• 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!

Ukraine U-Turn: Kiev to ban itself from NATO

Phantom

Phantom

John Schnatter 2012
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
638
Reaction score
184
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAAGqdCAH88"]YouTube- Ukraine U-Turn: Kiev to ban itself from NATO[/ame]

RussiaToday said:
Ukraine's new government looks set to turn its back on a key objective of the previous administration. The ruling coalition is preparing to pass a law that would keep the country out of any military alliances. This would provide a legal block for any possible membership of NATO, as RT's Ekaterina Gracheva explains.
Click to expand...

All I can say is I'm glad Ukraine decided to keep the sovereignty of it's military instead of becoming mercenaries for other people's interests!
 
Shame that the Ukraine is so split like it is, the political and social differences are almost too much. I think they would benefit from NATO more than it would with ties with Russia. As for avoiding military blocs it can formally obviously but it has to move closer to Russia or the west, it cannot exist entirely on its own and the benefits from siding with one or the other are too much to resist.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
NATO like the Cuban embargo is nothing but a relic of the Cold War. Its time to do away with it.
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better myself. After the Berlin Wall fell the Soviet Union started dissolving the Warsaw Pact then finally in 1990 Bush and Gorby declared the cold war over. Instead of America following suit they expanded.

NATO also turns the world into a fragile place. Say for example Russia attacks a very small country like Denmark. That means every other country in the alliance will have to fight Russia for Denmark... Which could lead to a large violent conflict.
 
Wiseone said:
Shame that the Ukraine is so split like it is, the political and social differences are almost too much. I think they would benefit from NATO more than it would with ties with Russia. As for avoiding military blocs it can formally obviously but it has to move closer to Russia or the west, it cannot exist entirely on its own and the benefits from siding with one or the other are too much to resist.
Click to expand...

Ukraine found out the cold war ended a long time ago (apparently NATO hasn't figured that out yet). They seek to be independent. You can trade and cooperate with both side. Joining a military alliance divides the world - it doesn't bring it closer together.
 
Last edited:
Preponderance of power is what brings peace which is why NATO continues to exist and why its important. Take for example your idea about Denmark and Russia going to war, if you were a Russian war planner which situation do you think is more favorable.
1) Denmark is alone with no allies
2) Denmark has all of the NATO countries on its side who will fight for it.

Obviously you want Denmark or any other target to be alone because you want the Russian or any other warplanners to look at the situation and see an un-winnable war and unobtainable objective. Thats how you prevent war, by making sure that no potential enemy can see a route to victory, so they don't even try.
The purpose of NATO while originally was to simply check potential Soviet Aggression still has a purpose to play by being an insurmountable obstacle to any potential aggression.

Also Ukraine is too small and its economics and culture are too tied into Russia for it to exist solely on its own. It must either stick with Russia or seek support from the west to continue as it is without social unrest, political unrest and economic unrest.

Lastly its geography and position next to Russia make it much too great a security risk to allow to become too pro-western. If Hitler had started in the Ukraine he would have reached Moscow and Stalingrad in two weeks, think how fast NATO could move if it were to start in Russia?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLuALCgagbM"]YouTube- Video Dispatch: A Revolution Reversal[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCtd2nNBh40"]YouTube- Video Dispatch: The Outlook from Ukraine[/ame]
 
I find it interesting that everyone who has thus far posted on this subject fails to realize that the word 'Blocs' is plural.
To my mind that means ANY side whether it be Russian or NATO military bloc.
I doubt in the long run that Ukraine it can remain neutral.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom