• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Americans Increasingly See Russia as Threat, Top U.S. Enemy

Not everyone would have been happy with the breakup of the United States in the 1860's had it happened. But many would have been.

Post Tito, and pre Yugoslavian military conflict was much US/NATO/IMF interference aimed at the breakup of Yugoslavia.

How nice of them.

Right, because Serbia and Russia were the only big "stakeholders" in Yugoslavia.


This report examines the roles played by Western International Financial Institutions (IFIs), intelligence agencies, militaries and strategic interests in the break up of the Yugoslav Republic.

Analysis

Background

The Yugoslav wars occurred between 1991 and 2001, and involved several conflicts leading to the breakup of Yugoslavia. The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was created at the end of World War II, and consisted of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Slovenia and Kosovo.

Setting the Stage

A Political and Economic Crisis

In 1980, longtime dictator of Yugoslavia, Josip Broz Tito died, leading to a leadership crisis.

By 1982, the Yugoslav debt had grown to 20 billion dollars, so the US Ambassador in Belgrade, Lawrence Eagleburger, created a group of individuals known as the “Friends of Yugoslavia” who organized a set of “rescue loans” by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank.[1] However, that same year, the IMF and World Bank had created a new loan agreement, entitled Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs), which gave the IFIs total control over a country’s economic and even many political decisions. The effect of the SAPs was that they “wreaked economic and political havoc… The economic crisis threatened political stability … it also threatened to aggravate simmering ethnic tensions.”[2]

Breaking Yugoslavia - Geopoliticalmonitor.com

Seems like an incomplete story, unless you would provide references that they also had something to do with the actual ethnic cleansing?
 
I'll try not to tremble in fear as I'm kicking back this summer in Nevsky Prospect.
 
Simpleχity;1064319173 said:
Americans Increasingly See Russia as Threat, Top U.S. Enemy



Not surprising at all. Americans are indeed keeping abreast of Russian military expansionism in Europe and Putin's dishonesty and manipulations.

Remember Obama laughing at Romney when Romney called Russia a threat?

Not that I'm a Romney fan at all, just saying, I agreed with Romney's assertion of Russia. He knew this would happen, and it did.
 
I'll try not to tremble in fear as I'm kicking back this summer in Nevsky Prospect.

Be sure and check out the 'Chocolate factory' at its eastern end for a great feed and plenty of complimentary Baltika too. Loved it :)
 
Tell me when was the last time that any of those nations were flying patrols so close to our borders? Or annexing sovereign territory from another country, as Russia has now done TWICE in the last few years? I know Monte you are the resident Putin fanboy, but they've sure been up to a lot of provocative actions of late.



So all those mass graves didn't play any part in the NATO's decision then hmm?

You've got the cart before the horse as usual. As documented earlier, US/NATO/IMF interference in Yugoslavia post Tito, precipitated those mass graves.
 
How nice of them.



Seems like an incomplete story, unless you would provide references that they also had something to do with the actual ethnic cleansing?

Again, instigating the break-up of Yugoslavia precipitated the violence that followed. So you can blame that on Russia all you want, but as you can see, Russia's pushing back, Putin has drawn his line.
 
Again, instigating the break-up of Yugoslavia precipitated the violence that followed. So you can blame that on Russia all you want, but as you can see, Russia's pushing back, Putin has drawn his line.

I visited Yugoslavia between 1986 and 1988 and even then they were spoiling for a fight. These people have been unable to live in peace each other for centuries. Theres no need to invoke the culpability of some third party culprit be it Russia or the US to explain what happened in the nineties
 
I visited Yugoslavia between 1986 and 1988 and even then they were spoiling for a fight. These people have been unable to live in peace each other for centuries. Theres no need to invoke the culpability of some third party culprit be it Russia or the US to explain what happened in the nineties

I didn't dispute that, in fact what I posted was evidence of the US/NATO/IMF stirring the pot post Tito that culminated in exactly what they were after, the breakup of Yugoslavia.
 
I didn't dispute that, in fact what I posted was evidence of the US/NATO/IMF stirring the pot post Tito that culminated in exactly what they were after, the breakup of Yugoslavia.

So in other words you in fact DID dispute that by blaming the west as usual.

