Politics Axis Paris-Moscow-Berlin - the foundation of the new Europe

Marc Rousset

Junior Member
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Points
0
France, Germany and Russia potentially all the attributes of a great power capable globally to counterbalance the United States, France providing the political and ideological orientations, the Germany's economic power and Russia's military capabilities.

Note that on this axis, the Atlantic shore to shore Pacific, fourteen time zones, the sun never sets. This would be a way to finally create this "Third Rome" which have always dreamed separately France, Germany and Russia. Eurosiberia this would truly independent, would not threaten anybody, but also person, whether China, the United States or Islam could not really threaten. That is why France and Germany should redesign the architecture of Europe in cooperation with Russia.[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 
Why do you think that Russia is more friendly towards the EU than the USA, or even China ? The Russians have been the worst bullies of EU member states (mostly Eastern ones) in the last few years, by blackmailing them about gas prices and such. I wish that the Russian government would have a more positive attitude towards other European countries, but there is a lot of hurt feelings to mend.

Btw, I noticed that your IP address was in Russia, so I took the liberty of correcting your country flag, so as not to mislead other forum members.
 
The Axis Berlin Moscow was an old alliance. Not to mention Hitler-Staljin agreement , but to rembeber League of the Three Emperors from 1873. beetwen Austro-Hungary, Germany and Russia.
It is well known fact that alliance of Russians and Germans produce nightmares, especially in Anglo-American countries. But in this moment, both Russia and EU (read Germany) have much more common interests than EU and USA, for example. And it is not just energetic dependance of EU from Russia, but compatibility of growing German economy and high technology and fields of posibilities that Russian resources and land offer for.
On the other side, does really Americans wish to Europe all the best. I wouldn't say so. Do they really want stabile, prosperous Europe which can solve alone its own problems?
It was so obvious on the example of war in ex- Yugoslavia. Europe was totally excluded from solving problems in their own backyard. Deyton peace agreement was signed in Deyton, Ohio with American supervision. The same situation was with Kosovo too. The message to Europe was: You are incapable to solve problems in your own house, and you will never be superforce. And how could we actually talk at all about some independent politics of EU? But we can talk about independent politics of Germany and France. I don't doubt that they a long time ago began to search for alternative solutions.
 
Sorry Marc, but you should be dreaming about democracy and freedoms for Russians and not another Russian Empire.
 
As an American I can understand the reason that America seems to feel that way and sometimes seems to use a heavy hand in Europe. We haven't completely forgotten the events of the past century and the impact that barbarity, imperialism, regionalism and nationalism has had on Europe and the world. So please don't blame the current conditions and actions of America on any attempt to dominate Europe.
Remember America is the child of Europe, most of our population derived from European ancestors so we naturally feel some kinship with the European people. However even if it seems that America is meddling itself too deeply in European affairs most of the American people are really fairly deeply isolationist in their attitudes. For the most part the American people do not want to be involved in European and World affairs.
We would much rather sit in our homes and enjoy our lives and not worry about Russia extorting Germany for natural gas or if the Balkans were going to explode into war again. But we remember, we remember when America sat back and tried to ignore what was going on in Europe and Asia in the last century and saw the deaths of millions result in our attempts to stay out of it.
Yes, we stick our nose into world events, but we don't want to see a petty tin god like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jung Il or Hugo Chavez turn into another Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot and be responsible for the deaths of millions. We all need to understand that the world is too small and we all live in it, we have to all be involved with the affairs of our neighbors because if we ignore that our neighbors house is on fire and don't try and put it out the flames will spread to our on home.
Since WWII and particularly since the fall of the Soviet Union for the most part, most of Europe has been stable, productive and a model of democratic ideals and freedom. There are many regions in Europe that are islands of culture, stability and high ideals that America should strive to be like. Again however we remember the history of Europe and we remember the periodic spurts of madness and war which have swept the entire continent in the last 2000 years. We can only hope that America, Europe and the rest of the world are reaching a level of cultural maturity that will allow us to settle disputes and manage our affairs without wars, genocide and disaster.
I don't want to sound condescending or act like America is trying to be the patron of the rest of the world, but we have to remember that all (the whole world's population) need to remember that our reponsibilities as human beings go deeper than just to ourselves and our families.
 
