Russia's foreign minister warns Sweden off Nato

[Deleted]

Uh? So youre willingly overlooking couple decades long history of trading? Why?

Are you a bot or something? It`s like you have only so many answers and questions up in your sleeve.

Read what I wrote. Read what I linked. Read and weep as it crushes your narrative.

[Deleted]

One would assume that "don't do this or we might shoot you" would have adverse effect. I suppose Russia doesn't think that thinly veiled threats will actually have the opposite effect in Swedes actually thinking more about joining NATO. Also, there is no land border between them. Planning to make a visit to Norway/Finland?
P.S.
Djalil, I do wonder how much you know about Baltics and why Russia is not considered friendly neighbor there.

To be honest, if Russia wants Sweden. They would'nt need a land connections. It will be enough with a rather small group of paratroopers and we would fall.

[Deleted]

You do realize Europeans resisted the idea of Union until Americans pushed them to the table (later on supported by France thinking it could counter-balance Germany - US - USSR).
The origins of EU came from the place of where Americans needed strong Western Europe that could pay it`s own military bills.

Start linking stuff as I did or cut it with the conspiracies

Yeah, The Great Illusion went in-depth arguing exactly for this point, using mathematical formulas and examples arguing for the same thing. The book was published in 1913. The author later won Nobel Prize for it. A year before World War 1 began. Amusing, right?

Sorry... are you telling me you're talking about a book written at a time where the concept of globalization was still foreign? Yeah ok.

The last 25 years were an anomally. Russia is back back from the operating table looking out to fix it`s strategic nightmare issue in the Eastern Europe, German economy has exhausted itself, Soutern Europe is hot mess with Italy going sideways fast and France not growing at all for the last decade.

Truly remarkable.

Such grim views.

Cool narrative. Great to see you exposing your bias. Spoiler alert : they are allies and friends. And no one is ''landing'' on their territory. They`re invited and welcomed.

Are they not landing? What they float mid air?

[Flurryfang]

Sweden and Finland should proberly join NATO. It is really a good thing, that the smaller countries in europe, who can't stand toe-to-toe with an aggresive Russia, joins together in defense. They will never be able to gather forces and attack anyplace, but if they make a defensive line, that would beat a russian army, it will bring peace.

Russia is not afraid, that NATO will attack them. The NATO countries are all so different, so going into an active position will be very hard for all the NATO nations. Russia/Putin just like to think, that if it came to war, they could beat anybody around them. With Sweden/Finland joining, there would be fewer countries to take in a war scenario.

[Deleted]

Why is it ok for Russia to talk shit, but not NATO?

What are we going to start a race on whos the biggest shittalker on an international scale? Come on now we dont need a race to the bottom.
Afterall... are we not better than them?

[Deleted]

Some more cold-shower fact-bombs for you, my dear idealist Djalil.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/busine...rs/564571.html

Russia's share in trade with the European Union dramatically reduced last year, pushing the country out of the top three main trading partners of the EU, the European statistics agency Eurostat reported Friday.

According to data from Eurostat, the Russian share in the total volume of EU trade dropped to 6 percent or 210 billion euros ($238 billion). It has been decreasing since 2013, Eurostat said.

Meanwhile the share of the United States — the EU's biggest partner — accounted for 18 percent or 619 billion euros ($702 billion). The U.S. is followed by China, whose share totaled 15 percent or 521 billion euros ($591 billion) and Switzerland with 7 percent — 253 billion euro ($287 billion).

[Orange Joe]

What are we going to start a race on whos the biggest shittalker on an international scale? Come on now we dont need a race to the bottom.
Afterall... are we not better than them?

How about just answer the question?

[Deleted]

Are you a bot or something? It`s like you have only so many answers and questions up in your sleeve.

Read what I wrote. Read what I linked. Read and weep as it crushes your narrative.

Nothing crushes anything and the point still remain.
So you're willingly overlooking couple decades long history of trading?
This is somewhat similar to the guy shouting we have no climate change because weve had a cold winter.