What a surprise :roll:
 
So in other words you in fact DID dispute that by blaming the west as usual.

What a surprise :roll:

When did I dispute that they were "spoiling for a fight" in the mid 80's? What I posted confirmed it and pointed out those behind it.

Beginning in 1990 Germany and the United States sought and achieved the breakup of Yugoslavia in two stages—1992-1995 and 1998-1999. The German government aimed at this division because it wanted to include as territory of its “vital interest” Slovenia and Croatia, the most economically developed states of the Yugoslavian confederation. These states were old allies in the Second World War (the Ustashi fascist group in Croatia and the nationalists in Slovenia). Through them Germany would achieve access to the Adriatic Sea.


http://www.iacenter.org/folder02/hidden_em.htm
 
Americans Increasingly See Russia as Threat, Top U.S. Enemy

not really. many of us are sick to death of getting dragged into this kind of ****. Europe needs to handle its own continent, and the same could be argued for the Middle East. we're sitting here with no good national health care program, bridges that were built in the 1950s, and an insufficient electrical grid. we have other **** to do, and we don't need this "i'm a bigger superpower than you" bull**** with Russia. that we're involved in this at all is a mistake, IMO.
 
When did I dispute that they were "spoiling for a fight" in the mid 80's? What I posted confirmed it and pointed out those behind it.

Only Tito's iron grip held them together as long as it did so the civil war was only a matter of time once he was gone . These people didn't need prompting by the West or anyone else kill each other nobody else was 'behind' it. I saw the hate at first hand so I know whereof I speak. Everything bad that happens in the world isn't all the fault of the nasty capitalists comrade
 
Only Tito's iron grip held them together as long as it did so the civil war was only a matter of time . These people didn't need prompting by the West or anyone else kill each other nobody else was 'behind' it. I saw the hate at first hand so I know whereof I speak. Everything bad that happens in the world isn't all the fault of the nasty capitalists comrade

I've already corrected you on that. Believe as you wish.
 
I've already corrected you on that. Believe as you wish.

I don't care to indulge your crusade against all things Western and make no apologies for calling you out on that :roll:
 
Last edited:
Simpleχity;1064319173 said:
Americans Increasingly See Russia as Threat, Top U.S. Enemy



Not surprising at all. Americans are indeed keeping abreast of Russian military expansionism in Europe and Putin's dishonesty and manipulations.

Several thoughts:

1. Russia and the U.S. clearly have some big differences in interests. Russia's interests and America's interests are not fully compatible and there is a large fault line across parts of Eastern Europe regarding, but not limited to the region Russia considers its "Near Abroad." These differences are not new and they predate the end of the Cold War.

2. The U.S. believes that rules and principles should largely guide the management of these differences. Its foreign policy has been grounded in that assumption and minimized the importance of power and Realpolitik. Russia, on the other hand, places much greater weight on power and Realpolitik. Russia has demonstrated its willingness to use force to secure what it believes are its interests. It has had a destabilizing role in Ukraine and that role has created greater uncertainty along Russia's boundaries and in neighboring countries. To the extent that Russia chooses to use force to secure its goals, some of which undercut American interests, Russia most definitely poses a real threat to U.S. interests.

3. In the larger context, U.S. policy remains on a trajectory of reducing U.S. military strength. Funding has not kept pace with GDP growth. Manpower, naval vessels, etc., have undergone absolute reductions (even as asymmetric threats e.g., that posed by ISIS, and the balance of power is evolving e.g., China is growing stronger and Russia remains embarked on a military modernization effort). Put another way, present U.S. national security policy is inconsistent with the national security environment that is presently evolving. Hard power matters greatly and rules/principles are not a full substitute. This evolution also provides a context by which Russia can threaten U.S. interests (directly as in Ukraine or indirectly by reducing cooperation on matters such as Iran's nuclear activities).

4. At present, the U.S. remains the world's strongest power. However, it does not have preeminence and this most definitely is not a unipolar world. Moreover, the qualitative U.S. advantage is eroding, in part, on account of the U.S. defense policy choice and, in part, on account of the renewed efforts underway to build or rebuild military power in various countries, including Russia.

