Biden Trip Shows Europe United Over N...

Biden Trip Shows Europe United Over NATO, Divided On Sanctions

There are 68 comments on the ABC News story from Mar 20, 2014, titled Biden Trip Shows Europe United Over NATO, Divided On Sanctions. In it, ABC News reports that:

Vice President Joe Biden's trip to Poland and Lithuania had a dual mission: show support of NATO allies in Russia's backyard while also considering ways to wean these countries off their dependence on Russia, especially its oil.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at ABC News.

First Prev
of 4
Next Last

“In the cockles of weirdness”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#1 Mar 20, 2014
...while all the leaders he met expressed a desire to work together under NATO’s principle of collective self-defense, there were clear rifts, even between neighbors, over how hard to hit Russia with economic sanctions in response to its takeover of the Ukrainian region of Crimea.

Estonia’s president Toomas Ilves was vehement Tuesday in his desire for the European Union to impose severe sanctions on Russia, regardless of the impact on energy supply.

But going into that meeting, not everyone in the Baltic region expressed the same enthusiasm for sanctions as their colleagues. Just after visiting with Biden Wednesday, Lithuania’s Dalia Grybauskaitė warned that economic sanctions on Russia would backfire on the West.

“I know how Russians think and believe me they don’t care about economic sanctions. And if economic sanctions were introduced today, horizontally, this will touch every Russian citizen and will be used by Putin to say ‘Look, I am not guilty it’s the West, Americans and Europe who are doing bad things to you,’” she said, per the Wall Street Journal.

The president of Latvia, Andris Berzins, emphasized his desire for long-term energy independence from Russia, a goal the United States shares, over sanctions that could not only cut off his country’s oil supply but throw its economy into a tailspin.
Cordwainer Trout

Brownsville, KY

#2 Mar 20, 2014
What's NATO going to do for a people so stupid they can't even control whether they are taken over by a bunch of violent Muslim monsters actually capable of installing a secondary system of law in many places. NATO has no need to exist. They are abusive and guilty of war crimes. They think they can buy off violent Muslim fanatics with land. Dissolve them and Europe may stand a chance.
Hawk

Kamuela, HI

#3 Mar 21, 2014
Cordwainer Trout wrote:
What's NATO going to do for a people so stupid they can't even control whether they are taken over by a bunch of violent Muslim monsters actually capable of installing a secondary system of law in many places. NATO has no need to exist. They are abusive and guilty of war crimes. They think they can buy off violent Muslim fanatics with land. Dissolve them and Europe may stand a chance.
NATO is the greatest insurance for world security, Russia and it's people fear it greatly and with good reason. To dissolve the alliance would be one of the greatest follies that man kind could inflect upon it's self and reduce the world once again into a mess of nation states out to take that which they can from whom they can without care of human cost.

Just NATO's existence is enough to put terror into the hearts of Russians that they had to attack their neighbors and take their land before they became protected by NATO's umbrella.

Mankind owes NATO a great debt from preventing another world wide conflict from taking place, it should continue to be the vanguard against world war.

[email protected]

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#4 Mar 21, 2014
Hawk wrote:
<quoted text>
NATO is the greatest insurance for world security, Russia and it's people fear it greatly and with good reason. To dissolve the alliance would be one of the greatest follies that man kind could inflect upon it's self and reduce the world once again into a mess of nation states out to take that which they can from whom they can without care of human cost.
Just NATO's existence is enough to put terror into the hearts of Russians that they had to attack their neighbors and take their land before they became protected by NATO's umbrella.
Mankind owes NATO a great debt from preventing another world wide conflict from taking place, it should continue to be the vanguard against world war.
One would have to believe that to be true.

You know till this day I still don't see why peope believe that Russians are somehow tough. Everything that I have read about Russian culture and history shows me a nation and people that are simply weaklings.

Case and point, the biggest example of the Russian "toughness" was the battle of Stalingrad now Volgograd, it has been widely reported and in a lot of cases verified that Russian troops were giving an order of "no step back" and Russian officers would gun down anyone that didn't advance at the pace to their liking.

