Ukraine Thread

[Gilrandir]

For the first post, that wasn't at all what he was saying, but I don't really care about your opinion.

You saw what you saw and it doesn't mean it was the way you saw. Like it was with Putin's words on Crimea.

Whenever you become too obnoxious, the thread turns into you communicating with yourself by posting link after link.

You forgot what you taught me, Master: attack the argument, not the person.

As for "communicating with yourself": while not idealizing myself and my style of posting I see other reasons for such development: people just lost interest in the topic. So if I see anything that I consider worth posting I do post it.

As far as second post is concerned, I have no idea who the guy is and what he has to do with Bandera.

He is a war (and not only) criminal who seems to be now glorified in Serbia (the very thing you cautioned Ukrainians against giving Bandera as an example).

http://mashable.com/2015/04/09/russi.../#XxOx4HL.skqH

"And I wanted Brenus to explain it." Err, why should have to explain your mental process? Be responsible for your words, I am for mine.

MY mental process? You make mutually exclusive claims (Montenegro isn't worth accepting into NATO and NATO is not that stupid to fail to see the worthlessness of Montenegro as a NATO member) and want ME to explain it?

[Brenus]

"Montenegro isn't worth accepting into NATO and NATO is not that stupid to fail to see the worthlessness of Montenegro as a NATO member" These are your words, not mine. Quote?

[Husar]

MY mental process? You make mutually exclusive claims (Montenegro isn't worth accepting into NATO and NATO is not that stupid to fail to see the worthlessness of Montenegro as a NATO member) and want ME to explain it?

I wouldn't call them mutually exclusive if you allow for the existence of some degree of altruism, pride and perhaps also strategic location and public image.
It can be worthless in terms of military contribution, or that is how I understood it, but it still helps the NATO portrayal of a safety umbrella for those who feel threatened and is therefore a worthy member.
By the way, too lazy to check the originals now, but the two positions you "quoted" there basically say the same thing, that NATO shouldn't/wouldn't accept Montenegro.

[Gilrandir]

"Montenegro isn't worth accepting into NATO and NATO is not that stupid to fail to see the worthlessness of Montenegro as a NATO member" These are your words, not mine. Quote?

Be my guest:

Montegro: 622,000 hbts.
US (NATO) base in Kosovo.
Really, what would be the interest of Montenegro for NATO? Naval Bases? Croatia would be more than happy to offer that... And Croatia has all the former military naval ports built by Tito.

The only thing worth to fight for in Montenegro is olive oil and Malboro made in Russia smuggling....

Ergo: Montenegro is worthless for NATO.

"So NATO is inveterately stupid in accepting Montenegro?" No.

Ergo: NATO is not that stupid to see Montenegro is worthless for it.

Yet we know NATO IS COOPTING Montenegro. How come?

I wouldn't call them mutually exclusive if you allow for the existence of some degree of altruism, pride and perhaps also strategic location and public image.
It can be worthless in terms of military contribution, or that is how I understood it, but it still helps the NATO portrayal of a safety umbrella for those who feel threatened and is therefore a worthy member.

This is how I see it. Not so Brenus.

[Brenus]

"Ergo: Montenegro is worthless for NATO." No. Your words, not my quote. Your opinion is a country populated of 600,000 inhabitants (hbts) is worthless, not mine.
"How come?" That is easy to answer: To bite Russia.

"I wouldn't call them mutually exclusive if you allow for the existence of some degree of altruism, pride and perhaps also strategic location and public image." Altruism? We speak of the same NATO? Strategic location? Did you had a look on a map, recently? Public image, perhaps.
Montenegro feel threatened by whom?
And can I remind you that two NATO member-states of NATO and more or less at war? So much of the "safety umbrella" .

[Gilrandir]

"Ergo: Montenegro is worthless for NATO." No. Your words, not my quote. Your opinion is a country populated of 600,000 inhabitants (hbts) is worthless, not mine.

# 1238 - the whole post:

Montegro: 622,000 hbts.
US (NATO) base in Kosovo.
Really, what would be the interest of Montenegro for NATO? Naval Bases? Croatia would be more than happy to offer that... And Croatia has all the former military naval ports built by Tito.

The only thing worth to fight for in Montenegro is olive oil and Malboro made in Russia smuggling....

My words, you say?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

This thread doth wander...

[Brenus]

"My words, you say?" Yes. Where do you read unworthy (worthless)? You are a linguist, you know the importance of words. There are no reason for NATO to built bases in Montenegro, it is not the same of Montenegro is unworthy as you said, is it?
You put a disdain that I didn't. YOUR words, not mine. And you can try to distort the wording as much you want, YOU put an adjective in it.
So, except to upset Russia, what is the reason to have Montenegro in NATO? Naval bases? No. Land bases? No. Airbases? No. For each NATO as plenty of all all around the Balkans. This not a the disdain you showed to Montenegro, it is a reality check.
You should try it.

[Kralizec]

"How come?" That is easy to answer: To bite Russia.

...or, it could be a case of Montenegro wanting to pursue closer relations with USA and Europe. And the rest of NATO welcoming that.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.


(edit: Canada too :P)

[Gilrandir]

"My words, you say?" Yes. Where do you read unworthy (worthless)? You are a linguist, you know the importance of words. There are no reason for NATO to built bases in Montenegro, it is not the same of Montenegro is unworthy as you said, is it?
You put a disdain that I didn't. YOUR words, not mine. And you can try to distort the wording as much you want, YOU put an adjective in it.
So, except to upset Russia, what is the reason to have Montenegro in NATO? Naval bases? No. Land bases? No. Airbases? No. For each NATO as plenty of all all around the Balkans. This not a the disdain you showed to Montenegro, it is a reality check.
You should try it.

I didn't show any disdain. This is YOUR interpretation (or rather perversion) of my words. I used the word in the meaning:

worthless adjective (NOT IMPORTANT)

not important or not useful:
She was criticized so much by her employers that she began to feel worthless.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dict...lish/worthless

For me, presenting no interest as a future ally = worthless as a future ally.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

...For me, presenting no interest as a future ally = worthless as a future ally.

Superficially, NATO is simply a defense alliance. On that prima facie basis, your basic point of assessment -- value to defensive alliance -- would clearly suggest Montenegran irrelevance.

NATO is, functionally, much more than that -- for good or for ill. I think Kralizec as the right of it in his post immediately above.