• 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!

‘They Will Die in Tallinn’

Westphalian said:
The Baltic states buy it - which is why they're so desperate for the US to station as many Americans there as possible.

Also, it's easy to sit in the US pledging un-dying allegiance to a place you've probably never been remotely near, when you know full well that there is no current prospect of conflict with Russia.

But talk is cheap. I don't think you'd be quite so sanguine if you thought that the US actually might directly attack Russia in defence of the Baltics. Don't be casual about war - not war with a power capable of destroying Uncle Sam. You shouldn't want that.
Click to expand...

The Baltic States have a long history of being brutally invaded by Russia for no reason. Of course they'll want some extra security even when they don't actually think their allies will leave them on the hook.

Oh really? The current Russian regime has been invading one neighbor for more than a decade now. The idea that there "is no current prospect of conflict with Russia" will only last as long as it takes for RT to invent a new fantasy about "genocide".

:lamo

You Putin fanboys love throwing around threats. Unfortunately for you, nobody's buying it.
 
Tigerace117 said:
The Baltic States have a long history of being brutally invaded by Russia for no reason. Of course they'll want some extra security even when they don't actually think their allies will leave them on the hook.

Oh really? The current Russian regime has been invading one neighbor for more than a decade now. The idea that there "is no current prospect of conflict with Russia" will only last as long as it takes for RT to invent a new fantasy about "genocide".

:lamo

You Putin fanboys love throwing around threats. Unfortunately for you, nobody's buying it.
Click to expand...


If you think NATO expansion was a great idea, then the Baltics should feel all secure by now.

But they don't. My contention is simply that they are indefensible (in or outside NATO) because of geography, and they don't trust the US to risk armageddon on their behalf.

That's not a threat - it's just an observation, and it's far more realistic than your curious inability to see that the Baltics are both inside NATO and still feeling vulnerable.
 
Westphalian said:
If you think NATO expansion was a great idea, then the Baltics should feel all secure by now.

But they don't. My contention is simply that they are indefensible (in or outside NATO) because of geography, and they don't trust the US to risk armageddon on their behalf.

That's not a threat - it's just an observation, and it's far more realistic than your curious inability to see that the Baltics are both inside NATO and still feeling vulnerable.
Click to expand...

They don't feel secure because the Russian government has a long history of aggressive expansion. If it wasn't for NATO the Baltic States would have been even more vulnerable, and likely already targeted.....as they were in the bad old days.

Easily defensible or not, they are still more than willing to fight if Putin and his cronies decide they have an opportunity.

Fantasizing that Russia can "destroy the US" is not an "observation". As I said before, the Baltic States feel vulnerable because the Russian government has a habit of inventing stories to justifying attacking their neighbors.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Hell, y’all we saw this coming. Estonia is a NATO member. Trump is planning to give those poor bastards up to Putin during their double secret meeting. Putin will wait until Trump cowards out on NATO. Meanwhile the Trump/GOP Congress will do nothing to stop Trump from further destroying the USA.
Click to expand...

Crimea anyone?
 
Tigerace117 said:
They don't feel secure because the Russian government has a long history of aggressive expansion. If it wasn't for NATO the Baltic States would have been even more vulnerable, and likely already targeted.....as they were in the bad old days.

Easily defensible or not, they are still more than willing to fight if Putin and his cronies decide they have an opportunity.

Fantasizing that Russia can "destroy the US" is not an "observation". As I said before, the Baltic States feel vulnerable because the Russian government has a habit of inventing stories to justifying attacking their neighbors.
Click to expand...


Actually, it is a factually based observation, and mutual destruction makes the US-Russian relationship virtually unique.


Nobody should ever want to see this happen. But pretending it can't is highly dangerous and complacent, and you seem to be living in such a world.
 
Rogue Valley said:
‘They Will Die in Tallinn’: Estonia Girds for War With Russia

bigOriginal.jpg




The Estonians have been preparing for war in earnest for about three years. Adult citizens are receiving resistance training. Weapons are being secretly stored.

Estonia, just like Ukraine, Poland, Latvia, and Lithuania, understands what Russian occupation truly means. None of these nations have any intention of reprising that nightmare again.

The downside is that ~30% of Estonia is ethnic Russian. One of the major enduring consequences of Russian military and administrative occupation.
Click to expand...

Well I guess if your whole country has TDS syndrome, that speaks for itself.
 
chuckiechan said:
Well I guess if your whole country has TDS syndrome, that speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

We know chuckie. Discredit an entire population to exonerate your hero Trumpov. You're sooooo predictable.
 
Westphalian said:
This is a good post which makes several good points.

The Baltics are not exactly flush with natural resources or hugely important strategically, and there's no way Russia is interested.


But there are many options short of old fashioned invasion. One of them is civil unrest among Russian speakers in Latvia or Estonia. It's easy to see how much conflict this could cause as no doubt Russia would quickly be accused of aiding and abetting.

