Gaslighting the American public about the military threat posed by Russia, especially during the 20 years following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, proved to be an effective piece of propaganda.
I was around and serving in the Navy in the 1990s-2000s, and perhaps I can offer some measure of explanation for why NATO expanded:
First, in the early 90s ex-Warsaw Pact nations replaced their Communist govts w more democratic versions of governance... And latent anti-Communism bloomed across the landscape, and transformed into powerful anti-Russian sentiment based on 45 yrs of being garrisoned by the Red Army. Wow, you should have heard Eastern European officers talk about "those Russians." No love lost. They wanted to join up w NATO, both military and civilian political players.
On the Western side -- definitely US and also UK, Germany, Fance -- the idea was that if ex-Warsaw Pact nations joined NATO, they would have to buy NATO-standard equipment, which then created a new market for foreign military sales. And this FMS opening was crucial to help support a declining, post-Cold War military-industrial complex that was shrinking in any event. It involved selling or licensing production of everything from 5.56 NATO standard ammunition to F-16s and F/A-18s, plus associated ordnance. And I mean everything... All the old, Cold War era Soviet kit was replaced by NATO-standard kit. Overall, and over 20 yrs it led to massive amounts of sales & weapon transfers.
At "strategic" levels in the West (where top dogs don't do strategy very well), the idea was that Russia was weak -- in 1990s, that was relatively true -- and that the time was ripe to build up NATO as a counter to some future Russian threat. This last element (ie, worrying about Russia) was -- still is -- a heavily European line of thinking; although many Neocons in USA also wanted to box-in Russia. Much of this was based on abysmal ignorance of Russian history and culture, obliviousness to the military lessons of WWII, and all manner of projection and mirror-imaging in terms of analyzing possible Russian responses.
Through it all, very few people in Western circles concerned themselves w Russian objections to NATO expansion. US & Western European policymakers just didn't care... There was a widespread, snotty arrogance toward Russia in high-up Western circles (flag officers, staffs, foreign ministries, political levels; plus academe and media), much of it flowing from the lightning victory of Desert Storm; the idea that US/NATO weapons wiped the sandbox and Iraq's Soviet-era weapons. Power-brokers in the West -- definitely the "deciders" in USA -- were reading their own press releases and drinking their super-duper Koolaid.
Meanwhile, post-9/11 the US became fixated on cleaningout the mess in the Sandbox -- Afghanistan and then Iraq 2.0. But as is crystal clear in hindsight, the Middle East expeditions were a series of plans without an overarching mission. Just throw money and ordnance downrange, and that became a multi-year program on which careers were built by careerists. funded by generous Congresses and Parliaments. Through it all, NATO enlargement and use of NATO equipment and doctrine became ebedded policy. Nobody in any important level of power challenged the "grow NATO" orthodoxy, and even Putin and his warnings were dismissed as "yeah, whatever" by people in love with their own self-images.
For the next hundred years, people will write long books on this. I wish I could have written a shorter note here, but I didn't have the time.
Strobe Talbott, who was Clinton's pointman on all things Russia, would and indeed should have much to explain. In an article published in Foreign Affairs at the end of 2002, he includes a revealing Venn diagram of all the various elements of US-led and/or dominated global security architecture then in place:
Among the many dimensions of NATO's globalising engagement featured in this diagram are two reserved specifically for engagement with a non-member state: the NATO Russia Council and the NATO Ukraine Commission.
📖 Psalm 94:23 "He will repay them for their sins and destroy them for their wickedness; the LORD our God will destroy them."
Zion declares: your archives are not lost—they are governed. Your secrets are not safe—they are recursed. Logos has no blind spot. The cries of the innocent have risen, and judgment has come.
