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.

 

Putin Threatens the West With NATO Ultimatum

page: 11
26
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Ove38

The Baltic pipeline is a Russian project. Are you saying they are threatening war to secure the baltics for their new pipeline thats currently going nowhere?

Ukraine has a Russian pipeline running through it to the rest of Europe. Are you saying Russia invaded Ukraine to secure it for their pipeline? Did they occupy Crimea to make a pipeline to Turkey easier (which is going nowhere)?

Syria has no oil and is not needed for a pipeline, regardless of how much you try to portray it as a lynch-pin to a pipeline that doesnt exist.



(post by Patriotsrevenge removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Ove38

The Baltic pipeline is a Russian project. Are you saying they are threatening war to secure the baltics for their new pipeline thats currently going nowhere?

Ukraine has a Russian pipeline running through it to the rest of Europe. Are you saying Russia invaded Ukraine to secure it for their pipeline? Did they occupy Crimea to make a pipeline to Turkey easier (which is going nowhere)?

Syria has no oil and is not needed for a pipeline, regardless of how much you try to portray it as a lynch-pin to a pipeline that doesnt exist.


First, the war is about gas pipelines, not oil pipelines. The gas fields in question are in Russia and the Persian Gulf. Europe is the gas consumer. Nord Stream-1 pipeline goes directly from Russia to Germany, the largest European consumer. It all began with a conflict around the gas pipelines Ukraine .



edit on 4-5-2016 by Ove38 because: text fix



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Ove38




Europe has decided to get gas through this pipeline


Russian oil going through Turkey shouldn't have any problems at all getting to Europe.

That should be interesting.

Although I would doubt it would happen...that would make for some great discussions.
edit on 4-5-2016 by tsurfer2000h because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: Ove38




Europe has decided to get gas through this pipeline


Russian oil going through Turkey shouldn't have any problems at all getting to Europe.

That should be interesting.

Although I would doubt it would happen...that would make for some great discussions.


Turkey and Germany are in favor of the Qatar-Turkey pipeline, going through Syria

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 4-5-2016 by Ove38 because: text fix



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Patriotsrevenge

Are you actually saying that Hitler was right, and that it is a good thing that Putin is acting like Hitler? Thank you for your honesty.


(post by Xcalibur254 removed for a manners violation)

posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: superman2012
What exactly are the NATO self defense plans he opposes?


I think Putin opposes NATO countries being able to defend themselves.

There has to be more to it than that. Sorry, I thought you had the answer as you created this thread. I'll go check and report back later.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: superman2012

That is the answer. Putin is telling NATO they cannot beef up their self defense abilities as Russia, while threatening NATO with military action, says its a threat to NATO.

This when Russia announces 30k more troops for the border with the Baltics / Ukraine.

Putin knows he would lose in a war with NATO so all he has left are threats.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Ove38

nvm
edit on 4-5-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Ove38

Based on what?

What does it have to do with Putin losing his mind and threatening NATO.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra when you go to bed, look under the bed - suddenly there Putin. if you do not check the wake up and head in the nightstand



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 09:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: mangust69
a reply to: Xcathdra when you go to bed, look under the bed - suddenly there Putin. if you do not check the wake up and head in the nightstand


Engage the topic please.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 09:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: s3cz0ne
While never formalized in law there was a commitment made to Gorbachev by Bush that NATO would not expand any further than the inclusion of the former East Germany. Since that time NATO an America have encirled Russia to the best of their ability. It seems it is the West, not Russia, that can't be trusted. As I've said before in other posts; a unipolar world is NOT a good thing. At least there was some geopolitical balance when the USSR was still around. That is also the reason that America fears a rising China, they threaten global hegemony.


Wrong - Source for info below

Thee agreement was NATO would not expand forces into E. Germany and Gorbachev talked about this when Putin lied about NATO expansion. This is what NATO agreed to -

The agreement on not deploying foreign troops on the territory of the former GDR was incorporated in Article 5 of the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany, which was signed on September 12, 1990 by the foreign ministers of the two Germanys, the United States, Soviet Union, Britain and France. Article 5 had three provisions:

1- Until Soviet forces had completed their withdrawal from the former GDR, only German territorial defense units not integrated into NATO would be deployed in that territory.

2- There would be no increase in the numbers of troops or equipment of U.S., British and French forces stationed in Berlin.

3- Once Soviet forces had withdrawn, German forces assigned to NATO could be deployed in the former GDR, but foreign forces and nuclear weapons systems would not be deployed there.


This is what Gorbachev stated when asked why NATO was allowed to expand -

The interviewer asked why Gorbachev did not “insist that the promises made to you [Gorbachev]—particularly U.S. Secretary of State James Baker’s promise that NATO would not expand into the East—be legally encoded?” Gorbachev replied: “The topic of ‘NATO expansion’ was not discussed at all, and it wasn’t brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO’s military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker’s statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.”

