If Putin moves Against Estonia...

theprestige said:
I figured it was some kind of gotcha game along those lines. Thus the snarky reply.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a gotcha game. It was a challenge to an argument.

Also, I wouldn't want to crap on anyone's "feelings", but Poland was a part of the Warzaw Pact, and an enemy of the US, until 1990, so I don't know where these nostalgic feelings of long lasting friendship can come from.
 
Last edited:
Border Reiver said:
Estonia is a part of NATO, and the NATO Charter obligates NATO to come to the aid of any member who is attacked.
Click to expand...


Yes, but has there ever been a scenario which called for that charter aspect to be invoked? It's one thing to have it down on paper, it's another to actually put it into practice when real, major consequences are on the line.
 
uke2se said:
The reason the year 2019 was chosen is because in that year Estonia will have been a part of NATO for as long as Poland has today. It was a challenge of Fudbuckers claim that Putin wouldn't try his aggression on a long standing NATO member, like Poland.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected. But Poland is on Germany's border, and is strategically important to us. I think that might change things.
 
Fudbucker said:
I stand corrected. But Poland is on Germany's border, and is strategically important to us. I think that might change things.
Click to expand...

That is true. I would hope it wouldn't matter, but I very well could.
 
Corsair 115 said:
Yes, but has there ever been a scenario which called for that charter aspect to be invoked? It's one thing to have it down on paper, it's another to actually put it into practice when real, major consequences are on the line.
Click to expand...

True. However, in reality the options at that point are either facing those major consequences or dissolving NATO. There was exactly one major reason why the Baltic and Eastern Central European nations were so eager to join NATO, and it wasn't to get their presidents yearly Christmas cards from the POTUS.
 
uke2se said:
It wasn't a gotcha game. It was a challenge to an argument.
Click to expand...
Of course.

Also, I wouldn't want to crap on anyone's "feelings",
Click to expand...
Of course.

but Poland was a part of the Warzaw Pact, and an enemy of the US, until 1990, so I don't know where these nostalgic feelings of long lasting friendship can come from.
Click to expand...
I think you're overestimating the evil taint of the Warsaw Pact, to Americans in the Cold War period. The Soviet satellite states might have been seen as enemies on the battlefield, but they were also seen as prisoners to a hateful regime, to be liberated from bondage.

The emergence of the Solidarity movement, and our government's support for it, in the 80s, did a lot to kindle sense of cameraderie on this side of the Atlantic. It foreshadowed the collapse of the Soviet bloc and the end of the Warsaw pact. It was that policy of making common cause with Poland in the 80s, and backing its dissidents openly against their weakening Russian overlords, that I'm talking about. Did the UK make no friends in Eastern Europe during the 80s?
 
theprestige said:
I think you're overestimating the evil taint of the Warsaw Pact, to Americans in the Cold War period. The Soviet satellite states might have been seen as enemies on the battlefield, but they were also seen as prisoners to a hateful regime, to be liberated from bondage.

The emergence of the Solidarity movement, and our government's support for it, in the 80s, did a lot to kindle sense of cameraderie on this side of the Atlantic. It foreshadowed the collapse of the Soviet bloc and the end of the Warsaw pact. It was that policy of making common cause with Poland in the 80s, and backing its dissidents openly against their weakening Russian overlords, that I'm talking about.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I find it strange, is all.

theprestige said:
Did the UK make no friends in Eastern Europe during the 80s?
Click to expand...

I don't know. I'm Swedish.
 
uke2se said:
Also, I wouldn't want to crap on anyone's "feelings", but Poland was a part of the Warzaw Pact, and an enemy of the US, until 1990, so I don't know where these nostalgic feelings of long lasting friendship can come from.
Click to expand...

You can start off with Count Kosciuszko during the American Revolution, then, Free Polish troops as allies during WW-II, and the belief that Poland was an occupied nation during the cold war.
 
Pope130 said:
You can start off with Count Kosciuszko during the American Revolution, then, Free Polish troops as allies during WW-II, and the belief that Poland was an occupied nation during the cold war.
Click to expand...

Which it was........
 
Red Baron Farms said:
Just being a Russian politician is a great risk. But I am less concerned about Putin as I am the people he might put at risk by his recklessness.
Click to expand...

Well, true. By "Putin," I meant "Russia" as a nation.

I honestly do not think that the rest of the world (meaning Europe and the United States) would just sit idly by, as Russia attempts an invasion of Estonia (not that I think that is how it would occur. There would be a "peaceful vote," or some "internal rebellion" most likely.)

But yes. It is frightening to think about what would happen to those innocent civilians caught in the cross-fire if some sort of open warfare did occur. The US and Europe would probably intervene.

On that note, I find it incredibly unlikely. I don;t think that Putin would even be able to survive as a politician within Russia if he even attempted such a move. The Russian people, I don't think, are THAT crazy to go along with such a thing. (One would hope.) Even in the less democratic Russia, Putin would still need support from the people of Russia, I would think. (I am no expert on Russian politics, so....)
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Risk of what? I don't see much stomach among NATO's political leaders to go to war with Russia over Estonia, especially if Putin plays the anschluss card again, like he did in Ukraine.

It's a proven technique, and he's already demonstrated that it's politically acceptable to NATO. Why wouldn't he double down on it if he saw a benefit? I think the lack of reward, not the potential risk of war, will be the deciding factor in Putin's calculus.
Click to expand...

The European politicians were seriously considering intervening in Ukraine. Hell, Merkle was all for full intervention! And right there, is half of European political clout.

If Russia attempted an invasion of yet another independent state, particularly one that is in the NATO alliance....don't bet on Europe and North America sitting there watching it happen. Putin knows Merkle very well by now, and he should know that she is very serious. And she has the backing of other European leaders, their militaries, and its economy. Putin does not know who will become the next US president, but no matter who it is, they will have the backing of the threat of the full US military and economic might as well. Neither of which is much to laugh at.
 
theprestige said:
You say that like it's obvious, but today I learned that this paradigm is considered somewhat strange in Sweden.
Click to expand...

It sure does. I would say calling Poland during the cold war occupied might work as a rhetorical device, but it does not resemble reality.
 
Nihilianth said:
Out of curiosity, how wasn't it occupied?
Click to expand...

It had its own government, ostensibly self-determined. This was shown to be true when they withdrew from the Warsaw pact in 1990.

Let's say it was occupied in the same way West Germany was occupied.
 
casebro said:
But why Estonia?
Click to expand...

It's in NATO, borders Russia, and some border towns in Estonia have heavy native-Russian populations.

Russia taking on NATO would freak out the markets, maybe drive oil back up. Putin's crony buddies could short the market before he made his move and make a bunch of money (maybe that last part would be too obvious?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom