Obama to Deliver Warning to Putin on NATO’s Frontier
Source: Bloomberg
By Angela Greiling Keane and Phil Mattingly Sep 2, 2014 12:00 AM ET
U.S. President Barack Obama touches down in Estonia tonight to deliver reassurance to Baltic nations and a direct warning to Russian President Vladimir Putin that NATO stands by its military commitment to alliance security.
Obama added a stop in Tallinn, Estonia, to a long-scheduled trip to this weeks North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit in Cardiff, Wales, as Putin ramped up support for separatists in Ukraine even after sanctions by the U.S. and European Union.
By meeting there with the presidents of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania -- all NATO members -- Obama is telling Russia dont even think about messing around in Estonia or in any of the Baltic areas in the same way that you have been messing around in Ukraine, Charles Kupchan, White House senior director for European affairs, said.
Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-02/obama-to-deliver-warning-to-putin-on-nato-s-frontier.html
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)former9thward
(31,802 posts)Not one of its members is willing to confront Russia.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)Putin doesn't think so either. He's paranoid about it.
former9thward
(31,802 posts)One would think they had a D-Day style invasion force in New York harbor.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)former9thward
(31,802 posts)Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/hagel-isis-threat-terrorism-us-airstrikes-2014-8#ixzz3CBdkXz00
bemildred
(90,061 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)I now think we really should offer Ukraine NATO membership. I think Putin ought to be contained.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)What's that about if it's not a real threat?
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)how rational Putin is, he's acting like Kim Jong Un lately with his bizarre statements and actions. Angela Merkel basically said he was kind of nuts last spring. So now is certainly the time to gather your buddies and wait in the alley with baseball bats, so to speak.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)"gather your buddies and wait in the alley with baseball bats"
Merkel has not covered herself in glory in this dispute. Dither and moan about it mostly.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)I think Sweet Beloved Pootie understands that, unless he's cracked in the head.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Nice chat, gotta go.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)newthinking
(3,982 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)in a right wing manner. Is that how mods behave now? Who's running DU anymore?
Cha
(295,907 posts)nothing else
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)But where the heck do you get off calling anyone a "rwanker"? Particularly Purveyor?
Response to Scootaloo (Reply #11)
Post removed
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You know that does happen, it's not a situation that only Republican presidents find themselves in.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)That wasn't the basis of Purveyor's attack. His golfer shit came straight from the Free Republic/Hot Air crowd. That used to not be allowed here. DU was founded as a refuge for Democrats and Progressives. Did something change?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Flying out there to glare over the border and basically threaten Russia over something Russia pretty certainly has no plans of doing is pretty silly. Now if the president wanted to make such a stop in central Asia to do the same that would make more sense, as there's nothing like NATO to back those states up, which makes them much more likely to be on the list.
As for your accusations - Slavish follow-the-leader behavior, loyalty cards, and purity tests are not progressive. Unlike some political groupings, we lack - and any honest progressive will resist - Reagan's "eleventh commandment." We think critically, and we poke fun at our figures. The attitude you present - that the President is above criticism or mockery or judgement by mere mortals is far more republican than anything Purveyor has posted.
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)or other Democrats. DU was supposed to be a haven against such shit--one of the reasons I've stuck around for 7 years. Purveyor used a very characteristic right wing attack against the President. Skinner et al need to review some of the people here and what they're doing and saying.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Purity tests, site purges of the insufficiently loyal, all who question are enemies, cast out the insufficiently obedient, because progressivism! ...or something, I guess.
My body is ready!
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)the administrators have basically abandoned the original purpose of this website.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And if I were to tell you I think the president looks kind of tacky in khaki?
Purveyor is not a right-winger. He just happens to have a position different from yours and Cha's.
And frankly? a progressive tossing a golf joke at the president is the fucking least[ of DU's problems. If only the BOG were as concerned with the rampant racism, misogyny, transphobia, islamophobia, and constant calls to war and violence, as you all are with ribbing the president, i think DU might suck a little less.
C Moon
(12,188 posts)Control-Z
(15,681 posts)If a member of Democratic Underground is mocking or laughing at our American president, I believe they deserve our scourn. I'm just tired of it. (Understand, you are not who I'm referring to.)
earthside
(6,960 posts)I favor the mocking whenever we see the ascendence of the 'war party' again.
And, in my opinion, Pres. Obama is slowly, but surely, edging towards the 'Putin is Hitler' (or Stalin) warmongering meme.
I am tired of a Democratic leader who tends to pay lip service to unions (since yesterday was and election year Labor Day), excuses the war crimes of the last administration and now starts beating the war drums.
I give Pres. Obama credit thus far for not getting us into any more wars ... but we are back in Iraq and we will be staying in Afghanistan.
I understand the political fatigue with second term presidents -- but these stakes are very high in Ukraine, in Iraq and Syria.
Mock, protest, rage ... whatever it takes to get Pres. Obama's attention to prevent what McCain-Cheney-Cruz-et al. want most: another terrible war.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)honor its treaty obligation to come to the Baltics' defense in the event of a Russian invasion?
earthside
(6,960 posts)... besides the warmongering party?
We are being 'played' once again by the 'war party'.
Take a look at Stephen Cohen's articles at The Nation.
For instance: The Silence of American Hawks About Kievs Atrocities
Frankly, I think Putin has been rather justified in a lot (perhaps not all) of his actions.
Of course, you will never hear or read that perspective from the mainstream, establishment political and media culture.
polly7
(20,582 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)warmongering, invading aggressor.
Congrats on your support of a fascist, imperialist regime's invasion of its neighbor.
Cohen is a Poot-licker. He previously was a sycophant towards the USSR. He is an anti-American authoritarian.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)This is all due to "regime change" and bringing an extremist minority government to power in an attempt to weaken Russia. How in the hell did the neocon wife of Robert Kagen (one of the architects of PNAC and the Iraq war) get into the position?
CJCRANE
(18,184 posts)and other European countries based on a crisis they helped foment.
Mission Accomplished!
Cha
(295,907 posts)You want to hold an alka-seltzer under your tongue to get the full effect there?
Can you translate your post from Rarghyarblish for me?
What I'm trying to say is... you look a little mad there, brah. You chill?
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)...
Even as Ukraine remains at the forefront of this weeks agenda, the increased strength of Sunni militants operating in Syria and Iraq has also risen on weeks agenda, as European nations face what U.S. law enforcement officials call the very real threat of their citizens traveling to Syria to train and fight, then returning for attacks.
The U.S. will push NATO to get more involved with combating Islamic State threats in the Middle East, Kupchan said. As Wales last week prepared to host its first NATO summit, the U.K. raised its terror threat level to severe, citing the risk from Western passport-holders who are aligned with Islamic extremists.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I've asked this pretty often... well, every time it comes up - and have yet to get an answer.
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)I have no doubts that the issue of drawing of military infrastructure of NATO member-countries to the borders of our country, including via enlargement, will remain one of the external military threats for the Russian Federation, Mikhail Popov, deputy secretary of the Security Council said in an interview to RIA Novosti.
All NATOs actions show that both the US and NATO are trying to escalate a deterioration of relations with Russia, he added.
We consider that defining factor in [Moscows] relations with NATO will remain the unacceptability for Russia of the expansion plans of alliances military infrastructure to our borders, including via enlargement, he stated.
http://rt.com/news/184376-russia-military-doctrine-nato/
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Doesn't answer my question though. it's Russia's verbal response to NATO's... er... questionable troop movements. Nothing said about Russia actually planning to make a move on those states.
hack89
(39,171 posts)The Baltic states have sizable Russian populations. Putin's stated role as the protector of all Russians and his apparent desire to rebuild the Soviet empire has them spooked.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Anything actually coming from Russia saying "you're next, Lithuania"? Or even a serious hint to that effect? Paranoia is the major export of the Baltic states (well that and damn fine vodka - this is probably not a coincidence) but taking paranoia as real threat without supporting evidece is really just aggression with a veneer of hysteria as cover.
More succinctly, is there any real reason to think Russia would risk full-out war with NATO over fucking Estonia? I mean hey, no offense to Estonians, but, it's not exactly the sort of place that you look at and go "Yup, this is worth a couple million lives in a vast regional conflict."
and do spare me the "PUTIN IS THE DEVIL! HE'S AN IRRATIONAL MANIAC! HE'S EEEEEEEVIIIIIILLL!" argument that is so easy to fall back on. He's an arrogant prick who thinks he's the smarter version of George Dubya, but he's not a dude who's fallen all the way off his rocker and is just smacking launch buttons in a bunker hile cackling madly.
hack89
(39,171 posts)so why are you hanging so much on what Putin says or doesn't say?
As for the value of the Baltic states, it is a matter of geography. Losing the Baltics cost Russia access to valuable ice free ports and naval bases on the Baltic. Right now they are limited to a small strip of coast near St Petersburg.
Putin just annexed Crimea and is annexing Eastern Ukraine while lying about it to us and the Russian people. Point out to me any hint he has given where he will stop? What reassurances has he given to any former Soviet state?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Something were we can go "yes, Russia is fucking around in eastern Ukraine"?
is there similar evidence for designs to go to war with NATO over Latvia?
Gin Rummy, is that you?
You're not seriously going with the conspiracy theory bullshit where lack of evidence is proof of your position, are you hack? i mean come on, really.
And while you're sparing me the paeans of Putin's putrescent and perniciously perfidious persona, do also spare me the "Putin-lover" accusations I see you working yourself toward. I'm simply asking if there is credible reason to think the dude is going to go to war with NATO over some febrile imperial delusions. I honestly think it's pretty fucking unlikely - the stakes are too high and potential gain too low.
hack89
(39,171 posts)You think Putin is transparent and honest. I don't.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)What else do I think, that I have not expressed? Maybe you can tell me my thoughts on small dogs, or the flavor of various kinds of schnapps?
No, I think he's not insane enough to start a war with NATO over fucking Latvia. I think there is no coherent, supporting evidence that he has designs to do so. And I very certainly do not believe that the absence of evidence is in and of itself evidence of the assertion that is lacking evidence.
hack89
(39,171 posts)it is sometimes very unpleasant interacting with you - I should know better by now.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Tally-ho towards personal attacks!
hack89
(39,171 posts)you ruin any pleasure I would normally find in a spirited discussion. Is everything here so important that you have to be rude about it?
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)After telling me what I think, after engaging in another personal attack against me, I'm the one being rude.
Wellokaythen.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Russia has defended its annexation of Ukraine's Crimea peninsula by arguing it has the right to protect Russian-speakers outside its borders, so the reference to linguistic tensions in another former Soviet republic comes at a highly sensitive moment.
And this petty thug is also threatening Kazakhstan:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/01/kazakhstan-russian-neighbour-putin-chilly-nationalist-rhetoric
The remarks, to an audience of young people in Russia on Friday, sent shocke waves through the central Asian republic, which also hosts a large ethnic Russian minority centred in the north on the Russian border.
Putin said there had never been a country called Kazakhstan, that the republic was purely the product of the current president, Nursultan Nazarbayev.
"I am confident that a majority of its population supports development of close ties with Russia," said Putin. "Nazarbayev is a prudent leader, even the most prudent in the post-Soviet space. He would never act against the will of his country's people."
Kazakhstan, he said, was "part of the large Russian world that is part of the global civilisation in terms of industry and advanced technologies. I am confident that that's the way things are going to be in the medium and long-term."
Nazarbayev had "done a unique thing. He created a state in a territory that had never had a state before. The Kazakhs had no statehood."
And the fact that he's already invaded two of the former USSR colonies.
Fair to say the #1 reason why he wouldn't go into the Baltics is NATO.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Bingo. The Baltics and Poland, even Finland aren't worth the war that would result.
As I said, I don't doubt there's paranoia - but paranoia isn't evidence.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)take Article 5 deadly seriously, and to reassure the NATO members on the front lines.
One wouldn't want Putin getting the idea that NATO members might throw the new and outlying members under the bus.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And NATO's own boundary-stretching of the treaty in question?
Now okay, this I can kind of get. I mean I'm sure Poland, at least, remember how fucking often it's been left out to dry by its "allies" in the past, and it could probably use the reassurance.
The rhetoric has been coming across less like "reinforcing nato" and more like "OMFG PUTIN IS CONQUERING EUROPE OMG WTF BBQ!" though. so i wanted to know if there was backing for the walleyed McCaining going on around here.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)"We are all Ukrainians now."
Point to be made is that , yeah Russia gets to bite off chunks of Ukraine because that is how things are.
But he should also be clear that it's a much different story re: NATO members--on whom he is not allowed to lay a finger, because that is also how things are.