PDA

View Full Version : tPF McCain: Rand Paul Works for Putin



Ethereal
03-16-2017, 12:25 PM
McCain: Rand Paul 'working for Vladimir Putin' (http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/324182-mccain-rand-paul-working-for-vladimir-putin)

BY JORDAIN CARNEY - 03/15/17 05:17 PM EDT

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Wednesday accused Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) of working for Russian President Vladimir Putin after he objected to a treaty related to Monte$#@!.

"He has no justification for his objection to having a small nation be part of NATO that is under assault from the Russians," McCain said from the Senate floor.

"The senator from Kentucky is now working for Vladimir Putin."

The flashpoint came after McCain asked for unanimous consent to set up a vote on a treaty on Monte$#@! joining NATO, but Paul objected.

...

Just when you think McCain cannot become any more unhinged, he proves you wrong in spectacular fashion.

The issue? Rand Paul's opposition to Montenegro's admittance to NATO. Because, you know, there is such a groundswell of support among Americans to admit Montenegro into NATO. I know I'm personally committed to defend a country I've never been to, don't care about, and that has a GDP a shade bigger than Serbia.

Peter1469
03-16-2017, 12:29 PM
Rand Paul replied: this is a good example of the need for term limits. :smiley:

Peter1469
03-16-2017, 12:32 PM
I would expect the defense industry is pushing for this: to become a member of NATO your equipment and tactics must be NATO compatible.

Common
03-16-2017, 12:37 PM
I guess this was reposted because the other was closed.

I supported McCain whole heartedly for alot of years, for his nam service and what he suffered through being a POW. I cant no longer, it appears all he wants to do is be in the limelight for one reason or another.

I dont know very much about foriegn affairs nor the right or wrong approachs to it.
I do know I dont care much at all about montenegro either way

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 12:38 PM
NATO Doesn't Need Montenegro's Teeny-Tiny Military (http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-skeptics/nato-doesnt-need-montenegros-teeny-tiny-military-16768)

Two thousand personnel. That's how big Montenegro's military is. Not only do we not need them, they are a massive liability.

Peter1469
03-16-2017, 12:39 PM
There is no strategic reason to consider them for NATO membership.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 12:42 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhbAFkV2s8A

Rand gives McCain an epic smack-down.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 12:47 PM
Two thousand personnel. That's how big Montenegro's military is. Not only do we not need them, they are a massive liability.


The strategic importance of Montenegro is inversely proportional to its size. With it, NATO will have full control of the Adriatic Sea, finish the encirclement of Serbia, and be emboldened to pursue a more aggressive stance towards Russia.

While the country has a population fewer than 700,000 and no more than 1,500 members of the military, the reason NATO wants Montenegro is not its military might, but in equal measures strategic location and symbolism.
Geographically speaking, the country is a natural fortress, and could be held against an invading force by a much smaller number of defenders, Thermopylae-style. That is precisely what the Montenegrin Army did at Mojkovac in 1916, protecting the flank of the retreating Serbian Army against a numerically superior Austro-Hungarian force.
Then there is the symbolism part. Back in the 15th century, even after they successfully overran the Serbian principalities of the central Balkans and advanced on Vienna, the Ottoman Turks found that they could never fully subjugate the mountain clans of Montenegro.



http://novorossia.today/montenegro-strategic-importance-surrounding-serbia-natos-aggressive-stance-towards-russia/

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 12:51 PM
http://novorossia.today/monte$#@!-strategic-importance-surrounding-serbia-natos-aggressive-stance-towards-russia/
How does any of that promote AMERICAN strategic interests?

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 12:53 PM
How does any of that promote AMERICAN strategic interests?
Last time I checked the U.S. is in NATO.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 12:56 PM
Last time I checked the U.S. is in NATO.
That's not an explanation. How does admitting Montenegro to NATO further American strategic interests? How does it make America safer or stronger? Please be specific.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 12:57 PM
That's not an explanation. How does admitting Montenegro to NATO further American strategic interests? How does it make America safer or stronger? Please be specific.

It makes NATO stronger given the reasons I posted already which is specifically an American strategic interest. NATO stronger = all of NATO's members are stronger and that includes the U.S.

Peter1469
03-16-2017, 01:03 PM
Why does NATO need to encircle Serbia?