A brave and valorous people would have, after given a gun turn that gun to the officer that threaten them, shot them and then moved on to kill the invaders of their nation.

So I do believe base off this battle and other examples of Russian history that they are really just a weak people, looking to be ruled over by strong leaders that threaten to harm them if they don't conform to their demands.

After all, the soviet union was allowed to existed as long as it did because the people en mass lack the bravery to fight for their lives.

Shame really, maybe that is why they are invading their neighbors, they have come to the realization that they are just a weak people and have to prove that they aren't by attacking those weaker than they are.
Cordwainer Trout

Brownsville, KY

#5 Mar 21, 2014
Hawk wrote:
<quoted text>
NATO is the greatest insurance for world security, Russia and it's people fear it greatly and with good reason. To dissolve the alliance would be one of the greatest follies that man kind could inflect upon it's self and reduce the world once again into a mess of nation states out to take that which they can from whom they can without care of human cost.
Just NATO's existence is enough to put terror into the hearts of Russians that they had to attack their neighbors and take their land before they became protected by NATO's umbrella.
Mankind owes NATO a great debt from preventing another world wide conflict from taking place, it should continue to be the vanguard against world war.
Falling for the EU/US Axis propaganda is dangerous to your health. NATO stands for the NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY Org. It has no business in Eastern Europe and Ukraine offers absolutely no threat to NATO States, nor does Russia. US/EU interests started funneling Billions of dollars into Ukraine funding even neo-Nazi elements among about 50 Western NGOs, who have now been given three positions in the top oligarchy now illegally "ruling" in Kiev. There WAS NO Russian invasion of Ukraine, nor of Crimea. That is totally false. A 1997 Treaty between Ukraine and Russia allowed 25 thou. Russian troops in Crimea and they only had 16 thou. there.

"Terror in the hearts of Russians?" You've got to be kidding and living in a little kiddie pen.

NATO has been repeatedly caught committing horrible war crimes. They have no reason to exist, except imposing Western banking interests on nations not wanting it. That is not a good reason.

Here is a balanced interview with a former US intelligence agent on Russia Today with a very intriguing interviewer...

#t=1624

You don't have a clue about what really goes on...
Cordwainer Trout

Brownsville, KY

#6 Mar 21, 2014
Dajokerman wrote:
<quoted text>
One would have to believe that to be true.
You know till this day I still don't see why peope believe that Russians are somehow tough. Everything that I have read about Russian culture and history shows me a nation and people that are simply weaklings.
Case and point, the biggest example of the Russian "toughness" was the battle of Stalingrad now Volgograd, it has been widely reported and in a lot of cases verified that Russian troops were giving an order of "no step back" and Russian officers would gun down anyone that didn't advance at the pace to their liking.
A brave and valorous people would have, after given a gun turn that gun to the officer that threaten them, shot them and then moved on to kill the invaders of their nation.
So I do believe base off this battle and other examples of Russian history that they are really just a weak people, looking to be ruled over by strong leaders that threaten to harm them if they don't conform to their demands.
After all, the soviet union was allowed to existed as long as it did because the people en mass lack the bravery to fight for their lives.
Shame really, maybe that is why they are invading their neighbors, they have come to the realization that they are just a weak people and have to prove that they aren't by attacking those weaker than they are.
Such perception is totally lacking any reasoned study of Russian history... something going on for a thousand years of significant culture... something Americans can only dream about...

Russians and Russians alone won the Second World War for the world. Not until many millions of Russians sacrificed their lives for the destruction of Nazi Germany did the Allies get involved, or even have a chance of success in Western Europe.

