It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
My last post on this subject...and honestly...tell me...do you really think that NATO has never considered it...or wouldnt want to split Russia ?
originally posted by: Nikola014
Since we're not allowed to discuss anonymous sources, let's talk about the subject.
I really would not be surprised if NATO had plans to destroy Russian Federation, it's a normal thing to have against your enemy. I'm sure Russia has war plans against NATO as well.
Maybe this story could help explain why did NATO help create the civil war in Ukraine. Maybe it was just a starting point, a step to create some kind of domino effect, which would destabilise Russia. Luckily or not, depending on your perspective, Russia reacted immediately and put a stop on that plan.
Are you insisting that NATO hadn't an inherent agenda to destabilize the USSR?
There were very specific plans to eject countries like Czechoslovakia and Hungary from the Soviet Union's orbit. The dissolution of the Soviet Union was certainly something that NATO welcomed, although it's not clear how much influence they had beyond mere propaganda.
You're seriously going to grandstand that such a 'how sweet would it be' scenario wasn't drawn all up by the likes of the freaking CIA?!?
Ya, bitter Cold War enemies for generations, but nope no secret dreams of splitting her into little pieces to never return to imperial rivalry. What a narrative that would be, if not for the fact that the moment she started again showing confidence to press for her local interests while also having the balls to imperil "our" imperial ambitions all around her native continent have we seen this total Neo-McCarthyism melodrama infest all Western propaganda discourse as is they're trying to take over the world (which is "our job" damnit!!).
Now, since you've clawed through the permafrost to expose those dormant worms for us all herein, do you have some sort of evidence that destabilization would have absolutely ceased regarding Russia post-USSR (in general)?
But here we go, you know what lets just give you carte blanche on this: YOU NAILED IT YO! Thing is, even IF totally true as you've framed it, how is that ant different or any worse than the corporate propaganda schemes that have been wielded at them the past couple years?
After witnessing you the past year make a playground out of logic regarding the symbiotic "like this" nature of the Two Party's + Military Industrial Complex + MSM + Federal Government + CIA + DOD and their every present pervasive ubiquitous stranglehold over every aspect of "media" our entire lives, it sure is a treat to see you take the Russian Press to the monkeybars for merely being state 'controlled' and not Corporatocracy controlled.
Russians living in Ukraine felt their lives were at risk by the fascists running Ukraine, and they decided they will protect themselves from the.
originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: nwtrucker
You are probably correct. I think there were a few US officials that were said to have participated in the destabilization. So it wasn't just the UN.
They're not Ukrainians. They are Russians, living and working in Ukraine.
How can a group of people, who got the power to run a country by force, be legal? Face it, Yanukovych was legally elected president, who was overthrown illegally.
And that's the whole truth. Plus, I never mentioned the word fascism. I just said that Russians in Ukraine felt their lives were at risks; guess what, turns out they were right
Russians living in Ukraine felt their lives were at risk by the fascists running Ukraine,
originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: nwtrucker
I think you answered your own question.
NATO used the hate some of the people living in Ukraine have towards Russia, to illegally impeach a legally elected president of Ukraine. Then, we all know what happened next. A complete chaos. And it was all thanks to NATO because they wanted to get rid of a president they disliked. It's a common habit NATO members have. And it's worked amazingly every single time...
Second, when you have a civil war, things always get ugly. Russians living in Ukraine felt their lives were at risk by the fascists running Ukraine, and they decided they will protect themselves from the. There was a referendum in Crimea, and the people had decided to join Russia. That's the most democratic thing in the world. Of course, the West suddenly has a problem with that, but, when something similar happens that goes along with their plans and interests, there's nothing wrong with it, and they say that we should all respect the will of the people.
I never mentioned Soros. I'm just saying there are war games going on in the world, which we know very little about
Again, federalism, not dismemberment. Note, also, the emphasis on economic opportunity. This is not a blueprint for conquest, it is an analysis of the shortcomings of the Russian Federation's top heavy centralized political system.
Despite these overt hostile moves against Russia, Russian neoliberals still believe that the economic policies that Washington urges on Russia are in Russia’s interest, not intended to gain control of its economy. Hooking Russia’s fate to Western hegemony under these conditions would doom Russian sovereignty.
Russia, The IMF And Neoliberalism
One of the key events that precipitated the demonstrations in Ukraine that eventually led to the ouster of President Yanukovych was his cancellation of an association agreement with the EU which carries with it an arrangement for loan funds from the IMF. An alternative arrangement was negotiated directly with Putin and Russia. The IMF agreement carried with it the market reform/austerity measures that are typical of IMF bailouts. In the case of Ukraine subsidized energy prices were one of the targets. In discussions about the complexities of the Ukrainian crisis on Daily Kos and elsewhere there is on strain of opinion that sees Russia as offering some sort of alternative to the harsh neoliberal policies of the IMF and the EU. This diary is an attempt to explore that notion by examining some of the present trends in economic and social policy in the Russian Federation.
I dont think the point of Game Theory was just to have an endless gentlemens proverbial smack talk fest of perpetual oneupsmanship, that is just ridding the merry go round together for shia'ites and giggles was that trillions of dollars and millions of people died for?
OK. There was NO referendum in Crimea. Even WikiLeaks doesn't claim that and they are certainly no friend of the U.S. They actually state that the vote was done virtually at gun point in their assembly. Again, that flies in the teeth of any nation returning to an empire. Whereas a warm water port and the sheer speed Russia re-armed the region speaks for itself.
originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: DJW001
I quite believe that there may have been some that would have wanted to do so, not every NATO member though hate's the Russian's but a lot of them DO, newer members long after these alleged event's in particular do - especially those that were former members of the Warsaw Pact.
In much of Europe you have to remember they still have the old folk hatred of the marauding Cossack tribe's that would often invade, loot, pillage and rape.
But there is a historic example and precedent of something similar, back after the first world war when the Ottoman Empire was forced to concede it's territory or fight on alone without Germany the European powers divided that territory between themselves THEN after the Second world war when those same FORMER powers whom had been saved by the US had to give up most or all of there empires including those formerly Ottoman controlled land's and territory's as part of an agreement with the US whom wanted the world to be free for free trade so that there own merchant's could compete on equal term's with them those area's were the further divided by the retreating old powers whom feared a resurgence of the Ottoman empire.
So they feared a resurgence of the Soviet Union and wanted to do something similar, I can understand but do not agree with it, a divided world is a troublesome world and they were probably acting out of several motivations, greed, resources, territory, exploitation, fear and even long held bias and racial bigotry against the Russian's which many nation's do feel because of those Cossack raid's, it could also have been so that peace and war could be engineered to order as and when they needed them.
Certainly they need to be investigated if this was an actual attempt but if it was just an opinion or something that was said, well that is bad enough but you can not censure a person for speaking there mind how else would you debate with them and changed there mind.