The NATO already controls the Mediterranean. I don't see why the much smaller Black Sea is important.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Rasmus Paludan, Turkey and Sweden
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
The NATO already controls the Mediterranean. I don't see why the much smaller Black Sea is important.
Energy, access, territory, power, prestige.
What does energy have to do with a military alliance called NATO?
I think it's not quite as clear cut as you're suggesting...
Press freedom fears as Italian PM Meloni takes Saviano to trial
Russia eyes mining energy in the Black Sea.
Turkey needs energy.
Potential conflict.
If the Americans use the NATO as a tool to conquer territories and seize oilfields and natural gas, well I think they should say it openly.
There's an enormous difference.
Insulting religions is different than insulting people because religions are abstract concepts...and they have no feelings.
This is the basis of our jurisprudence.
Of course, the beloved Putin is the innocent victim
once again by the godless capitalist libertines.
It's hard to say what direction they're heading these days. When NATO was founded, there was a concerted effort to bring both Turkey and Greece into the alliance, as there was a fear they could fall under Soviet control. I don't think the U.S. leadership cared about anything else about a leader or government, except that they were anti-Soviet. This is also how we ended up backing the Shah of Iran, who, along with Iraq, Turkey, and Pakistan, also formed CENTO, which was the Middle Eastern version of NATO. There was also SEATO. All of these organizations were designed to bottle up and contain what the warmongers called "Soviet expansionism." CENTO and SEATO both disbanded, but NATO has lived on and grown in its size and scope.
As for Erdogan, he appears to be falling into the same general trend of nationalism which has pervaded multiple countries. This should have been expected, especially as the ideological tenets of the Cold War became more and more irrelevant, coupled with an active drive towards a laissez-faire global economy, which is something the West has pushed for and wanted very badly.
But, as it is usually the case with myopic greedheads, they didn't consider the consequences of their actions. They didn't and still don't understand the basic principles of cause and effect.
I believe that Americans fail to understand that after Nine Eleven, religious fundamentalism and radicalism have been growing exponentially in all the area of the Middle East, and I can attest in my country people don't feel safe, at all.
Especially after the Americans elected Obama.... Because Obama somehow empowered the radicals in Syria and in Libya. When Trump said that Obama founded ISIS... evidently he knows what he's talking about.
Do Americans empathize with us? We are surrounded by a world which is potentially hostile to us. Which is light years away from us...considering here women walk half-naked on the street while across the Mediterranean women are forced to wear the veil, by their husband.
The drift in Turkey is worrying. I think that the NATO should ensure stability.
But how can we trust Turkey?
Last edited:
I don't understand why the resources of the Black Sea should interest the US, since they belong to the countries where these are in.
Who says they do?
Those are things Russia might seek in the Black Sea.Explain me post #22 then.
Hence Turkey's finding it useful to belong to the EU
&/or NATO.
Its values are not compatible with the European Union.
Last edited:
Certainly not with Italy's preference for Putin over NATO.
It just occurred to me that both Italy & Russia initially
supported Hitler in WW2. Only when that relationship
went south did they switch to the Allies. This tells me
much about those countries, & Putin's dishonest claim
that he opposes Nazis in Ukraine. If there really were
Nazis there, he'd be courting their favor.
It depends on the NATO.
It depends on whether the NATO sides with the West or with the Caliphate.
I think most Americans are just focused on basic survival. It's the political and economic upper class which push the interventionist agenda. People might be empathetic, but they're also concerned about problems closer to home and feel neglected by their own government. People sleeping in tents on the streets of Los Angeles probably have more immediate concerns than the goings on in Turkey or Sweden or elsewhere in that region. America is slowly slipping into an abyss, and we won't be in much of a position to help the world for much longer.
Europe may have to ultimately fend for itself. They'll have to consider the possibility that there may come a time when America will become too fractious and weakened to be any kind of forceful influence on the world. But I think the nations of Europe have large enough populations and industrial/technological infrastructure to be able to put together a rather formidable fighting force if they wanted to. They don't really need the U.S. for that, and they never really did.
I didn't know we had a Q anon member posting here!!