Hello D.A.I.G.
The main reason for the eastern countries (Former Block countries) to embrace NATO is the greed and hope for $$$ and not fear of Russia. NATO is fully aware of this and takes the advantage of giving them the outlook and partial support by upgrading their Armed Forces, or even an EU membership (Many, many $$$).
Both NATO and the former Russian republics are fully aware of this and use the same "motivation" which ends in NATO's favor, and resulting in a direct military buildup at Russia's borders. Russia simply doesn't have the $$ to buy or attract friends and as such gets more and more pissed off.
some issues:
is that true that the eastern countries that would agree to install that defence system would receive $$$ for that ?
does the countries of east are reacting by the own policy inposed by west about russia ? so, stay far from russia means stay close of EU not just by the euros, but also to can export more and bring investments and economic upgrades for their nations ?
then if the EU had a more close policy over russia, the intention of membership by eastern countries wouldnt make diference for russians, because they also will be close partners of europe. is that right ?
i just think its so sad that policy and economics are so far each other, because reading the economic newspapers is clear that is important stay close of russia, because for the next 10, 15 years russia will have a great industrial jump and the countries that will have close economic ties with moscow and the enterprises that invest in russia will have a lot of profits.
Everybody involved knows that Russia doesn't have the slightest military conventional capability to attack anyone successfully besides midgets like Georgia – meaning total occupation of a country such as the Ukraine – or a totally utopist scenario such as an attack on Poland or any other former Block country. At the end this "Georgia scenario" is exactly what happens and once Putin points at his nukes NATO and the US weasel into their holes and resort to the usual diplomatic blah blah – economic sanctions, embargo and probably telling Putin that he will not receive a birthday telegram.
agree with you, but also i think yes, russia have the capability to occupy not one but 2 or 3 of these countries at same time. wich doesnt means that they wanna do that. i dont think so.
Now how much frustration does NATO need to impose on Russia in order for the military high command or the Russian government to press the button (only alternative besides resignation), especially after a Russian orgy and Vodka intoxicated bears in uniforms?
have you watched "dr. strangelove" ? its almost quite like that scenario
but i think for russians its quite like a chess match. chess is a national sport in russia. i dont think they felt frustrated by nato policies, they are worried, because they dont trust too much in nato.
Anti - missile shield against – Iran? and rouge states or rather Russia? I am sure the Russians know the answer and keep regarding it as a further provocation.
yes, thats the most ridiculous of everything !!! IRAN DONT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO SEND A NUKE TO EUROPE !!!
they havent missiles to hits europe and also they dont have nuclear devices. all about iran´s nuclear program is pure speculation.
kruska, a good reading for you : "legacy of ashes - tim weiner", i think you gonna like this book.
regards !