[stevenho]

How is having foreign armies, that will lead to nothing but increasingly tense relation with a major trading partner, an "economic" choice?

You call them "foreign", we call them "allied". Semantics.
As to how tightening military cooperation leads to tightening other areas of cooperation I could explain with walls of text, but it is rather obvious.

[Deleted]

Some more cold-shower fact-bombs for you, my dear idealist Djalil.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/busine...rs/564571.html

Not sure who's talking about russia being THE FIRST trading partner. But thanks for the quote so you can see the kind of numbers we're talking about.

- - - Updated - - -

How about just answer the question?

How about you read up some of recent NATO statements?

[Independent voter]

2015 EU/US trade was

Export 272,687.9 Import 426,005.6 ($millions)

With the US importing nearly twice as much as it exported.

[Orange Joe]

How about you read up some of recent NATO statements?

First answer the question.

[Slant]

You do realize Europeans resisted the idea of Union until Americans pushed them to the table (later on supported by France thinking it could counter-balance Germany - US - USSR).
The origins of EU came from the place of where Americans needed strong Western Europe that could pay it`s own military bills.



Yeah, The Great Illusion went in-depth arguing exactly for this point, using mathematical formulas and examples arguing for the same thing. The book was published in 1913. The author later won Nobel Prize for it. A year before World War 1 began. Amusing, right?


The last 25 years were an anomally. Russia is back back from the operating table looking out to fix it`s strategic nightmare issue in the Eastern Europe, German economy has exhausted itself, Soutern Europe is hot mess with Italy going sideways fast and France not growing at all for the last decade.

Truly remarkable.



Cool narrative. Great to see you exposing your bias. Spoiler alert : they are allies and friends. And no one is ''landing'' on their territory. They`re invited and welcomed.

Couple of corrections there. It wasn't the US that "set Europeans to the table", it was Europeans. Starting with Germany, France and the Benelux countries (and Winston Churchill :P). It wasn't to counteract Russia or the US. The US was paying for Europe's rebuilding process, why would we counteract them. They were saints. And Russia was pretty much counteracted by the US alone. No, the whole idea of a European Community was to prevent WW2 from happening again. That is the main basis for it. Instead of creating an atmosphere where nationalism could prosper again, they wanted to tie Germany and its western neighbours together so closely that a war started by either side would destroy both.

See, for once they realised that it's not all just Germany, they remembered that before 1871/72 (which really began the intereuropean feud between France and Germany) France had conquered Germany, too. Twice. There was a lot of bad blood between the two countries and the people had to be forced to abandon all thoughts of revenge. Combining the most important industrial fields (steel and coal) was the logical first step. And none of it had any global "counterweight to US and USSR" in the plan.

The strong Western Europe you're talking about? That's the thing the US secured with the foundation of NATO and later the acceptance of Germany in that treaty.

What Djalil says about economy tying countries together, that is by and large accepted fact among politicians and economists. Whether or not Russia and the EU are tied closely enough to prevent war, nobody knows. I doubt they are. The EU doesn't need Russia half as much as Russia needs to export to the EU. See, the EU largely produces luxury goods these days. Cars, electronics, environmental technology, chemical shit. We can sell all of that to Asia or the US. While Russia only has raw resources to offer. And we can get that elsewhere, too.

The last 25 years were not an anomaly. It was an expected result. The West German constitution had exactly this in mind when they made it the states goal to unite both parts. That was '56. They knew it was inevitable, historically. And the Americans figured pretty quickly that communism couldn't last long, too. why? Because in the history of mankind, NOBODY ever could repress people for long periods of time. Even in China, who built their culture all around repression, they had revolutions on a regular basis (so someone else could repress the masses).

German Economy has exhausted itself? Have you looked at the numbers recently? 2 years in a row with a billion surplus... pensions are getting raised, I expect wages to finally follow suit to the economic boost that we've been pushing for quite a few years by now. Everyone else got huge hits during the financial crisis, we're one of the very few that came out of it like a champ. So much like a champ, that we're not only basically feeding Greece and a million Syrians but still expect to make a surplus. How is that an exhausted economy?