But let's ask ourselves this. The Baltics would be quick to try to invoke collective NATO self defence. But who seriously believes that the US should, or would, risk direct conflict with Russia over some de-populating states 4,000 miles from the US east coast? Would Americans be prepared to risk starting a conflict which could lead to the destruction of America, of them, of their children, over some grey conflict in a place where nobody lives and nobody has heard of?

I don't think so. That's why the Baltics can never be secure until they re-construct a positive relationship with Russia.
Click to expand...

Wow.... Why would the Baltics wish to be under the Russian thumb again?
 
Fledermaus said:
Wow.... Why would the Baltics wish to be under the Russian thumb again?
Click to expand...


Why does the West always seek to create a dichotomy between having Russia as an enemy or being subservient to it?


There is a middle ground called being independent and having constructive relationships with all states.

Facts of geography can't be changed, and the Baltics can't float off to the west. They are a long way from most of the west's military power, and very close to Russian power. They have no means of defending themselves. They need Russia for trade and their economy. They are, and this is simply irrevocable, closely in Russia's shadow no matter how much they may hate that.

So, given this, the question becomes what sort of relationship they want. Currently they opt for one of a degree of hostility, almost deliberately trying to needle Russia. I get that given their history and newness. But that policy will not make them secure or benefit their economy. A more constructive relationship with Russia, a less aggressive tone, a move away from trying to re-militarise the Baltics - these things will reduce tensions and make them more secure.

I expect that eventually the Baltic states will change their policy and tone. It will come because true security can only come when Russia is no longer demonised and cultivated as an enemy.
 
Fledermaus said:
Wow.... Why would the Baltics wish to be under the Russian thumb again?
Click to expand...


Why does the West always seek to create a dichotomy between having Russia as an enemy or being subservient to it?


There is a middle ground called being independent and having constructive relationships with all states.

Facts of geography can't be changed, and the Baltics can't float off to the west. They are a long way from most of the west's military power, and very close to Russian power. They have no means of defending themselves. They need Russia for trade and their economy. They are, and this is simply irrevocable, closely in Russia's shadow no matter how much they may hate that.

So, given this, the question becomes what sort of relationship they want. Currently they opt for one of a degree of hostility, almost deliberately trying to needle Russia. I get that given their history and newness. But that policy will not make them secure or benefit their economy. A more constructive relationship with Russia, a less aggressive tone, a move away from trying to re-militarise the Baltics - these things will reduce tensions and make them more secure.

I expect that eventually the Baltic states will change their policy and tone. It will come because true security can only come when Russia is no longer demonised and cultivated as an enemy.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Hell, y’all we saw this coming. Estonia is a NATO member. Trump is planning to give those poor bastards up to Putin during their double secret meeting. Putin will wait until Trump cowards out on NATO. Meanwhile the Trump/GOP Congress will do nothing to stop Trump from further destroying the USA.
Click to expand...

Fortunately NATO is more than just the US, even if they do contribute most to the coffers. There are substantial and well-armed and well-trained nations in NATO, plus 2 nuclear powers, who believe in and fulfill their commitments to mutual aid and defence. If the US were to withdraw from it, NATO would continue and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would still have the backing of the rest of the alliance and all of the non-NATO EU members.
 
And allow me to squeeze in here a bit of Trump disinformation.

That 2% of GDP for defense spending by NATO nations Trump is always bitching about is a goal until 2024 when it then becomes a commitment.

No NATO country is in default. No NATO country is committed to 2% until 2024. This was agreed upon by all NATO nations, the US included, at the 2014 NATO Summit in Wales.

And no, NATO nations did not agree to increase their military GDP% spending to 4% as Trump strongly suggested after the 2018 NATO Summit.
 
Andalublue said:
Fortunately NATO is more than just the US, even if they do contribute most to the coffers. There are substantial and well-armed and well-trained nations in NATO, plus 2 nuclear powers, who believe in and fulfill their commitments to mutual aid and defence. If the US were to withdraw from it, NATO would continue and Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania would still have the backing of the rest of the alliance and all of the non-NATO EU members.
Click to expand...

The US isn't leaving NATO.
 
Westphalian said:
Why does the West always seek to create a dichotomy between having Russia as an enemy or being subservient to it?

There is a middle ground called being independent and having constructive relationships with all states.

Facts of geography can't be changed, and the Baltics can't float off to the west. They are a long way from most of the west's military power, and very close to Russian power. They have no means of defending themselves. They need Russia for trade and their economy. They are, and this is simply irrevocable, closely in Russia's shadow no matter how much they may hate that.

