NATO has prevented gobbling

[VitaMan]

The reason NATO was created was to prevent large countries (Russia) from gobbling up smaller countries. Russia is now in the process of gobbling up non NATO member Ukraine. And Mr. Trump says, "Let them have it."


NATO has been a success.


As for the reason why NATO has never stood alone with the USA as a member, there is a lot of discussion about that. Probably for several reasons.

[Jacuzzme]

NATO was formed to allow European countries to be unburdened from what has been, like providing and paying for their own defense.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

The reason NATO was created was to prevent large countries (Russia) from gobbling up smaller countries. Russia is now in the process of gobbling up non NATO member Ukraine. And Mr. Trump says, "Let them have it."


NATO has been a success.


As for the reason why NATO has never stood alone with the USA as a member, there is a lot of discussion about that. Probably for several reasons.

quite likely the most inaccurate description of NATO ever written.


Ukraine has nothing to do with NATO. when NATO was founded Ukraine was part of the USSR. NATO was founded because of the USSR and the huge mistake by Truman not to force the USSR out of western Europe which he easily could have done. without losing one US soldier.


how you ask?

two words .. Moscow .. Nuke.


BOOM! cold war over. no NATO. no need.

[VitaMan]

Nothing correct or sensible in the post above.


It was mentioned in the quote above Ukraine is not a member of NATO. That is why it is possible for Russia to gobble it up.


Patton may have shared your wishes for a nuclear bomb.

[VitaMan]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

NATO was formed to allow European countries to be unburdened from what has been, like providing and paying for their own defense.

incorrect

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Nothing correct or sensible in the post above.


It was mentioned in the quote above Ukraine is not a member of NATO. That is why it is possible for Russia to gobble it up.


Patton may have shared your wishes for a nuclear bomb.

then you agree Ukraine is not NATO's issue because they are not a member of NATO which was founded to protect NATO MEMBERS from the USSR


thanks for clearing that up

[VitaMan]

There is nothing to clear up. Ukraine is not a member of NATO.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

The reason NATO was created was to prevent large countries (Russia) from gobbling up smaller countries. Russia is now in the process of gobbling up non NATO member Ukraine. And Mr. Trump says, "Let them have it."


NATO has been a success.


As for the reason why NATO has never stood alone with the USA as a member, there is a lot of discussion about that. Probably for several reasons.

Originally Posted by VitaMan

There is nothing to clear up. Ukraine is not a member of NATO.

then your thread has no point. you are completely wrong about NATO's purpose.

[VitaMan]

Sorry, you are incorrect


One of the purposes is to illustrate the benefits of being a NATO member. There are other purposes also.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

Sorry, you are incorrect


One of the purposes is to illustrate the benefits of being a NATO member. There are other purposes also.

who's incorrect? is Ukraine a NATO member or not?


no they aren't so your "gobbling" theory is .. incorrect.

[VitaMan]

You can stop making stupid posts now. Discussions with you are useless.


Refer to above posts where your question has already been answered......several times.

If Ukraine was a member of NATO, they wouldn't be in the process of being gobbled up by a much larger country.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

You can stop making stupid posts now. Discussions with you are useless.


Refer to above posts where your question has already been answered......several times.

If Ukraine was a member of NATO, they wouldn't be in the process of being gobbled up by a much larger country.

you seem unaware that the Minsk accords of the early 90's after the collapse of the USSR specifically forbade NATO expansion eastward meaning Ukraine was never by treaty going to be allowed in NATO. unless NATO broke their own agreement .. which they did. and the US by bringing up NATO membership of Ukraine.



the US and NATO caused the conflict by backing Ukraine after they reneged on allowing a referendum vote to allow the Donbas region to join Russia. the Minsk accords were broken by Ukraine.



who's the bad guy here?

[VitaMan]

something interesting you may have missed....Russia invaded Ukraine.

Is Ukraine a sovereign country ?

Is Ukraine in NATO ?

Is Mr. Trump in favor of letting Russia keep parts of Ukraine ?

Mr. Trump mentioned he can stop this conflict within 24 hrs of taking office.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

you seem unaware that the Minsk accords of the early 90's after the collapse of the USSR specifically forbade NATO expansion eastward meaning Ukraine was never by treaty going to be allowed in NATO. unless NATO broke their own agreement .. which they did. and the US by bringing up NATO membership of Ukraine.

the US and NATO caused the conflict by backing Ukraine after they reneged on allowing a referendum vote to allow the Donbas region to join Russia. the Minsk accords were broken by Ukraine.

who's the bad guy here?

You are going to have to start making a lot more sense.

The minsk agreement came about in 2015. Not the 1990’s. I have a feeling your thinking of something else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements


If you want to read up on NATO myths and misinformation you can do so here.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm

Pay attention to this entry:
Q. NATO promised Russia it would not enlarge after the Cold War?

A. The myth that there was a promise by Western leaders not to allow new members to join has been circulating for many years, and is actively used in disinformation campaigns by the Kremlin since the start of the Russian war against Ukraine.

While records show that in the initial stages of discussions about German reunification, US Secretary of State James Baker and his West German counterpart, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, floated such an idea with each other and with Soviet leaders in 1990, but diplomatic negotiations quickly moved on and the idea was dropped.

NATO’s founding treaty – signed in 1949 by the 12 original members and by every country that has joined since – includes a clear provision that opens NATO’s door to “any other European state in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area.” This has never changed. No treaty signed by NATO Allies and Russia ever included provisions that NATO cannot take on new members. Decisions on NATO membership are taken by consensus among all Allies.

Describing NATO’s open door policy as “expansion” is already part of the myth. NATO did not seek out new members or aim to “expand eastward.” NATO respects every nation’s right to choose its own path. NATO membership is a decision first for those countries that wish to join. It is then for NATO Allies to consider the application.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

You are going to have to start making a lot more sense.

The minsk agreement came about in 2015. Not the 1990’s. I have a feeling your thinking of something else. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements


If you want to read up on NATO myths and misinformation you can do so here.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/115204.htm

Pay attention to this entry:
Q. NATO promised Russia it would not enlarge after the Cold War?

A. The myth that there was a promise by Western leaders not to allow new members to join has been circulating for many years, and is actively used in disinformation campaigns by the Kremlin since the start of the Russian war against Ukraine.

While records show that in the initial stages of discussions about German reunification, US Secretary of State James Baker and his West German counterpart, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, floated such an idea with each other and with Soviet leaders in 1990, but diplomatic negotiations quickly moved on and the idea was dropped.

NATO’s founding treaty – signed in 1949 by the 12 original members and by every country that has joined since – includes a clear provision that opens NATO’s door to “any other European state in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area.” This has never changed. No treaty signed by NATO Allies and Russia ever included provisions that NATO cannot take on new members. Decisions on NATO membership are taken by consensus among all Allies.

Describing NATO’s open door policy as “expansion” is already part of the myth. NATO did not seek out new members or aim to “expand eastward.” NATO respects every nation’s right to choose its own path. NATO membership is a decision first for those countries that wish to join. It is then for NATO Allies to consider the application.

read this.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contro...NATO_expansion


The American-West German position became the basis for negotiations on February 7–10, 1990 with the USSR,[12] which became key in the dispute over the existence of an agreement that followed years later.[12] During these negotiations, representatives of the United States and West Germany have repeatedly linked the unification of Germany with the limitation of NATO expansion.[23][24] So, on February 9, 1990, at a meeting with Shevardnadze, James Baker stated that the United States was striving for a united Germany that would remain "firmly tied to NATO," promising at the same time "iron guarantees that NATO jurisdiction or forces would not move eastward."[25] Later that day, at a meeting with Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, he acknowledged that "It is important for the Soviet Union and other European countries to have guarantees that if the United States maintains its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, there will be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction or military presence by a single inch in the eastern direction". and, in addition, he asked Gorbachev whether he would prefer a united Germany "outside NATO, completely independent, without American troops, or a united Germany that retains ties with NATO, but with a guarantee that, that the jurisdiction or NATO troops will not extend to the east of the current line." When Gorbachev replied that "the expansion of the NATO zone is unacceptable," Baker agreed with this. In response, the head of the Soviet state told Baker that "a lot of what you said seems realistic" and urged him to "think about it."[12][26][27][28] Baker, at a press conference in Moscow on the same day, made public the resulting exchange, saying that the United States proposed, in order to mitigate the concerns of "those who are east of Germany,"[29][12] to prevent the expansion of NATO forces in the eastern direction and stated that the unification of Germany, according to the US position, is hardly possible without "certain security guarantees" with regard to the advance of NATO forces or its operation to the east.[29] Later, in its February 13 press release sent to embassies, the US State Department indicated that "the Secretary of State made it clear that the US supports a united Germany in NATO, but is ready to ensure that NATO's military presence will not expand further to the east."[30][12