U.S. military beginning review of Syria options

As an informed amateur, your analysis dovetails with what I expect to happen as well.

The thing I don't understand about Russia is why it has never really fully integrated into the European structure. I understand there is a pride thing, but when it comes down to it, I can't help but think Russian security and energy interests throughout central Asia could be much more readily achieved by having a tit-for-tat attitude with respect to the US specifically, and the West generally.

I know it is heresy to say it, but I've been wondering for years why they don't just work toward eventual NATO accession. Is it because of what was lost after the USSR fell?

Is this a case where domestic politics demands the sort of strongarm rhetoric, or do you think Russia identifies these areas as vital interests?

reply to post by cassandranova


Russians want to be in NATO but NATO does not want Russia in. Remember the US policy regarding NATO: Keep Germany down and Russia out.

NATO will accept Russia only if it break into pieces like USSR did. NATO is working hard on that. All this Libya, Iran, Iraq 2003 and now Syria are a step in that direction.

On the Russian side the word is "come what may but Russia is not breaking up". That answers your other question. That would be the Russian threshold, if NATO/US/West attacks Russia, it will be only half an hour before 10,000 H-Bomb warheads fall on US and West. Russia has nothing to speak of now conventionally. In addition to DEAD ARM they will further invoke cosmic mechanisms that WILL destroy this whole earth..............forever!

Originally posted by cassandranova
As an informed amateur, your analysis dovetails with what I expect to happen as well.

The thing I don't understand about Russia is why it has never really fully integrated into the European structure. I understand there is a pride thing, but when it comes down to it, I can't help but think Russian security and energy interests throughout central Asia could be much more readily achieved by having a tit-for-tat attitude with respect to the US specifically, and the West generally.

I know it is heresy to say it, but I've been wondering for years why they don't just work toward eventual NATO accession. Is it because of what was lost after the USSR fell?

Is this a case where domestic politics demands the sort of strongarm rhetoric, or do you think Russia identifies these areas as vital interests?

I'll try to be objective. Due to some reasons I can not disclose my real name and the degree of my personal involvement with the processes you are interested in. But for what it is worth, I participated (mostly as a consultant) in the talks Russians had with EU in the early nineties. Russians always expressed their desire and willingness to join NATO (even when NATO was just created SU requested to be accepted as a member, upon receiving nye The Warsaw Pact was created) and that desire was reiterated during the talks. German participants expressed understanding while the rest especially observes from the Baltic states were belligerently against. I'd like to stress that Germans felt somewhat indebted, since the Wall was down and with the Warsaw Pact disintegrated, it would be quite logical to accept New Russia. But there was USA, who would and will never allow such a thing to happen. It would mean... Yet it's out of topic here.

Concerning Central Asia. Please try to grasp a picture I'm going to offer: Imagine US dissolves, yet let say 30 states manage to stick together and assume all the former glory of the deceased Empire. Now shortly after such a tragic event for the nation, Russkies show up in the separated, liberated states and begin actively and shamelessly prepare say oil to be shipped to Russia. they build bases, they alienate people, they do whatever they think fit. It is an obvious threat to the remaining Union, isn it? Now, with all due respect, what kind of respect are you talking about. Central Asia for centuries, let's call it a given historical geosynchrocy, has been Russia's backyard. Just a parallel, a visual aid.



I'll gladly continue this discussion but not here - I think we are way too far from the subject.

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by cassandranova

 

Russians want to be in NATO but NATO does not want Russia in. Remember the US policy regarding NATO: Keep Germany down and Russia out.

NATO will accept Russia only if it break into pieces like USSR did. NATO is working hard on that. All this Libya, Iran, Iraq 2003 and now Syria are a step in that direction.

On the Russian side the word is "come what may but Russia is not breaking up". That answers your other question. That would be the Russian threshold, if NATO/US/West attacks Russia, it will be only half an hour before 10,000 H-Bomb warheads fall on US and West. Russia has nothing to speak of now conventionally. In addition to DEAD ARM they will further invoke cosmic mechanisms that WILL destroy this whole earth..............forever!

I think it's time to close this thread and move on. It seems that the matter of America et al. vs. Russia et al. is still a hot spot. I hope that whatever is going to be said here and after will resonate clarifying certain misunderstandings, mistrust, ignorance, arrogance and other obstacles on the way to better understanding among people, showing them the real culprits, and perhaps outlining ways of changing the situation. Don't forget - no one has canceled VOX POPULI...

another P.S. without signature
I just read: news.mail.ru... (in Russian) Russia shows fangs
5 Russian battle air crafts(two tu95 bombers,two su-24, one a50) flew in the immediate vicinity of Japanese island of Hokkaido. No violation of JA airspace.

Thanks for your responses. I actually was trying to figure out what thread would make sense to continue this discussion, but I'm at a loss for which forum to use!

Originally posted by cassandranova
Thanks for your responses. I actually was trying to figure out what thread would make sense to continue this discussion, but I'm at a loss for which forum to use!

I think POLITICS thread WW3 scenarios or The balance of powers now
I can't start a thread since I'm a newbie to this site and haven't reached 20 requirement yet. So someone else should launch it.

reply to post by MRHIDDENHAND


Ok pal, I have started a thread in WW3 forum............hope others take it from here. Happy Warring!

WW3 has begun: US NATO vrs PRIICS (wargame)

www.abovetopsecret.com...