Posted on 08/31/2022 1:27:16 AM PDT by Cathi
The best Scott Ritter interview I've seen (being interviewed by Czechs from the Czech Republic.)
Brutal historic truth about NATO leading up to today's disaster and how we got here.
I consider Ritter to be a "Giant Among Pygmies."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VYZGuaqT5Y
"If there was no NATO expansion, there would be no conflict in Ukraine."
IBTSRS
Same twisted logic!
Regards,
from the Wikipedia NATO page / history section
“In the 1990s, the organization extended its activities into political and humanitarian situations that had not formerly been NATO concerns.”
In other words, NATO SHOULD have been disbanded or majorly reduced after the cold war ended since there was no longer a purpose for it anymore.
but government never shrinks....it just bloats until it eventually explodes.
So says the convicted child sex predator.
Cut-and-Paste Cathi is a big fan of convicted sex offenders.
NATO is the impetus but it’s about the vast pro Russian majority in the east and ukrop treatment of them for years
Want to hazard a guess as to how many of them have ever even watched a Ritter video...:-)
The rule among the detestable here on FR is to slime, vilify, demonize, slur, accuse, etc. anyone who doesn’t agree with them.
It’s probably effective for low IQs...:-)
Millions follow Ritter, MacGregor, Larry Johnson, The Duran geopolitical analysts, etc.
Let’s be accurate! Twice convicted pedophile.
That took place in an 18 above certified chat room where he was led to believe the girl was a woman pretending to be a girl and he was going along with it
It’s not for me but I can promise you they attacked him with everything after he exposed deep state lies over Iraq and despite his shortcomings his claims have been thoroughly vindicated
Bannon has him on
Good enough for me
It’s what they do
Like leftists and now they love globalist media
They talk like joe Scarborough on Ukraine and with no shame
And billions don’t.
Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it. Those who DO study history are doomed to stand by watching helplessly while everyone else repeats it.
Just after the WW2 Tehran Conference, Stalin said to a journalist, (roughly translated):
"It's high time the Slavic race was in charge of Europe."
Putin is channeling Stalin, and probably delights in it.
Never forget that modern-day Russian culture is heavily derived from the Mongol hordes who over-ran Russia in the 13th century. They never really left.
Anyone who has read of or experienced the ten or so years after the end of WW2 knows this. Trieste, Greece, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, all bear witness.
“In the 1990s, the organization extended its activities into political and humanitarian situations that had not formerly been NATO concerns.”
Why would Russia be angry about NATO having HUMANITARIAN and POLITICAL as opposed to MILITARY ambitions?
I’m sure most of Russia didn’t mind Operation Allied Goodwill I & II, (February to March 1992) either: “NATO assisted an international relief effort by flying teams of humanitarian assistance experts and medical advisors to Russia and other Commonwealth of Independent States nations using AWACS trainer cargo aircraft.”
You know what’s really funny... I went through a list of all the NATO missions, and I can see in there lots of “at their own request” actions e.g.
Operation Anchor Guard - assisting defence in Turkey, who feared Iraqi invasion (Gulf War)
Event security for the Athens Olympics (2004)
African Union Mission in Sudan - providing air support prior to the UN mission (2005 to 2007)
Pakistan earthquake relief assistance (2005)
Hurricane Katrina response (2005)
There’s a very long list of countries that hasn’t asked NATO for a mission in the last 20 years - it obviously includes Russia since Putin came to office.
Russia wasn’t a focus for NATO for over thirty years - it was busy doing humanitarian and political work AT THE REQUEST OF THE RECIPIENT GOVERNMENTS. Russia never asked - it’s that simple.
If Putin and his mates did object to NATO political and humanitarian support when they could just as easily asked for it like anybody else, then it’s no better an indicator than their responses to Chernobyl and Kursk - massive inferiority complexes, paranoid and a misplaced sense of pride meant they’d rather see Russians die than admit they needed help.
