The Third World War
Almost a century on since the First World War, it's now becoming increasingly probable that there could be a third one. The First one was only postponed for a few years for foes to rearm and for Germany to start another war in 1939. And that second one didn't end after the surrender of the Nazis in 1945; after the defeat of Germany and the Yalta conference and agreement, the so called allied forces who fought against Germany, Italy and Japan - had their own grudges and differences: mainly between the then U.S.S.R and, America and its Western partners. The Soviet Union was grudgingly accepted and accommodated as a partner; but the West had no good feelings about the Soviets and vise versa. Hence, the Cold War that followed which the West lead by America and in the form of NATO, won - leading to the collapse of the U.S.S.R.
It seems NATO hasn't been satisfied with the U.S.S.R's collapse only; NATO is still wary with what was left of it - Russia; and they have not forgotten the humiliating agreement with Stalin at Yalta and what happened after that. Through the years and especially since the disintegration of the U.S.S.R , NATO prompted by the US - has steadily but surely been rearming and stretching and extending its arms and power closer and closer to Russia; from all sides. With what has just happened in Georgia, it seems as if Russia has had enough of that.
Will NATO push on with its expansion? That would be reckless and extremely dangerous. As in both the first and second World Wars, accidentally - 'one thing leads to another' until it becomes too late to stop events. The First World War happened, accidentally, mainly because one part of Europe wanted to be the dominant power there; the Second One, planned, was for the same reasons, but Hitler too - wanted to settle old scores and expand. And both World Wars, in one way or the other - were about power and dominating resources; mainly oil.
Hasn't Europe learnt enough from their history of the last Century? Hasn't enough suffering, destruction and horrors happened there for them to learn to live with and accommodate each other, rather than one part wanting to expand and dominate? NATO continuously preaches that every country should respect each others borders, and yet it is aggressively expanding; what kind of message does that send?If Russia or China act in the same way - extending and spreading their arms and missiles, would NATO quietly and passively accept that?
Rubbing Russia's nose more and more and pushing it further and further could accidentally lead to the unimaginable: the Third World War. Any body ready for that? Nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction which both sides posses have so far been deterrents, but for how long?
It seems NATO hasn't been satisfied with the U.S.S.R's collapse only; NATO is still wary with what was left of it - Russia; and they have not forgotten the humiliating agreement with Stalin at Yalta and what happened after that. Through the years and especially since the disintegration of the U.S.S.R , NATO prompted by the US - has steadily but surely been rearming and stretching and extending its arms and power closer and closer to Russia; from all sides. With what has just happened in Georgia, it seems as if Russia has had enough of that.
Will NATO push on with its expansion? That would be reckless and extremely dangerous. As in both the first and second World Wars, accidentally - 'one thing leads to another' until it becomes too late to stop events. The First World War happened, accidentally, mainly because one part of Europe wanted to be the dominant power there; the Second One, planned, was for the same reasons, but Hitler too - wanted to settle old scores and expand. And both World Wars, in one way or the other - were about power and dominating resources; mainly oil.
Hasn't Europe learnt enough from their history of the last Century? Hasn't enough suffering, destruction and horrors happened there for them to learn to live with and accommodate each other, rather than one part wanting to expand and dominate? NATO continuously preaches that every country should respect each others borders, and yet it is aggressively expanding; what kind of message does that send?If Russia or China act in the same way - extending and spreading their arms and missiles, would NATO quietly and passively accept that?
Rubbing Russia's nose more and more and pushing it further and further could accidentally lead to the unimaginable: the Third World War. Any body ready for that? Nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction which both sides posses have so far been deterrents, but for how long?
Comments
Your comparison seems invalid. The Germans lost World War I and were very bitter about it. Hence when they began to recover their nationalism and hurt pride made it easy for Hitler to come to power. If you want to compare current events with the events that led up to World Wat II then Russia is playing Germany's role. It is Russia that lost. Russia that was humiliated. Russia that is resurgent.
Hasn't Europe learnt enough from their history of the last Century? Hasn't enough suffering, destruction and horrors happened there for them to learn to live with and accommodate each other, rather than one part wanting to expand and dominate?
Europe? You forget about Japan and the USSR both, don't you? Only part of Russia is in Europe... and that part is in EASTERN Europe. And you also forget about Australia, Canada and a dozen other combatants IN World War II.
NATO continuously preaches that every country should respect each others borders, and yet it is aggressively expanding;
Interesting definition of "aggressively" you've got there! What does the word "aggressive" mean to you?
As always, Western politicians and leaders are unashamedly hypocritical and biased in their reaction.
You should look in the mirror sometime, before throwing that word "hypocritical" around.
Are you a serious student of world politics? Do you value truth?
Firstly, NATO quite definitely pushes other nations as well, as any serious student of world politics is aware- outside the US.
Secondly, and completely separately, did you actually type "NATO does not invade sovereign nations for the purposes of securing oil pipelines" with a straight face and uncontrollable laughing?
AbdulMuhib has answered you very well. Ron: the main reason NATO and the US want missiles very close to Russia is not because of Iran or N.Korea - even a fool would know it's mostly aimed at Russia and protecting oil resources. NATO can easily use Turkey to have missiles targetting Iran or N.Korea.
The problem with Ron and Craig is that, they view and look at the World through a biased window. While I know that both NATO, especially the US, and Russia will and have always done whatever it takes to protect their interests. Even if it means causing the deaths and suffering of millions of others.
Both the US and Russia are ruthless and brutal when it comes to serving their interests; and unashemedly biased and hypocritical - the US suports Kosovo's 'rights for independence' from Serbia and yet it can't accept South Osstia and Abkhazia breaking up; Russia very much supports South Ossetia and Abkazia, but it brutally crsuhed Chechnya's struggle for independence.