It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CFR: Ukraine Crisis, It's the Wests Fault

page: 12
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Bassago

Oh, well since you remembered a tiny detail you are clearly in the right. Why don't you have the honesty to admit that the title of this thread is misleading and ask the Mods to change it accordingly? Then we could settle down and discuss the content of Mearsheimer's essay. You know, encirclement, NATO expansion, Nuland's $5 billion... all of the talking points that have been flogged to death on every other Ukraine thread?




posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:04 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001



Oh, well since you remembered a tiny detail you are clearly in the right.


Yes I am, thank you for saying it in a tiny way.



Why don't you have the honesty to admit that the title of this thread is misleading and ask the Mods to change it accordingly?


Nope because it's not and once again you are wrong. Last time I'll say this, the thread title is T&C and references the article linked in the OP. Don't like it, well that's the way it goes.



Then we could settle down and discuss the content of Mearsheimer's essay. You know, encirclement, NATO expansion, Nuland's $5 billion...


Ah we finally get to the crux of the matter. You admit that simply because you don't like the way I presented the thread you (and to be honest several others) pretty much refuse to "settle down" and "discuss the content" of the OP.

Well guess what, this is my thread and as I said if you don't like it feel free to move along and bash some other Ukraine thread with the party line.

You get a star for finally being honest anyway.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: tanka418

Again you are missing the point. The op ed piece is not from the cfr. The cfr had nothing to do with it except for putting it in their journal.




No...I don't think I missed any points here.

Firstly, the CFR did not have to publish the essay. They had a choice...they opted to publish...some of that must go to support for the essay and the opinions contained. Further, this would be one of those "typical human" things...you know the kind of erroneous BS that all sentient beings come up with, because that is what "feels" right / natural. Something y'all should have learned somewhere in "communications"...

Next; there are the conditions of submission to CFR. For instance; did you know that the CFR expects to have exclusive license? That is very much not typical of places like ATS...who typically operate under a "creative commons" style of license. In any case, IF CFR decided not to publish, the author may have little if any recourse in publishing. And, for a professor, publishing is quite important.

Finally; John Mearsheimer is far more educated in foreign relations than I, or you. He is far more knowledgeable in the history, affairs, politics, current events of that region, and area of politics that I or you.

So...it would seem that his opinion, regardless of its real or apparent support, is worthy of more consideration than simply comparing it to a few of the West's version of Russian Times. This is a person who has actually taken the time to deeply analyze the available data, far more time, and much deeper analysis than any of the West's news providers.
Oh and by the way; I would trust his data analysis skills, on this topic, over any "reporter", or "news analysis".



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Bassago


Nope because it's not and once again you are wrong. Last time I'll say this, the thread title is T&C and references the article linked in the OP. Don't like it, well that's the way it goes.


No, it is not T&C! It parrots but does not quote exactly the article you link to, which is not in fact the original essay, but rather excerpts that have been edited and supplemented by other sources in a deliberate effort to mislead. Mearsheimer no more represents the Council on Foreign Relations than you or I represent the official opinion of ATS. Your failure to acknowledge this self evident fact suggests that the whole crux of the OP is to create a false impression. Everything Mearsheimer says in his essay has been debated endlessly on threads here on ATS, and therefore does not add anything to the discussion. The one element this thread does add is the false impression that the CFR, believed by the information challenged to be a shadowy and sinister organization, has officially espoused views that confirm Russian propaganda talking points. Why not explain yourself?



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

The Council on Foreign Relations is a "think tank" that exists entirely to publish different perspectives on important issues. They choose to publish opinions the majority of members consider anathema in order to stimulate debate.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001



No, it is not T&C! It parrots but does not quote exactly the article you link to, which is not in fact the original essay,


Nope wrong again. The title reflects the article (I chose) that discusses both the original paper published by the CFR and other sources including the NY Times. My thread I get to choose what I'm going to present, not you. Live with it or move along.



Everything Mearsheimer says in his essay has been debated endlessly on threads here on ATS, and therefore does not add anything to the discussion.


You (thankfully) do not get to choose what ATS members discuss. Live with it.



The one element this thread does add is the false impression that the CFR, believed by the information challenged to be a shadowy and sinister organization, has officially espoused views that confirm Russian propaganda talking points. Why not explain yourself?


Nope again, that was an off topic attempt (by you I believe) to derail the thread (again) from the points made in the OP. Discuss the points or move along.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   

ATTENTION!!!!!



Please discuss the topic...it is not a debate about the title.....

You are responsible for your own posts.




ETA
do not reply to this post




edit on Mon Aug 25 2014 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: tanka418

The Council on Foreign Relations is a "think tank" that exists entirely to publish different perspectives on important issues. They choose to publish opinions the majority of members consider anathema in order to stimulate debate.



Well...almost...sort of...


The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries.
-- from the Mission Statement of the CFR.

However, that wasn't my point...although, I should also have pointed out that this is not an "op ed", It is presented as an essay, as differentiated from an "opinion", or a "comment", etc. There is also no disclaimer.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe

ATTENTION!!!!!



Please discuss the topic...it is not a debate about the title.....

You are responsible for your own posts.






Don`t steel my thoughts, they are mine !



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Thank you DontTreadOnMe.

So getting back to the point of the OP in the first place here's some of the main points.

The Ukraine crisis is being blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression.

The United States and its European allies actually share most of the responsibility for the crisis.

]The taproot of the trouble is NATO enlargement, the central element of a larger strategy to move Ukraine out of Russia’s orbit and integrate it into the West.
NATO Enlargement

This taproot can currently most easily be identified by the following.

The U.S. State Department spent more than $5 billion dollars in pushing Ukraine towards the West.

