Yes, but even among the newer books there's a big range in the interpretation of the new information, especially with regard to the Lenin-as-German-agent idea. — jamalrob
In connection with the slogan of “a workers’ and peasants’ government”, the time is appropriate, in my opinion, for issuing the slogan of “The United States of Europe”. Only by coupling these two slogans shall we get a definite systematic and progressive response to the most burning problems of European development…
If we think about it, Ukraine has nothing to do with the North Atlantic or NATO, and Russian occupation or control of Ukraine poses absolutely no threat to the national security of America or Britain. — Apollodorus
Especially with NATO it comes to this: do you see NATO as an extension and a tool of the US or NATO as a security arrangement of European countries and the US? — ssu
The Alliance’s creation was part of a broader effort to serve three purposes: deterring Soviet expansionism, forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism in Europe through a strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European political integration.
When Ukrainians voted for independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, all of its 24 “oblasts,” or regions – including Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea – supported independence. The large minority of ethnic Russians – 17.3% of the population at Ukraine’s last census in 2001 – were included as Ukrainian citizens in an independent state. For the most part, they too voted for independence.
For most of the first two decades after independence, ethnic Russians have lived peacefully with Ukrainians and the country’s other ethnic minorities.
But that changed in 2010 when Viktor Yanukovych, a politician from Donetsk, became Ukraine’s president. Though he did not state outright that he preferred a pro-Russian future for Ukraine, many of his policies marked a move away from the pro-European policies of his predecessors and played into Vladimir Putin’s designs on Ukraine.
Ukraine was on track to sign an association agreement with the European Union in 2013. Instead, Yanukovych decided to join an economic union with Russia. This set off mass protests around the country that resulted in Yanukovych’s being ousted. Putin then annexed Crimea on the pretext of protecting ethnic Russians living on that peninsula.
Meanwhile, pro-Russian separatists took over multiple cities in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in the hope that Russia would have a similar interest in protecting Russians in eastern Ukraine.
....Most Ukrainians see their future as a sovereign country that is part of Europe. But this directly contradicts Putin’s goals of expanding the Russian World. They are conflicting visions that help explain why Ukraine remains a flashpoint. — Why Putin has such a hard time accepting Ukrainian sovereignty
Ukraine was on track to sign an association agreement with the European Union in 2013. Instead, Yanukovych decided to join an economic union with Russia. — Why Putin has such a hard time accepting Ukrainian sovereignty
In Ukraine, the IMF had long planned to implement a series of economic reforms to make the country more attractive to investors. These included cutting wage controls (i.e., lowering wages), “reform[ing] and reduc[ing]” health and education sectors (which made up the bulk of employment in Ukraine), and cutting natural gas subsidies to Ukrainian citizens that made energy affordable to the general public. Coup plotters like US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland repeatedly stressed the need for the Ukrainian government to enact the “necessary” reforms.
As long as you observe its founders are an assortment of sovereign states, not just few individuals that already have died. And it's a process as the leadership in those sovereign states change as does the political situation in Europe.Well, why don’t you start with a more logical question like, in what sense could NATO not be a tool of its founders? — Apollodorus
During the tug of war between the US and Russia, the Americans were engaged in a destabilization campaign against the Yanukovych government. The campaign culminated with the overthrow of the elected president in the Maidan Revolution—also known as the Maidan Coup—named for the Kiev square that hosted the bulk of the protests.
As political turmoil engulfed the country in the leadup to 2014, the US was fueling anti-government sentiment through mechanisms like USAID and National Endowment for Democracy (NED), just as they had done in 2004. In December 2013, Nuland, assistant secretary of state for European affairs and a long-time regime change advocate, said that the US government had spent $5 billion promoting “democracy” in Ukraine since 1991. The money went toward supporting “senior officials in the Ukraine government…members of the business community as well as opposition civil society” who agree with US goals.