Italy is taing note of Greece and they are slowly trying to get their shit together. They have problems, but they are addressing them now that Berlusconi finally seems to be gone for good.

I mean, you paint a picture that literally has nothing to do with reality. Why are you doing this? Is discrediting Djalil really worth that much to you? Don't you have proper arguments?

[Deleted]

You call them "foreign", we call them "allied". Semantics.
As to how tightening military cooperation leads to tightening other areas of cooperation I could explain with walls of text, but it is rather obvious.

"other areas of cooperation"?
By the way it's not semantics. Theyre foreign. Allied isnt a synonym of Foreign.

- - - Updated - - -

2015 EU/US trade was

Export 272,687.9 Import 426,005.6 ($millions)

With the US importing nearly twice as much as it exported.

Thank you for this insightful post Hubcap.

[Deleted]

1.Start linking stuff as I did or cut it with the conspiracies
2.Sorry... are you telling me you're talking about a book written at a time where the concept of globalization was still foreign? Yeah ok. Such grim views.
3.Are they not landing? What they float mid air?

It`s a common knowledge. Sad that you`re historically illiterate. Go read de Gaulles ideas about it and how the Americans basically coerced the Brits to share the breathing air with the French in the same room. I`m not your nanny, you can find it yourself.

Book which dealt with specific idea - assumption that economic ties in Europe, particularly between France, Germany and UK were so developed it made interstate warfare impossible. It wasnt globalization, it was all about regional economy between the three and it`s ties (which in some industries was even more linked than today).
Funny how it all worked out considering the release date of said book.

I know what the implication there was. Landing as in being unwelcomed and uninvited. Lame narrative, Djalil. Lame.

[Ausr]

It`s a common knowledge. Sad that you`re historically illiterate. Go read de Gaulles ideas about it and how the Americans basically coerced the Brits to share the breathing air with the French in the same room. I`m not your nanny, you can find it yourself.

Book which dealt with specific idea - assumption that economic ties in Europe, particularly between France, Germany and UK were so developed it made interstate warfare impossible. It wasnt globalization, it was all about regional economy between the three and it`s ties (which in some industries was even more linked than today).
Funny how it all worked out considering the release date of said book.

I know what the implication there was. Landing as in being unwelcomed and uninvited. Lame narrative, Djalil. Lame.

If it ain't Twitter length, he won't read it.

[Deleted]

First answer the question.

First, NATO already does talk shite. Just read up recent statements and find out by yourself. Secondly, shouldnt we be the better side in this and not start a race to the bottom?

[Orange Joe]

First, NATO already does talk shite. Just read up recent statements and find out by yourself. Secondly, shouldnt we be the better side in this and not start a race to the bottom?

I never said NATO didn't talk shit. I'm asking why you think it's ok when Russia does it, but it's bad when NATO does.

[Slant]

I never said NATO didn't talk shit. I'm asking why you think it's ok when Russia does it, but it's bad when NATO does.

For the same reason we think it's ok when NATO does it but bad when Russia does it. It's "the other one" doing it. :P

[Deleted]

It`s a common knowledge. Sad that you`re historically illiterate. Go read de Gaulles ideas about it and how the Americans basically coerced the Brits to share the breathing air with the French in the same room. I`m not your nanny, you can find it yourself.

Book which dealt with specific idea - assumption that economic ties in Europe, particularly between France, Germany and UK were so developed it made interstate warfare impossible. It wasnt globalization, it was all about regional economy between the three and it`s ties (which in some industries was even more linked than today).
Funny how it all worked out considering the release date of said book.

I know what the implication there was. Landing as in being unwelcomed and uninvited. Lame narrative, Djalil. Lame.

1. Common knowledge my ass. Please read up on ECSC and find out the real political will behind achieving LONG TERM peace.
2. Funny how it all worked out and how it ACTUALLY worked out in "making war not only unthinkable but practically impossible". Oh you mean EU is falling apart huh?
3. Who said anything about being unwelcomed and uninvited. They are very much welcomed and invited. This is the whole point.