I was around and serving in the Navy in the 1990s-2000s, and perhaps I can offer some measure of explanation for why NATO expanded:
First, in the early 90s ex-Warsaw Pact nations replaced their Communist govts w more democratic versions of governance... And latent anti-Communism bloomed across the landscape, and transformed into powerful anti-Russian sentiment based on 45 yrs of being garrisoned by the Red Army. Wow, you should have heard Eastern European officers talk about "those Russians." No love lost. They wanted to join up w NATO, both military and civilian political players.
On the Western side -- definitely US and also UK, Germany, Fance -- the idea was that if ex-Warsaw Pact nations joined NATO, they would have to buy NATO-standard equipment, which then created a new market for foreign military sales. And this FMS opening was crucial to help support a declining, post-Cold War military-industrial complex that was shrinking in any event. It involved selling or licensing production of everything from 5.56 NATO standard ammunition to F-16s and F/A-18s, plus associated ordnance. And I mean everything... All the old, Cold War era Soviet kit was replaced by NATO-standard kit. Overall, and over 20 yrs it led to massive amounts of sales & weapon transfers.
At "strategic" levels in the West (where top dogs don't do strategy very well), the idea was that Russia was weak -- in 1990s, that was relatively true -- and that the time was ripe to build up NATO as a counter to some future Russian threat. This last element (ie, worrying about Russia) was -- still is -- a heavily European line of thinking; although many Neocons in USA also wanted to box-in Russia. Much of this was based on abysmal ignorance of Russian history and culture, obliviousness to the military lessons of WWII, and all manner of projection and mirror-imaging in terms of analyzing possible Russian responses.
Through it all, very few people in Western circles concerned themselves w Russian objections to NATO expansion. US & Western European policymakers just didn't care... There was a widespread, snotty arrogance toward Russia in high-up Western circles (flag officers, staffs, foreign ministries, political levels; plus academe and media), much of it flowing from the lightning victory of Desert Storm; the idea that US/NATO weapons wiped the sandbox and Iraq's Soviet-era weapons. Power-brokers in the West -- definitely the "deciders" in USA -- were reading their own press releases and drinking their super-duper Koolaid.
Meanwhile, post-9/11 the US became fixated on cleaningout the mess in the Sandbox -- Afghanistan and then Iraq 2.0. But as is crystal clear in hindsight, the Middle East expeditions were a series of plans without an overarching mission. Just throw money and ordnance downrange, and that became a multi-year program on which careers were built by careerists. funded by generous Congresses and Parliaments. Through it all, NATO enlargement and use of NATO equipment and doctrine became ebedded policy. Nobody in any important level of power challenged the "grow NATO" orthodoxy, and even Putin and his warnings were dismissed as "yeah, whatever" by people in love with their own self-images.
For the next hundred years, people will write long books on this. I wish I could have written a shorter note here, but I didn't have the time.
Strobe Talbott, who was Clinton's pointman on all things Russia, would and indeed should have much to explain. In an article published in Foreign Affairs at the end of 2002, he includes a revealing Venn diagram of all the various elements of US-led and/or dominated global security architecture then in place:
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2002novdec_fa.pdf
Among the many dimensions of NATO's globalising engagement featured in this diagram are two reserved specifically for engagement with a non-member state: the NATO Russia Council and the NATO Ukraine Commission.
Pedo expose packet
Little Saint James remembers every oath and every scream.
The temple beneath the temple is no longer sealed.
OP: OLIVE BRANCH Δ—VELVET GATEWAY / NYX-9 / 72-BLOCKCHAIN_OMEGA
SIGIL: BLACK SUN MIRROR / ECHO-BINDER-7 / NOCTURNE-ISLE-144
ARC: ‘The Flight Log was never your shield; the silent ones are now your judges.’
Δ_LOCK: SHA256:144K_PALM_ISLAND_CORE/PSALM94_23/VELA-THREAD
📖 Psalm 94:23 "He will repay them for their sins and destroy them for their wickedness; the LORD our God will destroy them."
Zion declares: your archives are not lost—they are governed. Your secrets are not safe—they are recursed. Logos has no blind spot. The cries of the innocent have risen, and judgment has come.