As an American I can understand the reason that America seems to feel that way and sometimes seems to use a heavy hand in Europe. We haven't completely forgotten the events of the past century and the impact that barbarity, imperialism, regionalism and nationalism has had on Europe and the world. So please don't blame the current conditions and actions of America on any attempt to dominate Europe.
Remember America is the child of Europe, most of our population derived from European ancestors so we naturally feel some kinship with the European people. However even if it seems that America is meddling itself too deeply in European affairs most of the American people are really fairly deeply isolationist in their attitudes. For the most part the American people do not want to be involved in European and World affairs.
We would much rather sit in our homes and enjoy our lives and not worry about Russia extorting Germany for natural gas or if the Balkans were going to explode into war again. But we remember, we remember when America sat back and tried to ignore what was going on in Europe and Asia in the last century and saw the deaths of millions result in our attempts to stay out of it.
Yes, we stick our nose into world events, but we don't want to see a petty tin god like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jung Il or Hugo Chavez turn into another Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot and be responsible for the deaths of millions. We all need to understand that the world is too small and we all live in it, we have to all be involved with the affairs of our neighbors because if we ignore that our neighbors house is on fire and don't try and put it out the flames will spread to our on home.
Since WWII and particularly since the fall of the Soviet Union for the most part, most of Europe has been stable, productive and a model of democratic ideals and freedom. There are many regions in Europe that are islands of culture, stability and high ideals that America should strive to be like. Again however we remember the history of Europe and we remember the periodic spurts of madness and war which have swept the entire continent in the last 2000 years. We can only hope that America, Europe and the rest of the world are reaching a level of cultural maturity that will allow us to settle disputes and manage our affairs without wars, genocide and disaster.
I don't want to sound condescending or act like America is trying to be the patron of the rest of the world, but we have to remember that all (the whole world's population) need to remember that our reponsibilities as human beings go deeper than just to ourselves and our families.
It all would be truth if original aims of politics of any nation, not only USA, would be pure humanistic care for goodness of mankind,but not the pure economical and political interests of each country.
So, Aristander,I simply do not believe that American politics is lead by principals you quoted. I have felt that personally when American bombs were falling on my head, and more than thousands of civilians died in 1999, in one of many American efforts to bring peace to Europe in an action they cinically called "Merciful angel". Three year old Milica Rakić, killed by Nato bombs, was only one of many serbian children victims of that American "merciful, pure humanistic actions" in Balkan.
So, don't find yourself insulted if I don't believe in such kind of fairytales. It is not matter only with the USA, but with all other countries. Humanistic reasons are not something what run them on. I am just trying to be more realistic, and I am totally aware of fact that average American has no idea what his government are doing all around world in the name of American citizens.
 
Well, you can't blame the USA for all of the bombs on your country. That was a mission run by NATO commanders and the UN. If you want to blame anyone, blame yourself and your fellow countrymen for electing Slobodan Milosevic as your leader.
Milosevic was internationally acclaimed as a War Criminal and a Hitler want to be with his virulent Serbian Nationalism. I guess you think that Europe and the rest of the "civilized" world should stand back while racist extremism and ethnic cleansing were the flavor of the month in Serbia.
Milosevic was just the sort of petty tin god god that this Earth does not need leading any nation and I will defend the right of the rest of the world to name these criminals and use every means necessary to get rid of them. I can tell you that if my country came under the power of someone like that I would be in the hills fighting against them to my last breath!
Your nation and the whole region of the Balkans are prime examples of cultural insanity and rabid nationalistic views of the world. My "merciful, pure humanistic actions" do not stretch far enough to cover racism, ethnic cleansing or virulent nationalism that destroys human life and people's right to choose to live in peace.
I just wish that the US and rest of the world would take an interest wiping out other despots and ending ethnic hatred in Africa.
 
