• 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!

WHITE HOUSE TO PUTIN Don't 'Even Think About Messing Around' With The Baltics

President Barack Obama's message to Russian president Vladimir Putin when traveling to Europe next week is to not "even think about messing around" with the Baltic states, the White House said Friday.

Read the article here: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/white-house-putin-dont-even-214107060.html

What Obama is telling Putin is that Article 5 of the NATO Treaty means that if it messes with the Baltic states or any other member of NATO it will be messing with NATO, including the USA.

If Obama and NATO were serious, and I wish they were, they would be amassing significant forces and equipment in Belarus as he speaks - his words have been proven to be empty rhetoric and embarrassing. What ever happened to "speak softly, and carry a big stick"?

With Obama abandoning Eastern Europe by dropping the missile shield and with no obvious buildup of forces, just what is the "or else" part of this empty threat supposed to involve? Putin can't fly to NYC anymore?
 
If Obama and NATO were serious, and I wish they were, they would be amassing significant forces and equipment in Belarus as he speaks - his words have been proven to be empty rhetoric and embarrassing. What ever happened to "speak softly, and carry a big stick"?

With Obama abandoning Eastern Europe by dropping the missile shield and with no obvious buildup of forces, just what is the "or else" part of this empty threat supposed to involve? Putin can't fly to NYC anymore?

what the heck does belarus have to do with anything?

Besides, belarus is in russia's pocket so why should we expect the only remaining dictatorship in europe to cooperate?
 
If Obama and NATO were serious, and I wish they were, they would be amassing significant forces and equipment in Belarus as he speaks
- his words have been proven to be empty rhetoric and embarrassing. What ever happened to "speak softly, and carry a big stick"?

With Obama abandoning Eastern Europe by dropping the missile shield and with no obvious buildup of forces, just what is the "or else" part of this empty threat supposed to involve? Putin can't fly to NYC anymore?



Belarus?

You need to do a little research. Belarus is in Putins hip pocket.
 
My apologies to both Unitedwestand and Shrubnose - you're absolutely right. I was thinking of the Baltic Sea NATO states that could be used to marshall resources and be less confrontational than resources in Poland or Ukraine itself yet be close enough to imply business. My point being that if you are going to make a threat you have to actually have resources in place to implement the "or else". If not, Russia could own much if not all of Ukraine as they did with Crimea before NATO and the US could get in the game.
 
I think you guys in USA are taking it too slightly. If a NATO member is attacked then it becomes larger than every other countries' president. We just retaliate, wherever it may go.
 
Being Canadian, allow me a hockey metaphor.

I have seen this many times, while playing, officiating and just watching. A new 'star" comes along and as is usual shows talent early and is advanced up the spectrum. He will soon find himself at 13, playing against 18 year olds.

Because he has heard for years he has such great gifts, be it stick handling, speed, a cannon of a slap shot or just a combination of all of it as well as size.

In the junior leagues he is now not so much the star, the game has changed, his moves no longer work, his opponents have experience, cunning and learned strategy; he finds himself stapled to the ice or boards a lot, his shots easily turned away by experienced goal tenders.

He does not realize he is, frankly, out of his league. He presses harder, faster, taking more risks, believing his own myth in the wake of mounting evidence he is, at this level a very average player, convinced he is the next Gretzski.

As all metaphors do, it breaks down there as the hockey player merely gets benched. But as Obama presses harder and takes more risk against a far more experienced and cunning opponent, Americans and the world must realize that the rookie star's failure could be WWIII

Sadly true... +1

1407992596_image.jpg
 
What's Obama going to do if he does?

He will put Us in war with Russia and then will come another president to fix the things out there. That's all Obama can do.
 
He will put Us in war with Russia and then will come another president to fix the things out there. That's all Obama can do.
Is a wimp or a warmonger? Pick one of the two.
 
Is a wimp or a warmonger? Pick one of the two.

Right now, I can't call him wimp, nor warmonger.
Right now I can say that his threats and red lines are so useless.
And I believe that if he start a war with Russia, he can't handle it.
 
Right now, I can't call him wimp, nor warmonger.
Right now I can say that his threats and red lines are so useless.
And I believe that if he start a war with Russia, he can't handle it.
NATO is not his red line.

I agree that he should not be using red line rhetoric with Russia though. It's a fight we can't win.
 
He will put Us in war with Russia
and then will come another president to fix the things out there.
That's all Obama can do.



How do you fix things after a world-wide nuclear war?

Fill us in. We really need to know this.
 
NATO is not his red line.

I agree that he should not be using red line rhetoric with Russia though. It's a fight we can't win.

