Donald Tusk is dancing around the fire like an Indian high on firewater.
His show is primarily for domestic consumption for the gullible segment of the EU/NATO population. At the end it is the general population who is going to pay for this new drive against Russia. A Russia that was unable to take major cities like Kyiv and Kharkov that are right on her border.
I see your points, but I don't believe that Poland is planning to launch a unilateral offensive against Belarus, Russia, or against Russia inside the territory that Ukraine claims as its own. I was concerned about some moves towards Belarus in the past but I no longer see a serious threat on that front since they won't go it alone and Trump won't back them.
I also think the Poles are more sensible, they will not march forward and cross borders. It does not look like anybody will do that now. I was satirizing Tusk’s withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention. I think he used this step to overdramatize the possibility of a Russian attack on Poland. A play to harden the fears in the hearts of the EU/NATO population. As far as the Baltic States are concerned I can actually understand them. Their territories are very small and I think they still have sizable Russian population groups. If they do get into a serious issue with Russia their defense opportunities are limited. Just one more reason for Lithuania to allow a transportation corridor between Kaliningrad and Russia.
The East Shield and Baltic Defence Line wouldn't be needed if Poland and the Baltic countries were sure of article 5 guaranteeing their security. Apparently, they don't trust the Americans anymore.
I am wondering why the UK and EU along with US neocons get the idea that Putin yearns to attack the EU countries? It seems like
1. a projection of what they want to do, i.e. to attack Russia and
2. presents Europe/US as "victims" of Russian aggression.
Victims who experience all their aggression as if it is all coming from outside of them, feel that all their hostility is 100% justified. In fact, the danger of victimhood is that an individual or country is less able to control their aggression precisely because of this sense of righteous indignation and hostility.
I also wonder if NATO should be dissolved, i.e., what are the pluses and minuses of ending the NATO alliance?
It seems to me NATO started as a limited defensive alliance during the Cold War, which might actually have been started by the CIA for all we know. (Funny how governments and their agencies are always trying to "solve" problems they themselves create) But it has evolved into a perpetual war machine, i.e. an offensive alliance, that bleeds countries of their limited tax payer dollars for a threat that no longer exists. This works well for the military industrial complex and those who profit from endless war, it works for money laundering purposes back to political leaders who vote for military adventurism which corrupts and rots these politicians' incentives to care about their constituents.
Is there any other benefit from NATO, and from all NATO'S adjacent war mongering NGOs and the PSYOPs that go with them, paid for by the tax payers without our consent?
Why do certain groups think individual despots are going to invade them? Good question the Answerer is a psychiatric one. Most all despots are sociopaths like a serial killer, meaning they get a kind sexual gratification from it being in charge of others. The only way to deal with them is to lock them up for absolute life or execute them. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombings
They are all the same North Korea would invade South Korea if i had a chance. Saudi Arabia kills reporters that may have family dirt on him.
That whole anti-mine treaty is a joke. If land mines are to be banned, how about poisoned food and wells, booby traps, etc.? I think the Baltics and Poland SHOULD embrace land mines and plant mines densely along the border. I don't worry that the Russians would step on those mines. I want these countries to fix their fences and make sure they don't look east. Digging a wide moat along the border would be just fine as well.
By the way, when the chihuahuas think they are safe, maybe they will become more reasonable.
Donald Tusk is dancing around the fire like an Indian high on firewater.
His show is primarily for domestic consumption for the gullible segment of the EU/NATO population. At the end it is the general population who is going to pay for this new drive against Russia. A Russia that was unable to take major cities like Kyiv and Kharkov that are right on her border.
I see your points, but I don't believe that Poland is planning to launch a unilateral offensive against Belarus, Russia, or against Russia inside the territory that Ukraine claims as its own. I was concerned about some moves towards Belarus in the past but I no longer see a serious threat on that front since they won't go it alone and Trump won't back them.
I also think the Poles are more sensible, they will not march forward and cross borders. It does not look like anybody will do that now. I was satirizing Tusk’s withdrawal from the Ottawa Convention. I think he used this step to overdramatize the possibility of a Russian attack on Poland. A play to harden the fears in the hearts of the EU/NATO population. As far as the Baltic States are concerned I can actually understand them. Their territories are very small and I think they still have sizable Russian population groups. If they do get into a serious issue with Russia their defense opportunities are limited. Just one more reason for Lithuania to allow a transportation corridor between Kaliningrad and Russia.
Tusk, like a good european, is showing that he hates Russia so much that he'll blow off Polish children's legs to spite Russia.
The East Shield and Baltic Defence Line wouldn't be needed if Poland and the Baltic countries were sure of article 5 guaranteeing their security. Apparently, they don't trust the Americans anymore.
Agreed
I am wondering why the UK and EU along with US neocons get the idea that Putin yearns to attack the EU countries? It seems like
1. a projection of what they want to do, i.e. to attack Russia and
2. presents Europe/US as "victims" of Russian aggression.
Victims who experience all their aggression as if it is all coming from outside of them, feel that all their hostility is 100% justified. In fact, the danger of victimhood is that an individual or country is less able to control their aggression precisely because of this sense of righteous indignation and hostility.
I also wonder if NATO should be dissolved, i.e., what are the pluses and minuses of ending the NATO alliance?
It seems to me NATO started as a limited defensive alliance during the Cold War, which might actually have been started by the CIA for all we know. (Funny how governments and their agencies are always trying to "solve" problems they themselves create) But it has evolved into a perpetual war machine, i.e. an offensive alliance, that bleeds countries of their limited tax payer dollars for a threat that no longer exists. This works well for the military industrial complex and those who profit from endless war, it works for money laundering purposes back to political leaders who vote for military adventurism which corrupts and rots these politicians' incentives to care about their constituents.
Is there any other benefit from NATO, and from all NATO'S adjacent war mongering NGOs and the PSYOPs that go with them, paid for by the tax payers without our consent?
Why do certain groups think individual despots are going to invade them? Good question the Answerer is a psychiatric one. Most all despots are sociopaths like a serial killer, meaning they get a kind sexual gratification from it being in charge of others. The only way to deal with them is to lock them up for absolute life or execute them. Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Russian_apartment_bombings
They are all the same North Korea would invade South Korea if i had a chance. Saudi Arabia kills reporters that may have family dirt on him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Jamal_Khashoggi
Trump is not much different and those that want hold onto power.
That whole anti-mine treaty is a joke. If land mines are to be banned, how about poisoned food and wells, booby traps, etc.? I think the Baltics and Poland SHOULD embrace land mines and plant mines densely along the border. I don't worry that the Russians would step on those mines. I want these countries to fix their fences and make sure they don't look east. Digging a wide moat along the border would be just fine as well.
By the way, when the chihuahuas think they are safe, maybe they will become more reasonable.