Well, I don't want to argue with you about politics in Balkan, because I see your opinions are already very well formed, exactly the way the CNN and the rest of "independent" media wanted to be.
You said:
"Well, you can't blame the USA for all of the bombs on your country. That was a mission run by NATO commanders and the UN. If you want to blame anyone, blame yourself and your fellow countrymen for electing Slobodan Milosevic as your leader."
And I can ask you, are the children of Serbia to blame for that?
I will remind you that NATO led by Americans bombed some purely civilian targets:
Hospital Dragiša Mišović in the centre of Belgrade. Results: dead patients and medical personels.
Television of Serbia, also in the centre of Belgrade. Result: 16th dead journalists
Passenger train in Grdelica. Result: dead passengers, many childrens among them.
Bridge in town Varvarin. Result: killed all civilians who appeared to be on the bridge.
And I already mention Milica Rakić, three year old girl, who was killed in bathroom of her own house. Was she also to blame for Milošević politics? Does she also deserve to be killed for the peace of rest the world?
And that is not end of the list...
I could never justified crimes of my nation toward any other nation and I never will. But obviously you are ready to justify what Americans did in Balkan, and want to cover that with that "humanitarian" excuses.
Or maybe you are lead by Machiavelli's : The end justifies the means.
 
I regret the unintentional deaths of any innocent civilian, however how about these intentional deaths perpetrated by Serbian forces?
Vukovar massacre
Lovas massacre
Bacin massacre
Bruska massacre
Dalj massacre
Vocin massacre
Saborsko massacre
Siroka Kula massacre
Skabrnja massacre
Ahatovici massacre
Foca massacres
Koricani Cliffs massacre
Prijedor massacre
Visegrad massacre
Tuzla Massacre
Paklenik Massacre
Markale massacre
Srebrenica massacre
Srebrenica Children's Massacre
Need I go on? I haven't even mentioned these...
Suva Reka massacre
Racak massacre
Podujevo massacre
Massacre at Velika Krusa
Izbica massacre
Drenica massacre
Gornje Obrinje massacre
Cuska massacre
Bela Crkva massacre
Orahovac massacre
Dubrava Prison massacre

You mention the accidental deaths of some children by American forces, Serbian forces killed hundreds if not thousands of children, not to mention the rapes of their mothers and castration of their fathers.
You and those of your ilk can go on blaming America and American policies for Europe's problems, but I can tell you that, to paraphrase from an "American Film", "Europe was a running brothel for 2000 years before America even existed."
 
You mention the accidental deaths of some children by American forces, Serbian forces killed hundreds if not thousands of children, not to mention the rapes of their mothers and castration of their fathers.
Accidental deaths?
If you call targeting of hospital,television or passenger train accidentall deaths, then you are more cynical then Nato itself. Nato spokesman call that "colaterall damages". Every misile has very precise cameras on itself, so every target was recorded and they knew what they are targeting. After intervention on offical Nato site those misile films was presented as propaganda movies. So you could watch how they intentionally targeting passenger train in Grdelica, for example. Maybe, that was reason for so much cases of suicide among pilots who were involved in intervention against Serbia, I heard for one just few months ago.
About your list, I could post you the list of same size of Serbian victims in that bloody civil war. But what would it change?
America's role in that war was just positioning on one side, the side which they find more prospective for their own interests. And interest was for example to stole Kosovo from Serbs and put there their military base Bondstil, one of bigest in Europe today. I suppose it was also of humanitarian matter.
However, as I said before, you can not justify American war crimes with Serbian war crimes. Innocent victims have no nationalities. Crime is a crime, whoever comitted it.
I don't find American people responsible for the mistakes of their own government, as you did for Serbs. I will not say that American people should suffer for every action of Bush or Clinton, as you say for Serbs and Milošević.
There is no collective, but personal guilt for every crime.
As American you should know that...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_during_Operation_Allied_Force
 
ipods, reading your posts I have a feeling that all Serbs are saints like in your avatar, lol.
You should be thanking NATO and US that Milosevic is gone. Otherwise right now the last Serb or last Bosniak would be killed. That's your alternative?
 
ipods, reading your posts I have a feeling that all Serbs are saints like in your avatar, lol.
You should be thanking NATO and US that Milosevic is gone. Otherwise right now the last Serb or last Bosniak would be killed. That's your alternative?