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 01:03 PM
It makes NATO stronger given the reasons I posted already which is specifically an American strategic interest. NATO stronger = all of NATO's members are stronger and that includes the U.S.
Let me put it another way. How will I, as an American, be better off by admitting Montenegro to NATO? Give me some specifics.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 01:08 PM
Why does NATO need to encircle Serbia?
If you assume that Russia is diligently plotting the downfall of western civilization, then I suppose it makes sense to admit Montenegro. But as you and I both know, that narrative is a feverish exaggeration borne out of the imperialist ambitions of neocons and neoliberals. In reality, there is no reason to admit Montenegro because there is no Russian threat looming over western civilization. Russia clearly wants cooperation based on mutual respect and rational self-interest. It's the supremacist neocons and neoliberals who want a uni-polar world.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 01:31 PM
Let me put it another way. How will I, as an American, be better off by admitting Montenegro to NATO? Give me some specifics.

I've already given those examples... The fact that the U.S. is in NATO and that organization is specifically there to mitigate the chance of war. Not being dragged into another war because of preemptive power projection is a benefit in my opinion...

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 01:32 PM
If you assume that Russia is diligently plotting the downfall of western civilization, then I suppose it makes sense to admit Montenegro. But as you and I both know, that narrative is a feverish exaggeration borne out of the imperialist ambitions of neocons and neoliberals. In reality, there is no reason to admit Montenegro because there is no Russian threat looming over western civilization. Russia clearly wants cooperation based on mutual respect and rational self-interest. It's the supremacist neocons and neoliberals who want a uni-polar world.

Yet they view the poisoning of journalists that express differing opinions to them is; "rational self-interests". That begs the question of how rational the Russians can be...

The Xl
03-16-2017, 01:36 PM
Everyone probably works for Putin in that deranged old mans head.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 01:55 PM
I've already given those examples... The fact that the U.S. is in NATO and that organization is specifically there to mitigate the chance of war. Not being dragged into another war because of preemptive power projection is a benefit in my opinion...
Admitting Montenegro makes war more likely, not less likely.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 01:57 PM
Yet they view the poisoning of journalists that express differing opinions to them is; "rational self-interests". That begs the question of how rational the Russians can be...
From the perspective of an authoritarian government, crushing internal dissent is entirely rational. It may be unjust, but it's not irrational. In any case, Russia's internal repression has little if anything to do with US-Russian relations. What they do inside their own country doesn't really concern our national defense.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 02:02 PM
Admitting Montenegro makes war more likely, not less likely.
We disagree but adding Montenegro makes winning a war more likely.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 02:03 PM
From the perspective of an authoritarian government, crushing internal dissent is entirely rational. It may be unjust, but it's not irrational. In any case, Russia's internal repression has little if anything to do with US-Russian relations. What they do inside their own country doesn't really concern our national defense.

What they are doing inside their country they will be more than willing to do outside. We've seen this first hand in the Ukraine.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 02:12 PM
We disagree...
The expansion of NATO is heightening tensions between the USA and Russia, making a war more likely, not less likely.


...but adding Monte$#@! makes winning a war more likely.

Nobody will "win" if the USA and Russia go to war. That's why it's called mutually assured destruction. We should be doing everything within reason to minimize the probability of war with Russia and admitting Montenegro will have the exact opposite effect.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 02:14 PM
What they are doing inside their country they will be more than willing to do outside.

Because?


We've seen this first hand in the Ukraine.

So you've bought into the "Russian aggression" narrative being peddled by the establishment?

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 02:15 PM
The expansion of NATO is heightening tensions between the USA and Russia, making a war more likely, not less likely.



Nobody will "win" if the USA and Russia go to war. That's why it's called mutually assured destruction. We should be doing everything within reason to minimize the probability of war with Russia and admitting Montenegro will have the exact opposite effect.
Again I disagree. On both fronts. Wars do not necessarily equate to mutually assured destruction and admitting Montenegro will not have a discernible effect towards war rather more of a deterrent.

Ethereal
03-16-2017, 02:18 PM
Again I disagree. On both fronts. Wars do not necessarily equate to mutually assured destruction and admitting Monte$#@! will not have a discernible effect towards war rather more of a deterrent.

The Russians have made it crystal clear that they consider NATO expansionism a serious threat to their national security. Therefore, the continued expansion of NATO only increases the chances of a war between the USA and Russia.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 02:28 PM
Because?



So you've bought into the "Russian aggression" narrative being peddled by the establishment?

Naturally there is always two sides of the story... But you cannot deny Russia involvement up to and including:
False and corrupt referendums.
Russian paramilitaries killing more than 9,000 Ukrainians.

