JAB;859637 wrote: Admittedly, I'm not up on how countries get into NATO, but how could the US have stopped it on their own? Aren't these countries voted in, which means the US has the same one vote as everyone else?
By the time the vote is taken the pressure has already been applied. When one partner has so much more influence than any other single member the nominal vote count is not the end of the story.
This guy is right.
This guy is right.
Jester;859675 wrote: How about 'nothing'.
Does it matter now? Russia pointing them things back at us is a laugh, first considering they are probably still pointing at us anyway. Second, the advanced technology we have now and are developing will most likely make them a limited threat anyway.
If you ask me Gorby and Putin are acting like big losers. Russia should apply for a NATO charter as well and just join in and fight what they dont like from the inside.
OK, I agree, do nothing.
Do not put a ring of steel around Russia's western border that is as big a threat to them as Cuba was to the US in 1963.
Does it matter now? Russia pointing them things back at us is a laugh, first considering they are probably still pointing at us anyway. Second, the advanced technology we have now and are developing will most likely make them a limited threat anyway.
If you ask me Gorby and Putin are acting like big losers. Russia should apply for a NATO charter as well and just join in and fight what they dont like from the inside.
OK, I agree, do nothing.
Do not put a ring of steel around Russia's western border that is as big a threat to them as Cuba was to the US in 1963.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
This guy is right.
GHW Bush was lauded the other day on a PBS show that did the real work of ending the Cold War after Reagan did the flashy "Tear down this wall" stuff.
At that point - or rather during that process - we should have packed up an gone home. We did draw down, but I think we should have closed any purely US military base not on US soil, with the caviat that some of ya'll know of places where it would have been stupid. But generally speaking .......
At that point - or rather during that process - we should have packed up an gone home. We did draw down, but I think we should have closed any purely US military base not on US soil, with the caviat that some of ya'll know of places where it would have been stupid. But generally speaking .......
This guy is right.
JAB;860560 wrote: The US influence obviously doesn't succeed all the time as evidenced by the war in Iraq. If that same influence was applied in the NATO vote, then it succeeded because others were already in favor of a country joining. Seems to me that the other nations do what is in their best interest no matter what the US does and no matter what they're voting on.
Obviously the application of pressure does not work every time but apply sufficient pressure then, if the level of disagreement is not too great, then people can and will act against their better judgement.
As to acting in their best interest, by applying the correct pressure you can change where someone's best interest lies.
If you are seriously suggesting that, by applying pressure, one party can never change the actions of another then I strongly disagree.
Obviously the application of pressure does not work every time but apply sufficient pressure then, if the level of disagreement is not too great, then people can and will act against their better judgement.
As to acting in their best interest, by applying the correct pressure you can change where someone's best interest lies.
If you are seriously suggesting that, by applying pressure, one party can never change the actions of another then I strongly disagree.
This guy is right.
JAB;862932 wrote: No, but the inclination or willingness to move towards change has to be there before any pressure is effective.
When it's personal I'd agree with you but in a situation like this it's more down to economics and trade off of favours.
When it's personal I'd agree with you but in a situation like this it's more down to economics and trade off of favours.