First, because Russia sucks too. — StreetlightX
What does this even mean? I — StreetlightX
You don't think the democratic will of the Ukrainian people has any role in to play? — Wayfarer
As long as you observe its founders are an assortment of sovereign states, not just few individuals that already have died. — ssu
And it's a process as the leadership in those sovereign states change as does the political situation in Europe. — ssu
But if we consider the interests and will of Ukraine, we must also consider the interests and will of Russia. — Apollodorus
If NATO and the EU refuse to set a limit to their expansion, where will this end? In what position will it leave Russia? And how is Russia supposed to react? — Apollodorus
Russian agitprop. Russia has economic opportunities for trade and peaceful economic cooperation, or would have, if it managed its affairs properly. In case you haven't noticed, it's a kleptocracy run by a dictator who routinely murders any legitimate political opponent. — Wayfarer
Yes, those sovereign states are the member states. It's totally logical. Now the US formed various similar Treaty organizations, NATO, SEATO and CENTO and only NATO is still working. The idea of it being just a tool of the US isn't the whole picture. It is that European countries are happy with the arrangement of NATO that ought to be mentioned also. the organization had so much elan that it didn't dissolve once the Soviet Union went away. CENTO basically dissolved because of revolutions, and SEATO member countries just didn't see it as relevant. Once the other countries don't want to play, then the organization goes to the dustbin of history whatever the US would want. I'm sure the US would be all happy if there would be a SEATO nowdays. Now it has to stick with bilateral aggreements and AUKUS.Well, I see zero consistency or logic in what you are saying.
You first implied that NATO was not a tool of US interests.
Now you are admitting that it was a tool, but a tool of "sovereign states". — Apollodorus
If NATO and the EU refuse to set a limit to their expansion, where will this end? In what position will it leave Russia? — Apollodorus
As I understand it, ‘their expansion’ in this case is simply leaving the door open to sovereign nations who wish to join them. NATO partners are not seeking to expand by invading Ukraine of forcibly occupying other nations. The issue at hand is Russia’s ability and implicit threat to do exactly that, whilst then hanging the blame on America for doing it. It’s transparently duplicitous. — Wayfarer
Atlanticism manifested itself most strongly during the Second World War and in its aftermath, the Cold War, through the establishment of various euro-Atlantic institutions, most importantly NATO and the Marshall Plan.
Following World War I, New York lawyer Paul D. Cravath was a noted leader in establishing Atlanticism in the United States. Cravath had become devoted to international affairs during the war, and was later a co-founder and director of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Research by historian Dov Levin, for example, found that between 1946 and 2000, the United States manipulated the democratic elections of other countries more than 80 times, including in European countries such as Italy and Greece … From a strategic point of view, there is criticism, among other things, that relations between Europe and the USA are unequal, as the US enforces its foreign policy with little consideration for European interests …
The union and EU citizenship were established when the Maastricht Treaty came into force in 1993. The EU traces its origins to the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the European Economic Community (EEC), established, respectively, by the 1951 Treaty of Paris and 1957 Treaty of Rome. The original member states of what came to be known as the European Communities were the Inner Six: Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and West Germany.
As for US policy, it must be directed towards pressing for the acceptance of Germany into the European Councils. We must put pressure on the French to let the Germans come in on a dignified basis…
Whether Germany will in the future be a benefit or a curse to the free world will be determined, not only by the Germans, but by the occupying powers. … Our own stake and responsibility is also greater. Now is the time for French initiative and leadership of the type required to integrate the German Federal Republic promptly and decisively into Western Europe … We have also reserved to ourselves in the Occupation Statute very considerable powers with respect to the action of the German Federal Republic …
These measures of relief and reconstruction have been only in part suggested by humanitarianism. Your Congress has authorized and your government is carrying out, a policy of relief and reconstruction today chiefly as a matter of national self-interest … There is no charity involved in this. It is simply common sense and good business. We are today obliged from considerations of self-interest to finance a huge deficit in the world’s budget … The International Trade Organization must be established … The fourth thing we must do in the present situation is to push ahead with the reconstruction of those two great workshops of Europe and Asia – Germany and Japan ….”.
As the unrivaled global superpower, America exports its culture on an unprecedented scale. From music to media, film to fast food, language to literature and sport, the American idea is spreading inexorably, not unlike the influence of empires that preceded it.
rape rap, — Apollodorus
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.