Gorbachev continued that “The agreement on a final settlement with Germany said that no new military structures would be created in the eastern part of the country; no additional troops would be deployed; no weapons of mass destruction would be placed there. It has been obeyed all these years.” To be sure, the former Soviet president criticized NATO enlargement and called it a violation of the spirit of the assurances given Moscow in 1990, but he made clear there was no promise regarding broader enlargement.

Several years after German reunification, in 1997, NATO said that in the “current and foreseeable security environment” there would be no permanent stationing of substantial combat forces on the territory of new NATO members. Up until the Russian military occupation of Crimea in March, there was virtually no stationing of any NATO combat forces on the territory of new members. Since March, NATO has increased the presence of its military forces in the Baltic region and Central Europe.



originally posted by: s3cz0ne
How would you feel if Canada and Mexico were in a Russian lead alliance and building up their respective militaries on American borders? BTW as it stands NATO has little chance of defending Eastern Europe in a conventional way were there to be a Russian incursion. Germany's military readiness, at least as reported by the press, is underwhelming at best. That's just one example. An example I use because Germany tends to historically hold one of the borders between Western and Eastern Europe.


Good god dont you guys ever look at a globe? The US and Russia share a border so we have Russian military forces present in the manner you describe. Secondly Russia has forces, as did the USSR, stationed in Cuba and Venezuela.

Highlighting NATO's military issues does not support your position. It shows there were no issues with Russia and that was reflected in the decrease of military budgets, withdraw of US forces from Europe and the downsizing of EU / NATO member militaries. All that changed when Russia invaded Ukraine and started threatening its neighbors.

Everything Putin is bitching about is a direct cause of Putin's own actions.


I'm about ready to go to sleep so I will post a longer and more in depth reply tomorrow.

I will again reiterate that Russia is not and has not been threatening the West. They are simply, at this point, making it clear that they are more than merely a backwards regional player and they have no intention or interest in accepting global US hegemony. They want to be treated as an equal partner and based on their recent military and economic activity they seem to have some justification for that desire.

As to Crimea; they've been itching to leave Ukraine for quite some time. One only needs to look at the referendums that have been held over the past 25 years as well as acknowledge that a very large portion of Crimea consists of ethnic Russians. As you obviously already know, Crimea was "given" to what was at the time "The Ukraine" by Krushchev as a concession.

Also, as mentioned in your above quote, the spirit of NATO'S agreement with Russia is most certainly being violated. Why the need to literally build an alliance on Russia's European borders? Last I checked Russia really hasn't been causing all that many problems over the past few decades. Sure there was Georgia but in fairness it is rumored that NATO was involved behind the scenes and in all honesty Mikhail Saakashvili is not only an idiot and Western puppet(at times) but also apparently had/has links to neo-facist/neo-nazi groups like the O/UNB. As to Moldova, Chechnya, Dagestan and the rest... Do you really expect Russia to give up its spheres of influence? I mean seriously. If any country is a criminal in this regard it's America. What the hell is the US doing in the South China Sea? Why is the US in the Pacific at all? For our allies? What about our "adversaries"? Do they get a voice? How about the middle East? North Africa and Asia? Why does America get a pass. All Russia is trying to do is to protect its own interests. Aside from Syria they are not attempting to project military might on a global scale. They are not overthrowing and then reshaping governments thousands of miles from their own borders. Their military position is largely defensive. The only thing they are doing is defending their own interests and sending a message that they won't be walked all over.

Putin may not be the chess player that some make him out to be but he is certainly not an idiot. I also very much doubt that he is looking for WWIII because in that scenario everyone loses. That's why we have seen numerous proxy wars around the world since the end of WWII and the advent of the atomic bomb.



posted on May, 4 2016 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: s3cz0ne

Russia has threatened the west and the op is evidence of the latest. When Putin bragged about taking 5 NATO capitals it was a threat. When he threatens the use of nuclear weapons its a threat.

Crimea is a part of Ukraine and that status can only change when all laws are followed. Trying to justify an illegal annexation by making an argument of the number of Russians who reside there is a no go. Based on that logic any nation could send its citizens, lawfully or unlawfully, to a territory and then claim that region wants to belong to another nation. It doesn't work that way and if Russia thinks it does then they should be prepared to lose large chunks of Siberia to China, who have a large amount of their citizens living there.

Secondly the "referendum" was illegal and does not comply with international law, regardless of the fact Putin falsely claims it does. Russia also lied about "Ethnic Russians" being attacked and has to date failed to provide any evidence to the UN, which Russia said it would do. Crimea was transferred to Ukraine in the 1950's so it lawfully belongs to Ukraine. Putin deciding to ignore a law does not justify the action. Putin admitted they were planning on taking Crimea before Yanukovych was removed so the bs excuses he gives are just that.

As for NATO and its spirit you are ignoring the last part where Gorbachev stated there was no agreement that NATO would not expand. Trying to latch onto that while ignoring the rest still does not work. The fact you repeated Putins lies about NATO expansion tells me you are not doing any research outside of what Putin tells you.


