Is there a signed treaty? No. But the US SoS (James A. Baker III) and the German Foreign Minister (Hans-Dietrich Genscher) are on the record in 1990

Genscher is on video tape stating very clearly: "Wir waren uns einig, dass nicht die Absicht besteht das NATO-Verteidigungsgebiet auszudehnen nach Osten. Das gilt übrigens nicht nur im Bezug auf die DDR, die wir da nicht einverlaiben wollen, sondern das gilt ganz generell."

In English: we are in agreement that there is no intention of expanding the NATO security zone eastwards. This applies not only to the GDR, which we do not intend to incorporate, but in general."

Or how about Baker's words, Feb. 9, 1990, St. Catherine's Hall at the Kremlin:
"If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the East."

And the minutes show Gorbachev as having said:
"Certainly any extension of the zone of NATO is unacceptable."

To which Baker replied:
"I agree."

Again, no treaties, nothing. But some people, myself included, make the argument that unequivocal statements of a nation's highest-ranking diplomat are to be taken seriously, unless overruled by explicit, written agreements.

And from what we've heard from Gorbachev over the years, he took them for their words.

Admittedly, having been replaced by Yelzin who received massive "help" from the US might have made Gorbachev a little grumpy.

What remains at the end is this: NATO was created as a defensive alliance against the Soviets and wasn't dissolved when the Soviet Union collapsed. The highest-ranking diplomats of the primary players at that time (US, FRG) are on the record with promises that NATO wouldn't expand eastwards after the German reunification. Now NATO is closer to Russia's border than ever and the Ukraine had a democratically elected government (they were thugs, but elected) overthrown by forces that had massive support from the US. As a result, fascist militias wearing SS insignia are roaming free in Novorossiya, with government support.

If I were Russia, I'd be pissed.

But I'm in Germany, so now I have a strongman in charge of Russia, a thug who has journalists and opposition in general killed, on the one side, and the Americans who installed a Nazi-sympathising regime in Ukraine on the other.

What's not to like about it.

So when the US establishment then goes on a full-blown bender to position Russia as a scapegoat for now having to live with President Trump, they are playing with fire just to distract from their fucked-up domestic policies.

And we're not even touching on the hypocrisy of the US being outraged when some foreign nation meddles in their internal affairs. Of course Russia tries to influence US politics in their favor. Guess what, so does the UK, France, Germany, NZ, China, Japan, even bloody Luxembourg for all I know. Just like the US exerts influence on German politics (ie German Marshall Fund, Atlantikbrücke, etc), and on politics of every other nation of significance.

It was 1976 that there was kerfuffle over the East German womens swim team and doping... when it was pointed out that the girls had rather deep voices, a DDR official said, "we came here to swim, not to sing."

This is Cloverfield meets Transformers meets DDR.

I honestly don't know how I feel about that combination....

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by oritteropo.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by Boise_Lib.

Dude, you clearly can't comprehend what was said. He said European Socialism works, not that Europe is socialist. He then pointed to socialist programs in Europe, such as universal health care, paid for college tuition, pension programs, etc. How are those programs not socialist? Hint: THEY'RE SOCIALIST PROGRAMS! There's no two ways about it. How idiotic can a person be who proclaims socialism is bad, but they send their kids to public school, or they collect unemployment benefits, or draw social security, or they live in the Tennessee River Valley and appreciate the fact they have electricity, or they have an affordable federal gov't backed mortgage, or they safely assume the food they eat won't kill them, or that they can safely assume the house they live in won't fall on their heads because of government safety code, or their tires won't blow out driving down the road, or they can still get medical care if they become poor, or...

Guess what? Every single one of those above are examples of either direct gov't intervention into the economy, or were outcomes from a time when the government did. That's direct opposition to free market principles. And before anyone says it, YES, IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT SOCIALIST SOLUTIONS DON'T ALWAYS WORK WELL. We know that. But it's absolutely positively ridiculous to suggest socialist ideas and solutions NEVER work. It's absolute bullcrap to the extreme that you can see everyday in your life that it does make everyone's life better.