[email protected]

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#7 Mar 21, 2014
Cordwainer Trout wrote:
<quoted text>
Falling for the EU/US Axis propaganda is dangerous to your health. NATO stands for the NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY Org. It has no business in Eastern Europe and Ukraine offers absolutely no threat to NATO States, nor does Russia. US/EU interests started funneling Billions of dollars into Ukraine funding even neo-Nazi elements among about 50 Western NGOs, who have now been given three positions in the top oligarchy now illegally "ruling" in Kiev. There WAS NO Russian invasion of Ukraine, nor of Crimea. That is totally false. A 1997 Treaty between Ukraine and Russia allowed 25 thou. Russian troops in Crimea and they only had 16 thou. there.
"Terror in the hearts of Russians?" You've got to be kidding and living in a little kiddie pen.
NATO has been repeatedly caught committing horrible war crimes. They have no reason to exist, except imposing Western banking interests on nations not wanting it. That is not a good reason.
Here is a balanced interview with a former US intelligence agent on Russia Today with a very intriguing interviewer...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =HZsubnlsxxgXX#t=1624
You don't have a clue about what really goes on...
Haha... I like how you start with saying that Hawk is falling for propaganda and then finish with a link to Russia Today which by definition a propaganda news station.

Sorry friend, you are the one drinking the kool aid in this post.

[email protected]

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#8 Mar 21, 2014
Cordwainer Trout wrote:
<quoted text>
Such perception is totally lacking any reasoned study of Russian history
Translation.... You are right Joker, Russians are weak.
Cordwainer Trout wrote:
<quoted text>... something going on for a thousand years of significant culture... something Americans can only dream about....
Why would Americans dream of having Russian's history, a history book of failure as a civilization and an deeply embedded weakness as people isn't what we would want to be known for.

I could go on, but I am getting this vibe from you that you seem to hold Russia and being Russian in high regard, which if fine. but being unable to accept their deeply and glaring flaws as a people is...well...tragic.
Cordwainer Trout wrote:
<quoted text>Russians and Russians alone won the Second World War for the world. Not until many millions of Russians sacrificed their lives for the destruction of Nazi Germany did the Allies get involved, or even have a chance of success in Western Europe.
This is so laughably wrong I hardly believe it's worth debating further. It was America that won WWII that is simple historical fact. Without American industry and military Germany would have conquered both Britain and Russia.

Remember it wasn't America coming to Stalin with hat in hand for weapons money and supplies to save their Army from destruction.

“Abe”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#9 Mar 21, 2014
Dajokerman,

Its true the ruSSian soldier is actually a cowardly soldier.

That's why there was a high desertion rate in the ruSSian army.

Stalin was aware of the cowardly nature of the average russian so he employed NKVD units behind the ruSSian/red army front lines to threaten and SHOOT the ruSSkies who deserted or didn't fight hard enough.

Also the people who did the hardest fighting against the Nazis were NON-Russians like ethnic Ukrainians, Hungarians, Poles and Baltic people. The Red Army according to Historian Timothy Snyder was only about 55% ethnic Russian.....but of course Russia today likes to take full credit for defeating the Nazis. The Red Army would have fell apart if not for all of the food and aid the Americans and British gave the ruSSians in the Lend Lease program. ruSSian Lies and Bravado knows no bounds

“Abe”

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#10 Mar 21, 2014
Separate NON-Red Army units did more to attack Berlin then Red Army units.

As for the Red Army....its were soldiers from NON-Russian Soviet republics who did the most damage against Nazi Germany.
Hawk