5. U.S. foreign policy has also been excessively reactive in recent years. Lack of strategic thrust has led to the U.S. ignoring areas where interests with great powers are incompatible and left the U.S. behind the curve of events far too often. The lack of strategic definition to U.S. foreign and military policy has been exploited by Russia, which places national interests ahead of economic ones and is willing to endure punishing sanctions in pursuit of its goals. This context is also one that undermines American interests.

In short, I do believe Americans have reasonable basis to be concerned about Russia--not as a direct threat, but as a destabilizing and not necessarily reliable entity when it comes to sustaining American interests. Such an outcome has economic and national security implications for the U.S. The consequences for countries lying along Russia's boundaries are much starker and those countries are facing a genuine loss of strategic flexibility when it comes to pursuing their own interest on account of Russia's aspirations and conduct.
 
So which war hawk on here is ready to go toe to toe with Putin's boys?

Management of the differences with Russia does not necessarily require a military solution. It does entail strengthening the NATO guarantee for existing NATO members, better linking defense policy with the security environment, and assuring that Russia and the U.S. have a clear understanding of one another's critical interests to avoid measures that would impede on those interests and trigger suboptimal outcomes. The kind of diplomatic understanding that existed between the U.S. and USSR during the latter part of the Cold War, which helped lead to a peaceful resolution, is not present today in either country. Unless it is rebuilt, the relationship will remain rocky and uncertain, and much more than would otherwise be the case. Strategic opportunities where collaboration is possible would be missed and management of areas in which real differences exist would be ineffective.
 
When did I dispute that they were "spoiling for a fight" in the mid 80's? What I posted confirmed it and pointed out those behind it.

Beginning in 1990 Germany and the United States sought and achieved the breakup of Yugoslavia in two stages—1992-1995 and 1998-1999. The German government aimed at this division because it wanted to include as territory of its “vital interest” Slovenia and Croatia, the most economically developed states of the Yugoslavian confederation. These states were old allies in the Second World War (the Ustashi fascist group in Croatia and the nationalists in Slovenia). Through them Germany would achieve access to the Adriatic Sea.


The Breakup of Yugoslavia

Conspiratorial dribble from a Greek conspiracy theorist. Shocking.
 
Conspiratorial dribble from a Greek conspiracy theorist. Shocking.

Nice try, but the International Action Center was formed by anti-imperialist and former USAG Ramsey Clarke!
 
Nice try, but the International Action Center was formed by anti-imperialist and former USAG Ramsey Clarke!

*Yawn* its conspiratorial nonsense and no one is buying it. Luckily it doesn't matter.
 
not really. many of us are sick to death of getting dragged into this kind of ****. Europe needs to handle its own continent, and the same could be argued for the Middle East. we're sitting here with no good national health care program, bridges that were built in the 1950s, and an insufficient electrical grid. we have other **** to do, and we don't need this "i'm a bigger superpower than you" bull**** with Russia. that we're involved in this at all is a mistake, IMO.
I didn't pull the results from a conspiracy site. Whether you agree or not, the poll numbers from Gallup point to Americans growing increasingly wary of both Russia and Putin. Rightfully so IMHO.
 
Simpleχity;1064327368 said:
I didn't pull the results from a conspiracy site. Whether you agree or not, the poll numbers from Gallup point to Americans growing increasingly wary of both Russia and Putin. Rightfully so IMHO.

that doesn't mean we want some proxy war with Russia.
 
Simpleχity;1064327368 said:
I didn't pull the results from a conspiracy site. Whether you agree or not, the poll numbers from Gallup point to Americans growing increasingly wary of both Russia and Putin. Rightfully so IMHO.

There's also polls that reveal that Americans are growing tired of US foreign Policy, period, not just when democrats advance it, not just when republicans advance it but period. We don't want what you're lobbying for, hear?

Public Sees U.S. Power Declining as Support for Global Engagement Slips | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press
 
*Yawn* its conspiratorial nonsense and no one is buying it. Luckily it doesn't matter.

Yes I know, because if it reveals that the US is culpable, its conspiracy, all the while you peddle your conspiracies about Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria, China, Russia, and whoever else your bigoted and hate filled mind takes a disliking to.
 
Back
Top Bottom