More, I think it's a fight which can't be won the way he might think.
no matter how bad and evil are russia's intentions, it's a superpower.
And Coldwar expressed very well that these 2 countries can't confront each other. It's a loss for both sides.

Indeed yeah, Russia should be afraid of NATO more than US.
But honestly, I think NATO is weak. And I believe that's because of EU itself. They expanded NATO with selfish corrupted small countries which won't move a finger without something in return. They see it as a business (my country included)
 
How do you fix things after a world-wide nuclear war?

Fill us in.

Why do you think it is going to be a nuclear one.
I do not believe US and Russia wills spend a nuclear bomb to throw to each others because they both know it's impossible to hit the target.
It's such a long way to Moscow and Washington for both of them.
 
Pfff. And what are we going to do? :roll:

Obama couldn't intimidate a six year old girl, let alone a regional superpower. If I were Putin, I'd just laugh and keep right on doing what I was doing.

Thats the problem-Obama is out of paint for his red lines, and even if he wasn't Putin has already called Obama's bluffs several times.

And if the US does nothing, NATO does nothing.
 
Being Canadian, allow me a hockey metaphor.

I have seen this many times, while playing, officiating and just watching. A new 'star" comes along and as is usual shows talent early and is advanced up the spectrum. He will soon find himself at 13, playing against 18 year olds.

Because he has heard for years he has such great gifts, be it stick handling, speed, a cannon of a slap shot or just a combination of all of it as well as size.

In the junior leagues he is now not so much the star, the game has changed, his moves no longer work, his opponents have experience, cunning and learned strategy; he finds himself stapled to the ice or boards a lot, his shots easily turned away by experienced goal tenders.

He does not realize he is, frankly, out of his league. He presses harder, faster, taking more risks, believing his own myth in the wake of mounting evidence he is, at this level a very average player, convinced he is the next Gretzski.

As all metaphors do, it breaks down there as the hockey player merely gets benched. But as Obama presses harder and takes more risk against a far more experienced and cunning opponent, Americans and the world must realize that the rookie star's failure could be WWIII

What we really have here is an ACORN community organizer vs a KGB thug. We already know how that game will go.
 
Why you think it is going to be a nuclear one.
I do not believe US and Russia wills spend a nuclear bomb to throw to each others because they both know it's impossible to hit the target.
It's such a long way to Moscow and Washington for both of them.
I do agree that game theory dictates that neither country will ever use nuclear weapons against each other as long as MAD exists.

So I don't necessarily think that anything precludes a non-nuclear, devastating and potentially nation-ending ground war with Russia, at least to start. Once the war reaches a turning point either way, the MAD equation would start to change from the perspective of the losing side.

A 10 year old alliance with Estonia is not worth a war with Russia, not even close.
 
Why do you think it is going to be a nuclear one.
I do not believe US and Russia wills spend a nuclear bomb to throw to each others because
they both know it's impossible to hit the target.
It's such a long way to Moscow and Washington for both of them.





With nuclear weapons (Both sides have thousands of them.) you can be off target a good bit and still get the same effect as a direct hit.
 
Which NATO country do you expect Putin to invade first?

Haven't they already invaded Crimea and the Ukraine already? May not be NATO countries, weren't they considering becoming such?

NATO

Relations between Ukraine and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) started in 1994.[SUP][1][/SUP] Ukraine applied to join the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) in 2008.[SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][3][/SUP] On December 3, 2008 NATO decided it will work out an Annual National Programme of providing assistance to Ukraine to implement reforms required to accede the alliance without referring to MAP.[SUP][4][/SUP] Plans for Ukrainian membership to NATO were shelved by Ukraine following the 2010 Ukrainian presidential election in which Viktor Yanukovych was elected President.[SUP][5][/SUP] President Yanukovych opted to keep Ukraine a non-aligned state.[SUP][6][/SUP] This materialized on June 3, 2010 when the Ukrainian parliament excluded, with 226 votes, the goal of "integration into Euro-Atlantic security and NATO membership" from the country's national security strategy.[SUP][7][/SUP] "European integration" is still part of Ukraine's national security strategy and co-operation with NATO was not excluded.[SUP][7][/SUP] Ukraine considers its relations with NATO as a partnership.[SUP][8][/SUP][SUP][9][/SUP] Ukraine and NATO still hold joint seminars and joint tactical and strategical exercises and operations.[SUP][10][/SUP][SUP][11]
[/SUP]
Ukraine

So that'd be a yes. Seems that Putin doesn't like the idea, and made his cause all this mischief and conflict. But seems to me that a sovereign nation should be allowed to chose whether to become a NATO member or not.
 
Back
Top Bottom