Kamuela, HI

#11 Mar 22, 2014
Mr Slovak wrote:
Dajokerman,
Its true the ruSSian soldier is actually a cowardly soldier.
That's why there was a high desertion rate in the ruSSian army.
Stalin was aware of the cowardly nature of the average russian so he employed NKVD units behind the ruSSian/red army front lines to threaten and SHOOT the ruSSkies who deserted or didn't fight hard enough.
Also the people who did the hardest fighting against the Nazis were NON-Russians like ethnic Ukrainians, Hungarians, Poles and Baltic people. The Red Army according to Historian Timothy Snyder was only about 55% ethnic Russian.....but of course Russia today likes to take full credit for defeating the Nazis. The Red Army would have fell apart if not for all of the food and aid the Americans and British gave the ruSSians in the Lend Lease program. ruSSian Lies and Bravado knows no bounds
I had the pleasure of meeting an old Polish WWII vet that told me the very thing you are saying, I didn't believe it at first because I figured that Russia did win the eastern front alone. But after speaking to him I learn that it was in fact the conquered eastern states that won the eastern front when the Russians gave them weapons and let them fight for them.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#12 Mar 22, 2014
Mr Slovak wrote:
Dajokerman,
Its true the ruSSian soldier is actually a cowardly soldier.
That's why there was a high desertion rate in the ruSSian army.
Stalin was aware of the cowardly nature of the average russian so he employed NKVD units behind the ruSSian/red army front lines to threaten and SHOOT the ruSSkies who deserted or didn't fight hard enough.
Also the people who did the hardest fighting against the Nazis were NON-Russians like ethnic Ukrainians, Hungarians, Poles and Baltic people. The Red Army according to Historian Timothy Snyder was only about 55% ethnic Russian.....but of course Russia today likes to take full credit for defeating the Nazis. The Red Army would have fell apart if not for all of the food and aid the Americans and British gave the ruSSians in the Lend Lease program. ruSSian Lies and Bravado knows no bounds
the siege of Leningrad would show your altered view of history to be pure bullshit...

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#13 Mar 22, 2014
Hawk wrote:
<quoted text>
I had the pleasure of meeting an old Polish WWII vet that told me the very thing you are saying, I didn't believe it at first because I figured that Russia did win the eastern front alone. But after speaking to him I learn that it was in fact the conquered eastern states that won the eastern front when the Russians gave them weapons and let them fight for them.
ummmm...the Germans marched across Eastern europe into russia with no problem...if the russians gave them weapons it would have had to have been when they had the Germans on the run back to Germany and LIBERATED, those states...

logic is fun!!!!

[email protected]

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#14 Mar 22, 2014
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>ummmm...the Germans marched across Eastern europe into russia with no problem...if the russians gave them weapons it would have had to have been when they had the Germans on the run back to Germany and LIBERATED, those states...
logic is fun!!!!
Well, if we are going to bring history and logic into this discussion.

http://www.ww2.pl/Polish,Army,on,the,Eastern,...

it is well documented that the Eastern polish armies that was captured during the invasion of Poland by the soviets was given weapons and equipment by the soviets and fought along with the Red Army through out the eastern front.

Poland was the only "liberated state" in the path of the USSR to Berlin, so the truth of Hawk's story does hold logical water, granted it's an little known footnote in general history.
Clear Dharma

Liverpool, UK

#15 Mar 22, 2014
Hawk wrote:
<quoted text>
I had the pleasure of meeting an old Polish WWII vet that told me the very thing you are saying, I didn't believe it at first because I figured that Russia did win the eastern front alone. But after speaking to him I learn that it was in fact the conquered eastern states that won the eastern front when the Russians gave them weapons and let them fight for them.
Except for when they surrounded Warsaw, then the Poles were told by the Russians that we'll shoot you in the back if you dare enter the city.
Clear Dharma

Liverpool, UK

#16 Mar 22, 2014
Biden's a total waste of skin btw.
Cordwainer Trout

Brownsville, KY

#17 Mar 22, 2014
Dajokerman wrote:
<quoted text>
Haha... I like how you start with saying that Hawk is falling for propaganda and then finish with a link to Russia Today which by definition a propaganda news station.
Sorry friend, you are the one drinking the kool aid in this post.
You're the wuss, who is so scared of listening to a former US Intelligence agent, that you proclaim for all to see you don't have the nads to distinguish relevant information out of facts, whoever discusses them. Scholarship is not blocking information. You're a character straight out of Orwell's 1984.

Plus, you can't even read. Hawk and you speak for yourselves.

You don't have answers as to why Obama has flooded Ukraine with 5 Billion Dollars, some going to thugs... so you irrationally slam anyone exposing it.
JBH

Richmond, Canada

#18 Mar 22, 2014
Hawk wrote:
<quoted text>
NATO is the greatest insurance for world security, Russia and it's people fear it greatly and with good reason. To dissolve the alliance would be one of the greatest follies that man kind could inflect upon it's self and reduce the world once again into a mess of nation states out to take that which they can from whom they can without care of human cost.
Just NATO's existence is enough to put terror into the hearts of Russians that they had to attack their neighbors and take their land before they became protected by NATO's umbrella.
Mankind owes NATO a great debt from preventing another world wide conflict from taking place, it should continue to be the vanguard against world war.
---------+

NATO has lost BADLY in Iraq war, and could not even face up the insurgents but had to withdraw.
NATO HAS WON NOTHING in Afghanistan either and is going to withdraw soon.

NATO had killed and paralyzed so many lives of NATO people instead.
So many NATO soldiers coming back are still committing suicides at all time high.

[email protected]

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#19 Mar 22, 2014
Cordwainer Trout wrote:
<quoted text>
You're the wuss, who is so scared of listening to a former US Intelligence agent, that you proclaim for all to see you don't have the nads to distinguish relevant information out of facts, whoever discusses them. Scholarship is not blocking information. You're a character straight out of Orwell's 1984.
Plus, you can't even read. Hawk and you speak for yourselves.
You don't have answers as to why Obama has flooded Ukraine with 5 Billion Dollars, some going to thugs... so you irrationally slam anyone exposing it.
Really? You came back for more?

You insult someone for listening to and believing "propaganda" and then link a video from Russia Today by definition a propaganda news station and expect others to believe it as true.

What I find so interesting is your belief that they are somehow telling you the truth and that nothing that they are "reporting" is false or any way attempt to paint Russia in the best light possible in everything, even when Russia is wrong.

But again, I can see that you think highly of Russia and Russians (judging from your news source, completely understandable) But Russia is the clear aggressor and has no legitimate reasons for their actions in Ukraine in the slightest. It is best that you stop making a fool of yourself and gather what limited dignity that you have and just stop with this rants.
Cordwainer Trout

Brownsville, KY

#20 Mar 22, 2014
Dajokerman wrote:
<quoted text>
Translation.... You are right Joker, Russians are weak.
<quoted text>
Why would Americans dream of having Russian's history, a history book of failure as a civilization and an deeply embedded weakness as people isn't what we would want to be known for.
I could go on, but I am getting this vibe from you that you seem to hold Russia and being Russian in high regard, which if fine. but being unable to accept their deeply and glaring flaws as a people is...well...tragic.
<quoted text>
This is so laughably wrong I hardly believe it's worth debating further. It was America that won WWII that is simple historical fact. Without American industry and military Germany would have conquered both Britain and Russia.
Remember it wasn't America coming to Stalin with hat in hand for weapons money and supplies to save their Army from destruction.
You pick and choose history and generalize condemnations of nations without regard to facts. A scholar has the capability of stating their overviews and knowledge without this trivial cut and paste nonsense. You try it because of its childish confusing nature.

Whatever stupidity got Hitler to war on two fronts led to the Russians completely destroying the German 6th Army and many of the Romanian support troops. That defeat was the absolute turning point against Germany and America acknowledged it. It was years before America entered the continent with many fewer casualties, then only because they saw Russia storming the Eastern front and inevitably throughout all Germany.

The Russian people have been morally destroyed by Marxists, but are now emerging from that darkness. America is now entering it, but with Marxists poisoning them with drugs, which has made their downfall much faster.

Russian cultural achievements are so profound they need not be enumerated, however ridiculously stupid your remark about a "failure" of civilization. American's short history has to embrace crosses in jars of urine to feel some attachment to culture. That mediocrity is completely the fault of wannabes like you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 2 min Sorry Hill 2,244
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min Yeah 1,459,368
Donald J Trump, our next president (Mar '16) 3 min VN Vet 1,114
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 4 min AMERICAN SUNSHINE 253,418
News Democrats: Congress stiffing city on Donald Tru... 6 min Truth Sayer 1 7
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 8 min Quirky 404,184
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... 11 min Truth Sayer 1 450
More from around the web