The U.S. ambassador to Ukraine (Geoffrey Pyatt) and assistant Secretary of State (Victoria Nuland) were also recorded plotting the downfall of the former Ukraine government in a leaked conversation.

Top-level U.S. officials involvement/interference during the protests.

Seems most of these points are self evident but am willing to look into each of them. Particularly the "non-binding" agreement that NATO made promises not to expand into post Soviet countries. Which it promptly broke.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Looking at several news reports, there definitely seems to be something "big" going on in the South. Of course Kiev says Russia is involved, and information about stuff going on is from both sides and unconfirmed witnesses (so to be taken with big grain of salt).

For whatever reason the Separatists are on a "big" offensive(s).

You can only speculate as to why, maybe to send a signal before the upcoming "peace talks"..."it`s going to be a long run if you keep on fighting Kiev."Or for strategic reasons...Kiev needing to fight at more fronts or to give Donetsk better access route to Russia (see article).

en.itar-tass.com...



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien



You can only speculate as to why, maybe to send a signal before the upcoming "peace talks"..."it`s going to be a long run if you keep on fighting Kiev."Or for strategic reasons...Kiev needing to fight at more fronts or to give Donetsk better access route to Russia (see article).


The simplest reason may also be that the separatist consider themselves patriots and are going to fight against what they perceive as an externally implemented (and partially) Neo-Nazi government put in place against their wishes.

I know that would do it for me.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bassago
a reply to: BornAgainAlien



You can only speculate as to why, maybe to send a signal before the upcoming "peace talks"..."it`s going to be a long run if you keep on fighting Kiev."Or for strategic reasons...Kiev needing to fight at more fronts or to give Donetsk better access route to Russia (see article).


The simplest reason may also be that the separatist consider themselves patriots and are going to fight against what they perceive as an externally implemented (and partially) Neo-Nazi government put in place against their wishes.

I know that would do it for me.


Yeah, that`s why they are fighting...but the reason for the offensive now is strategic.

You can speculate about why, but it`s really not clear what the strategic reason behind it is atm, but there sure is one or more.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I just wish the US would invade us...

That would mean "our" politicians finally have grown some balls (and ovaries) :

Guest Column from Germany — America Frightens Us — by Roman Baudzus




Now the Dutch wait for the appearance of US troops to show up at the Hague should international law ever be applied to Washington’s war criminals. As one German magazine put it recently, “with friends like America, we don’t need enemies.”


www.paulcraigroberts.org...



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien




Guest Column from Germany — America Frightens Us — by Roman Baudzus



Wow a 2002 article about the government under Bush...


Bush would have preferred to try to enforce America's interests in negotiations on the Court.


www.spiegel.de...

So what's the connection?



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: BornAgainAlien




Guest Column from Germany — America Frightens Us — by Roman Baudzus



Wow a 2002 article about the government under Bush...


Bush would have preferred to try to enforce America's interests in negotiations on the Court.


www.spiegel.de...

So what's the connection?


The article refers to US threats when mood started to shift in 2002 in connection with the mood now shifting because of US policies, was that not clear reading it ?



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
IT'S ONLY ABOUT THE BLACK SEA PORT and NOTHING else,RUSSIA will secure it regardless of western intervention.We won't stop this with force of arms so the Donsk region will fall under Russian occupation. UN can do as they please ...but they SUCK on this type of operation and WE won't go fight.
edit on 25-8-2014 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 03:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien




The article refers to US threats when mood started to shift in 2002 in connection with the mood now shifting because of US policies, was that not clear reading it ?


It was an article from 2002, and what does it even have to do with the events of today?


Wednesday, 06/12/2002 - 13:27 clock


www.spiegel.de...

Your trying to make some kind of connection that just isn't there...why?



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 03:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: BornAgainAlien




The article refers to US threats when mood started to shift in 2002 in connection with the mood now shifting because of US policies, was that not clear reading it ?


It was an article from 2002, and what does it even have to do with the events of today?


Wednesday, 06/12/2002 - 13:27 clock


www.spiegel.de...

Your trying to make some kind of connection that just isn't there...why?


The law is still there and the mood is shifting in the same manner...so there`s your the connection...seriously, I have to make that connection for you, you`re not able to make it on your own...?



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Looks like things are getting more interesting in the (new) Ukraine government. Poroshenko has dissolved the Parliament and is calling for "elections" in October. Guess he didn't like the make up of this one as much as he thought.

KIEV, Ukraine (AP) -- Ukraine's president on Monday dissolved parliament and called for early elections in October as his country continues to battle a pro-Russian insurgency in its eastern regions.

In a statement on his website, President Petro Poroshenko said snap elections would be held Oct. 26.

Poroshenko said the dissolution, which was prefigured by the breakup of the majority coalition last month, was in line with "the expectations of the vast majority of the citizens of Ukraine" and called it a move toward "cleansing" the parliament.
Ukrainian president dissolves parliament

More cleansings, I bet those folks living in Donetsk and Luhansk know exactly what he's talking about *wink wink* and look out for those snipers eh?
So why is this happening exactly?

Many members of parliament "are allies of the militants-separatists," Poroshenko said, referring to the pro-Russian rebels

OK got it.

Edit: I suggest this adds additional support that Poroshenko is a dutiful lapdog to the US/EU/NATO and more specifically the IMF who as noted before wants east Ukraine and the pro-Russian supporters brought under control.

Wonder what he'll do if the "election" doesn't get the outcome he wishes? Or more likely it will since how will anyone in the east get to vote as his army has bombed hundreds of thousands out of the homes. That won't look good.
edit on 929pm5858pm42014 by Bassago because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join