So, given this, the question becomes what sort of relationship they want. Currently they opt for one of a degree of hostility, almost deliberately trying to needle Russia. I get that given their history and newness. But that policy will not make them secure or benefit their economy. A more constructive relationship with Russia, a less aggressive tone, a move away from trying to re-militarise the Baltics - these things will reduce tensions and make them more secure.

I expect that eventually the Baltic states will change their policy and tone. It will come because true security can only come when Russia is no longer demonised and cultivated as an enemy.
Click to expand...

Deliberately needling Russia = Being and wishing to remain independent. And their history is of invasions and annexing by various entities ESPECIALLY Russia.

And Russia, through their land grabs and border invasions, have painted themselves as the aggressors.
 
Westphalian said:
Actually, it is a factually based observation, and mutual destruction makes the US-Russian relationship virtually unique.


Nobody should ever want to see this happen. But pretending it can't is highly dangerous and complacent, and you seem to be living in such a world.
Click to expand...

Listening to RT doesn't not count as "facts" to make an observation bud. What make sure the US-Russian relationship unique in Russia's continual embracing of totalitarian ideology and brutally oppressing their own people. Most countries stop such behavior at some point down the line.

The fact of the matter is that even with Trump in charge the Baltic States aren't going to roll over for Vlad.
 
Another dichotomy of this weird world:

During the Cold War, a US-Soviet summit was generally welcomed as a beacon of hope. Hope of dis-armament, a reduction in tension, of arms control, of more diplomacy, of a safer world. Sure - the Soviets were evil ideologists bent on world domination, but even so ....... anything which improved relations was good.


Fast forward to 2018, and Democrats, liberals, and neo-cons are up in arms at the thought of a US - Russia summit. Why? What's changed?

Is Russia too evil to talk to, compared to the Soviets or North Korea?

Or do you think you can simply bully and threaten Russia into submission?

Are you people scared of diplomacy, of reducing the risk of a global war in which the world could be destroyed? What is the problem?
 
Westphalian said:
Another dichotomy of this weird world:

During the Cold War, a US-Soviet summit was generally welcomed as a beacon of hope. Hope of dis-armament, a reduction in tension, of arms control, of more diplomacy, of a safer world. Sure - the Soviets were evil ideologists bent on world domination, but even so ....... anything which improved relations was good.


Fast forward to 2018, and Democrats, liberals, and neo-cons are up in arms at the thought of a US - Russia summit. Why? What's changed?

Is Russia too evil to talk to, compared to the Soviets or North Korea?

Or do you think you can simply bully and threaten Russia into submission?

Are you people scared of diplomacy, of reducing the risk of a global war in which the world could be destroyed? What is the problem?
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with a US - Russia meeting... if it was a meeting of equals... it aint.

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
 
Fledermaus said:
Maybe it is because it is not defendable that Estonia CHOSE to be part of NATO....
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how many troops NATO has in Estonia. That is called a "trip wire".

Estonia, as a member of NATO has a mutual self defense treaty with 29 other nations.
In the case of the USA, a treaty (ratified by the Senate) OUT RANKS any other law of the land.

An attack on one, is an attack on all.
If Russia attacks Estonia, Russia has just declared war on the 29 members of NATO.

That's why NATO troops were with along side us after 9/11 in Afghanistan.
 
PeteEU said:
Nothing wrong with a US - Russia meeting... if it was a meeting of equals... it aint.

Sendt fra min SM-N9005 med Tapatalk
Click to expand...


It's a meeting of nuclear equals - and ultimately, nuclear weapons matter a lot in the world.


Russia's capacity to destroy the Us is what permits it to be truly independent. It's also what makes Russia a useful 'enemy' in a way that AQ and ISIS never could be. Russia is the US MIC's best friend.
 
JONRID said:
It doesn't matter how many troops NATO has in Estonia. That is called a "trip wire".

Estonia, as a member of NATO has a mutual self defense treaty with 29 other nations.
In the case of the USA, a treaty (ratified by the Senate) OUT RANKS any other law of the land.

An attack on one, is an attack on all.
If Russia attacks Estonia, Russia has just declared war on the 29 members of NATO.

That's why NATO troops were with along side us after 9/11 in Afghanistan.
Click to expand...


Yes, yes, Jonrid .......... we've all heard the sales pitch before :roll:.

It's just that what the Baltic states fear is not outright invasion (Russia's not interested ..... it's never going to happen) but so called hybrid warfare of plausible deniability - grey areas. How does NATO work then? Do you think Berlin, Paris and Washington would be quite so gung-ho? Do you think fat and lazy Europeans living in their cosy closeted existence would risk escalating a conflict in a way which could engulf them and destroy their wealth, even their lives?

Think again. The trouble with expanding to Russia's borders is that things happening there matter much more to Russia than to places far away. Russia has escalation dominance - I'm not going into now but it's a massive problem for military planners. It's precisely why nobody bothered lifting a finger for Ukraine. The same principle applies in the Baltics. Geography is immutable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom