NATO: Saviour or Warmonger?

[Loki]

Let's discuss NATO. What do you think of NATO?

Inspired by this post:

Without NATO, the Baltic States would end up like Georgia. By the way, there are no NATO troops here. Only the global center of NATO cyber-defense is in Tallinn, Estonia. Because Estonians are the most skilled in that area.

I would feel a lot safer if NATO troops would actually be here. Because of the aggressive Eastern neighbor we have. Estonia may be in NATO, but the only defense here is only the Estonian armed forces. Russia has a million soldiers when Estonia has about 20 000(when mobilized)

I will write my thoughts in more detail when I am not at work. Briefly, let me state that in my view NATO is redundant. NATO is currently being used as a tool to encircle Russia, even though the Cold War has finished ... angering the Russians, breaking down trust on both sides and possibly causing the world's great European powers to enter a phase of armed struggle again. This is so very unnecessary, undiplomatic and counterproductive.

[The Lawspeaker]

A necessary evil. It had lost it's purpose for a while (Kosovo 1999 and Afghanistan) but thanks to our old "friends" in Moscow NATO can make itself useful again.

If it wasn't for NATO we'd all be speaking Russki by now and live under communism.

[Loki]

If it wasn't for NATO we'd all be speaking Russki by now and live under communism.

But that's just the point. The Communist Soviet Union does not exist anymore. The Cold War was against an ideology. That ideology (communism) has collapsed, apart from North Korea, Cuba and a few other insignificant countries. Comparing modern Russia to the Soviet Union is a bit like comparing modern Germany to Nazi Germany.

On the other hand, if the SU did conquer the rest of Europe, it would likely have been more white and less multicultural today.

[The Lawspeaker]

On the other hand, if the SU did conquer the rest of Europe, it would likely have been more white and less multicultural today.

You're wrong- horribly wrong. If you were to check the population charts of the Baltic you'd see a lot of minorities that weren't there 60 years ago.
Why ? because the Russians brought them in.

Take Estonia for example (it's wikipedia but I am not in the mood of looking a long time for crappy sources that only provide half the info I need.) Before World War II is was a homogeneous society with 88 percent of the population being Estonian
Or Latvia where the same process of ethnic fracturing and Soviet colonization took place, or the Czech Republic where some of the minorities were invited by the communist authorities.

And I can assure you another thing: there would have no free speech and we wouldn't have been on a nice forum like our own. Being South African, Loki, you wouldn't have had to live through it. The Europeans on the other hand.....

Loki I need to ask you one thing here: have you ever been behind the former Iron Curtain ?

[EWtt]

Take Estonia for example (it's wikipedia but I am not in the mood of looking a long time for crappy sources that only provide half the info I need.) Before World War II is was a homogeneous society with 88 percent of the population being Estonian[/URL]

After the German troops left Estonia in 1944 it was even over 95% Estonian (most historical minorities fled due to the imminent Soviet occupation). By 1989 it was down to 64,7%.

[The Lawspeaker]

After the Germans left Estonia in 1944 it was even over 95% Estonian. By 1989 it was down to 64,7%.

And we would have had a minority problem anyways: one of Kazakhs, Belorussians, Russians, Ukrainians, Jews and so on. Those groups that would have been kindly invited by our new "peoples'" government while trains with Dutch families would have gone to Siberia during the late 1940's, early 1950's

[Svarog]

A necessary evil. It had lost it's purpose for a while (Kosovo 1999 and Afghanistan) but thanks to our old "friends" in Moscow NATO can make itself useful again.

If it wasn't for NATO we'd all be speaking Russki by now and live under communism.

That is just ridiculous, if you think Putin is afraid of NATO you're very wrong, as we all remember NATO said they will not allow Russians to enter Georgia and will defend their Georgian allies, Georgia signed a contract with NATO and all confident created a conflict which they knew Putin and Russia won't ignore, they also thought NATO will have their back, in less than few hours hundreds of Russian tanks entered territory of Georgia and even the capital itself was burned to the ground, Georgia was forced to surrender in no time while NATO was sending appeals on Russia to stop the violence during the whole war

Beside few guns they sent to Georgian soldiers and very 'strong voice of concern' what exactly NATO did to prevent Russia from entering and conquering the country?

Nope, if Russians wanted to conquer Baltic states or whatever, no chance in hell NATO would risk a confrontation with Russian army, which is btw weaker than it have been in a long time, it's all politics, NATO would not do shit about it.

[EWtt]

Beside few guns they sent to Georgian soldiers and very 'strong voice of concern' what exactly NATO did to prevent Russia from entering and conquering the country?

The difference between Georgia and the Baltics is that the Baltics are full NATO members.

Nope, if Russians wanted to conquer Baltic states or whatever, no chance in hell NATO would risk a confrontation with Russian army, which is btw weaker than it have been in a long time, it's all politics, NATO would not do shit about it.

That would equal the dissolution of NATO, because NATO in theory means "an attack on one member is an attack on all of them". Sure, many NATO countries won't send in their forces immediately, we will have to keep the Russians away from the coastline long enough until NATO mobilizes their armed forces.

Russians wouldn't risk having a direct confrontation with NATO, either.

[Loki]

The difference between Georgia and the Baltics is that the Baltics are full NATO members.

The fact that the Baltic countries belong to NATO doesn't change anything about their security. They belong to the European Union, that in itself would be enough of a deterrent for any Russian attack. NATO is not even necessary. NATO is following an aggressive foreign policy of expansion. In that sense, it is rather not unlike the Soviet Union ...

[EWtt]

NATO is following an aggressive foreign policy of expansion. In that sense, it is rather not unlike the Soviet Union ...

I don't think NATO expansion happens against will. Back when Estonia joined NATO we had public elections in 2003 with an approval rate of 67%. The countries NATO considers for membership have expressed interest in joining NATO.