1. Russia does ALWAYS lie. That's a fact. I have a lot of evidence but not gonna list them here. So if Russia says they don't want NATO over here, it must be lying?
2. If Russia doesn't want us to NATO, why is it intentionally making us feel insecure? With all those airspace violations lately, and those defiant speechs. Feeling insecure is the reason why countries want to join NATO.
De facto Suomi is already there, my dear LITTLE friend. As someone whose 2nd Motherland is the Republic of Karelia (Petroskoi), I know what I'm talking about.
The only bad thing SOVIET UNION (not really Russia) did to your country was stealing 11% of your territory in 1940 (I don't live in those lands, so I owe you nothing ;P), but hey, most bolsheviks and commies were not actually ethnic Russians and your ancestors, politicians of that era particularly, have been pretty kind to them. So next time before you help some corrupt russophobe like Lenin, use your brain.
Ethnic Russians don't hate you, and Russia doesn't violate any rule/law, dummy. They pity you. Your country has been discriminated for ~7 centuries by Swedes, and you were better off with Russian Empire. And it's not something I read in brainwashing newspapers or books. My great-grandma was an ethnic Swede and Finnish citizen.
So please, stop whining. Nobody has any intention to make you "feel insecure". And there is no need to post your questions anonymously. I doubt any FSB agend is interested in reading all the nonsence sheeple discuss on Y!A.
No, they don't. That is precisely what Russia is trying to prevent.
How ever, the way they are trying to prevent Finland from joining NATO is by increasing their military presence and their military activity near Finland. Doing this, they are increasing the public opinion to pro-NATO in Finland. When the support gets high enough the government will initiate the negotiations to join, and in the case for Finland and Sweden, the process to join NATO will be fast.
1. A childish statement. Just to prove it logically as you wanted you'd have to quote every public statement of the government and prove it is wrong. I highly doubt this is within your abilities.
2. I don't see how your feels are a concern of the Russian government. It is your right to join anything you want. It is the right of the Russian government to respond respectively. Joining the NATO officially you are simply making yourself a potential target. Otherwise than membership in a potentially hostile military alliance, I can't imagine a single half-rational reason for the Russian government to attack Finland.
http://www.transnational.org
http://blog.transnational.org/2014/06/tff-pressinfo-if-militarism-continues-humankind-is-doomed/
"It’s the MIMAC, stupid !
There is only one rational explanation of this dangerous madness: MIMAC = the Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex.
The vested interests shared by elites in these sectors are obvious. No matter what the world looks like – more or less peaceful – MIMAC keeps growing. There is a word for it: autism.
And whether politicians like it or not, they obey, see no alternatives to acquiring more arms – like a junkie wanting yet another shot. And some benefit through corruption and later well-paid board posts in the military industry.
No relations between threat and armament
It’s about 45 years now that peace and conflict research pointed out that if one of the super powers disappeared, the other would quickly find another enemy to legitimize its MIMAC with.
And we know how things developed after 1989.
There is no relation between threats and MIMAC and it’s the latter with its academic and media elites that justifies its further growth by pointing to new ‘threats’ and the necessity to be able to conduct wars all the time.
Threats are constructued to fit MIMAC’s insatiable needs. MIMAC is not a service to make society secure. And peace won’t grow out of it – because:
When you have the weapons, you tend to use them – rather than think and seek diplomatic solutions and genuine conflict-resolution.
Most media avoid militarism as an issue "
Elites in power yes in the westwest LIE, LIE!!!!!!!!!!
NATO IS THE ITCH THAT HAS NO PURPOSE! NEEDS WAR WAR WAR TO JUSTIFY ITS EXISTENCE!!!
NATO in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, every country broken for everyday normal civilians.
Try independent NEWS sources, NOT government/ oligarch/ corporation propaganda, passing FOR news!
Clinton put paid to that promise! If not written down...........yep, leaves an memorable impression. Get IT DOWN IN WRITING OR THEY CAN WELCH!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39133.htm "But he and others are silent on the quid pro quo. The quid was Moscow's agreement to swallow the bitter pill of a reunited Germany in NATO; the quo was a U.S. promise not to "leapfrog" NATO over Germany farther East. Washington welched on the deal.
Even hawkish former American national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski now concedes, "It is reasonable for Russia to feel uncomfortable about the prospect" of Ukraine in NATO. And that is the nub of today's crisis there — not the "chauvinistic fanaticism" Mr. Brzezinski attributes to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The foundering of the unique opportunity in 1990 to create a lasting peace in what President George H. W. Bush called a "Europe whole and free" was a tragedy. The expansion of NATO to the east — especially the decision to bring in Georgia and Ukraine — led, among other things, to Georgian-Russian hostilities in August 2008 and now to the current violence in Ukraine.
The fact that the Shevardnadze-Baker agreement was not recorded in an official document has helped revisionists to create alternative history, but there is compelling evidence testifying to Washington's reneging on key oral commitments to Moscow."
If the elite HAD TO PAY FOR WARS OUT OF OWN pocket, instead of making the ruled COUGH up, whilst having an incestuous relationship with the industrial military complex to benefit financially themselves, they may be more credible!
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article39599.htm "Warmongering, though, is not an easy sell in a crisis-hit EU these days. Not only Germany, but also France, Italy, Spain, Romania, Hungary and even Poland have expressed "reluctance" one way or another to back NATO's strategy of a more "robust" presence in Eastern Europe and the Baltic. Moreover, the Empire of Chaos and its Brit junior partner in the "special relationship" want everyone to shell out more cash (a minimum of 2% of GDP). Even as the EU is facing no less than its third recession in five years.
The bottom line is there will be no more rotation on NATO's Eastern front. Legally, the set up cannot be defined as "permanent", because it will go against a 1997 NATO-Russia pact. But it will be permanent. That applies to Szczecin, in Poland, near the Baltic, and the so-called multinational Corps Northeast - land, air and sea. Estonia and Latvia for all practical purposes are being touted as "Putin's next targets". And defending them from "Russian aggression" is NATO's new red line.
Additionally, Finland and Sweden may sign NATO Host Nation agreements. This implies NATO forces may use Swedish and Finnish territory in the future on the way to what's hazily referred to as "operations". At least deployment of foreign troops still needs parliamentary approval - and Swedes and Finns are bound to raise eyebrows. "
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article40301.htm "But try asking someone who’s actually been following events in Ukraine that same question, and you’re going to get an entirely different answer. Among the people who follow the daily developments in Ukraine, roughly two out of three support the Russian position. This isn’t something you’re going to find in the survey data, but if you take the time to comb the comments lines in the international media, you’ll see what I’m saying is true.
This is from Makman1:
“I was under the impression that a proper democracy would first use negotiating as a way to understand the divergent groups involved in the Ukrainian revolution and then apply a political solution, if possible. The present Ukrainian government immediately used force. PERIOD! The Harper government, instead of using its “influence” to attempt to defuse a complex situation blindly followed the actions of the USA. If Harper really cared at all he would ask his foreign minister to get directly involved with Russian and Ukrainian counterparts and help reach a compromise…. Hopefully, Harper is not supporting Ukrainian right wing fascists?”"
no one ALWAYS does ANYTHING