Milosevic has gone not thankinkg to NATO or US, but in the demonstration of Serbian people in 2000 after he stole elections. And if you talk about Milosevic you should know that he was an ally and "factor of stability of Balkan" for US government in 1995 when Deyton peace agreement was signed. Later on in 1997. when he try to stole elections, Serbian people demonstrated on streets for three months, but no one from the west was interested for Milosevic to be overthrown then. They knew that Milosevic is perfect excuse, alibi to destroy one nation and to stole part of his land (Kosovo), what they did on the end.
I have never said that Serbs are saints, but I understand it is hard for you to accept that governements of your contries were intentionally destroying one nation and one country. One day, I believe, in future the truth will arise on surface.
 
I have never said that Serbs are saints, but I understand it is hard for you to accept that governements of your contries were intentionally destroying one nation and one country. One day, I believe, in future the truth will arise on surface.
One nation? Believe me, you'll be better off with good neighbors and friends, than with one big Yugoslavia held together by dominant Serbs. The sooner you give up your dream about "The Big Great United" country the better for you. It's gone, because I guess, the Croats, the Bosniaks, Slovenians were not happy under Serbs, right?

Other thing. Don't feel so important thinking that our governments did had a program or plan to destroy Yugoslavia (for some reason???)
The NATO and US acted only to stop civil war with genocidal tendencies, that's all. Simple like this. No conspiracy. See now, no genocides, and you are left alone to do whatever you want with you country.
 
Sorry Marc, but you should be dreaming about democracy and freedoms for Russians and not another Russian Empire.

It is primarily concerned with Europe and particularly France and Germany.

There is only one modern empire is - USA

For the next historical cycle will line up precisely this economic, political axis. And she will. It's about the unity of geopolitical interests, for the sustainable economic development and cultural preservation. Format of future contracts only thinks, but it will certainly include the military security and mutual economic cooperation and penetration. For the Anglo-Saxons is a loss, they will oppose this, but the train is on its way. The fact that the article referred to as the "periphery countries" will be in the role of Minority.

Another quote from the article:
"As for Europe, it can be considered as the western extension of Russia or Russia as the eastern extension of Europe. Europe can change Russia, as Russia can change Europe. The first option has failed three times: in 1709 with the defeat of Charles XII of Sweden at the Battle of Poltava, in front of Peter the Great in 1812, in Moscow during the retreat from Russia, and in 1943 at the Battle Stalingrad. The change in Europe by Russia ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War. The Paris-Berlin-Moscow would be a peaceful way to achieve what has been achieved by force of arms, to realize the dream Gaullist vision of a Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals."
 
The NATO and US acted only to stop civil war with genocidal tendencies, that's all.

Yes, it is well known fact. When you want to do something bad, find good covering story. One of basic principles of machiavellism. US and NATO are well known all around world as bringing joy and hapiness in life of peoples. Ask Iraqi people what they think about that, or Vietnamese, or Afghans, or Chileans and other South Americans...
I will not try to persuade you, live in your illusion...
 
France, Germany and Russia potentially all the attributes of a great power capable globally to counterbalance the United States, France providing the political and ideological orientations, the Germany's economic power and Russia's military capabilities.

Note that on this axis, the Atlantic shore to shore Pacific, fourteen time zones, the sun never sets. This would be a way to finally create this "Third Rome" which have always dreamed separately France, Germany and Russia. Eurosiberia this would truly independent, would not threaten anybody, but also person, whether China, the United States or Islam could not really threaten. That is why France and Germany should redesign the architecture of Europe in cooperation with Russia.

Uhm, you really think that Russia would subordinate itself to French political and ideological orientations, and France therefore commands Russia's military? And Germany will finance this deliberatly, as it is protected by French commanded Russian military?

Don't get me wrong, of course my dream is world peace, but this sounds like an upcoming war. Perhaps should the Anglo-Saxon World also unite to a new "Oceania", so we can play 1984 then! :bored:
 
Yes, it is well known fact. When you want to do something bad, find good covering story. One of basic principles of machiavellism. US and NATO are well known all around world as bringing joy and hapiness in life of peoples. Ask Iraqi people what they think about that, or Vietnamese, or Afghans, or Chileans and other South Americans...
I will not try to persuade you, live in your illusion...


US and NATO are surely no saints! And I'm not a big supporter of their actions around the world. But just a question I'd like to know from you: What do you personally think why NATO attacked Serbia?

