@beer4brekkie@DefenceHQ@LukePollard@SkyNews Yeah, yeah… Unable to challenge my knowledge of this subject, you fall back on a tired ad hominem pejorative.
Predictably boring, mate.
I do not regard you as a credible or objective source on this issue.
Where is the logic in expanding an organisation that was created specifically to counter the Warsaw Pact, after the Warsaw Pact itself had ceased to exist? The prevailing consensus among the west in the early 2000's was that Russia would fall apart - let-alone become a real threat again, hence why the US shifted its main focus to the Pacific and China.
Of course, tin-pot Middle Eastern regimes can only generate so much money for the military industrial complex; and Ukraine does have some fantastic soil and minerals.
One can only hope that sanity eventually prevails.
The Soviet Union did collapse under its own weight - no argument there; but the claim that Putin simply invented “evil NATO” as a scapegoat while plotting imperial restoration from day one doesn’t match the early record.
When Putin first took power he publicly floated Russia joining NATO (BBC interview with David Frost in 2000; later confirmed by then-NATO Secretary General George Robertson). He also proposed joint European/US-Russian missile-defence cooperation several times in the early 2000s (including a mobile theatre system with NATO) as an alternative to a unilateral American shield.
At the same time, NATO continued expanding eastward. The 2004 accession of the Baltic states put the Alliance directly on Russia’s border. And Ukraine was already being treated as a red line: declassified transcripts of Putin’s conversations with President Bush show him warning as early as 2001 that Ukrainian NATO membership would create long-term confrontation, a position he repeated more bluntly in 2008.
None of this excuses later Russian aggression or the corruption and power-concentration that followed. It does, however, show that the story is more complicated than “Putin just needed someone else to blame so he could rebuild the empire.” NATO’s post-Cold War enlargement and Russia’s reaction to it are part of how we got here.
In short, Russia was never going to be a great power again because of flawed internal state mechanisms, and and economy that was being built around the exporting of raw materials and energy. Hence why it become the "junior" partner of China.
No disrespect intended, but what you wrote is complete nonsense.
Russia does not have the military capability to defeat a second-rate power, let alone dominate Europe.
NATO expanded eastward, right up to Russia’s borders.
You appear to have no real grasp of geopolitics or of how we actually arrived at the present situation.
In short, Russia is not the reason Britain is turning into a giant - ideologically driven - dump.