I have some respect for Scott Ritter but he’s just flat out wrong on Gorbachev - “not one inch eastward” was an INFORMAL draft pledge that neither Russia nor the USA kept in the formally signed and witnessed agreements. Why do you think Russian fascists hate Gorbachev so much? He admitted that America held up its end of the AGREED stuff - and what Sheverdnaze and Baker discussed was NEVER part of the final deal.
Genscher made clear “that the changes in Eastern Europe and the German unification process must not lead to an ‘impairment of Soviet security interests.’ Therefore, NATO should rule out an ‘expansion of its territory towards the east, i.e. moving it closer to the Soviet borders.’”
The “Soviet interest” ended the day Russia, Ukraine and Belarus jointly declared the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Anyone suggesting otherwise needs to be horsewhipped until common sense sets in.
By that dumb shit logic, the USA and Mexico oughta respec’ the interests of the Aztec Empire.
NATO should have been disbanded in the mid 1990’s. Globalists pushed for it to expand. Now look at the mess.
you seem to miss the point.
the alliance was created for a specific purpose — once that purpose was no longer needed, then the alliance should have been disbanded or majorly shrunk back.
You need two to tango, and if one side knocked down the wall and offered an olive branch to genuinely have an East meets West mindset, then there is no need for NATO.
but 30 years later AFTER the fall of the wall, it’s still expanding??????????
seems like one side wasn’t interested in the tango.
The last thing we need are billion dollar budgets involved in humanitarian efforts.
This is not about Leftists, Soros, Globohomoism, or other Russian protagonists’ distractions. This is about Russia invading and annexing Ukraine and killing its people.
-Russia invaded and annexed Chechnya.
-Russia invaded and annexed Georgia.
-Russia invaded and annexed Crimea.
-Russia invaded and is attempting to annex Ukraine.
-Russia invaded and annexed LPR.
-Russia invaded and annexed DPR.
-Russia has declared its intention to invade and annex Moldova.
-Russia has declared its intention to invade and annex the Baltic states -NATO members.
NATO is correct to arm Ukrainians to fight Russia in Ukraine to avoid nuclear war when Russia attacks the Baltic States.
Russia’s conventional forces are vastly inferior to NATO’s which compels it to first-use nuclear weapons when attacking NATO countries.
Putin is pushing an “I win or everyone loses” strategy. NATO and the rest of the world has had enough.
A Napolean complex tyrant is running Russia. He’ll need to be pulled out of a hole and his neck stretched before this is over.
NATO expanded East 16 years ago. The new members were former Warsaw pact Soviet satellites, who have good reason to fear Russia after 40 years of occupation.
So the idea that NATO “provoked” the war is bull manure.
No, it didn’t need to end at all. I’m surprised this bizarre argument even gets entertained.
NATO always was, from day one, a treaty-driven organisation where member states OR non-members could ask it for humanitarian, peace-keeping, or other forms of support - at no point EVER was its mission expressly limited to a Soviet or Russian context.
“[NATO] commits the Allies to democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law, as well as to peaceful resolution of disputes.”
In effect it’s just a smaller version of the United Nations, with a collective defence element.
And the ending of the Soviet Union - by Soviet hands, not NATO’s - ended ANY obligation on the part of the Alliance to keep acting as if the Soviet Union still existed.
Therein lies the tragedy - Gorbachev understood that the NATO mission AGAINST THE SOVIETS ended when the Soviet Union folded. Yeltsin got the same memo. Only Putin, and his revanchist paranoid ex-spook chums, never accepted that the end of the Soviet Union didn’t mean the end of Russia; they’ve laboured under an absurd delusion that NATO threatened Russia when IT NEVER DID.
Putin could’ve stopped being a whiny, pompous, paranoid, butt-hurt son of a bitch, and just accepted that NATO had more important things to do with its time than babysit a state of Russia. It’s his malfunction.
“same twisted logic.”
No it’s not. Not even close.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.