This editorial is spot on. It's what I've tried hammering home with no effect to QM and WP that there are too many examples of ideas within the US that have or did work that were socialist in nature. Socialism isn't a dirty word. It's one approach of several economic philosophies that can help solve problems, just as free market ideas can work. Neither work 100% of the time, so stop with the ridiculous notion that neither is the be all end all of all economic ideas. Every industrialized nation is a mixed economy. A completely 100% free market economy doesn't exist, and would fail if it did. (Ditto 100% true communist economies.)

>> ^conan:

WTF has any one of you actually an idea what socialism means? This rant of Bill is just useless. "European socialism"? The last socialist country was the DDR (east germany) back in the 80s. I just can't stand it anymore. Stupid throwing around of buzzwords. Socialism is a specific form of government. Switzerland is NOT a socialist country. Germany is NOT a socialist country. Sweden is NOT a socialist country. Get your facts straight and read a book from time to time!

WTF has any one of you actually an idea what socialism means? This rant of Bill is just useless. "European socialism"? The last socialist country was the DDR (east germany) back in the 80s. I just can't stand it anymore. Stupid throwing around of buzzwords. Socialism is a specific form of government. Switzerland is NOT a socialist country. Germany is NOT a socialist country. Sweden is NOT a socialist country. Get your facts straight and read a book from time to time!

And maybe if she picked one she might actually be good at DDR of Violin

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by vaporlock.

>> ^ant:

>> ^kasinator:
>> ^ant:
You submit that 32 DOHs video. Oh and you can fix your title by editing your submission so you do that now please.

I should, but I got a couple in line right now. And thanks for the reminder.

I would submit too, but I am full in my queue and have tons of videos to submit as well. I have almost 500 KB big in a text file!


O_O thats huge! Imma look at your vids now. feel free to gander at mine.

>> ^kasinator:

>> ^ant:
You submit that 32 DOHs video. Oh and you can fix your title by editing your submission so you do that now please.

I should, but I got a couple in line right now. And thanks for the reminder.


I would submit too, but I am full in my queue and have tons of videos to submit as well. I have almost 500 KB big in a text file!

>> ^ant:

You submit that 32 DOHs video. Oh and you can fix your title by editing your submission so you do that now please.


I should, but I got a couple in line right now. And thanks for the reminder.

>> ^kasinator:

<div role="button" tabindex="0" title="about:blank" style="border: 1px solid rgb(223, 223, 223); background: transparent url(chrome://flashblock/content/flash.png) no-repeat scroll center center ! important; overflow: hidden; -moz-background-clip: border ! important; -moz-background-origin: padding ! important; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous ! important; min-width: 32px ! important; min-height: 32px ! important; width: 480px; height: 385px; cursor: pointer; display: inline-block; visibility: visible ! important; -moz-box-sizing: border-box;" bgActive="url(chrome://flashblock/content/flashplay.png) no-repeat center" bgInactive="url(chrome://flashblock/content/flash.png) no-repeat center"></div>
<div><div style="margin: 10px; overflow: auto; width: 80%; float: left; position: relative;" class="convoPiece"> ant said:<img style="margin: 4px 10px 10px; float: left; width: 40px;" src="http://static1.videosift.com/avatars/a/ant-s.jpg" onerror="ph(this)"><div style="position: absolute; margin-left: 52px; padding-top: 1px; font-size: 10px;" class="commentarrow">◄</div><div style="padding: 8px; margin-left: 60px; margin-top: 2px; min-height: 30px;" class="nestedComment box">Plaiying?
</div></div></div>

You submit that 32 DOHs video. Oh and you can fix your title by editing your submission so you do that now please.

>> ^legacy0100:

Why would anyone do this!??!


Because he can.

As technically impressive this may be, he's playing DDR, tapping arrows on a screen, which is pretty much fail in itself no?