids from concerned nations, nations that Russia scared into the embrace of NATO. NATO isn't expanding and it hasn't since Albania and Croatia were accepted in 2009, but Russia has been expanding and just this year made an expansion. That NATO has forces stationed in nations close to Russia is a refection of those nations interests, concerns about Russia and the fact that the eastern European nations also have military's and if they are NATO members than as a consequence of them maintaining a military Russia is going to have troops near it.

you did not answer, at which part Russia move toward NATO ?

 

[SvenSvensonov]

you did not answer, at which part Russia move toward NATO ?

Well, since Turkey is a NATO member, and Russia appropriated a port region of Crimea that is geographically near Turkey, I think we can safely say that Russia expanded towards a NATO member. Again as a comparison, NATO last expanded in 2009.

 

[BDforever]

Well, since Turkey is a NATO member, and Russia appropriated a port region of Crimea that is geographically near Turkey, I think we can safely say that Russia expanded towards a NATO member. Again as a comparison, NATO last expanded in 2009.

crimea case comes into scene after westerner backed party forcefully through out elected Ukrainian govt who threatened russian ethnic group, is not it ? and later resulted civil war in Ukraine ?

 

[AgentOrange]

Both are equally culpable. The Russians expanded their presence with several acquisitions of territory. NATO accepted membership bids from concerned nations, nations that Russia scared into the embrace of NATO. NATO isn't expanding and it hasn't since Albania and Croatia were accepted in 2009, but Russia has been expanding and just this year made an expansion. That NATO has forces stationed in nations close to Russia is a refection of those nations interests, concerns about Russia and the fact that the eastern European nations also have military's and if they are NATO members than as a consequence of them maintaining a military Russia is going to have troops near it.

It's debatable whether Russia would have felt compelled to act to defend its traditional spheres of interests if NATO didn't keep aggressively expanding, *after* it's primary threat and reason for being, the USSR, was already gone. It's not a chicken and egg scenario and NATO shares more of the blame. Russian actions, IMO, have always been reactionary whereas NATO has been the provocateur.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

crimea case comes into scene after westerner backed party forcefully through out elected Ukrainian govt who threatened russian ethnic group, is not it ? and later resulted civil war in Ukraine ?

Who cares? You asked for a response to your question of when Russia expanded towards a NATO member, I gave one. The reasons for the expansion are not important. Additionally, like the dispute over MH17, the case you cited is equally disputed and thus I will not vouch for or refute its validity.

 

[BDforever]

Who cares? You asked for a response to your question of when Russia expanded towards a NATO member.

reason for expansion is not important ! ! ! really ? just because the responsible party will be western side which might weaken ur credibility ? lol

i give u a hypothetical scenario:
russian backed party through out elected Mexico's govt forcefully and it also racist toward american ethnic group, what will be USA's response ?

 

[SvenSvensonov]

reason for expansion is not important ! ! ! really ? just because the responsible party will be western side which might weaken ur credibility ? lol

i give u a hypothetical scenario:
russian backed party through out elected Mexico's govt forcefully and it also racist toward american ethnic group, what will be USA's response ?

Not to take control over Mexico if that's what your implying.

 

[BDforever]

Not to take control over Mexico if that's what your implying.

USA will surely try to take control over Mexico. not just USA but any country will do same. so lesson is... don't go to fk around other's neighborhood. live in peace with your own stuff.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

USA will surely try to take control over Mexico. not just USA but any country will do same. so lesson is... don't go to fk around other's neighborhood. live in peace with your own stuff.

Really?!? You know the contingency plans of the US government? Offer your opinion if you want, but don't offer it as a reality. You can say the US would take control over Mexico, but you are only speculating. On what basis to you base your claim? What rational do you offer to support your theory that the US would take control over Mexico.

 

[BDforever]

Really?!? You know the contingency plans of the US government? Offer your opinion if you want, but don't offer it as a reality. You can say the US would take control over Mexico, but you are only speculating. On what basis to you base your claim? What rational do you offer to support your theory that the US would take control over Mexico.

based on your own contingency plan.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

based on your own contingency plan.

My contingency plan??? When did I offer a contingency plan. And if by "your contingency plan" you meant that of the US, please find me some proof or reference that supports the theory that the US would annex Mexico in the event that armed groups supported by foreign government took control of the Mexican government. I'll wait. This will take you a long time.