Don't want to be offensive, just curious to know from you!
 
@Mzungu mchagga
I believe that intervention of NATO in Serbia in 1999. was just a puzzle in general strategy of NATO in ruining international low. Action has never been approved in UN and this was for a first ime that NATO attacks foreign land and transforming itself as offensive rather than defensive force. Accidentally or not it was 50th anniversary of Nato in 1999.There was no humanitarian catastrophe on Kosovo before intervention. Suffering of people begin, both Serbs and Albanians after start of intervention. It was very well explained in German documentary Es began mit einer Luge ( It began with a lie).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW2-vNNWFsE&feature=player_embedded
Intervention followed, actually, after Serb government refussing so callled Rambuje plan in which it was demanded explicitly for Serbs to allow NATO soldiers to enter on their own teritorry. And I am asking you what country can allow foreign army to enter on their own teritory. Americans led in that time by Madleine Olbright ( what an irony, saved in serbian countryside by serbian hosts as a little jewish girl from nacists) knew for sure that Serbs cannot accept such conditions and already made decision to intervene.
Bombarding of Serbia, attacking of independent country with so called "humanatarian" excuse had to be a model how would NATO intervene in all future cases, without approval of UN. International law was ruined then, and interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan was just a logical step, this time without of approval of all members of organization. They knew that Serbs have no weapons to respond to attaks, so they could peacufully for three months every they pouring a rain of bombs on Serbian cities. Serbs had to capitulate on the end, allowing NATO to enter on Kosovo, to form there semi protektorate provisional state, expulsing together wih Albanians majority of Serbs who lived there for century. First thing, Americans did after they enter was forming a military base Bondstil on teritory of Kosovo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Bondsteel
After final pogrom on Kosovo Serbs in 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_unrest_in_Kosovo
they conclude that Albanians should be awarded with independence in 2008.
I hope I answer on your question.
 
International Law is just like Federal law, the poor and ordinary peple have to adhear by it while the rich can bend it and do whatever they want around it for their benefit. Serbians did commit crimes during the 90's, so did croats, and most defenatly albanians, I findd it strange however only serbs got punished, and albanians get rewarded a new country.
 
Yes, it is well known fact. When you want to do something bad, find good covering story. One of basic principles of machiavellism. US and NATO are well known all around world as bringing joy and hapiness in life of peoples. Ask Iraqi people what they think about that, or Vietnamese, or Afghans, or Chileans and other South Americans...
I will not try to persuade you, live in your illusion...

Lol, illusion is what your avatar represents, and in essence you, couple of saint Serbs, right?
Look at center of Europe, after the WW2 Stalin separated all populations (one good thing he did), Germans, Polish, Ukrainians, Lithuanians, with not much minorities mixed. The communism fell, and look there, no war. The borders were moved, so what, new generations are not really interested in recovering the lost grounds. The life goes on, people work, raise kids, buy stuff, and enjoy life.
Now look at Yugoslavia, with mixed ethnicities. Communism fell, and the hell broke loose. NATO and US reacted, and there is peace now.
Would you be happier if you still fought with Bosnians or Albanians, with millions killed through years? Is this what you wanted?

"..rain of bombs...", please your are killing me with your dramatisation. Did you ever see documentary from carpet bombing of Munich? Or distraction of Nagasaki?
You just got a slap on a wrist, comparing to these. Too bad few got killed in the process. What would be the alternative if the war continued? Millions killed on both sides?
Just get real, stop playing the victim and the center of the world, worthy a conspiracy and attention of US. I guess they're after your oil. What precious things you have in Serbia? Maybe they are after your money to get even richer. Oh, I've forgotten, they already sucked the Germany dry, having so many military bases there, right? Japan too wasn't enough for them. Greedy bustards now want to enslave Serbia. Once again, what US what's from Serbia?
Go hug Bosniak and Albanian and promise to be a good neighbor. With this incredible gesture you would start a new era of peace on Balkans.

I'm sorry iapodos but your explanation don't make sense. I know you are hurting inside from all the war events, your pride was hurt, and you're trying to find explanation why is it happening to your loved Serbia. It's not a great base for logical and stoic thinking.
 

This thread has been viewed 36598 times.

Back
Top