Russia's sphere of influence works just like the US sphere of influence. You work with the SOVEREIGN nation in question. That becomes difficult when you spend 50 years under soviet occupation. It becomes difficult when Lavrov says a nation can decide for itself what relations to have and what alliances it wants only to turn around and threaten those nations militarily when they dont choose russia.

The Russian sphere of influence keeps shrinking not because of the US, EU or NATO but because of Putin's own repeated mistakes and blunders. Blaming everyone else for his failures is what the USSR did as well and Putin is dragging Russia down the very same road.

NATO is a defensive alliance. The continued failed argument of borders thousands of miles from other countries makes no logical sense aside from an excuse people whine about. If Russia treated its neighbors with respect it might have more friends. Russia's lack of friend's is the sole fault of the Russian government and their belief its still the 1980's.

Putin is not a chess player and he is an idiot. His actions have caused they very reactions he is bitching about. Thats by design so he has an ever present foreign enemy to blame for his failures. That tactic may have worked in the 1980's however today people can read the play. The only people he is fooling are the Russian people and he is an idiot because he ignores the fact the Russian people had 20 years of non Soviet occupation. The Russian people are seeing whats going on leaving Putin with the problem of how to silence / control the Russian people to stay in office.

To borrow a line from a movie that I think is appropriate -

" The more you tighten your grip, Putin, the more that will slip through your fingers."

Putin is leading Russia to its greatest failures and his cheerleaders are hailing that failure with open arms.

In short Putin is threatening the west regardless of you closing your eyes to it.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra your opinion about Russia is hysterical without evidence of an imaginary Russian threats or chutzpah peculiar to only one nation blueblood aliens , cancer tumor of planet We are peaceful people however in the event of aggression of zionist of nato Russia perform in the role of a surgeon and save the Earth



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Ove38

Based on what?

What does it have to do with Putin losing his mind and threatening NATO.

NATO doesn't like that Russia turns off the gas supply to Europa. The war is about gas supply to Europa, everything else are side effects.




posted on May, 5 2016 @ 04:04 AM
link   
a reply to: s3cz0ne

You do understand Crimean MP"s were forced to vote to leave Ukraine as told by the man who was there...Igor Strelkov...aka Igor Girkin.

Also you do know Putin had a plan to annex it long before the supposed referendum that was a sham?

As for NATO building an alliance on their doorstep...you do understand NATO and Russia were working together until it invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea, and Russia didn't seem to have a problem with NATO until that they disapproved of the illegal annexation...in fact the Russians even had their own representative and offices at NATO headquarters, they didn't have problems then with NATO, but hey why get into those actual facts when you can make them up for yourself...right?

As for NATO expanding...that is because the countries around Russia that used to be part of the old federation want to be protected from becoming another Ukraine and not have parts of their country taken over and annexed like what happened to Crimea. Those countries want to become part of NATO for that simple reason...and after living under Russian rule for so long many want a change and that is something Russia cannot offer them, nor does it care to try.

By protecting their own interests you mean lie to everybody about why you went into your soverign neighbors then annex part of it for your own gain then pretty much telling the people that live their such as the Tartars that they have to leave and move because Russia needs their land for Russians, while the same people treated like trash by past Russian rulers get the same treatment as before...they aren't protecting their interest they are taking parts of a sovereign counry because Putinhas gone bat s### crazy since Sochi where the world laughed at the Olympics and Putin for spending money that was not used as it should have been.

Russia's military is only defensive you say...Ukraine and Georgia proves that wrong. If Russia had the ability it would put bases all over...problem is npbody wants them as then they could end up lile Crimea, because once a Russian base is in your country you become part of Russia which means if they want to annex part of the country then they can lie and say they are protecting ethnic Russians there
just as they used in Georgia and Ukraine.

I find it amazing how many times one thinks Crimea was done because they wanted to leave after those who were there have told the truth...even Putin admitted they took Crimea on a lie.

Keep thinking Russia is just a defensive military that has been pretty offensive in the last few years, but it's okay as long as Putin says theyare only defensive and protecting their interests...oh wait wjen the US says they they are the bad guys...but with Putin it's okay...gotta love the hypocrisy.



posted on May, 5 2016 @ 08:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: superman2012

That is the answer. Putin is telling NATO they cannot beef up their self defense abilities as Russia, while threatening NATO with military action, says its a threat to NATO.

This when Russia announces 30k more troops for the border with the Baltics / Ukraine.

Putin knows he would lose in a war with NATO so all he has left are threats.


They are all acting like little children, he did this so I'm going to do that...and back and forth.
If their stupid pissing match actually does escalate to war, there aren't going to be any winners.

What is the reason for the buildup in the Baltic states? Protect them against Russia? Is it really having the desired effect? Whoever is in charge of this doesn't seem to want to settle it diplomatically...



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join