All leading to universal international condemnation.

Private Pickle
03-16-2017, 02:29 PM
The Russians have made it crystal clear that they consider NATO expansionism a serious threat to their national security. Therefore, the continued expansion of NATO only increases the chances of a war between the USA and Russia.

And we've made it quite clear that the Russian Federations expansion in the Crimea is also a serious threat to many nation's national security...didn't stop them...

Peter1469
03-16-2017, 04:37 PM
If you assume that Russia is diligently plotting the downfall of western civilization, then I suppose it makes sense to admit Montenegro. But as you and I both know, that narrative is a feverish exaggeration borne out of the imperialist ambitions of neocons and neoliberals. In reality, there is no reason to admit Montenegro because there is no Russian threat looming over western civilization. Russia clearly wants cooperation based on mutual respect and rational self-interest. It's the supremacist neocons and neoliberals who want a uni-polar world.

If I assume that Russia wants to cause the downfall of of the West, Montenegro still does not rise to much of an asset, other than to deny it to Russia. We could keep that from happening without admitting Montenegro to NATO.

Green Arrow
03-16-2017, 07:00 PM
McCain is senile.

Ethereal
03-18-2017, 05:02 PM
Naturally there is always two sides of the story... But you cannot deny Russia involvement up to and including:
False and corrupt referendums.
Russian paramilitaries killing more than 9,000 Ukrainians.

All leading to universal international condemnation.
I can and will deny it. The situation in Ukraine was instigated by western intelligence agencies in coordination with some of the seediest and most corrupt elements of Ukrainian society, including neo-Nazis. The Russian aggression narrative is palpably and demonstrably false. And I don't know what you mean by "false and corrupt referendums". Multiple polls of the Crimean people have corroborated their referendum to join Russia. In any case, Ukraine is a unique situation and has little relevance to the overarching relationship between the west and Russia. What happens in Ukraine is not some kind of test case for how Russia will behave towards other countries.

Ethereal
03-18-2017, 05:03 PM
And we've made it quite clear that the Russian Federations expansion in the Crimea is also a serious threat to many nation's national security...didn't stop them...

I don't see your point.

Ethereal
03-18-2017, 05:03 PM
McCain is senile.
I think you're giving him too much credit.

Mister D
03-18-2017, 05:06 PM
"God"s children" McCain needs to retire.

Tahuyaman
03-18-2017, 06:32 PM
Rand Paul replied: this is a good example of the need for term limits. :smiley:Nothing is more entertaining than watching McCain go the extra mile in an attempt to gain the approval of the media.

Mister D
03-18-2017, 06:35 PM
Nothing is more entertaining than watching McCain go the extra mile in an attempt to gain the approval of the media.
He should have learned his lesson after the "Straight Talk Express" fiasco. Once he lost to Bush they dropped him like a bad habit.

Tahuyaman
03-18-2017, 06:55 PM
He should have learned his lesson after the "Straight Talk Express" fiasco. Once he lost to Bush they dropped him like a bad habit.


He thought that he would get them on his side in his campaign against Obama. They brutalized him.

Mister D
03-18-2017, 06:56 PM
He thought that he would get them on his side in his campaign against Obama. They brutalized him.

Yep and he learned nothing from that experience, apparently.

Tahuyaman
03-18-2017, 07:06 PM
Yep and he learned nothing from that experience, apparently.

He keeps thinking that he can win them over. It's delusional.

Newpublius
03-18-2017, 07:11 PM
Naturally there is always two sides of the story... But you cannot deny Russia involvement up to and including:
False and corrupt referendums.
Russian paramilitaries killing more than 9,000 Ukrainians.

All leading to universal international condemnation.
But this isn't different than Pakistan/India in Kashmir or Northern Ireland. We are still seeing the natural consequences of a political entity dissolving with new lines being drawn with sizable ethnic minorities on the wrong side of the line.

Mayhem often ensues.

Private Pickle
03-19-2017, 10:00 AM
I don't see your point.
That they could give two-fucks about the same thing you say we should yet you continually defend their actions for the sake of an argument surrounding U.S. interventionalism.

Ethereal
03-19-2017, 01:37 PM
That they could give two-$#@!s about the same thing you say we should yet you continually defend their actions for the sake of an argument surrounding U.S. interventionalism.

Still not following you.

My point was that angering Russia by expanding NATO makes war more likely, not less likely. Your response had no logical connection to that point as far as I could tell.