Teslag said:

---

"Soft aggression"

But keep accusing everyone of being warmongers while you give Putin, the ultimate warmonger, a complete pass.

---

As expected..

BlueTaze said:

---

For Teslag and all those who claim NATO expansion is not a concern of Russia. For those who claim Russia wasn't provoked and that no assurances were ever made to them about not expanding NATO. Are all of these sited footnotes "Russian Propaganda"? It's time to stop denying historical facts. Russia is our enemy, but they certainly have legit grievances and we have no business wasting our money on this war.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

---

It won't budge him one bit.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Teslag said:

---

"Soft aggression"

But keep accusing everyone of being warmongers while you give Putin, the ultimate warmonger, a complete pass.

---

As expected..

---

Keep goaltending for Putin. He literally appreciates your effort.

BlueTaze said:

---

For Teslag and all those who claim NATO expansion is not a concern of Russia. For those who claim Russia wasn't provoked and that no assurances were ever made to them about not expanding NATO. Are all of these sited footnotes "Russian Propaganda"? It's time to stop denying historical facts. Russia is our enemy, but they certainly have legit grievances and we have no business wasting our money on this war.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

---

Those discussions involved the non deployment of NATO into the former eastern Germany. Which we did not do. It never involved NATO expansion into former satellite states.

As even Gorbachev clarified years later…

Quote:

---

The interviewer asked why Gorbachev did not "insist that the promises made to you [Gorbachev]particularly U.S. Secretary of State James Baker's promise that NATO would not expand into the Eastbe legally encoded?" Gorbachev replied: "The topic of 'NATO expansion' was not discussed at all, and it wasn't brought up in those years. … Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATO's military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Baker's statement was made in that context… Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled."

---

Gorbachev himself said we fulfilled those promises, and they only related to the former GDR. Not the Baltic's. Not Romania. Not Hungary. Not anywhere else, including Ukraine.

Facts

Quote:

---

Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the "not one inch eastward" formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev's statement in response to the assurances that "NATO expansion is unacceptable." Baker assured Gorbachev that "neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place," and that the Americans understood that "not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO's present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction." (See Document 6)

---

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16117-document-06-record-conversation-between

Gorbachev made several comments that were inconsistent in both confirming and refuting the topic of assurances against NATO expansion. So therefore you have to go into the archives for additional sourcing. Its very clear the West understood Russia's concern for NATO expansion and made efforts to address it in past. Putin is our enemy, but he is historically accurate in his representation of NATO engagements in past.

HarryJ33tamu said:

---

Learn some history.

Interesting pic.twitter.com/61G9RKibAY

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 12, 2024

---

Absolutely sickening. I pray Trump is able to kick out every last neocon from the state dept and pentagon. These people should never again have any influence on foreign policy. Total **** show.

BlueTaze said:

---

Quote:

---

Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the "not one inch eastward" formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev's statement in response to the assurances that "NATO expansion is unacceptable." Baker assured Gorbachev that "neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place," and that the Americans understood that "not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO's present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction." (See Document 6)

---

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16117-document-06-record-conversation-between

Gorbachev made several comments that were inconsistent in both confirming and refuting the topic of assurances against NATO expansion. So therefore you have to go into the archives for additional sourcing. Its very clear the West understood Russia's concern for NATO expansion and made efforts to address it in past. Putin is our enemy, but he is historically accurate in his representation of NATO engagements in past.

---

And the hand wave…

JB99 said:

---

HarryJ33tamu said:

---

Learn some history.

Interesting pic.twitter.com/61G9RKibAY

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 12, 2024

---

Absolutely sickening. I pray Trump is able to kick out every last neocon from the state dept and pentagon. These people should never again have any influence on foreign policy. Total **** show.

---

What is false about that video? Whatever else about the man, right up to about 3.5 minute mark, he is just laying out many things that happened. He could have even thrown in how we played a role in 2013 onward enabling ISIS (some say created) to take down Assad in Syria. Kerry and company as late as 2016 was fine with the expansion of the Islamist threat in return for taking down Assad. Did like how 2002 and some of the lost chances after 9/11 were mentioned. Those were seen real-time as they occurred.

BlueTaze said:

---

Quote:

---

Not once, but three times, Baker tried out the "not one inch eastward" formula with Gorbachev in the February 9, 1990, meeting. He agreed with Gorbachev's statement in response to the assurances that "NATO expansion is unacceptable." Baker assured Gorbachev that "neither the President nor I intend to extract any unilateral advantages from the processes that are taking place," and that the Americans understood that "not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO's present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction." (See Document 6)

---

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16117-document-06-record-conversation-between

Gorbachev made several comments that were inconsistent in both confirming and refuting the topic of assurances against NATO expansion. So therefore you have to go into the archives for additional sourcing. Its very clear the West understood Russia's concern for NATO expansion and made efforts to address it in past. Putin is our enemy, but he is historically accurate in his representation of NATO engagements in past.

---

You do realize that this:

Quote:

---

Americans understood that "not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO's present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction."

---

specifically refers to expansion into the former East Germany?

No one really foresaw the majority of the former Soviet satellite states of the Eastern Bloc applying for NATO membership at that time. It wasn't even a Soviet concern per Gorbachev's own statement.

Further, if an agreement isn't codified and things materially change (like the Soviet Union collapsing, most of the newly liberated countries of Eastern Europe standing on their own and subsequently requesting membership in NATO, etc.), the agreement isn't worth the paper it's not printed on. The US changes governments potentially every 4 years, and each new incoming administration is likely to have its own foreign policy positions and they are likely to be 180 degrees different than the previous administration's.

Given that known parameter, a handshake deal with the GHWB administration cannot and should not tie the hands of future administrations unless they want it to. Clearly subsequent administrations did not want to be bound by something they weren't bound by.

Especially when Putin/Russia aren't binding themselves to the fact they formally accepted Ukraine's independence and recognized them as a sovereign independent nation.

Whether woke tears or war monger tears, they will all taste delicious

Quote:

---

The US changes governments potentially every 4 years, and each new incoming administration is likely to have its own foreign policy positions and they are likely to be 180 degrees different than the previous administration's.

Given that known parameter, a handshake deal with the GHWB administration cannot and should not tie the hands of future administrations unless they want it to. Clearly subsequent administrations did not want to be bound by something they weren't bound by.

---

This is actually a very good response to the 90's era pledge as usually framed. That's why don't really consider it a key argument or rebuttal.

However, what it does explain is Russia's expectation of it. And actually, its a foolish nation that counts on our consistency in anything for precisely the reason the admins change so constantly.

What is so reckless here though is that Russia can't back down. Its their border. We have been too hostile about it after the fact, rather than using our leverage before. We are increasingly giving the impression we are directly at war with them and that's both dangerous and asinine. We have not been a good actor in this.

Russia has been anything but consistent in their promises as well. It's naive to just give them a pass here.

Teslag said:

---

Russia has been anything but consistent in their promises as well. It's naive to just give them a pass here.

---

You are misreading my post if saying its giving a pass to Russia's promise breaking.

Frankly, we are almost at a point where it would take a major separate power like China brokering between us and them.

Cold War soldiers itching for a fight…

I didn't say there was anything false about the video. In the video he explains how neocons alienated Russia and made no effort to normalize Russia in the early days. In fact, further pushing them away with aggressive NATO expansion. That I find sickening.

JB99 said:

---

I didn't say there was anything false about the video. In the video he explains how neocons alienated Russia and made no effort to normalize Russia in the early days. In fact, further pushing them away with aggressive NATO expansion. That I find sickening.

---

Hold. I didn't say you did. Was asking an open-ended question. Agree overall.